The good thing about Ubuntu is that it has so many forks: Xubuntu (Xfce), Kubuntu (KDE), Lubuntu (LXDE). They all use the same Ubuntu repositories. For example, you can get an Lubuntu system by removing the unity and gnome package from Ubuntu and installing the LXDE ones. I held off upgrading my Ubuntu machine from 10 because of the Unity thing. I installed Lubuntu 12 on another laptop last week and everything works great and there pretty much aren't any surprises going from 10.
What's annoying isn't Unity but the way Ubuntu changes the way startup scripts are done and small things like .xsession don't run by default (and if you turn them on, suddenly .Xmodmap stops working...). That's true for the Ubuntu derivatives too. But that's a fair trade-off for good drivers (even if they are proprietary) and up to date packages. Otherwise I'd go with Debian testing.
Yes - I'm using Gnome3 "classic". It is ok - just doesn't seem as configurable as Gnome2. XFCE might be good - I just don't have the time to figure it out.
Yeah, at first I was annoyed with the lack of configurability in Gnome 3. But when I discovered you could press the super key and just start typing the name of a program to start it, I found it nicer to use than Gnome 2.
I switched to xubntu, and use xfce4 on top of debian too. xfce4 is kind of nice, kind of half-busted, but overall, it feels like an older style desktop, which is what i want.
I recall trying Netbook remix on my Aspire One and quickly reverting back to stock Android, but I can't remember what I didn't like about it. OTOH Cinnamon reminds me pleasantly of Gnome Classic but feels less hobbled, compared to the old Gnome desktop.
I've been using Unity for about a year and it's not as bad as many proclaim it to be. My biggest complaint is that advanced features are hidden away. If all those crazy Compiz editors and whatnot were easier to accidentally find it would all be fine. A separate "For Advanced Users Only" options set in "Settings" would fix it and probably resolve tens of thousands of web searches without a browser.
Whilst I agree to an extent in that I used to be a Unity basher and now I use it as my main desktop and think it's by far the most polished Linux desktop UI, I can totally understand why it doesn't fit a lot of people's workflows.
It has a very opinionated approach to things and throws away a lot of customisation options (focus follows mouse, you can't move the launcher or go back to a standard taskbar etc).
I love some features but it just causes too many troubles when working with it.
I need for example right-click menues sometimes and those are simply not supported. So the only workaround is installing packages that get me applications menues back which is then a mess where the buttons to close a window switch from left to right depending on fullscreen or windows all the time. Not that I liked top-menues to start with anyway. And certainly lot's of applications just work badly with the top-menu simply because Linux-apps never were written for that. So you get stuff like double-menues even with some applications which are in the offical distro.
Or the idea to use F10 as a system key - sorry, but it just isn't one and never was. Which is why it's used by lots of applications which suddenly miss a key now - who came up with this shit?
There is one reason Ubuntu stays on my Laptop - it works most of the time good enough with the hardware. And I can live with Unity most of the time. But Unity is the reason why Ubuntu doesn't make it on my desktop.
I've been using it for a few months and becoming more and more upset with it. I have very high inertia and so I've stuck with it to give it a chance, but the deal-breaker is probably going to be that sliding my mouse to a new window ought to result in me immediately being able to type in the new window.
That's not the only mouse-related thing it does poorly. The workstation I use at work came with Unity as the default. I decided to give myself a week to get used to it but gave up after only 3 days. Using Synergy with Unity is a complete pain in the ass with that menu thing that is on the left side of the screen. It was constantly activating when I moved my mouse to the other computer or not activating at all when I wanted it to.
After 3 days I just installed Awesome and went from there. Unity provides me absolutely nothing that I want that Awesome doesn't. The only thing it does for me is get in the way.
I do not remember how but I am almost 100% sure I at one point ran Gnome2+Compiz with focus follows mouse. Maybe you need to install the advanced configuration manager for Compiz.
What? Unity is the first shell that actually properly supports multi-monitor setups. I use it with two monitors actually and it's been just amazing to work with.
The edge resistance. The weird, inconsistent, PITA edge resistance it puts in between screens.
Whoever thought that was a good idea needs to be thrown off the team, forever. It drove me absolutely nuts until I finally managed to get rid of it.
I use FVWM2 at work with two monitors, when I have time I plan on moving to xmonad. I've used Dropbox and a few other lightweight WMs too. They all worked OK with my dual-monitor setup.
I've used Unity at home since the beginning, and it's the single worst multi-screen experience I've ever had. I only stick with it in hopes that I'll get to watch it evolve into something useable.
So, you not tested it with KDE. I was using dual monitor setup for a year with KDE and it's amazing ! The only problem that I had it's thanks to crap ATI drivers.
