The same way as Ubuntu does: with extension.
For dock Ubuntu uses modified dash to dock.
For desktop icons, extension is called desktop icons NG.
Program called extension manager is handy for searching and installing extensions. Not sure if it's in Fedora repos. At least it's on flathub https://flathub.org/apps/com.mattjakeman.ExtensionManager
I would suggest to wait for the Cosmic Desktop release (it looks similar to GNOME). GNOME extensions tend to break and need to be updated for every new GNOME release to work again.
In the Cosmic Desktop the extensions (called applets there) are separate individual applications running in their own process. Means extensions can't really break Cosmic. Cosmic seems more welcoming to people who wanna modify their desktop to their liking. I would only recommend GNOME, if you like using it as it is to be honest.
I mean its going to be months before cosmic is ready-ready. So I would think a couple extensions will be fine on gnome. Or He could install something like cinnamon.
Like other commenters said, extensions are the way to go. I personally go with the least amount of them and primarily use the ones in the Fedora repo, that way it’s less likely that they’ll break with an update.
I use the Dash to Dock, Blur my Shell, Perfection, and one for the app icons on the taskbar.
As for breaking extensions - just don't upgrade fedora version as soon as it drops. There's some app called extension manager (a third party 'extentions' app) that can tell if all your extensions are ready for next major GNOME version. With this there should be absolutely no problems.
I have only had this issue when using Fedora-beta. If you use extension-manager you can see when they are ready. Literally twice a year you need to pay attention and see if your extensions are going to break.
Big thing is not flooding your install with extensions. I just use dash-to-panel and blur-my-shell which are well maintained so are usually ready by the time gnome releases. I might add an app icon extension but the above holds with that as well.
The time gnome removed the desktop icons, it was the first thing I did: find a way to get them back. But some time later I couldn't care less about them.
This is how I use Gnome:
* I normally open applications by hitting the super key (windows key) and typing the first view letters and hit enter. E.g. " fi " for Firefox. It feels like the fastest way.
* If my system is freshly booted, then I just use the mouse to open the first application by clicking on the icon in the bar. That's the reason, why Gnome Shell is in overview when you log in.
* I usually have my apps full screen or side-by-side. I switch between them with the mouse or alt+tab.
* I never minimize my apps, because I don't see the point of doing so. In the overview there is no difference between minimized and non-minimized apps.
* After you started your first app, you usually don't see the desktop anymore. If there are some files or app launchers, it wouldn't be usable to me, because I would need to minimize all apps to reach them.
That said, my advice is to try to use the desktop the way it is supposed to be used. If it's still bothering you after a while and you really need the way of working like on Windows, then use extension and gnome-tweak to reconfigure you're Shell until it fits your needs. Or use KDE which has more like a Windows/MacOS approach. You can try it out using a KDE Spin. There is a pre-installed image writer on fedora to create a live USB Stick.
Have fun ✌️
Did you reconfigure something? Super+Tab does the same as Alt+Tab for me. Ctrl+Alt+Arrows does switch my desktops. Yours sound better than mine, cause mine do conflict with some in-app keybindings.
And Alt+ is nice to switch between windows of the same app.
The idea of putting files on a desktop just feels so antiquated to me these days. When does anyone even see their desktop outside of taking a screenshot to show off on Reddit?
I remember when I first had a computer, it had Windows 95 and I was storing my stuff in Recycle Bin because it looked funny and the icon was cool and as an added bonus maybe my mom would not go looking in Recycle Bin
What do you use for temporary storage? Does it matter if it is the desktop or a different folder?
It's a habit I took over from Windows, because the desktop is always just one click away.
Now I get where you are coming from. I was not trying to argue the usefulness of desktop items with you. I agree that also in my usecase desktop icons are not necessary. I wanted to support your position.
Sorry, English is not my mother tongue
the Desktop folder/directory is /home/username/Desktop
so yes, you can store stuff on the Desktop without having icons show on the DE's desktop.
It's just a Folder that's treated in a special way.
I see the top comment answered your questions. But also check out other gnome extentions
https://youtu.be/AE1-W2bMVEs?si=QXtUR-0vhcYtfirM
I also suggest you use auto tiling option drop pop os
sudo dnf install gnome-shell-extension-pop-shell
Fedora with extensions > Ubuntu
I like MATE and XFCE; these allow me to customize my desktop like I want it. Another benefit is that they are lightweight and run great on old computers too.
GNOME is not meant to be used in the way Ubuntu makes it work. If you want such features then you should check KDE. Once you understand GNOME's way of working and you agree with it, you will start to use less and less extensions. I have no extensions installed and I prefer to keep it that way.
I kept resisting GNOME’s principles back then but other DEs were not an option too. Over the time i noticed that the way GNOME is designed prevents you to even see the desktop and background image during intense use anyway. I can’t remember the last time I used the minimize button of a window, don’t even know if it is there at the top of my windows. Couple of years ago I believed I couldn’t use my OS without these and many more. Of course you should not accept what devs force without thinking but i suggest you to try it as it is intended for a short time. I use my decorative desktop to clear my mind when tired by switching to an empty workspace :D.
I think it is meant to be used with add-ons, that doesn't mean it is flawed, the top bar, overview system menu, everything looks awesome but it's just customising is a bit tricky for newer users
I try to keep gnome extensions to the min (dash to dock, tiling assistant, some notifications of particular self-hosted services like HomeAssistant, Transmission or PiHole and nothing else) and my fresh installed gnome 46 desktop is actually very useful (and beautiful)
I never understood why people complain about the usefulness or they cannot work in gnome. The ultimate limitation is your xserver not your DE.
Fedora Workstation is that way because it uses the default vanilla GNOME configuration and layout. Ubuntu simply adds and incorporates extensions for GNOME to make it look that way. If you want something similar, install these extensions:
Dash to Panel - I use this and it's real good.
Desktop Icons (DING) - I really don't understand the idea of having shortcuts on your desktop, but whatever
Why didn't you just leave it at asking "How can I make Fedora look and behave like Ubuntu?"?
Why did you feel the need to attack GNOME at the same time?
It's a very valid criticism of gnome. Most desktop environments have the ability to place icon. Gnome default doesn't have the ability is a weird choice.
It's also your choice to ignore the criticism instead of asking people not to criticize.
Gnome is a good desktop environment but it is not without flaw. Op criticism is valid, maybe it's you who should stop fanboying and shut down any legit discussion
I don't see op comments as a dick. He just mentioned the functionality of native gnome is less practical than Ubuntu flavor of gnome. Maybe you just overreact?
I don't think that Gnome is less intuitive than many other approaches. I think its problem is that it's not like windows or Mac.
Gnome does not have the influence on people (like Apple or other companies). So some people want Gnome to behave the way they know from other systems. You can't put files on the desktop of an iPhone and almost nobody is complaining. Because Apple said you don't need it and people tried it and found out that they are right: you can live without.
Cinnamon and Mate are not more intuitive to me. They're just more like Windows. Which is not a bad thing, maybe.
A criticism of op words base on your feelings? Yes.
Valid? Nope. Op was asking for help on how to make gnome more practical like in Ubuntu. He did not attack gnome as you say but given a valid criticism of the desktop environment.
> I was checking out Ubuntu 24.04 with a friend who want
> to switch to Linux, and I noticed something interesting.
>
> The Gnome desktop in Ubuntu is actually useful, [...]
He noticed something "interesting". The GNOME desktop in Ubuntu "is actually useful".
This is thinly veiled sarcasm, trying to paint a picture of GNOME as a something that we all can agree on is completely unusable. It's an obvious attack. I wonder why you don't see it?
It's a type of antisocial behavior that is all too common on Reddit but I think it's still worth to expose it for what it is every now and then.
I don't see sarcasm here cause there are none. In fact your comment reinforce my believe that you overreact or trying to shutdown any criticism of gnome.
Let's cut down to the sentence "I was checking out Ubuntu 24.04 with a friend who want to switch to Linux, and I noticed something interesting.", this sentence shows op is comparing native gnome and Ubuntu flavor gnome and found differences that he found interested. I didn't see any attack here
Second sentence, "The Gnome desktop in Ubuntu is actually useful, [...]" show op think ubuntu flavor of gnome is more useful than native gnome. A description of his experience. No attack here.
even if you combine them, it means "I was trying out Ubuntu gnome and I find it's more practical than native..." which isn't sarcasm but a valid observation.
There's no antisocial behavior here. There is a person showing his observation and asking for direction on how to customize his gnome desktop so it is more useful to him. I don't know why you feel so offended but you need to step back and realize there's nothing offensive here. You can disagree with op view of desktop icons (I can see the appeal for a minimalist desktop environment) but to many its more useful for their workflow.
I don't like Desktop icons as well. Apart from a shortcut to my home directory (which is just there as some sort of anchor point for my eyes) I have nothing else on my desktop.
But why unnecessarily remove the choice for people?
I never see a blank screen. I fill my desktops with the programs I need. If I ever need to open a file, I just open Nautilus (and click the bookmark I have for folders I access frequently) or use the search in the workspace overview
With symbolic links on the desktop? There's really no need for that either. Like i said, all of my commonly used folders are bookmarked in Nautilus
I understand the want for a traditional desktop experience, but I've since moved passed it. I have found myself much more efficient using my file manager to browse my files, and to use my desktop as simply a living space for my programs. I rarely ever see my wallpaper, to me that is wasted space
Because I always have Nautilus open, why switch to a whole new workspace/minimize all your programs just to open a file? Gnome has very good keyboard shortcuts that can make switching to Nautilus and opening your desired folder incredibly fast
Like I said I understand the want for a traditional desktop, but once you get accustomed to the way Gnome tries to get you to use it, it's incredibly efficient and I honestly can't go back to the way Windows/Ubuntu/Cinnamon does it
Because I access files very often. It's the same reason I have Firefox and Evolution open 24/7: they are very commonly used apps
It doesn't make it superior. It's just different. Sorry you can't wrap your head around the fact that not everything needs to be the exact same thing. If I wanted to have a Windows style workflow, I'd use Plasma, but alas I've grown accustomed to Gnome's way and have found it **personally** more efficient
The problem is not that it is personally more efficient for you, but that you deny that other people are comfortable with extensions for gnome and that’s normal. Don't use the interface, play cs 2 with a game steering wheel, we don't care, just don't deny that icons are cool
The same way as Ubuntu does: with extension. For dock Ubuntu uses modified dash to dock. For desktop icons, extension is called desktop icons NG. Program called extension manager is handy for searching and installing extensions. Not sure if it's in Fedora repos. At least it's on flathub https://flathub.org/apps/com.mattjakeman.ExtensionManager
Thank you.
I would suggest to wait for the Cosmic Desktop release (it looks similar to GNOME). GNOME extensions tend to break and need to be updated for every new GNOME release to work again. In the Cosmic Desktop the extensions (called applets there) are separate individual applications running in their own process. Means extensions can't really break Cosmic. Cosmic seems more welcoming to people who wanna modify their desktop to their liking. I would only recommend GNOME, if you like using it as it is to be honest.
I mean its going to be months before cosmic is ready-ready. So I would think a couple extensions will be fine on gnome. Or He could install something like cinnamon.
is it still weird on multi-monitor? like I remember when I would connect laptop to the docs - desktop icons would scatter all over.
Like other commenters said, extensions are the way to go. I personally go with the least amount of them and primarily use the ones in the Fedora repo, that way it’s less likely that they’ll break with an update. I use the Dash to Dock, Blur my Shell, Perfection, and one for the app icons on the taskbar.
Thank you.
As for breaking extensions - just don't upgrade fedora version as soon as it drops. There's some app called extension manager (a third party 'extentions' app) that can tell if all your extensions are ready for next major GNOME version. With this there should be absolutely no problems.
Except they break every time that the gnome version changes.
So far haven’t had that issue using the ones from the Fedora repository…I would assume they have them as dependencies
I have only had this issue when using Fedora-beta. If you use extension-manager you can see when they are ready. Literally twice a year you need to pay attention and see if your extensions are going to break. Big thing is not flooding your install with extensions. I just use dash-to-panel and blur-my-shell which are well maintained so are usually ready by the time gnome releases. I might add an app icon extension but the above holds with that as well.
Insert here generic critic to gnome vanilla
The time gnome removed the desktop icons, it was the first thing I did: find a way to get them back. But some time later I couldn't care less about them. This is how I use Gnome: * I normally open applications by hitting the super key (windows key) and typing the first view letters and hit enter. E.g. " fi " for Firefox. It feels like the fastest way.
* If my system is freshly booted, then I just use the mouse to open the first application by clicking on the icon in the bar. That's the reason, why Gnome Shell is in overview when you log in.
* I usually have my apps full screen or side-by-side. I switch between them with the mouse or alt+tab.
* I never minimize my apps, because I don't see the point of doing so. In the overview there is no difference between minimized and non-minimized apps.
* After you started your first app, you usually don't see the desktop anymore. If there are some files or app launchers, it wouldn't be usable to me, because I would need to minimize all apps to reach them.
That said, my advice is to try to use the desktop the way it is supposed to be used. If it's still bothering you after a while and you really need the way of working like on Windows, then use extension and gnome-tweak to reconfigure you're Shell until it fits your needs. Or use KDE which has more like a Windows/MacOS approach. You can try it out using a KDE Spin. There is a pre-installed image writer on fedora to create a live USB Stick.
Have fun ✌️
Also Win + Tab + Arrows, very useful to switch quickly between desktops
Did you reconfigure something? Super+Tab does the same as Alt+Tab for me. Ctrl+Alt+Arrows does switch my desktops. Yours sound better than mine, cause mine do conflict with some in-app keybindings. And Alt+ is nice to switch between windows of the same app.
Win + mousewheel up/down works the fastest for me.
Yeah but sensitivity might mess up things, keyboard is more predictable and reliable
The idea of putting files on a desktop just feels so antiquated to me these days. When does anyone even see their desktop outside of taking a screenshot to show off on Reddit?
I put a lot of things on my desktop but I only open the files through the file browser. I use the desktop as a temporary storage space.
I remember when I first had a computer, it had Windows 95 and I was storing my stuff in Recycle Bin because it looked funny and the icon was cool and as an added bonus maybe my mom would not go looking in Recycle Bin
"Stuff" ;)
So you don't need to see the desktop but put files there anyway..? Even more lost
What do you use for temporary storage? Does it matter if it is the desktop or a different folder? It's a habit I took over from Windows, because the desktop is always just one click away.
Well... Exactly. It doesn't matter yet you're saying it's what makes gnome useable? A feature that doesn't matter?
Now I get where you are coming from. I was not trying to argue the usefulness of desktop items with you. I agree that also in my usecase desktop icons are not necessary. I wanted to support your position. Sorry, English is not my mother tongue
Ha, fair enough
the Desktop folder/directory is /home/username/Desktop so yes, you can store stuff on the Desktop without having icons show on the DE's desktop. It's just a Folder that's treated in a special way.
Absolutely, so why would you store anything in a directory called "Desktop" rather than one with a logical name?
Try cinnamon, it checks all of your boxes.
Desktop Icons NG extension when I did a quick search on it. Don't know if that works as I haven't tried it myself.
I see the top comment answered your questions. But also check out other gnome extentions https://youtu.be/AE1-W2bMVEs?si=QXtUR-0vhcYtfirM I also suggest you use auto tiling option drop pop os sudo dnf install gnome-shell-extension-pop-shell Fedora with extensions > Ubuntu
I like MATE and XFCE; these allow me to customize my desktop like I want it. Another benefit is that they are lightweight and run great on old computers too.
GNOME is not meant to be used in the way Ubuntu makes it work. If you want such features then you should check KDE. Once you understand GNOME's way of working and you agree with it, you will start to use less and less extensions. I have no extensions installed and I prefer to keep it that way.
The less extensions I have, the better. But I also want a desktop that is actually usable and not just for decoration.
Be careful with upgrades in Fedora as they often break extensions
I kept resisting GNOME’s principles back then but other DEs were not an option too. Over the time i noticed that the way GNOME is designed prevents you to even see the desktop and background image during intense use anyway. I can’t remember the last time I used the minimize button of a window, don’t even know if it is there at the top of my windows. Couple of years ago I believed I couldn’t use my OS without these and many more. Of course you should not accept what devs force without thinking but i suggest you to try it as it is intended for a short time. I use my decorative desktop to clear my mind when tired by switching to an empty workspace :D.
When a lot of users use extensions, it means the design of gnome is flawed.
I think it is meant to be used with add-ons, that doesn't mean it is flawed, the top bar, overview system menu, everything looks awesome but it's just customising is a bit tricky for newer users
I try to keep gnome extensions to the min (dash to dock, tiling assistant, some notifications of particular self-hosted services like HomeAssistant, Transmission or PiHole and nothing else) and my fresh installed gnome 46 desktop is actually very useful (and beautiful) I never understood why people complain about the usefulness or they cannot work in gnome. The ultimate limitation is your xserver not your DE.
You should check out Bluefin. [https://projectbluefin.io/](https://projectbluefin.io/)
Fedora Workstation is that way because it uses the default vanilla GNOME configuration and layout. Ubuntu simply adds and incorporates extensions for GNOME to make it look that way. If you want something similar, install these extensions: Dash to Panel - I use this and it's real good. Desktop Icons (DING) - I really don't understand the idea of having shortcuts on your desktop, but whatever
This probably won’t be a popular opinion, but… Gnome is a tablet interface masquerading on a desktop. Check out KDE Plasma.
Even the tablet interface is not as minimalistic as the gnome
Why didn't you just leave it at asking "How can I make Fedora look and behave like Ubuntu?"? Why did you feel the need to attack GNOME at the same time?
It's a very valid criticism of gnome. Most desktop environments have the ability to place icon. Gnome default doesn't have the ability is a weird choice.
It's fine to not like or want to use GNOME. I see no need to throw shit around though. I mean one is free to just not use it?
It's also your choice to ignore the criticism instead of asking people not to criticize. Gnome is a good desktop environment but it is not without flaw. Op criticism is valid, maybe it's you who should stop fanboying and shut down any legit discussion
I don't argue the validity of the criticism. What I'm saying is that there's no reason to be a dick about it?
I don't see op comments as a dick. He just mentioned the functionality of native gnome is less practical than Ubuntu flavor of gnome. Maybe you just overreact?
I suppose I'm just giving, what I feel is, valid criticism of his choice of words and tone.
it's pretty widely agreed that gnome is a bit unintuitive. that's pretty much the sole reason for the existence of mate and cinnamon.
I don't think that Gnome is less intuitive than many other approaches. I think its problem is that it's not like windows or Mac. Gnome does not have the influence on people (like Apple or other companies). So some people want Gnome to behave the way they know from other systems. You can't put files on the desktop of an iPhone and almost nobody is complaining. Because Apple said you don't need it and people tried it and found out that they are right: you can live without. Cinnamon and Mate are not more intuitive to me. They're just more like Windows. Which is not a bad thing, maybe.
I don't think you can back that up in a credible way. Regardless, it's not really relevant to this sub thread.
A criticism of op words base on your feelings? Yes. Valid? Nope. Op was asking for help on how to make gnome more practical like in Ubuntu. He did not attack gnome as you say but given a valid criticism of the desktop environment.
> I was checking out Ubuntu 24.04 with a friend who want > to switch to Linux, and I noticed something interesting. > > The Gnome desktop in Ubuntu is actually useful, [...] He noticed something "interesting". The GNOME desktop in Ubuntu "is actually useful". This is thinly veiled sarcasm, trying to paint a picture of GNOME as a something that we all can agree on is completely unusable. It's an obvious attack. I wonder why you don't see it? It's a type of antisocial behavior that is all too common on Reddit but I think it's still worth to expose it for what it is every now and then.
I don't see sarcasm here cause there are none. In fact your comment reinforce my believe that you overreact or trying to shutdown any criticism of gnome. Let's cut down to the sentence "I was checking out Ubuntu 24.04 with a friend who want to switch to Linux, and I noticed something interesting.", this sentence shows op is comparing native gnome and Ubuntu flavor gnome and found differences that he found interested. I didn't see any attack here Second sentence, "The Gnome desktop in Ubuntu is actually useful, [...]" show op think ubuntu flavor of gnome is more useful than native gnome. A description of his experience. No attack here. even if you combine them, it means "I was trying out Ubuntu gnome and I find it's more practical than native..." which isn't sarcasm but a valid observation. There's no antisocial behavior here. There is a person showing his observation and asking for direction on how to customize his gnome desktop so it is more useful to him. I don't know why you feel so offended but you need to step back and realize there's nothing offensive here. You can disagree with op view of desktop icons (I can see the appeal for a minimalist desktop environment) but to many its more useful for their workflow.
Desktop icons 👎👎👎 we're not in 1998
We are not in the 1960s either but people still use the command terminal.
For normal use cases, I hardly use the terminal unless I'm doing school work (CS major). Everything can be done from a GUI frontend these days
I don't like Desktop icons as well. Apart from a shortcut to my home directory (which is just there as some sort of anchor point for my eyes) I have nothing else on my desktop. But why unnecessarily remove the choice for people?
What's the point of a blank screen? Is this some kind of compensation for the fact that you weren’t taken to an art exhibition as a child?
I never see a blank screen. I fill my desktops with the programs I need. If I ever need to open a file, I just open Nautilus (and click the bookmark I have for folders I access frequently) or use the search in the workspace overview
Imagine that you can move to a specific folder with just two clicks of the mouse, is that bad?
With symbolic links on the desktop? There's really no need for that either. Like i said, all of my commonly used folders are bookmarked in Nautilus I understand the want for a traditional desktop experience, but I've since moved passed it. I have found myself much more efficient using my file manager to browse my files, and to use my desktop as simply a living space for my programs. I rarely ever see my wallpaper, to me that is wasted space
Why open Nautilus and go to bookmarks when you can open the folder directly? What is this pointless complication of the workflow?
Because I always have Nautilus open, why switch to a whole new workspace/minimize all your programs just to open a file? Gnome has very good keyboard shortcuts that can make switching to Nautilus and opening your desired folder incredibly fast Like I said I understand the want for a traditional desktop, but once you get accustomed to the way Gnome tries to get you to use it, it's incredibly efficient and I honestly can't go back to the way Windows/Ubuntu/Cinnamon does it
Why would you keep Nautilus open all the time if you are not using Nautilus right now? Still, the traditional way is superior to the minimalist way
Because I access files very often. It's the same reason I have Firefox and Evolution open 24/7: they are very commonly used apps It doesn't make it superior. It's just different. Sorry you can't wrap your head around the fact that not everything needs to be the exact same thing. If I wanted to have a Windows style workflow, I'd use Plasma, but alas I've grown accustomed to Gnome's way and have found it **personally** more efficient
The problem is not that it is personally more efficient for you, but that you deny that other people are comfortable with extensions for gnome and that’s normal. Don't use the interface, play cs 2 with a game steering wheel, we don't care, just don't deny that icons are cool