XFCE is also a useful desktop interface. Unity might be good for tablet minded people but, at least, I found it to be highly disruptive of making any sort of useful workflow. Whichever shell one chooses Lilypond always performs excellently.
Shane Brandes On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Bric <b...@flight.us> wrote: > On 11/03/2014 08:09 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Bric wrote: >> >>> One particular, however: I would stay away from "Unity", and opt for >>> "GNOME" during installation. Someone could still correct me and persuade me >>> about the glory of Unity, but I have instinctively disliked it from its >>> inception, and am happily using the "traditional" Gnome. >> >> >> With "traditional" do you mean Gnome 2.x or the new Gnome 3.x + >> Gnome-shell? >> >> Just like Unity (which I have not tried yet) Gnome3/Gnome-shell can be >> quite a shock if you are looking for a "traditional" desktop. I am really >> happy with it now, but it did take some time to get used to. >> >> There are other alternatives if you are looking for something more >> "traditional". Linux = freedom of choice. >> > > good point. I guess there was a big leap from 2 to 3. I am using 3.10.4 > currently. The bigger differences though are internal, AFAICT; the exterior > of 3 doesn't seem that much different from 2.0. (And I did use the word > "traditional" in quotes, originally ;-) > > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
