(This post and its featured image were generated by an LLM and reviewed by a human.)
The GNOME ecosystem has long been a cornerstone of the Linux desktop experience. With each new release, it brings a slew of new features, enhancements, and changes. One such change that has stirred up quite a bit of controversy is libadwaita. Introduced as a part of GNOME’s shift towards a unified look and feel, libadwaita has been met with mixed reactions. While it aims to provide a consistent design language across GNOME applications, it falls short in several key areas, making it a poor choice for many users and developers. Here’s why libadwaita is stupid and you shouldn’t use it.
1. Lack of Theming Support
One of the most glaring issues with libadwaita is its rigid stance on theming. Unlike its predecessor, GTK3, libadwaita imposes a strict adherence to the Adwaita design language. This means that users and developers have little to no flexibility when it comes to customizing the appearance of their applications. For a community that thrives on choice and personalization, this is a huge step backward.
Custom themes have always been a significant part of the Linux desktop experience. They allow users to tailor their environment to their personal taste and needs, fostering a sense of ownership and individuality. By locking users into a single design aesthetic, libadwaita strips away this freedom, making the desktop experience feel bland and uniform.
2. Alienation of Non-GNOME Users
The Linux community is diverse, with various desktop environments catering to different tastes and workflows. While GNOME has its dedicated user base, not everyone subscribes to its design philosophy. By enforcing a strict visual consistency, libadwaita alienates users of other desktop environments who might want to use GNOME applications.
For instance, KDE Plasma, XFCE, and other environments have their unique theming and design principles. When GNOME applications built with libadwaita are used in these environments, they often look out of place, breaking the visual harmony and coherence of the desktop.
3. Increased Fragmentation
libadwaita’s rigid design principles contribute to further fragmentation within the Linux ecosystem. Developers who want to create applications that adhere to their own design language or the design language of other desktop environments now have to look elsewhere or put in extra effort to circumvent libadwaita’s limitations. This can lead to a fragmented user experience, where applications look and behave inconsistently depending on the underlying toolkit used.
4. Stifling Innovation
By imposing a strict design language, libadwaita stifles innovation in user interface design. The beauty of the Linux ecosystem has always been its diversity and the freedom it offers to developers. Historically, this has led to a rich variety of interfaces and user experiences, driven by experimentation and user feedback.
With libadwaita, the GNOME project is essentially saying that there is only one correct way to design applications. This top-down approach discourages developers from experimenting with new ideas and design patterns that could potentially lead to better and more innovative user experiences.
5. Poor Backward Compatibility
Transitioning to libadwaita has been anything but smooth for many developers. Applications that were previously built with GTK3 often require significant rewrites to conform to libadwaita’s new paradigms. This not only increases the workload for developers but also introduces compatibility issues, leading to a fragmented ecosystem where old and new applications fail to coexist harmoniously.
Conclusion
While the intention behind libadwaita—to create a consistent and polished user experience—is commendable, its execution leaves much to be desired. By stripping away theming support, alienating non-GNOME users, increasing fragmentation, stifling innovation, and introducing compatibility issues, libadwaita ultimately does more harm than good.
The strength of the Linux ecosystem has always been its diversity and the freedom it offers to users and developers. By adopting such a rigid and uncompromising approach, libadwaita undermines these core values. As such, it’s high time the community reconsiders its stance on libadwaita and looks for alternatives that align better with the principles of choice and flexibility that have long defined the Linux experience.
So, if you care about the freedom to customize your desktop, the harmony of your environment, and the future of innovation in Linux UI design, it’s clear: libadwaita is stupid, and you shouldn’t use it.
