I would get his argument if say there was just Ubuntu, and Gnome was the only desktop in town, but it isn't. You have XFCE, LXDE, KDE, and not to mention the litany of window managers out there that either run a standalone desktop or on top of another desktop. I occasionally look over on /r/unixporn and see some of the crazy wm configs people have put together.

And if you just like the good ol' days of gnome 2 then go install mate (Gnome 2 fork) or trinity (KDE 3.5 fork)

Many companies and now projects have come to a realization:

Customizability = Complexity = More Maintenance

FOSS groups can’t really afford to have a bajillion options they need to maintain and test compatibility between them. Also, maintenance (especially for free) isn’t fun.

> Customizability = Complexity = More Maintenance

There's truth to this but the extent to which it's true I think depends on how much the system was built customizability in mind.

So for extensive customizability to work without being a serious impediment to development, it needs to be a goal from the start, and most cases it isn't — it's more common for that type of feature to be bolted on further down the road.

It's the last point that rubs me.

FOSS should be whatever the developers decide it should be. It's not up to the users to decide what requirements a piece of software should fulfill.

Thanks for the summary. I don't see anything there of concern (to me).

  - I'm not leaning into Gnome (or Ubuntu/Canonical)
  - Don't need my desktop to be fun, it should get out of the way for the real fun
  - Can't say I've ever used more than 4 desktops

The last two seem particular to individual desktops or opinion.

is compiz fun really gone though? You can have debates about the rest of it, but it seems like folks really have kept most of the compiz stuff like wobbly and burning windows alive :)