Fedora reawakens the hibernation debate

> GNOME has always been against the spirit of empowering the user anyway, in the real sense. Instead of giving the user tools to compose a workflow that suits them best, and the "features" like these they'd like to turn on or off, they seem to be more focused on imposing a certain workflow, focusing on their brand, a certain way of doing things, in that you need to adapt to the way they envision GNOME to work.

Devil's advocate: someone who can look after themself can easily install what they need to make their system configurable to their heart's content, so they haven't lost much. Someone who cannot is probably better served by a simpler, less configurable system, even if it is not quite optimal for their needs. The standard system is also much better tested, which is a big plus for less capable users. So much the theory, I realise that the practice is probably far away.

I am in neither group: I am a capable user, but I do not want to waste time fiddling with my system or running into strange bugs because I tried out interesting options. I like being able to take a new system and be up and running in a couple of hours, and for that I am willing to adapt to the system rather than adapting it to me. So I am probably one of the small group who appreciates the way GNOME do things.