I see, the time does but the round doesn’t. I saw the round and assumed they’d be the same, oops!

Oh of course! I meant to say they aren’t worth it to me, folks’ uses and wants for a smartwatch vary so widely. I totally agree that the pebbles have great aesthetics, and the issues about data collection for pretty much everything else on the market. I do wish the new pebbles had a heart rate monitor, though.

The bangle and the pebble both have the e-paper display, but as far as I know they’re the only ones. They’re a huge draw for me, I love not having a bright screen that kills the battery.

I got introduced to smartwatches with the original pebble time, and when Rebble stopped working on my phone I switched to a Bangle.js 2. I still have some nostalgia for pebbles, but the bangle is pretty much just better for everything except aesthetics, and is less than half the cost. The new pebbles just aren’t worth it, unfortunately.

tl;dr (understandable, to be honest): on a technical level, modern GNOME prioritizes polish at the expense of flexibility, and COSMIC is focused on customizability. Bad communication aside, they have fundamentally different goals and audiences.

Acknowledging that this is a 4-year-old article, I think it’s important to read this as a very one-sided perspective. However, I am certainly not defending System76, as it does seem like some pretty poor behavior if the article is to be believed.

I’m going to look past the issues over communication and behavior, as others have already addressed that in this thread. Other than that, it seems that the main issue is arguing over the role of GNOME in the software ecosystem. How I see this is that:

• System76 is arguing for backwards compatibility and and more customizability.
• GNOME is arguing for “bulletproof” theming of apps by restricting user choice and modularity.

Honestly, I think this is pretty reflective of how the current state of the respective DEs.

GNOME is the cleanest, most polished Linux desktop environment, if you use it exactly as the designers of GNOME envision. If you want any options outside the extremely limited set GNOME provides by default, you need to rely on extensions, which are less stable and less polished, and may or may not be updated to new DE versions.

COSMIC is a clean-sheet implementation designed around modularity. It’s really the main thing they talk about. It has the advantage of being Wayland-only, and (supposedly) pretty much every element of the DE is modular, and there is a pretty substantial amount of customization available even in the fairly barebones 1.0 implementation.

In terms of COSMIC “just being GNOME with extra color options”, I disagree. I really like the UI design concept of GNOME, and ten versions ago I used it all the time. However, over the last few versions it’s become very locked-down into only supporting one narrow way of using the desktop, and I need features outside that (e.g. system tray, options for window tiling, etc.). Even with ten extensions modifying the behavior – which causes stability issues when I get a new GNOME version – I still find things which bother me and are only fixable with manual dconf editing, which means I just can’t daily-drive GNOME.

I think that’s who COSMIC is really for: someone who wants less windows-y, more intentional UI design than KDE, but with good customizability. It sucks if the creators of a pretty neat new DE were not effective participants in their previous DE, so I really hope they don’t make the same mistake with COSMIC, and manage it properly as an open source project.