well i have been thinking a bit and got a few ideas
fixing natively Fraction scaling 100% 125% 150% 175% 200%
Beter graphical support of rendning the systems windows (still lags with Intel Arc B580 -Battlemage).
where is graphical trippel buffering on Mate?
what is the plan of modernising of Desktop Mate for year 2025/2026
Mate is a traditional desktop. Why do you want to modernize it? I want it to stay traditional. Otherwise I would use gnome 3, which Mate forked from gnome 2, which was a traditional desktop!
Which distribution are you using? To my knowledge, the performance of the Intel Arc depends greatly on kernel and firmware; which means more than just the "desktop" itself could be to blame.
The roadmap is here: Roadmap | MATEwiki - Wayland support is probably the next big ticket item. I don't know how this will play out with compositors for a full Wayland (Ubuntu) MATE experience - so how triple buffering fits in to the plan is unclear (to me). I don't experience any issues that convince me that triple buffering is needed regardless - but I use a rather simple (Ubuntu) MATE setup (no fancy Compiz stuff etc).
Wait wait…what does our friend mean here by “modernize” exactly?
They could just mean Wayland finally being fully supported?
I hope that's what they mean. Modernise to be compatible with the latest technologies people need to use and NOT MODERNISE in function/appearance.
Honestly In my opinion the move to Yaru was too much "modernisation" for me. Leave me with my Ambiant MATE theme!
Jaymo
Some things, in the hidden layers, need to evolve/modernize to ensure it continues to be compatible/workable with the environment evolving around UbuntuMATE. I am sure that the only reason Yaru was implemented was because the way HTML/XML/DOM was evolving was forcing the need to implement a GUI layer "engine" concept which ensured that the "headland" packages, upon which the UM DM was dependant, did not leave our much-love GUI broken, unless something changed. 
Some things just can't be avoided, as the saying goes, like taxes or death! I think Yaru was one of those inevitables to ensure an interraction as close as possible to what we had before. Imagine if @Wimpy had not made Yaru happen, keeping UM's need predominant in his mind but, instead, the time came when we were forced to adopt a similar layer but conceived by someone, for example, whose vested interest was more in line with Elementary OS !!! While I did not "enjoy" the forced switch, I came to accept that it wasn't forcing a complete rethink at the GUI level (only at the underlying ease of customization).
"Most major desktops like GNOME, KDE, Xfce, Cinnamon, and MATE work fine with either Xorg or Wayland. However, some effects, features, and apps may be limited under Wayland. " - thelinuxcode
To read more:
Thank you for this article @jymm ! I enjoyed reading it and now I know about the differences between the X11 and Wayland a bit more as well. The quote that intrigued me is this one:
"So in most cases, Linux desktop users will be able to transition to Wayland without issues. But niche and proprietary software may necessitate keeping Xorg around." - I think that future will be a bit rocky for slow implementation of Wayland but when the switch does come MATE DE will be more than ready to go with Wayland
I think every change is difficult but sometimes necessary so we can keep up with new ideas/technologies, key thing is implementing old with the new to get a sturdy and solid mixture, an alloy if you will, that will manage our old needs with new possibilities 
Yes, that would be nice. And free scaling would be even better.
The problem belongs to OS/Kernel/Driver domain and not to desktop environment.
IMHO, triple buffering means that the software in question critically underperforms. Is it Gnome or Wayland I wonder?
I think change will soon become a real problem as AI makes new and more powerful hardware quicker than we are willing to spend money.
Linux a has been very good at supporting old, medium aged and new software. As hardware quickly develops will it still be able to do that or will old hardware quickly lose support? Think of the lines of code this could add to the kernel.
I am not a big supporter of AI and I am a bit of a tech Luddite.
@ericmarceau I completely understand your point and, I would much rather have a cohesive UM desktop than one that is forced to be disjointed because themes couldn't keep up with the times (between GTK3 and GTK4 apps, for example).
I guess, for me, Yaru looks good and I definitely appreciate the efforts @Wimpy and the UM team have made to ensure a very cohesive, visually appealing experience, but Ambiant MATE was one of those things that set UM apart visually, and made UM feel like a haven for those of us not happy with the new-ish UI style of design (i.e., prefer skeumorphic design to the flat look).
I understand, as time progresses, the preferences of the masses change and evolve, but there are times I wish some things could just stay as is, and the theming stuff is one of them. I don't mean to bash Yaru as it is a good theme and works well across many app platforms, but I generally have this opinion/dislike about flat design of the late 2010's and onward in general.
Hopefully I did not stray too far off the topic of this thread. This may be more of a philosophical statement than anything to do with Ubuntu MATE or MATE suggestions or improvements.
Jaymo
Although I too absolutely loved Ambient MATE, the "internal infrastructure" of the "Ambient" family of themes was such that it hamstrung developers who definitely needed to improve the core OS, but couldn't implement those improvements without eventually breaking all the "Ambients".
Again, I too hate change for the sake of change ... but ... change must happen, or the OS/DM will be abandoned by more and more users, rather than being adopted.
To grow UM, the environment must be able to offer advantages that other DMs don't. I believe that having a "safe haven" offering a known, stable quantity (i.e. UM) is attractive in itself for all those who have the wisdom to recognize that innermost need for their primary channel onto the world!
What I think undermines the attraction to UM may be the fact that there is an appearance of conflict between "stable GUI", for what is visible, and "continuity of assured service/compatibility" for the hidden layers of the OS/DM, or their ability to incorporate evolving capabilities that others may wish to add, without supplanting those that exist.
The how for reconciling those two strong needs, and communicate an assurance that they are both delivered with every release, is beyond my experience and skillset.
I believe the original points of this thread has been already addressed, and well as it seems to me. However, I feel compelled to share my thoughts regarding this matter. I reserve the opinion that MATE is already fine as it is, because I consider GNOME 2 as finished (good) work.
Inheriting from a finished work and pushing it forward, I love how the MATE desktop has strictly adhered to the former's traditional metaphors across how many years. It is what appeals to its audience, and I believe modernizing in the sense that I got it from OP, would dissipate that appeal and so would the audience gradually diminish. Not a very good thing. It's like leaving your best friend behind, for no good reason whatsoever.
Or simply put, that removes the raison d'etre. So, what for?
With GNOME 2 being finished about 14 years ago, there are a lot of things to be done. @ericmarceau and @stephematician already mentioned some of them.
One that I'd like to add, and have struggled with numerous times before is the consistency of look and feel across the apps. I hold the belief that it's becoming more prevalent across GTK apps, particularly those using 4 and libadwaita. I assume most of you have experienced that before, unless you specifically avoid or don't really need those apps. It just happens to be unnerving to open your desktop one day to find out that your apps revolted against your theming as if your aesthetic choices really are that bad.
But hey! If it is, no shaming, right?
I believe that this is related to the argument of a handful few that MATE lacks apps of its own, kind of in the same regard as Xfce. Though I find this immaterial against the fact that people are usually gonna pick up something along the way which they like better and often has more features. Such as in the case of a media player, where people I know tend to go with VLC.
Getting back on the topic, I believe MATE can do better in that regard. Just recently, Linux Mint had figured out how to work around libadwaita in some of the GNOME apps they've previously downgraded. It sure is handy that they've also worked on Mint X on that regard. I'm pretty sure MATE and its loyal fleet could collaborate with the Mint team on this matter. Just imagine, how nice it'd be to have a desktop so coherent, Windows 11 would be so bashful of it lol.
TL;DR: MATE is a nice upkeep of already finished, well-done work. It'd be nice if they figure out the theming for newer apps, like Linux Mint did.
22 posts were split to a new topic: Adapting to the future of app theming
I wish MATE had a builtin automatic wallpaper changer like Xfce has.