Gnome 3.0

molom · 2009-04-24 17:17:56

Lexion wrote:

compiz IS a WM. I've used it standalone.

I know

molom · 2009-04-24 17:20:11

moljac024 wrote:

That's just it with all these new interface "innovations". It all only looks neat and doesn't improve usability.
I'm actually thinking that there really isn't much to improve, or it's hard for everyone to break from the current interface mentality.

That's the exact reason, the mouse and keyboard interface has been used for too long and it has reached it's peak in usability. That's why you have companies like MS trying to innovate in touch screen capabilities.

cb474 · 2009-04-25 04:19:58

I feel like I'd have to use this to decide if it added usability for me or not. I does look cool, which I don't mind. But I wouldn't want it to demand enormous greater amounts of resources and demand a super new processor. The thing I like about Gnome (over KDE) is that it's more simple and straight forward to me, while still being a full desktop environment with all the features I want. I guess it strikes a good balance, for me, between the lighter environments like XFCE and the eye candy heavy environments.

I do wonder though if Gnome is stuck with a situation where eye candy is the order of the day and it if wants to maintain its popularity it has to go that direction, usability or not. Ironically, I could see this resulting in a movement away to something else, like XFCE, until that grows and gets too big and something replaces it, etc., ad inifitum. Maybe as projects get bigger and more popular they unavoidably become bloat, despite the best intentions. Ubuntu certainly seems to suffer from this.

Anyway, I hope Gnome finds a way to focus on usability, over eye-candy for it's own sake.

I also wish, with all the focus on workspaces, that Gnome would provide a feature I've always wanted: separate desktops. I want to have different icons and files on separate desktops, in each workspace, and have them always open that way on startup. It drives me crazy to see the same files and icons on every desktop and seems pointless.

Last edited by cb474 (2009-04-25 09:34:59)

na12 · 2009-04-25 06:25:36

I also wish, with all the focus on workspaces, that Gnome would provide a feature I've always wanted: separate desktops. I want to have different icons and files on separate desktops, in each workspace, and have them always open that way on startup. It drives me crazy to see the same files and icons on every desktop and seems pointless.

+1

bernarcher · 2009-04-25 07:55:39

Concerning workspaces:

The first time I learned about workspaces, years ago on KDE, the concept fascinated me. But also my exceptions never were fulfilled. I want the workspace concept functionally extended. Something like workmap folders each associated to a separate workspace, e.g. all correspondence on one workspace, programming on another, creative writing on yet another etc. These kinds of workspace environments should easily be saved, removed and restored on demand using a fast and decent GUI. Something elaborating on this would be a real improvement for my needs.

When KDE 4 came out I hoped the plasma concept would point in this direction. But, alas, it is bloated and as yet broken. So why don't have it in Gnome 3 or better yet universally implemented, fast and easy to maintain, so that it would even run on my IceWM here?

Last edited by bernarcher (2009-04-25 07:59:00)

cb474 · 2009-04-25 09:31:59

bernarcher wrote:

I want the workspace concept functionally extended. Something like workmap folders each associated to a separate workspace, e.g. all correspondence on one workspace, programming on another, creative writing on yet another etc. These kinds of workspace environments should easily be saved, removed and restored on demand using a fast and decent GUI.

Yeah, something like that is what I have in mind too. I suppose the panels could even be customized differently for each workspace. Different menus, different quick launch buttons, all oriented toward the applications appropriate to the area for which the workspace is used (e.g. writing, surfing, programming, etc.).

Perhaps it is more complicated to do this for some reason, as compared to something like compiz, which for the most part simply adds more elaborate graphics and animation to windows and workspaces, as they are already defined.

bernarcher · 2009-04-25 10:04:03

cb474 wrote:

I suppose the panels could even be customized differently for each workspace. Different menus, different quick launch buttons, all oriented toward the applications appropriate to the area for which the workspace is used (e.g. writing, surfing, programming, etc.).

Exactly what's in my mind.
Ideally, if you have some routine job to do, you go to the workspace in question, load your workmap if necessary, and start exactly in the environment suiting to this task where you left off. Even months after...

Now, how to make this one tasteful to the Gnome developers?

cb474 · 2009-04-25 10:18:12

Yeah, having the possibility for truly independent workspaces, with Gnome panels and windows otherwise working the way they already do, seems like a much more radical and useful innovation than GnomeShell in it's current state. It wouldn't on first glance look different, but it would be a more real functional change.

The more I look at GnomeShell, the more I don't see what it adds. At first blush I thought: That's cool. I want that! But now when I think about it, it seems like it just adds a slightly different way to switch between work spaces (which actually requires more key strokes and/or mouse movements); and a slightly different way to move windows between workspaces (maybe a little easier than the current system). But the workspaces as workspaces are essentially the same.

The panel of course has been changed. But mostly it seems like what you get is really just a drop down menu that offers you favorite/recent applications and recent documents. It just animates the appearance of this menu in an new way that seems really different at first. But functionally it's not any different than a drop down/pop up menu. And it's actually much more limited than the current menu system, because it's limited to two default (somewhat arbitrarily selected) menus. In a way, it's like just a simplifeid slab style pop up menu. You can also apparently type in the names of apps and files to call them up (something already offered by GnomeDo).

It all looks simpler and more elegant. But sometimes that is actually not a better solution. A little space for complexity is not always a bad thing. And again, GnomeShell functionally is not much different than what we already have.

Anyway, I guess we should post our thoughts in the appropriate Gnome forums.

Last edited by cb474 (2009-04-25 10:21:51)

combuster · 2009-04-25 11:07:58

Well I'm pretty much unimpressed... I like to have as many information about my box as possible on my desktop without any affect on usability and efficiency of course... So as far as I am concerned if they leave enough customizable options in Gnome 3 I'll use it, if not it's gonna be some other, lighter DE...

daf666 · 2009-04-25 12:02:23

looks like a needless attempt to compete with the KDE/windows 7 hype.. do I need to wait for the whole desktop shrinking and expanding to launch a terminal? KISS.

cb474 · 2009-04-25 19:27:42

daf666 wrote:

do I need to wait for the whole desktop shrinking and expanding to launch a terminal? KISS.

That's a good point. If you're working in just one workspace, it could be really annoying to have the desktop shrink and expand every time you launch something.

molom · 2009-04-26 08:28:35

I'll like to see Ubuntu's response to Gnome 3 if the final version looks and works like this.

Varreon · 2009-04-26 16:26:27

I cant say I like it. What happens if you have more than 5 programs installed on your computer?

What I think would be a much better design:
Enable dragging and dropping of windows from the pager preview to your active desktop or another pager icon. To launch applications, I'd stick with the gnome-2 style panel

Skripka · 2009-04-26 17:06:31

daf666 wrote:

looks like a needless attempt to compete with the KDE/windows 7 hype.. do I need to wait for the whole desktop shrinking and expanding to launch a terminal? KISS.

Well, Yes.

For Gnome to win over converts from Windows/Mac as well as please critics, they need to cater to that base. No matter WHAT the Gnome devs do-they're not going to please a great many folks. Most current Gnome users like Gnome as it is, with no desire to have the wheel reinvented....whereas critics and new users, want more bling a la KDE4/Win7/OSX.

lucke · 2009-04-26 17:30:50

In KDE 4.2 there's a support for what some of you want - activities, which allow to have task-oriented workspaces. KDE 4.3 should improve on it.

aardwolf · 2009-04-27 12:13:58

kensai wrote:

Is sad, I have always been a GNOME user, and now I am on KDE4 because here is where progress is being made.

They have ruined the search function of Kate, made it extremely hard to select multiple files in file open dialogs, and ruined EVERYTHING that was good about Konqueror 3.5 as file manager. Furthermore, they limited what you can do with the taskbar on the desktop and have graphical glitches in the taskbar (especially the tray) on every PC I've seen KDE 4.2 on, which never got fixed in 4.0, 4.1 or 4.2.

Where do you see the progress???

Last edited by aardwolf (2009-04-27 12:14:52)

alexandrite · 2009-04-27 12:47:11

Skripka wrote:

daf666 wrote:
looks like a needless attempt to compete with the KDE/windows 7 hype.. do I need to wait for the whole desktop shrinking and expanding to launch a terminal? KISS.
Well, Yes.

For Gnome to win over converts from Windows/Mac as well as please critics, they need to cater to that base. No matter WHAT the Gnome devs do-they're not going to please a great many folks. Most current Gnome users like Gnome as it is, with no desire to have the wheel reinvented....whereas critics and new users, want more bling a la KDE4/Win7/OSX.

In the end, it it really helpful to anyone to do marketing for free software? It seems like they would have to sacrifice usability, alienating their user base to do so, in order to attract a potential new user base that may not even like the complicated "two-mode" interface. In the end, writing your software to pleace critics and attract new users is destructive to the project. Most of the software I use and like (including Arch Linux itself) is made with the thought that if you write something that works well, then people will come to use it because of its own merits instead of its power to draw users in with the pointless eyecandy they are used to seeing.

cb474 · 2009-04-27 21:05:41

alexandrite wrote:

In the end, it it really helpful to anyone to do marketing for free software? It seems like they would have to sacrifice usability, alienating their user base to do so, in order to attract a potential new user base that may not even like the complicated "two-mode" interface. In the end, writing your software to pleace critics and attract new users is destructive to the project. Most of the software I use and like (including Arch Linux itself) is made with the thought that if you write something that works well, then people will come to use it because of its own merits instead of its power to draw users in with the pointless eyecandy they are used to seeing.

Yeah, I wonder it's possible to become a big as Windows or even OS X without becoming exactly like them and taking on all the problems they have. Not being the most popular thing may have the benefit of being who/what you want to be. I too worry that Gnome now has a stated goal of promoting itself more.

smartboyathome · 2009-04-28 22:03:17

cb474 wrote:

Perhaps it is more complicated to do this for some reason, as compared to something like compiz, which for the most part simply adds more elaborate graphics and animation to windows and workspaces, as they are already defined.

I don't think it would be overly complicated, especially with GNOME going the way of E17, a la combining the panel and window border into a "desktop shell". E17 has had this function for ages as an option for their shelves (desktop hasn't had it, but then again the E17 desktop is kind of lacking), which means it shouldn't be too hard to implement, and definitely isn't too heavy on resources, as if it were E17 wouldn't have included it.

Rasi · 2009-04-28 23:06:15

aardwolf wrote:

kensai wrote:
Is sad, I have always been a GNOME user, and now I am on KDE4 because here is where progress is being made.
They have ruined the search function of Kate, made it extremely hard to select multiple files in file open dialogs, and ruined EVERYTHING that was good about Konqueror 3.5 as file manager. Furthermore, they limited what you can do with the taskbar on the desktop and have graphical glitches in the taskbar (especially the tray) on every PC I've seen KDE 4.2 on, which never got fixed in 4.0, 4.1 or 4.2.
Where do you see the progress???

First of all, i knew someone would start a kde rant in this topic...

anyway.. why is it hard to select multiple files? heard of the ctrl key? or simply turn on doubleclick mode again...

and the taskbar is limited? cant agree.. what do you miss? multiple line taskmanager? it exists. Resizing? exists. autohiding? exists. window can cover? its there. place any widget from desktop in your panel? oh wait, kicker couldnt do this. Honestly, plasma allows so many things to be done (also with the panel) its hard to believe kicker could do more.

the graphical glitches have never been kde's fault and the fact you mention them shows you havent tried kde for quite some time. (or you have a crappy old card with crappy old drivers) - its fixed since nvidia driver 180.xx
intel never had those problems and i am not sure about ati.

cant say anything about konqueror since krusader is way better anyway

but now, back to topic

Anikom15 · 2009-05-01 22:34:29

DE's are too bloated, WM's take too long to setup and have little annoyances. I'm gonna try XFCE next and see what I think, but I have a feeling I'll be searching for a suitable DE or WM again.

BTW, X sucks, and I think we need a rewrite or a whole new server. However it'll need to be compatible with X to catch on.

The Unabeefer · 2009-05-01 22:43:04

I was trying Fluxbox the other day, but the bloat is WAY too much for me...

duendetuc · 2009-05-20 04:25:19

I want to close windows with a middle click on the window box at the gnome panel. Like tabs in firefox. I don't know why this wasn't implemented yet.
I have searched somewhere to make this suggestion to gnome developers but I didn't find it.

Sorry my English.

Ghost1227 · 2009-05-20 14:33:53

Anikom15 wrote:

DE's are too bloated, WM's take too long to setup and have little annoyances. I'm gonna try XFCE next and see what I think, but I have a feeling I'll be searching for a suitable DE or WM again.
BTW, X sucks, and I think we need a rewrite or a whole new server. However it'll need to be compatible with X to catch on.

I don't remember what it was called off the top of my head, but there was a post recently regarding a project that attempted to do just that. IIRC it was still in alpha stage, but is being actively worked on.

Everyone else: Lotsa good arguments, and I wholeheartedly agree with the majority of you. I probably wouldn't even use GNOME3 other than a quick install just to see how it works. So... who wants to start a new DE project?

Primoz · 2009-05-20 15:11:08

Ghost1227 wrote:

Anikom15 wrote:
DE's are too bloated, WM's take too long to setup and have little annoyances. I'm gonna try XFCE next and see what I think, but I have a feeling I'll be searching for a suitable DE or WM again.
BTW, X sucks, and I think we need a rewrite or a whole new server. However it'll need to be compatible with X to catch on.
I don't remember what it was called off the top of my head, but there was a post recently regarding a project that attempted to do just that. IIRC it was still in alpha stage, but is being actively worked on.
Everyone else: Lotsa good arguments, and I wholeheartedly agree with the majority of you. I probably wouldn't even use GNOME3 other than a quick install just to see how it works. So... who wants to start a new DE project?

While I like KDE and probably wouldn't change it for any new DE, I would like to see a DE based on Fluxbox.
Something like LXDE is for OpenBox. That's just an idea.
Or something that uses tilling WM.

Last edited by Primoz (2009-05-20 15:11:34)

Arch Linux

#26 2009-04-24 17:17:56

Re: Gnome 3.0

#27 2009-04-24 17:20:11

Re: Gnome 3.0

#28 2009-04-25 04:19:58

Re: Gnome 3.0

#29 2009-04-25 06:25:36

Re: Gnome 3.0

#30 2009-04-25 07:55:39

Re: Gnome 3.0

#31 2009-04-25 09:31:59

Re: Gnome 3.0

#32 2009-04-25 10:04:03

Re: Gnome 3.0

#33 2009-04-25 10:18:12

Re: Gnome 3.0

#34 2009-04-25 11:07:58

Re: Gnome 3.0

#35 2009-04-25 12:02:23

Re: Gnome 3.0

#36 2009-04-25 19:27:42

Re: Gnome 3.0

#37 2009-04-26 08:28:35

Re: Gnome 3.0

#38 2009-04-26 16:26:27

Re: Gnome 3.0

#39 2009-04-26 17:06:31

Re: Gnome 3.0

#40 2009-04-26 17:30:50

Re: Gnome 3.0

#41 2009-04-27 12:13:58

Re: Gnome 3.0

#42 2009-04-27 12:47:11

Re: Gnome 3.0

#43 2009-04-27 21:05:41

Re: Gnome 3.0

#44 2009-04-28 22:03:17

Re: Gnome 3.0

#45 2009-04-28 23:06:15

Re: Gnome 3.0

#46 2009-05-01 22:34:29

Re: Gnome 3.0

#47 2009-05-01 22:43:04

Re: Gnome 3.0

#48 2009-05-20 04:25:19

Re: Gnome 3.0

#49 2009-05-20 14:33:53

Re: Gnome 3.0

#50 2009-05-20 15:11:08

Re: Gnome 3.0

Board footer