Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME Is Losing Relevance On The Linux Desktop

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    I still can't understand how people can NOT like Gnom3. I mean, it's the most comfortable and the most easiest to use desktop environment there is.

    You can control everything with your keyboard if you want to
    You really can't - the gimped keybindings are one of the things I hate most about GNOME Shell.

    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    you can control also everything with your mouse. You can do a hybrid version. The ways you've to 'go' with your mouse are extreme short and logical.
    It really feels like they designed it primarily with the mouse in mind, but explain how "Move mouse to top-left, then traverse the entire screen to the right" to access multiple desktops is short and logical.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by pdffs View Post
      You really can't - the gimped keybindings are one of the things I hate most about GNOME Shell.

      It really feels like they designed it primarily with the mouse in mind, but explain how "Move mouse to top-left, then traverse the entire screen to the right" to access multiple desktops is short and logical.
      ctrl + up/down can switch desktops without going into the overlay. You can also just alt tab, which by default shows applications from all desktops. To automatically open an app in a new desktop you can middle click on it from the overlay. I rarely find myself using my mouse to change desktops in gnome-shell.

      These days I prefer unity anyway though

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Detructor View Post
        I still can't understand how people can NOT like Gnom3. I mean, it's the most comfortable and the most easiest to use desktop environment there is.

        You can control everything with your keyboard if you want to, you can control also everything with your mouse. You can do a hybrid version. The ways you've to 'go' with your mouse are extreme short and logical.
        The problem is, the offered paradigms don't "scale" if you have many windows open.

        Sure, if you just have Firefox and Rhythmbox open, alt-tabbing is fine.

        But if you have 10 or 12 windows open, the absolute easiest way is to commit to muscle memory exactly where the window is relative to the position of the others in your taskbar, and just move the mouse down there and click it. It takes about 500 msec instead of "Alt-Tab... nope, not that one... alt-tab... nope, not that one... alt-tab... nope, not that one... alt-tab... nope, not that one... THERE we go!". And if you want to use the mouse, you have to move it all the way up to the top of the screen, then wait while it renders an iconified version of all the windows, then move your mouse to click on the one you want. That takes a lot of time. The other problem with the window selection is that the tiling feature "wraps" the windows around to the next line, so it's easy to lose track of the position of one window in the list. So for frequent task switchers (*raises hand*) it's useless.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
          ctrl + up/down can switch desktops without going into the overlay. You can also just alt tab, which by default shows applications from all desktops. To automatically open an app in a new desktop you can middle click on it from the overlay. I rarely find myself using my mouse to change desktops in gnome-shell.
          Yeah, my point was that their design for interaction was far from the "short and logical" that Detructor claimed. And there's a reason you don't use the mouse to do it - because it's painful

          Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
          These days I prefer unity anyway though
          Masochist :P

          Comment


          • #20
            Once Unity gets the new spread specifications implemented, It will be almost perfect for me.

            http://design.canonical.com/2012/03/...to-the-spread/

            Comment


            • #21
              I wish GNOME would have first made a GNOME 2.4 release which would have been GNOME 2.32 ported to GTK 3.
              Instead of jumping at GTK 3 and GNOME 3 at the same time.

              Then forks (MATE) would be using GTK 3 now instead of GTK 2.
              I hope that MATE keeps the GNOME 2 spirit but gets ported to GTK 3.

              I use Ubuntu 12.10 (alpha) with the gnome-classic-session which is like GNOME 2.32.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                I wish GNOME would have first made a GNOME 2.4 release which would have been GNOME 2.32 ported to GTK 3.
                Instead of jumping at GTK 3 and GNOME 3 at the same time.
                I think you've hit the nail on the head.

                Aaron Seigo from KDE mentioned that they chief thing they learned from the 4.0 release, was that it wasn't wise to port the applications and DE in the same stroke. (Not to mention they also switched to Qt 4). Perhaps there is a limit to how many changes people are prepared to accept at once. It's fine if all the apps are different, if the desktop is still the same as the one you've always known an loved. And people can accept the lack of a menu button, if the apps are still the same.

                I think that everyone has a person, internal limit that determines just how many changes they are prepared to accept at once before they're brain starts screaming at them that this is all a conspiracy to destroy everything they love in the world.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by AJSB View Post
                  I really don't like GNOME 3.x , KDE 4.x and even worse , UNITY.


                  For me is for a long time already XFCE or LXDE.
                  I love LXDE mostly because of;PCmanFM, lxterm and openbox. YMMV but when you get used to something it kinda becomes the way you look at how your PC should act. Lubuntu is beautiful as well for being a bloated (fully functional) Linux distro Michael, give it a shot will ya? KDE is beautiful no doubt, you should give it a chance as well. I have issues with it but I can't deny it's really cool.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by AJSB View Post
                    I really don't like GNOME 3.x , KDE 4.x and even worse , UNITY.


                    For me is for a long time already XFCE or LXDE.
                    I am on KDE on my work computer but whenever I have the chance I go to dwm. A project I have my eyes on however is Razor-qt which basically is an LXDE based on Qt.
                    I have always felt that Qt apps are nicer looking than their GTK counterparts.

                    e17 is nice too and now with the real release and the success of Bodhi, I hope we can see some evolution on that front too.
                    An e17/razor-Qt combo (rather than the more common e17/LXDE) could be interesting.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by StephanG View Post
                      I think you've hit the nail on the head.

                      Aaron Seigo from KDE mentioned that they chief thing they learned from the 4.0 release, was that it wasn't wise to port the applications and DE in the same stroke. (Not to mention they also switched to Qt 4). Perhaps there is a limit to how many changes people are prepared to accept at once. It's fine if all the apps are different, if the desktop is still the same as the one you've always known an loved. And people can accept the lack of a menu button, if the apps are still the same.

                      I think that everyone has a person, internal limit that determines just how many changes they are prepared to accept at once before they're brain starts screaming at them that this is all a conspiracy to destroy everything they love in the world.
                      Not only that, but it would have been nicer with an indeterminate release of GNOME 2 with GTK 3 because people might want to fork if they don't like GNOME 3.

                      If there were a GNOME 2.4 release with GTK 3 then MATE could be using GTK 3 instead of GTK 2 now, that would be nicer.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by StephanG View Post
                        I think that everyone has a person, internal limit that determines just how many changes they are prepared to accept at once before they're brain starts screaming at them that this is all a conspiracy to destroy everything they love in the world.
                        Well said.

                        Personally, I'm still waiting for Gnome to become as flexible and feature-rich as a simple XFCE+compiz combo. Otherwise I don't think it's that bad IF (!!) you buy into the whole usage pattern paradigm. If you don't, it makes you want to throw your hardware at the wall or out the window within minutes. In that respect it's very much like a commercial OS.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                          If there were a GNOME 2.4 release with GTK 3 then MATE could be using GTK 3 instead of GTK 2 now, that would be nicer.
                          Gnome 3 Fallback Mode is basically Gnome 2 ported to GTK 3 with some bugfixes:
                          http://www.vuntz.net/journal/post/20...e-gnome-panel!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by allquixotic View Post
                            The problem is, the offered paradigms don't "scale" if you have many windows open.

                            Sure, if you just have Firefox and Rhythmbox open, alt-tabbing is fine.

                            But if you have 10 or 12 windows open, the absolute easiest way is to commit to muscle memory exactly where the window is relative to the position of the others in your taskbar, and just move the mouse down there and click it.
                            to be honest, when I'm on linux I use the tiling manager/work spaces. I've two to three windows per work space (since there is a neat plug-in that advances the default tiling manager of Gnome3 that's pretty easy to do for more than two windows) and just go through the spaces when I've to.

                            I can remember more precisely on which space an application was simply because it was grouped with another application there (probably). I use alt-tab barely on gnome3. Only to switch between two terminal windows maybe (because none of those require me using the mouse)

                            I also never really liked the application switches. The bar was too full after a few hours of work and I always had to reach out for the mouse.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by bug77 View Post
                              So, not even considering KDE? I'd love to know your reasoning. I'm genuinely curious, since I have been using KDE at work for some time (on and off). I'd like to know what a Gnome user thinks about KDE.
                              Here's what a Gnome user who used KDE (4.2 - 4.6) for about 1 year thinks about KDE: It crashes a lot and is unpolished. For the longest time there were tiny visual bugs in apps, notifications, plasma, etc. that kept piling up over time, making the desktop experience look like Windows 98. Also I dislike that I need to spend 5 minutes configuring every new KDE program that I install (I know I'm exaggerating, but you get my point). My first impression coming from Gnome was that it was awesome and gave me all the power to configure what I wanted. Soon I realized that this meant spending lots of time configuring stuff, because of all this "power". It has great programs, but most of them are full of features that I never needed to use once. I also think that Gnome is exaggerating with the "simplification" business, but still most Gnome apps are easier to look at due to the lack of visual clutter, something that to me is important. I don't know how Calligra is doing, but KOffice was unusable due to the lack of text editing and spreadsheet features (ironic!). Things I liked about KDE: Dolphin, Digikam, KLauncher (I think it was the name... it's the "start menu") because at that time it was the better desktop integrated tool for quickly launching applications using the keyboard.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by devius View Post
                                Here's what a Gnome user who used KDE (4.2 - 4.6) for about 1 year thinks about KDE: (cut)
                                Agreed 100%. And having tried almost any linux desktop environment / window manager out there, I still find Gnome 3 a much better choice than the others (unless you're using an old pc, in which case I'd use xfce and/or openbox). Gnome 3 is fast and intuitive, works fine on my netbook (unlike KDE) and I can almost avoid using the mouse (unlike Gnome 2).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X