Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 3.x Will Bring Back Some GNOME 2 Features

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

  • #31
    @kigurai
    thats actually a good plan, you got a nice setup there

    only problem i got with it is that i dont like tabed terminals so i got a minimum of 3 terminals per virtual desktop



    isnt the point of the desktop environment to give you windows/apps/whatever and stay out of your way ?
    i want 3+ terminals in one virtual desktop, so gnome3 users will hate me and call me a troll ?

    but for a more normal(firefox only) user gnome3 is pretty good
    i got it on the computer my family uses

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by gens View Post
      only problem i got with it is that i dont like tabed terminals so i got a minimum of 3 terminals per virtual desktop

      isnt the point of the desktop environment to give you windows/apps/whatever and stay out of your way ?
      i want 3+ terminals in one virtual desktop, so gnome3 users will hate me and call me a troll ?

      but for a more normal(firefox only) user gnome3 is pretty good
      i got it on the computer my family uses
      I can't speak for all "GNOME3 users", but personally I could not care less how you organize your work. Do whatever fits you best.
      What I do not like is the constant "GNOME3 is not for people doing real work" (like your comment above), because it is arrogant, and not true.
      And most of all, it is not constructive at all. It helps no one.
      Last edited by kigurai; 11-22-2012, 10:06 AM. Reason: clarification, also sanity.

      Comment


      • #33
        hmm, yes it can be interpreted as arrogant
        i apologies if it insulted you, let me clarify

        real work can be done on ANY desktop environment
        actually if you dont need firefox, it can be done on a tty easily

        my point is that gnome3 is due to its little quirks not so good as for example gnome2 or any other with tabs or a "normal" alt+tab behavior


        also sry i wasnt clear, the point about calling ppl trolls because they think differently was due to some post 1-2 pages ago where some1 called such user a troll
        it was not pointed at you

        and i did say something constructive, i sayd that grouping tasks in alt+tab is bad for having many similar windows open
        like having firefox open and a commercial opens another firefox window and starts playing jingles or just wastes your cpu with useless flash ads


        its not about complaining about "my stile dosent work so good here", its about not being able to change any basic behavior and having a stile forced upon you
        do your thing but respect others

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by gens View Post
          hmm, yes it can be interpreted as arrogant
          i apologies if it insulted you, let me clarify
          No harm done!

          my point is that gnome3 is due to its little quirks not so good as for example gnome2 or any other with tabs or a "normal" alt+tab behavior
          And there we disagree.

          and i did say something constructive, i sayd that grouping tasks in alt+tab is bad for having many similar windows open
          I think it works well. I have no problem using it with e.g. Matlab, which spawns lot of windows.

          its not about complaining about "my stile dosent work so good here", its about not being able to change any basic behavior and having a stile forced upon you
          do your thing but respect others
          Yes, GNOME changed. And people were pissed. The rational thing to do is either see if the new style works for you, or find something else. I am not sure where the "spew hate on Internet" part fits in. Also, not directed at you personally, but you do keep suggesting that GNOME3 is objectively worse. Which I doubt is true, if it is even measurable.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by gens View Post
            so in my opinion it is obvious that gnome3 was made for a tablet, not for a desktop
            You do realise that tablets usually do not come with a keyboard to begin with, right?

            From what I'm reading, GNOME 3 must be horrible for tablets. It relies on hotkeys and uses LLVMpipe, with which the low-powered devices have a whole lot of problems.

            Comment


            • #36
              I don't see any reason to apologize.

              I don't doubt that a person can get "real work" done with GNOME Shell. And a person can also clean the carpet with a lint roller. I just question the sanity of any person that would choose to use it for such cases when there are better options available -- including plain old Windows.

              Hey if you can make it work for you and enjoy it and all that, I'm not going to dissuade you from using it.

              I'm just going to call you nuts, that's all.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by johnc View Post
                I don't see any reason to apologize.
                Then don't.

                I don't doubt that a person can get "real work" done with GNOME Shell. And a person can also clean the carpet with a lint roller. I just question the sanity of any person that would choose to use it for such cases when there are better options available -- including plain old Windows.
                As pointed out, YMMV. Having used both extensively I can safely say that I like GNOME3 better. Apart from the Internet, I have not met a single person that have had any difficulties working with GNOME3.
                And all these people manage to get work done. As far as I know, we are all sane. Although after about 10 posts here, I am starting to doubt on my own sanity

                Comment


                • #38
                  @kigurai

                  i couldnt agree more that UI design is a subjective thing
                  but this is no small project where a few people can get together and say "we will make the desktop we wanna use and not care about others"

                  as that kind of way of thinking shows how much the people that make that decisions care about their, what was at the time huge, userbase
                  why should i as a person that loved gnome2 and its customizability respect their decisions

                  in fact i took my subjectivity in account and just told what bothers me with gnome3
                  when it came out i also sayd what i like about gnome3, and theres plenty things i do

                  every DE has good and bad sides, if you think any is perfect you didnt try enough of them

                  and to quote from GitS "overspecialization is death"


                  @GreatEmerald

                  you can easily do anything with mouse only, meaning that you can do anything with fingers only
                  everything is big and drag-able
                  maybe i didnt spend enough time reading the keyboard shortcuts, but there were many things i couldnt do with standard kb shortcuts

                  even if you need a monster tablet to use it normaly, it still looks and acts like something you'd expect from some good android gui
                  aint it ironic

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by kigurai View Post
                    As pointed out, YMMV. Having used both extensively I can safely say that I like GNOME3 better. Apart from the Internet, I have not met a single person that have had any difficulties working with GNOME3.
                    And all these people manage to get work done. As far as I know, we are all sane. Although after about 10 posts here, I am starting to doubt on my own sanity
                    sanity and internet dont mix dont even try to make sense of all the people posting things (including ofc myself)
                    on the other hand, on the internet youl find ppl from different cultures with far different views on what matters then your own culture

                    in the end if you like something, nobody's opinion should even matter at all; unless ofc the person if off to destroy what you like so much

                    but i dont see how anyone would like their windows grouped
                    maybe im just wrong

                    bla, who cares, im done making sense
                    time to get something usefull done

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                      Assuming that you're actually asking this question, you can maximize a window more easily by dragging it to the window edge you would like it to fill (top to fill the whole screen), or if your screen is especially large, just double-click on any portion of the titlebar. This is clearly much easier than aiming for a square button on the edge of a window, but perhaps not as discoverable as some would like.
                      Are you seriously telling us that holding a button pressed while moving the mouse is easier than a single click? Really? Have you ever watched somebody with limited mobility do that? Are you saying it's easier to remember a different behavior for each edge of the screen than a single button? Are you crazy? Gnome used to be one of the more accessible desktops. Used to, not any longer.

                      And what do you consider an "screen especially large"? I have a 27" main screen and two 17" auxiliary screens, and I don't consider any of them or the sum of them to be especially large, in fact I run out of space pretty often.

                      Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                      So far as minimizing goes, GNOME is trying to avoid the behavior of hiding applications in an abstracted list. It's not a very natural behavior, and it may only seem so because most of us have been using task lists for a very long time. They don't represent much, and they are usually small targets for the mouse.
                      Not a natural behavior? Tell me you have never been caught by your mom/(girl/boy)friend/boss looking at a comic/porn/something and wanted to hide
                      it behind the table/desk? Same goes for windows in a computer, sometimes you need/want to hide things, and changing to a different area/desktop doesn't do the trick, because when they tell you to show them a web/picture/document you go to choose/create a different area and they can see all the already existent areas, including what you wanted to hide.

                      Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                      If you end up with more windows on the screen than you can manage, you can easily begin categorizing them in the overview. I understand that sometimes you don't always have a clear idea of how to group tasks, so a trick I like to use is middle-clicking the titlebar to send the window I've been looking at back.
                      And what do I do when I need to look at multiple windows wich hold input data I need to use for my current task? I NEED a lot of windows in the same screen, and It was easy to manage with gnome 2.xx, not any more with 3.x. Changing windows every few seconds isn't an option, I NEED them visible for a SINGLE TASK.

                      Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                      To be clear, while the overview is a good, natural way to manage tasks, the designers are aware of the issues with certain workflows and they're still trying to come up with better solutions to those problems.
                      So you admit you had something that WORKED, but wanted a change and shoved down OUR throats what YOU think is better, even when you KNOW it has flaws that can get in the way of the users.

                      Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                      Aside from that, GNOME tries to encourage you to focus on one task at a time, as reduced distractions are better for your productivity. Of course, if you're not working on anything that may just mean helping you focus better on having fun.
                      What happens when you NEED to manage multiple tasks simultaneously? Then GNOME gets in your way and stops you from working properly, because somebody thinks its better that way.

                      In my daily job, I have to monitor a lot of things that may or may not raise visual alarms any second (so multiple windows at the same time), do some minor tasks while keeping an eye on those alarms, and every few minutes shove the minor tasks aside (minimize) to attend one of those alarms or any unscheduled events (while still keeping an eye on the alarms). If I change to a second viewing area to use a maximized window, I can't see the alarms in the first area, so that is a BIG NO!!! to GNOME 3 new workflow.

                      In my own time, I usually have an IM app maximized on screen 1, a movie on auxiliary screen 3 and anything else on screen 2. If I'm reading my mail (thunderbird/evolution/claws/...) and click a link to open it in the browser, and then switch to a different area/desktop where my browser is, GNOME changes my 3 screens and I can't see whether somebody started talking to me. I could mark the media player window as visible on all desktops, but what happens to the IM multiple windows? That's only ONE example, me, but there are a LOT of people out there, with different use cases you DON'T KNOW.

                      Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                      Not to mention that mutter does have minimize and maximize, they just arent enabled by default.
                      That's the best part of GNOME. The "we have this functionality, so let's hide it because our users are so retarded they get confused by it, we know better after all because we are geniuses" mentality and attitude.

                      I've been a GNOME user since for a looong time, since I tried it with Debian 1.3.1. I've tried many alternatives during this years and always came back. Now I'm ashamed of supporting GNOME, and trying the alternatives again, but if things continue the way the are now, this time I won't be back

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by gens View Post
                        but this is no small project where a few people can get together and say "we will make the desktop we wanna use and not care about others"
                        Then we disagree again.
                        I think the people developing GNOME have the right to construct the desktop environment they want. Why would anyone want to develop a desktop environment that you don't want to use yourself?
                        That, I think, is insanity
                        Yes, GNOME is a large project, but should that really exclude them from trying something new, because some of their older users might not agree?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                          Assuming that you're actually asking this question, you can maximize a window more easily by dragging it to the window edge you would like it to fill (top to fill the whole screen), or if your screen is especially large, just double-click on any portion of the titlebar. This is clearly much easier than aiming for a square button on the edge of a window, but perhaps not as discoverable as some would like.
                          Are you seriously telling us that holding a button pressed while moving the mouse is easier than a single click? Really? Have you ever watched somebody with limited mobility do that? Are you saying it's easier to remember a different behavior for each edge of the screen than a single button? Are you crazy? Gnome used to be one of the more accessible desktops. Used to, not any longer.

                          And what do you consider an "screen especially large"? I have a 27" main screen and two 17" auxiliary screens, and I don't consider any of them or the sum of them to be especially large, in fact I run out of space pretty often.

                          Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                          So far as minimizing goes, GNOME is trying to avoid the behavior of hiding applications in an abstracted list. It's not a very natural behavior, and it may only seem so because most of us have been using task lists for a very long time. They don't represent much, and they are usually small targets for the mouse.
                          Not a natural behavior? Tell me you have never been caught by your mom/(girl/boy)friend/boss looking at a comic/porn/something and wanted to hide
                          it behind the table/desk? Same goes for windows in a computer, sometimes you need/want to hide things, and changing to a different area/desktop doesn't do the trick, because when they tell you to show them a web/picture/document you go to choose/create a different area and they can see all the already existent areas, including what you wanted to hide.

                          Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                          If you end up with more windows on the screen than you can manage, you can easily begin categorizing them in the overview. I understand that sometimes you don't always have a clear idea of how to group tasks, so a trick I like to use is middle-clicking the titlebar to send the window I've been looking at back.
                          And what do I do when I need to look at multiple windows wich hold input data I need to use for my current task? I NEED a lot of windows in the same screen, and It was easy to manage with gnome 2.xx, not any more with 3.x. Changing windows every few seconds isn't an option, I NEED them visible for a SINGLE TASK.

                          Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                          To be clear, while the overview is a good, natural way to manage tasks, the designers are aware of the issues with certain workflows and they're still trying to come up with better solutions to those problems.
                          So you admit you had something that WORKED, but wanted a change and shoved down OUR throats what YOU think is better, even when you KNOW it has flaws that can get in the way of the users.

                          Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                          Aside from that, GNOME tries to encourage you to focus on one task at a time, as reduced distractions are better for your productivity. Of course, if you're not working on anything that may just mean helping you focus better on having fun.
                          What happens when you NEED to manage multiple tasks simultaneously? Then GNOME gets in your way and stops you from working properly, because somebody thinks its better that way.

                          In my daily job, I have to monitor a lot of things that may or may not raise visual alarms any second (so multiple windows at the same time), do some minor tasks while keeping an eye on those alarms, and every few minutes shove the minor tasks aside (minimize) to attend one of those alarms or any unscheduled events (while still keeping an eye on the alarms). If I change to a second viewing area to use a maximized window, I can't see the alarms in the first area, so that is a BIG NO!!! to GNOME 3 new workflow.

                          In my own time, I usually have an IM app maximized on screen 1, a movie on auxiliary screen 3 and anything else on screen 2. If I'm reading my mail (thunderbird/evolution/claws/...) and click a link to open it in the browser, and then switch to a different area/desktop where my browser is, GNOME changes my 3 screens and I can't see whether somebody started talking to me. I could mark the media player window as visible on all desktops, but what happens to the IM multiple windows? That's only ONE example, me, but there are a LOT of people out there, with different use cases you DON'T KNOW.

                          Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
                          Not to mention that mutter does have minimize and maximize, they just arent enabled by default.
                          That's the best part of GNOME. The "we have this functionality, so let's hide it because our users are so retarded they get confused by it, we know better after all because we are geniuses" mentality and attitude.

                          I've been a GNOME user since for a looong time, since I tried it with Debian 1.3.1. I've tried many alternatives during this years and always came back. Now I'm ashamed of supporting GNOME, and trying the alternatives again, but if things continue the way the are now, this time I won't be back

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Wow, this thread's gettin' crazy. I love how broad the discussion gets on these forums, since Phoronix attracts people from all over the Linux community.

                            I develop software in GNOME 3. I don't have a great deal of hardship doing so. I think the issue is that people come to GNOME with their own way of doing things, and if GNOME doesn't do everything just like they have been doing it, they throw their arms up saying that it's incompatible with their way of working.

                            The designers and developers are doing their best to improve the way we work in GNOME, and for me it has been effective. I do a lot of creative work and programming, and I don't find the Alt+Tab and window switching behavior more difficult than a taskbar. I find that being able to see and manage everything quickly with large mouse targets in the overview allows me to get a better cognitive visualization of what's happening on my computer, and helps me to know which task I'm even switching to, whereas a textual window list with icons isn't really telling me anything but the window title.

                            It may not work for you, and that's fine. But assuming that it just plain doesn't work, not for anyone, is totally wrong. While GNOME contributors have to make decisions about how to craft a more pleasant user experience, the infrastructure is very flexible. Cinnamon, elementary, and extensions are proof of GTK and libmutter's flexibility, and it's certainly not necessary to GNOME's success to be this open and customizable. You don't have to use GNOME- if you've tried for a couple weeks and it hasn't grown on you, please do use something else.

                            Just don't expect angst to change anyone's mind. Being a UI biggot and flailing your arms wildly will never be as useful as engaging with the designers and developers, expressing your concerns calmly, and having a two-way discussion about how the UI could meet your needs better. And if you come to an impasse, accept that GNOME's default interface is not for you, and that's okay.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                              After a long time of fighting with this new gnome shell and fallback mode I decided to try KDE after I last tried it like a year ago. Don't know what I didn't like back then but after trying it today I can say it's quite a viable option, especially if you like to configure things just the way you want them. I am surprised how less shitty kde has become in the past few years. Keep up the good work and don't listen to these idiots that try to do a paradigm change and other bullshit. Fuck you gnome! Fuck you! Fucking arrogant devs who think they know better.... How much wasted time on this bullshit, trying to talk to them and convince them that gnome shell doesn't work. I'm never coming back to gnome after all this shit they tossed. Again: fuck you gnome! Die already!!!!
                              We weren't the ones who installed GNOME 3 on your computer, man. *does the wassamatta hands*

                              But seriously, I understand exactly what you're talking about. I use GNOME 3, evangelize it, I've contributed and whatnot, but as for many of us there's a KDE user in there somewhere, too. It just depends on what side you lean towards the most- no one in GNOME is saying don't use KDE. They're just offering an alternative to common interface design which dictates some things arbitrarily without taking into account what is natural for a human, not necessarily what's natural for someone who grew up in a world dominated by Windows and Mac OS. They're both useful.

                              The only thing you've said I take issue with (yep, don't even mind the swears) is that GNOME Shell doesn't work. It may not work for you, but it works for me, my grandma, my bioengineering pals, and a huge variety of types of users. I'm sorry, it's just the truth- I mean, do you think the people who enjoy using GNOME are just delusional and pretending it works?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I just registered to say I dislike the way Gnome has handicapped the user interface, and believe it was driven as a fad with the advent of iOS and touch screen interfaces.

                                I hope the old GNOME 2.x functionality will be easy to enable and not hidden away in some convoluted way. Basically I want the ability to choose Gnome 2 at installation.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X