Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What People Are Saying About GNOME [Part 3]

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by phocean View Post
    Such design starteed much before IOS. At least, I remember the SLAB menu on openSUSE.

    Now I can understand some people like you don't like change, but don't you think it is very personal ? And that it is impossible to make everyone happy ?
    Many improvements (in any field) would have never happened without changing habits. Innovate or die, that's the rule in terms of market share. There are many people (developers, designers and users) who thought it was time for some change.
    That's life and we are many liking it.
    Because "New" and "Better" are not the same thing. Just look at Vista... It's very possible to make everyone happy in the OSS world, but only if they are willing to listen to their user base instead of being microdictators trying to rule over their tiny digital fiefdom causing the OSS community to once again fracture and become just a little less relevant to the mass market because of it.

    Comment


    • #32
      @Kaczu

      Did you just call Linus Torvalds and company a bunch of slackers sir?? What part of Gnome 3 gets right in the middle of what I am trying to do, and Stays in the middle and in the way are you missing sir? I frequently have more than one thing going on, and gnome 3 seems to say "hey I will only tolerate you doing one thing at a time!". You know what? I have multi tasked for many years, I am NOT going to stop because some backwards devs think I should only do one thing at a time! Talk about a pain in the ass.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Kivada View Post
        Wrong, If they wanted to reinvent the wheel again they should have started a side project.
        Like they did? Gnome Shell. The reason why classic Gnome desktop is dying is because developers have no intrest in it. No one here's stopping anyone of forking, maintaining or improving it.

        Originally posted by Kivada View Post
        One would think that both they and us want to see Linux succeed, but they don't seem to want it to.
        They want to take "Linux" to the masses and you think that it should remain as a relic of past, unchanged. I'd say that it's you who seems to want Linux on desktop to die. Gnome hasn't been able to penetrate the desktop market in the past even though it remained the same for a long time. The way to move foward is to try something new.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by kaczu View Post
          So far I haven't seen a post so far that has identified a problem with GS itself
          You're right the functionnalities implemented in GS are working pretty well, people complains about things they cannot do in GS and this is not forcely relevant for gnome dev.

          Originally posted by kaczu View Post
          Gnome-Panel.....??
          It's not about gnome-panel per se it's workspace selector, windows selector, menu... and have the ability to not use the dock, use desktop with icon, have multi-screen configuration well supported, window minimize and maximize buttons... Maybe I'm all wrong and with version 3.2 you can change the default settings without editing conf files manually and not have to use keys shortcuts all the time just to not lose a lot of time. Anyway I will keep trying it have to get better.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by diriel View Post
            Did you just call Linus Torvalds and company a bunch of slackers sir?? What part of Gnome 3 gets right in the middle of what I am trying to do, and Stays in the middle and in the way are you missing sir? I frequently have more than one thing going on, and gnome 3 seems to say "hey I will only tolerate you doing one thing at a time!". You know what? I have multi tasked for many years, I am NOT going to stop because some backwards devs think I should only do one thing at a time! Talk about a pain in the ass.
            I don't know you, but I'm able to switch between apps with alt+tab (and between windows of the same app with | + tab), or use the activities menu and select the proper one - at least you know what it's inside each window with the preview. So I don't understand why you say gnome 3 wants you to focus at one thing.

            The only thing I've felt to be slower is changing between workspaces with the mouse, but the intended behaviour is to have everything on sight and be able to organise quickly the stuff. If I want to change between workspaces on work, I just use the shortcut keys.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by diriel View Post
              Did you just call Linus Torvalds and company a bunch of slackers sir?? What part of Gnome 3 gets right in the middle of what I am trying to do, and Stays in the middle and in the way are you missing sir? I frequently have more than one thing going on, and gnome 3 seems to say "hey I will only tolerate you doing one thing at a time!". You know what? I have multi tasked for many years, I am NOT going to stop because some backwards devs think I should only do one thing at a time! Talk about a pain in the ass.
              You are basically making my point. You've started off with a strawman argument, basically a non-sequitur. Then follow it up about how it "gets in your way" without actually saying how. How in the world is there going to be improvement if you can't communicate?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by rafirafi View Post
                It's not about gnome-panel per se it's workspace selector, windows selector, menu... and have the ability to not use the dock, use desktop with icon, have multi-screen configuration well supported, window minimize and maximize buttons... Maybe I'm all wrong and with version 3.2 you can change the default settings without editing conf files manually and not have to use keys shortcuts all the time just to not lose a lot of time. Anyway I will keep trying it have to get better.
                I think most of these have been addressed by either extension or Advanced Settings in 3.2. Multimonitor support got added in there I think somewhere around June or July.

                Comment


                • #38
                  If you read carefully the comments, you will answer yourself.

                  Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                  This is precisely what they did. GTK3 libs started entering into G2 at least 2 years ago. There's an entire page talking about the switch over on Gnome 2.28 and that came out in what 2009? They had discussions on the implementation of GTK3 a good 6 months to a year before that. How slow do you want them to go? It seems to me that people wanted Gnome to never change, to be frozen in time, which would have been perfect because these same people were moving over to KDE because it was so new and fresh and because of the changes it brought.

                  So far I haven't seen a post so far that has identified a problem with GS itself (aside from the fair criticism of updates to well known apps). I've seen posts around Global Menu (which is Unity). I've seen the nebulous argument about loss of productivity without much explanation as to how. Loss in customisability compared to G2 I'll give you, but productivity? Nope. Last time I checked gnome-panel itself wasn't a application that directly helped me with getting work done. Vim? yes. Firefox? yes. Virtualbox/KVM? yes. Terminal? yup. Nautilus? You betcha. Remote Desktop? Couldn't live without it. Apache? Ya damn right. Gnome-Panel.....??! Are you serious? I'm pretty sure my boss would be pissed if I spent all day adding widgets and applets to Gnome panel all day, or hovered in the Gnome menu without actually opening the application I needed to be working in.
                  You only need to read the first 1000-2000 posts carefully, without "fanboys eyes" :-D... Trolls are easy to identify and discard in a quick review.

                  Most people outside the "oneiric" GNOME Shell planet uses a standard "panel + taskbar + app menu" in their desktops, a paradigm used today because in 20-30 years is the best GUI model for a "multitasking" Desktop Computer - even Apple use this model -. When you try to impose a radically different model to your users, this model MUST be much better than the old model, and Shell isn't precisely better for many desktop workflows, where "multitasking" is "having many app windows active at the same time" in a time efficient way ;-).

                  Shell is designed for mobile touchscreen devices and the minimal "web browser - mail client - Office suite" workflow - said by GNOME developers -, but this paradigm has many design "failures" that make Shell difficult to use with non-minimal workflows in Desktop computers... You loose too much time in desktop tasks only, and your productivity in many technical and non technical workflows is affected seriously.

                  Do you want some examples? Lets go...

                  1) Launch an app from the dock:

                  - Click on Activities, or press the "windows" key, or move the mouse pointer to the upper left corner. 1 physical action or mental process.

                  - There is a change to a totally different screen, and you must "relocate" your mind and identify where is the dock in the screen; just now, the Shell has broken your workflow and distracts you from the task that you was doing before... Very "useful" when you only need to do a rapid check of the servers log in a terminal, for example. And another mental process.

                  - Move the pointer to the dock, search your app launcher and click on it. 3 more actions.

                  - Leave again to a totally different window and wait to the new program window. 2 more actions.

                  You spend 6 actions or mental processes to ONLY launch an app from the "quicklaunch" dock, with a total disruption of your workflow... And i don't tell you how much time you loose when you must search the app in the "Applications" view... An enormous amount of time lost when you ONLY want to launch quickly an app most times, and you don't mind anything about active windows or workspaces.

                  2) Change between active windows when you use more than 3 or 4 programs at the same time: you spend too much time searching what window you want to mut on top, or you must use apps with tabs that doesn't fit vwey well in some workflows - like programmers or IT techs -... Even with the use of workspaces, this task is difficult with many active windows.

                  3) The "suspend" only option in the User menu: no comment, it explains itself... I only hope that the designer who decided this stupid option should be condemned for life to use most "real life" linux computers and enjoy the bugs, hangs and energy bills that you obtain with "suspend only" in Linux; pleeeeeeeease :-D - I work in IT tech support -... I suppose that the "genius" behind this brilliant decission hasn't to pay his/her employer's energy bill :-D.

                  4) The lack of BASIC customization: most GNOME Tweak Tool functions should be incluided by default in the Control Center - extensions control, for example -... If you have a graphic tablet control since the 3.0 release - oh, the all-powerful designers :-) - , why I can't have control over my installed extensions, themes and very important energy options in laptops like lid behaviour? Is more important a control for a designer tool than a common sense control of laptop lid behaviour?

                  5) Why I must use the Alt key for "discovering" hidden options when most desktop computers have a two button mouse - LEFT and RIGHT? Please, someone explain me this "feature" :-D.

                  Most of this "features" could be improved by using a persistent dock - with auto-hiding option -, a taskbar-window list-active windows only view - the lesser evil -, a workspace switcher icon in the Shell panel and integration of the lost "common sense" options on the GNOME control center; but GNOME devs look at "bad" GNOME Shell reviews as personal attacks, and they maintain the "we have the biggest penis in the town and we are always right" attitude. Look at the survey proposition mail list and you don't have to look elsewhere. And the fear of desktop customization doesn't help GNOME devs to look better :-D.

                  Before fanboys start to attack me with the stupid "whinning user" argument, I must say that I use Shell on my home Desktop PC and my netbook since Fedora 15, and I have used Linux computers since 1998... I'm not just the "moron" and "illiterate" user afraid of changes :-D, and I want GNOME to improve... But at work - IT tech support - I use Debian's GNOME 2.30 and SuSe's KDE 4.6 because I can't allow myself to loose too much time in desktop-only "tasks"... This is very important on a business Desktop environment, and GNOME Shell design failures are too big for that market; and corporate desktops are the main door into the Windows monopoly castle.

                  A funny final thought: I don't know many tablets having Alt or Windows key, fellas :-D...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Sounds like GNOME 3.2 is fixing a lot (but not all) of the issues that keep people away from it, and extensions are taking care of the rest. Still, I don't understand why GNOME 3 was released when it was and the team didn't keep it as perhaps a "research project" until it became more mature. Releasing something too early can seriously hamper a product's image (just look at KDE 4), and despite the "release early, release often" mantra, it doesn't seem to work as part of a large project a lot of people are bound to be uses. Not unless of course, the "release early, release often" sticks to pre-release builds, which I think GNOME 3 should have stuck with for a while longer.
                    Last edited by At0mic; 11-20-2011, 09:20 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                      So far I haven't seen a post so far that has identified a problem with GS itself (aside from the fair criticism of updates to well known apps). <cut> I've seen the nebulous argument about loss of productivity without much explanation as to how. Loss in customisability compared to G2 I'll give you, but productivity? Nope.
                      I was the one who pointed updates to 'well-known' apps (if you were talking about my nautilus post?). I do want to point out a few things, specifically to do with customization and productivity. depending on the type of applications you are using, and your workflow, gnome-shell DOES get in the way, regardless of extensions or what-have-you....there are some limitations based on GS's design (for some users).

                      I myself, love Gnome3 not Gnome-Shell -> Gnome 3, meaning the gnome 3 stack (application suite, backends, utlities and libs). I do NOT find GS to be useful or useable (that being said for many people i am sure it is fine). Nor do i find Mutter to be all that good of a WM. I would make the argument that in fact, customization has a direct impact on productivity, as it can enhance it. I use a few applications instead using GS (i also don't use gnome-panel, so #3/4 are partly to replace gnome-panel, while also providing features that surpass there counter parts in GS);

                      1.Compiz: No wobbly windows, cube or any of that crap. (i don't use compiz for eye candy). I specifically use the more productive plugins. ie: scale, expo, put, window rules, desktop wall, place window, tile ..to name a few. Mutter/GS doesn't even handle or provide similar functionality to many of those plugins - and they most definitely speed up and optimize my workflow. As a tablet/stylus user - i can tell you, in no way, shape or form does GS even compete for tablet usability. not even close. I also find compiz is more efficient for managing large numbers of apps. (meaning both Activities overview and alt-tab - are both what i consider a slow method of navigating).

                      2.Kupfer - much faster for keyboard shortcuts / launching than native GS tools. more advanced functions also. (so gnome-shell provides a similar tool that is slower, and less functional. great).

                      3. DockbarX - much better for managing groups/tabs, also added benefit of adding OSX-like 'expose-grouping' features to compiz' scale plugin, which is very useful for me. As a prime use-case, often i will have 16-20 VST instruments/fx open at a time. - these are all individual apps, but are grouped in scale... i can quickly navigate between them, much faster with dockX's hooks to scale in compiz than with GS' features . (gnome-shell can't handle in 'organized fashion' my average 35+ applications open at any given time...compiz? - no problem)

                      4. Gnome-pie - circular menu. great for tablet users, less obstrusive than using 'activities'. quick as well. (replacement for main-menu). As a sidenote: i also use easystroke (gesture recognition software, very useful for stylus/tablet users).

                      Now, yes - some of these do work with GS, but guess what - some work better with compiz and provide faster, more sensible ways of doing things. 'Activities' in GS is a huge caveat for me, it's distracting and to blingy. the way GS manages desktops kinda sucks(dynamic or statically, yes i know of gnome-flippery). I find GS is going out of it's way to replace tools that are better than what it is providing, and that is annoying. Who knows maybe by Gnome 4.0 it'll all smooth over, but i think there are valid points from some of the disgruntled users (especially those who have been using Gnome 3 since it's release, and who know about all of the various extensions, etc).

                      I myself won't be using GS anytime soon. it's not a lack of being able to adjust, or not knowing what is available/GS tricks. It just doesn't work for my needs, it's designed to work a certain way, where as i require a more modular desktop - which GS (and gnome, more and more) is arguably NOT.

                      ....and i know there are many people who feel the same way.
                      Last edited by ninez; 11-20-2011, 09:32 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        I was the one who pointed updates to 'well-known' apps (if you were talking about my nautilus post?). I do want to point out a few things, specifically to do with customization and productivity. depending on the type of applications you are using, and your workflow, gnome-shell DOES get in the way, regardless of extensions or what-have-you....there are some limitations based on GS's design (for some users).
                        Yeah that's what I was referencing. I agree Nautilus needs help.

                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        1.Compiz: No wobbly windows, cube or any of that crap. (i don't use compiz for eye candy). I specifically use the more productive plugins. ie: scale, expo, put, window rules, desktop wall, place window, tile ..to name a few. Mutter/GS doesn't even handle or provide similar functionality to many of those plugins - and they most definitely speed up and optimize my workflow. As a tablet/stylus user - i can tell you, in no way, shape or form does GS even compete for tablet usability. not even close. I also find compiz is more efficient for managing large numbers of apps. (meaning both Activities overview and alt-tab - are both what i consider a slow method of navigating).
                        While Compiz != Gnome, I do agree compiz does add some nice features. However, it also adds quite a bit in the way of problems that consistently need work arounds. It's development is not in tandem with Gnome's dev team or KDE's. That is but one reason why KDE went with compositing Kwin and Gnome went with Shell. Neither of them saw fit to go out of their way to support it because of this. The Gnome team said nope, while KDE devs allow it but they aren't going out of their way to make sure it works. Personally I've experienced quite a bit of problems ranging from crashing metacity or beryl to problems with Z-ordering full screen apps. Most of them have work arounds, but with every release of Kwin and GS their own stability has increased and in many ways has surpassed compiz.

                        That being said, there's quite a bit that GS does in fact do. Scale functionality is in the overlay and it works exactly the same. They even use the same default key bind. How you overlooked that is questionable since they both work exactly the same. Expo is vertical instead of horizontal but that's hardly going to be enough to kill productivity. All of the rest more or less that you've listed are either in a plugin or exist in a config file. In terms of Desktop Wall, that's just a workspace switcher that can be replicated any number of ways.


                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        2.Kupfer - much faster for keyboard shortcuts / launching than native GS tools. more advanced functions also. (so gnome-shell provides a similar tool that is slower, and less functional. great).
                        This same functionality exists in GS and it's anything but slow. That aside this program works in GS. So I don't get your rub here.

                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        3. DockbarX - much better for managing groups/tabs, also added benefit of adding OSX-like 'expose-grouping' features to compiz' scale plugin, which is very useful for me. As a prime use-case, often i will have 16-20 VST instruments/fx open at a time. - these are all individual apps, but are grouped in scale... i can quickly navigate between them, much faster with dockX's hooks to scale in compiz than with GS' features . (gnome-shell can't handle in 'organized fashion' my average 35+ applications open at any given time...compiz? - no problem)

                        I have the same exact workload and I can handle that pretty darn easily. I use AWN dock on the bottom and it observes the workspaces, meaning just because I click on an app it doesn't misplace the app in it's workspace. So this is usually my setup.

                        Ex:

                        15 RDP windows: Workspace 1
                        5 Terms: Workspace 2
                        4 browser windows: Workspace 3
                        Virtualbox: Workspace 4

                        That is pretty much my norm, more or less of the web browsers. Awn keeps track of where each app is. I click on that icon and it takes me to the workspace. Hit the windows key and I select the particular version of the app I need. It's a two step process. 1 mouse click and 1 keyboard key. Or I can right click on the app stack and go right to the particular app in that workspace. Sorry but it's anything but slow. If you need a video I'll make one but I promise you, finding an app you need after opening 20 or 30 is one thing GS is particularly good at.

                        I installed Dockbar though and the AWN plug in. It seems to work fine. It observes workspaces just as the regular AWN launcher does. However, if there's something I'm missing here then please let me know.

                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        4. Gnome-pie - circular menu. great for tablet users, less obstrusive than using 'activities'. quick as well. (replacement for main-menu). As a sidenote: i also use easystroke (gesture recognition software, very useful for stylus/tablet users).
                        Gnome-Pie works in GS.

                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        Now, yes - some of these do work with GS, but guess what - some work better with compiz and provide faster, more sensible ways of doing things.
                        It's not some. Everything that you listed except Compiz does work.

                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        it's not a lack of being able to adjust, or not knowing what is available/GS tricks.
                        I think that's exactly what it is. Otherwise you wouldn't have listed so many apps that do in fact work and work quite well. I installed 2 -4 all installed and all worked and none of them were slow. To me it seems that you tried GS in the beginning when it was slow and buggy and that viewpoint you have chosen to accept as being the baseline for all things Gnome-Shell as if nothing would change. GS in the beginning was wretched, horrible, and slow. Now? It's quite usable, pretty darn fast and the stability is actually amazing considering how young it is.

                        Originally posted by ninez View Post
                        It just doesn't work for my needs, it's designed to work a certain way, where as i require a more modular desktop - which GS (and gnome, more and more) is arguably NOT.

                        ....and i know there are many people who feel the same way.
                        If you just don't like it then I have no problem with that. However, too many people are bringing up old issues (EX: minimize button) or saying it doesn't do something when it does. When someone says "it get's in my way" I picture consistently mapping a network drive in Windows, or running up against the client limit in Professional versions of it, or switching out my hardware and it bugs me I need to reactivate. That to me is getting in my way and that really does prevent me from working. GS on the other hand is pretty minimal. So much so that people are clamouring to add features that I'm sure will "get in someone's way". Every app I've used in G2 I use in GS and so far nothing has crashed (except Oil Rush) or prevented me from working and I am the king of many windows being open (that I forgot to close).

                        We'll just have to agree to disagree.
                        Last edited by kaczu; 11-21-2011, 05:47 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Gnome 3.2 is nice to use IMO.

                          As long as the Gnome folks don't screw up their extension support for GS then it's going to blow Gnome 2 away in terms of customizability.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            The Gnome team said nope, while KDE devs allow it but they aren't going out of their way to make sure it works. Personally I've experienced quite a bit of problems ranging from crashing metacity or beryl to problems with Z-ordering full screen apps. Most of them have work arounds, but with every release of Kwin and GS their own stability has increased and in many ways has surpassed compiz.
                            Mutter/GS hasn't surpassed compiz, not even close. It lacks way too many features to make that claim. Furthermore, in GS you can't change any of the settings during runtime, as at least the last time i checked, they are all stored in javascript. Then any changes you make will disappear on an update. As far as beryl is concerned ~ that project died years ago, and is pointless in this conversation. I haven't had gtk-window-decorator / metacity give me any grief in a 'very long long time'. Nor do i have any problems with full-screen apps. KDE support Compiz in part because kwin and compiz share some code, and are very similar. i should also note: try disabling compositing in GS and watch what happens to your desktop - now do the same with compiz or kwin/KDE... and Mutter didn't even support disabling compositing on fullscreen, until 3.2 (but the patch had existed for what, a year before).

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            That being said, there's quite a bit that GS does in fact do. Scale functionality is in the overlay and it works exactly the same. They even use the same default key bind. How you overlooked that is questionable since they both work exactly the same. Expo is vertical instead of horizontal but that's hardly going to be enough to kill productivity. All of the rest more or less that you've listed are either in a plugin or exist in a config file. In terms of Desktop Wall, that's just a workspace switcher that can be replicated any number of ways.
                            erm, scale in GS does NOT work like compiz. Next are you going to tell me that scale in GS is exactly the same as OSX (pre-lion, obviously Lion added a bunch of new scale features)... not even close, in either case. for one, scale in compiz has a 'natural view' (spacial coordinates to each workspace, in combination with dockx, other features become available. GS's scale doesn't work the same at all. You also don't have the granular control of it's settings (nor any of mutter's settings, and worse yet - GS' FX speeds are hardcoded in js.) Scale in GS is also distracting, as it resides in the overlay. (which i find convoluted, and unnecessary). in compiz (or OSX) i just hit the hot-edge/or dockx and it's right in front of me, no darkening of screen, no slow animation, no overlay... I really don't see how you can think that is the same, dude. really?

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            This same functionality exists in GS and it's anything but slow. That aside this program works in GS. So I don't get your rub here.
                            i can set the speed in compiz to zero - for no distractions, GS/mutter the same effect is slower, and resembles playing slot machines. Saying that it is the same functionality, is simply not true, because it's not. scale in GS is like the very 1st implementation of expose in erely versions OSX and/or compiz.

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            I have the same exact workload and I can handle that pretty darn easily. I use AWN dock on the bottom and it observes the workspaces, meaning just because I click on an app it doesn't misplace the app in it's workspace. So this is usually my setup.

                            Ex:

                            15 RDP windows: Workspace 1
                            5 Terms: Workspace 2
                            4 browser windows: Workspace 3
                            Virtualbox: Workspace 4

                            That is pretty much my norm, more or less of the web browsers. Awn keeps track of where each app is. I click on that icon and it takes me to the workspace. Hit the windows key and I select the particular version of the app I need. It's a two step process. 1 mouse click and 1 keyboard key. Or I can right click on the app stack and go right to the particular app in that workspace. Sorry but it's anything but slow. If you need a video I'll make one but I promise you, finding an app you need after opening 20 or 30 is one thing GS is particularly good at.
                            (sidenote: my process is a one-step process, draw a gesture -> app is now open.)

                            So AWN solves some of your issues, not GS itself, correct? (so you now have both AWN and dash/activities in GS, 2 tools for the same job, essentially - but you've obviously installed AWN because it is better). I have found that by not using GS, i am having much nicer results. (no need for a bunch of extra bling, or 2-3 tools to do the same job). I don't really want to get into a lengthy explanation but, when i load up my 30+ apps (audio ones launch with Ladish), they are already organized on each workspace, just by using compiz, with a few customized settings. I haven't been able to get GS to do this correctly, even using something like devilspie didn't work very well. GS/mutter just lack some of those tools. Also, i really don't see how our setup is the same i am using 3x3 workspaces, that have my applications open with correct placement. My DAW alone takes up 3 workspaces, while the rest of my apps spread the others

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            I installed Dockbar though and the AWN plug in. It seems to work fine. It observes workspaces just as the regular AWN launcher does. However, if there's something I'm missing here then please let me know.
                            AWN and dockX being similar have nothing to do with what was said. but yes, they are similar tools. I already pointed out the compiz scale integration, and how it is almost essential to my workflow. it doesn't work that way with GS (ie: scale in GS, doesn't work like compiz').

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            Gnome-Pie works in GS.
                            I never said it didn't. I mainly use it as a main-menu replacement, but also pointed out that for accessing applications, it is far less obtrusive than 'Activities'. ~ meaning i do not require (or want) a 'main-menu' that takes up my whole screen to access, that is major overkill. i would rather do a simple gesture and click on what i want to use, short of that a normal menu in my books is better than huge ass overlay, to do the same thing.

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            Everything that you listed except Compiz does work.
                            with slightly different results, some which are very important to me. Again, i never said they don't work in GS - the main point i 'actually' made, was that most of these tools are better/faster/more customizable than the 'integrated' solutions in GS. I generally like 1 tool per job. So if i use gnome-shell i end up with 2 keyboard launchers, 2 docks, 2 main-menus, etc, etc.... the only other option is to just use what GS provides ~ which at this point isn't good enough for me, given the other options available.

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            I think that's exactly what it is. Otherwise you wouldn't have listed so many apps that do in fact work and work quite well. I installed 2 -4 all installed and all worked and none of them were slow. To me it seems that you tried GS in the beginning when it was slow and buggy and that viewpoint you have chosen to accept as being the baseline for all things Gnome-Shell as if nothing would change. GS in the beginning was wretched, horrible, and slow. Now? It's quite usable, pretty darn fast and the stability is actually amazing considering how young it is.
                            So using GS yesterday doesn't count?!?! I'm basing my opinions on the current GS/Gnome 3.2 - not my opinion from April/2011 (or even before that). This to me sounds like you convincing yourself, that my personal tastes are invalid, and i just don't understand GS or something. But that is ridiculous... If i used my first impressions of GS - i would be saying that i get nasty GFX artifacts everywhere, and that i have to use a 2nd class video driver (nouveau) over using Nvidia. Yes, things change (i'm not daft, you know!) As i have said before - I listed those apps, because they provide similar tools that GS provided but typically are better. I also don't see the point in GS - when i want to substitute almost every native tool it comes with, with better ones ~ that was the point. Not that these tools couldn't run in GS. (but that should've been somewhat obvious, i think).

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            If you just don't like it then I have no problem with that. However, too many people are bringing up old issues (EX: minimize button) or saying it doesn't do something when it does. When someone says "it get's in my way" I picture consistently mapping a network drive in Windows, or running up against the client limit in Professional versions of it, or switching out my hardware and it bugs me I need to reactivate. That to me is getting in my way and that really does prevent me from working. GS on the other hand is pretty minimal. So much so that people are clamouring to add features that I'm sure will "get in someone's way". Every app I've used in G2 I use in GS and so far nothing has crashed (except Oil Rush) or prevented me from working and I am the king of many windows being open (that I forgot to close).
                            I agree too many people who haven't really put GS to the test, do keep complaining about old issues. Well, as far as what you realize when people say 'it gets in the way'. I think you need to look a little broader. For example, there are instances (and i pointed this out above) where someone might like to disable compositing (3d intensive applications, that sort of thing), GS certainly in a case like this 'does get in the way'. There is no easy way in GS to deal with this issue, without your desktop experience going down the drain... For me personally, anytime that i have to go into a 'fullscreen' pile of bling overlay to access an app, etc - i find it distracting, and yes - that gets in my way! same goes with having to organize my workspaces in GS, i much prefer to have that semi-automated. that is another example of GS getting in my way. I prefer simplicity, visually unobtrusive ways of accessing tools that are fast, customizable (to suit my needs)... even with all of GS' extensions, i am finding the experience doesn't equal or surpass what i would get not using GS.

                            Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                            We'll just have to agree to disagree.
                            I didn't realize we were in an actual disagreement. My workflow isn't universal, neither is yours. Personally, i think it's bad for anyone at this point to assume that GS solves all problems for everyone. For some people, sure - that may be entirely true. While for others, that certainly isn't the case...

                            interesting incites, regardless..

                            cheerz
                            Last edited by ninez; 11-21-2011, 03:38 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              Mutter/GS hasn't surpassed compiz, not even close. It lacks way too many features to make that claim. Furthermore, in GS you can't change any of the settings during runtime, as at least the last time i checked, they are all stored in javascript. Then any changes you make will disappear on an update. As far as beryl is concerned ~ that project died years ago, and is pointless in this conversation. I haven't had gtk-window-decorator / metacity give me any grief in a 'very long long time'. Nor do i have any problems with full-screen apps. KDE support Compiz in part because kwin and compiz share some code, and are very similar. i should also note: try disabling compositing in GS and watch what happens to your desktop - now do the same with compiz or kwin/KDE... and Mutter didn't even support disabling compositing on fullscreen, until 3.2 (but the patch had existed for what, a year before).
                              Now being able to change settings is far cry from saying something it isn't there. Those are two totally different issues. Now we are on to disabling compositing?? I thought we were talking about productivity and how it gets in your way. Not trying to highlight that compiz and GS don't work the same. Are you complaining to just complain here?

                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              erm, scale in GS does NOT work like compiz. Next are you going to tell me that scale in GS is exactly the same as OSX (pre-lion, obviously Lion added a bunch of new scale features)... not even close, in either case. for one, scale in compiz has a 'natural view' (spacial coordinates to each workspace, in combination with dockx, other features become available. GS's scale doesn't work the same at all. You also don't have the granular control of it's settings (nor any of mutter's settings, and worse yet - GS' FX speeds are hardcoded in js.) Scale in GS is also distracting, as it resides in the overlay. (which i find convoluted, and unnecessary). in compiz (or OSX) i just hit the hot-edge/or dockx and it's right in front of me, no darkening of screen, no slow animation, no overlay... I really don't see how you can think that is the same, dude. really?
                              Actually it does. Again not being able to change settings is one thing, but saying that scale on compiz and the overlay in GS are completely different is hogwash when it comes to their basic functionality and intended use. That's customisability not productivity. You want GS to be compiz. How exactly is that supposed to be possible?

                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              i can set the speed in compiz to zero - for no distractions, GS/mutter the same effect is slower, and resembles playing slot machines. Saying that it is the same functionality, is simply not true, because it's not. scale in GS is like the very 1st implementation of expose in erely versions OSX and/or compiz.
                              So setting the speed is increasing your productivity?? Hmmm

                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              (sidenote: my process is a one-step process, draw a gesture -> app is now open.)
                              There's gesture apps that can easily do that. BTW how are you using the dock and the gesture and gnome pie? That would look pretty cluttered.

                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              So AWN solves some of your issues, not GS itself, correct? (so you now have both AWN and dash/activities in GS, 2 tools for the same job, essentially - but you've obviously installed AWN because it is better). I have found that by not using GS, i am having much nicer results. (no need for a bunch of extra bling, or 2-3 tools to do the same job). I don't really want to get into a lengthy explanation but, when i load up my 30+ apps (audio ones launch with Ladish), they are already organized on each workspace, just by using compiz, with a few customized settings. I haven't been able to get GS to do this correctly, even using something like devilspie didn't work very well. GS/mutter just lack some of those tools. Also, i really don't see how our setup is the same i am using 3x3 workspaces, that have my applications open with correct placement. My DAW alone takes up 3 workspaces, while the rest of my apps spread the others
                              I install AWN even in G2. It wouldn't matter what the DE was. That is my preference. So far it seems you just want compiz.


                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              AWN and dockX being similar have nothing to do with what was said. but yes, they are similar tools. I already pointed out the compiz scale integration, and how it is almost essential to my workflow. it doesn't work that way with GS (ie: scale in GS, doesn't work like compiz').
                              Sorry it does. Not having settings available to change is one thing, but I've used Scale in compiz and for the life of me while things look different their basic functionality is quite similar.


                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              I never said it didn't. I mainly use it as a main-menu replacement, but also pointed out that for accessing applications, it is far less obtrusive than 'Activities'. ~ meaning i do not require (or want) a 'main-menu' that takes up my whole screen to access, that is major overkill. i would rather do a simple gesture and click on what i want to use, short of that a normal menu in my books is better than huge ass overlay, to do the same thing.

                              with slightly different results, some which are very important to me. Again, i never said they don't work in GS - the main point i 'actually' made, was that most of these tools are better/faster/more customizable than the 'integrated' solutions in GS. I generally like 1 tool per job. So if i use gnome-shell i end up with 2 keyboard launchers, 2 docks, 2 main-menus, etc, etc.... the only other option is to just use what GS provides ~ which at this point isn't good enough for me, given the other options available.
                              Of course it's not going to be, Gnome != compiz. They aren't developed by the same people. You would end up with 2 docks in G2 you would have to delete one of them. You don't even see the second dock unless you hit overlay. So you are mad because it's loading something you can't see?

                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              So using GS yesterday doesn't count?!?! I'm basing my opinions on the current GS/Gnome 3.2 - not my opinion from April/2011 (or even before that). This to me sounds like you convincing yourself, that my personal tastes are invalid, and i just don't understand GS or something. But that is ridiculous... If i used my first impressions of GS - i would be saying that i get nasty GFX artifacts everywhere, and that i have to use a 2nd class video driver (nouveau) over using Nvidia. Yes, things change (i'm not daft, you know!) As i have said before - I listed those apps, because they provide similar tools that GS provided but typically are better. I also don't see the point in GS - when i want to substitute almost every native tool it comes with, with better ones ~ that was the point. Not that these tools couldn't run in GS. (but that should've been somewhat obvious, i think).
                              First off you listed applications as if they didn't install and performed badly. They install and perform pretty well. So it gave me the impression that you really hadn't used it. Unfortunately anyone who looked at your 2 -4 is probably going to say the same thing or do the same thing as I did. Install all of them and see how they work. They all installed. I had no issues. Compiz doesn't (which I agree with you on that it doesn't) but the rest do.

                              Your logic here isn't making any sense. If you are installing all of those apps in G2 it's because G2 doesn't provide them natively, no? So what's the deal? On one side of your mouth your saying GS doesn't do what all the apps you install do. Well that's not a surprise. Then install them. It's as simple as that. So far the only thing I agree with you on is the lack of customisability which is to be expected considering we are at what 3.2? However, just about all of your points are centered around compiz, something Gnome Devs don't support and KDE has trouble supporting as well. How much sense does it make to take an application that the Gnome Developers don't develop, and then say GS is getting in your way when Gnome doesn't develop that software? That's ridiculous. It's not G2 that's giving you increased customisability, it's Compiz that is doing that. That's like combining every application in repo and getting pissy that some DE doesn't have all of that functionality built in. Now that's just crazy, but that's the argument you are making here.

                              You're trying to take features from another application and say that GS should have it built in (even though G2 natively doesn't do what compiz does) and behave exactly the same even though those two projects are developed by two different development teams? How is that supposed to be possible?
                              Last edited by kaczu; 11-21-2011, 05:54 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by ninez View Post
                                Mutter/GS hasn't surpassed compiz, not even close. It lacks way too many features to make that claim. Furthermore, in GS you can't change any of the settings during runtime, as at least the last time i checked, they are all stored in javascript. Then any changes you make will disappear on an update. As far as beryl is concerned ~ that project died years ago, and is pointless in this conversation. I haven't had gtk-window-decorator / metacity give me any grief in a 'very long long time'. Nor do i have any problems with full-screen apps. KDE support Compiz in part because kwin and compiz share some code, and are very similar. i should also note: try disabling compositing in GS and watch what happens to your desktop - now do the same with compiz or kwin/KDE... and Mutter didn't even support disabling compositing on fullscreen, until 3.2 (but the patch had existed for what, a year before).
                                I had to go back to this point as there's something that I don't believe is correct. KDE can run uncomposited and so can GS. Compiz is a compositor just like Mutter and Kwin are. I've never run compiz uncomposited. Please tell me how that works. BTW Mutter is quite a bit faster than Compiz. Actually Kwin is as well.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X