A Look Back At The Desktop & X.Org/Wayland/Mir Milestones Of Ubuntu

[TheBlackCat]

No idea... I've not used recent KDE versions enough to really compare, so it's possible they're just as good. But my point wasn't really to compare Gnome with others... it's simply that it's a very good keyboard-oriented desktop.

What? You flat-out said "it has better keyboard support than any other mainstream desktop". How is that anything other than a comparison?

[bug77]

Pretty much. Don't think of it as searching for a program to run - it may technically be a search, but functionally it's more like using hotkeys.

In contrast, I have no use for shortcuts on the desktop, because they're hidden underneath all the windows - I'd have to minimise a bunch of windows (or use a keyboard shortcut) to reveal the desktop first. Shortcuts on panels are a little better, but panels don't have room for many of them, and that's still slower than just hitting a few keys...

Also, it's matter of what you do after you open the app. Because that's the really important stuff. Hitting Ctrl+I for italics Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V will always be faster than interrupting your typing reaching for the toolbar (or worse, going through the menus). The mouse is very useful, it's just not the answer to everything by itself. And neither is the keyboard that's why PCs to this day have both

[Delgarde]

What can you do with a keyboard in Gnome 3 that you can't do in Plasma 5?

No idea... I've not used recent KDE versions enough to really compare, so it's possible they're just as good. But my point wasn't really to compare Gnome with others... it's simply that it's a very good keyboard-oriented desktop.

[Delgarde]

He's talking about the fact the mouse can only issue one command per second (or so) at most. Using the keyboard, if you know your shortcuts, you can easily triple that. It's why there's no mouse support in Street Fighter or Tekken

Pretty much. Don't think of it as searching for a program to run - it may technically be a search, but functionally it's more like using hotkeys.

In contrast, I have no use for shortcuts on the desktop, because they're hidden underneath all the windows - I'd have to minimise a bunch of windows (or use a keyboard shortcut) to reveal the desktop first. Shortcuts on panels are a little better, but panels don't have room for many of them, and that's still slower than just hitting a few keys...

[GreatEmerald]

I was very clear and wrote about "Wayland implementations". Out of the 4 you mentioned only KWin is based on C++ and I think it targets the specific needs of KDE.

No; while KWin is built with Plasma 5 in mind, it's not just for its specific needs. LXQt, for instance, plans to use KWin as well, since there's no Openbox in Wayland.

[GreatEmerald]

Of course it has. It is developed with proper object oriented language (modern C++) and up until now by responsible people working under a single entity. You can bet that its design is way better, consistent and well thought than Wayland implementations hacked by of people from all over the places.

You know, this sounds like a description of Windows.

[rtfazeberdee]

You say "click one or twice or at most four times" - but that's not counting moving the mouse down to the start button, then up and through the menus. For me, that's *slow* - if I want to run (e.g) PuTTY to ssh onto a Linux server, it's just Start key, P, U, Enter. I can do that pretty much instantly, and my hands are still on the keyboard when the program opens, ready to start using it. A mouse is certainly superior for some tasks, but efficient desktop operation isn't one of them.

As such, I love Gnome 3, because it has better keyboard support than any other mainstream desktop... which is also why I think people are crazy when they describe it as a tablet-UI optimised for touch-screens.

I put my most used programs on the panel or desktop so its just one click, i used the keyboard for hunting down the programs i use rarely

[TheBlackCat]

As such, I love Gnome 3, because it has better keyboard support than any other mainstream desktop... which is also why I think people are crazy when they describe it as a tablet-UI optimised for touch-screens.

What can you do with a keyboard in Gnome 3 that you can't do in Plasma 5?

[TheBlackCat]

Wayland is a protocol definition, and not code in any language. So no C vs. C++ vs. ObjC vs. C#

Not true, Wayland provides client and server libraries (libwayland-client and libwayland-server, respectively) written in C. These allow applications and compositors to avoid having to interact with the protocol directly, instead accessing it through ordinary library calls.

[zoomblab]

Wayland != Weston/LibWeston != Kwin/QT != Mutter/GTK != Enlightenment/ELF

Wayland is a protocol definition, and not code in any language. So no C vs. C++ vs. ObjC vs. C#

Weston is a Wayland compositor implemented in C built on LibWeston. LibWeston (C code) could be reused by other Wayland compositors, but is _not_ used by the "big 3".

KWin is a Wayland compositor implemented in C++ built on QT/KDE-Foundations. i.e. Object Orientated

Mutter is a Wayland compositor implemented in (I assume) C built on GTK

E's compositor is also (I assume) implemented in C built on EFL

The are other compositor implementations, even in other OO languages, but I believe most of the smaller outfits eventually use LibWeston or QT's compositor lib.

NOTE: There is no "Wayland Server" (like X11 has) that the compositors connect or speak with. Clients connected directly to the compositor via the wayland protocol and the compositor has to deal with Input and Output hardware all on its own. (Usually via LibInput and GBM/DRI/EGL)

I was very clear and wrote about "Wayland implementations". Out of the 4 you mentioned only KWin is based on C++ and I think it targets the specific needs of KDE. Anyway, IMO this development is a great opportunity for someone to fork Mir and make it "talk" the Wayland protocol!