The CSD Initiative Is Pushing For Apps To Abandon Title Bars In Favor Of Header Bars

[Apopas]

Titlebars are useless. I remember myself since the days of gnome 1 to seek for the theme that had them as tiny as possible.

[johnc]

This isn't that big of a deal since nobody uses desktop Linux.

[dkasak]

It works for me. The screenshot ( I don't appear to be able to insert directly ):

http://tesla.duckdns.org/images/powercom_etl.png

... is from my upcoming ETL framework ( hopefully being open-sourced soon ), and I've been using CSD since they became available for maximizing the usable area. There's a lot of hate happening in these forums for anything that comes out of the Gnome people. This is more a reflection of the people in the forums than Gnome technology. Gnome people should free to discuss how they think apps should be designed without this kind of bullshit. I personally run Enlightenment, because I prefer it over Gnome. But I don't go around flaming Gnome devs or users, because I'm not a childish arsehole, and I believe in having a vibrant ecosystem of software - some of which I'm going to prefer over others.

[polarathene]

If they want devs to jump into their bandwagon, then they should start by making a CSD switch in their applications so that they are optional and can be turned off by other desktop environments and the people who hate them. First show some good faith to people if you want them to play along with you.

Please NO! CSD may be useful only if optional! this is AGAIN gnome3 people trying to enforce their view as the "one and only", the "perfect one"

i want to be able to manage my own button placement, header font site, use it to dash, move, place tabs, even colors, so i can flag apps for one job and apps for another different job. I have when a app force me to use their header UI, just because the author uses that... guess what, not everyone uses the same system or even like it.

I personally use close button on the left, pin, minimize and maximize on the right and use tabs in the title bar.

Yep... I'm fine with it, provided it's opt-in for other DE, if Gnome wants headerbars for their apps to differentiate themselves or of the belief it provides a better UX, go for it. So long as the apps can still be useful and consistent to those who use other DE and don't agree with the headerbars UI, being able to use SSD(or DWD in future) UI and enjoy consistency. Bad enouogh already with GTK not being friendly on other DE like KDE, flatpak will help a bit at least with portals. IIRC, GTK is reluctant to help with being accessible for the menu to other DEs that like to implement features like Global menus(Unity/KDE), can't recall how Unity went about it but it wasn't viable for KDE to use?

In kde, it's actually pretty easy to save up the space the decoration would take:

in kwinrc:

[Windows]
BorderlessMaximizedWindows=true

All maximized window no longer have decorations. Trying to save up space (40px?) for non-maximized window is silly in my opinion. Although saving that space for maximized (maximum size) window make sense, as you cannot make it larger.

Thanks for that, pretty cool tip

I usually just move the taskbar (the bar with the tray icons and the start Menu, which is by default on the bottom of the screen on a Windows PC) on the left and call that a day. I have so much horizontal space on "modern" 16:9 screens that goes to waste anyway.

You could also just have the taskbar autohide?(at least on KDE). I've seen a few users of the years who prefers taskbar on the side though
on windows 10, the autohide is a bit problematic with some apps refusing to reveal the taskbar :\

[ssokolow]

It works for me. The screenshot ( I don't appear to be able to insert directly ):

http://tesla.duckdns.org/images/powercom_etl.png

... is from my upcoming ETL framework ( hopefully being open-sourced soon ), and I've been using CSD since they became available for maximizing the usable area. There's a lot of hate happening in these forums for anything that comes out of the Gnome people. This is more a reflection of the people in the forums than Gnome technology. Gnome people should free to discuss how they think apps should be designed without this kind of bullshit. I personally run Enlightenment, because I prefer it over Gnome. But I don't go around flaming Gnome devs or users, because I'm not a childish arsehole, and I believe in having a vibrant ecosystem of software - some of which I'm going to prefer over others.

As someone whose focus is UI and UX design, that screenshot leaves me quite literally speechless.

[dkasak]

As someone whose focus is UI and UX design, that screenshot leaves me quite literally speechless.

That's fine. It's for technical people.

[ElectricPrism]

As a CSD user I find it a pleasant experience and the inconsistent experiences across applications annoying. Which is why I simply avoid non CSD apps.

[mike44]

The same as Ubuntu 16.04 Unity does?

[Danny3]

CSD is idiotic. How should I know if user prefers dark/bright theme, small/large buttons, needs high contrast etc... And why should I care about it when I just need a way to move and close a window?

And wayland doesn't require CSD. They could create xdg_decorations, but Gnome people don't like it for some reason.

This is exactly my case.
I'm using Linux Mint 18.3 Cinnamon edition.
I like the default dark theme, but I don't like those small round window control buttons.
So I searched and downloaded a theme that resembles Windows XP, this one:
https://cinnamon-spices.linuxmint.co...s/view/Mint-XP
I've installed it and I'm happy that I finally have big rectangular colored ( close button) buttons like I like them to be.

There is still one program, the Calculator if I remember correctly, which doesn't respect my wish with the custom theme and still displays the old default titlebar.
Guess what, I hate it!
So for me, every program styling the titlebar in its own way and not respecting my general wish would be a nightmare.
I want consistency!

[mifritscher]

CSD is for me nonsense, because there are so many different devices with different needs. (Besides that, they look very ugly for me in the current state). Additionally, global consistency is a must.

I would like if there would be a protocol of wayland/X11 to have one global instance which handles both "globally needed buttons/widgets" (as the ones in the header bar) and also the menu bars.
This global instance would paint them in a consistent way. Additionally, it can adopt them if there are constraints on the display. E.g. on the gemini, it could paint the header bar on the left side instead on the top, and can hide the menu by default and pop it when a button is pressed.

Just have a look at http://www.jens-wawrczeck.de/picture..._farbig_02.jpg what I mean. Yes, this was possible 20 years ago! They had already globally consistent header bars - ok, side bars *g*, which was handled by one global instance. This was globally consistent - look e.g. at http://www.jens-wawrczeck.de/epoc/Mind.gif or http://www.jens-wawrczeck.de/epoc/nFTP.gif . But it was also flexible - look at http://www.jens-wawrczeck.de/epoc/EnRoute.gif . The menu was hidden by default but was accessible everywhere by button or key press and looks like http://www.jens-wawrczeck.de/epoc/eFIXmobile.gif .
This was a very wonderful design which worked from tiny 480x160 over 640x240 to full size screens (640x480 and 800x600 these days). For e.g. 5:4/3:2 monitors the side bars could be moved up- or downwards globally, or for big devices with touch-screens as it main mouse replacement + keyboard, the menubars could be drawn downwards to minimize hand movements.