Three Things That Annoy Me With Using GNOME 3

[blackiwid]

Didn't Sun spend like $200 million on usability testing which went into Gnome 2, then the community threw it all out for Gnome 3? and now they wonder why people hate the new UI.... I remember they presented information about it at Linux.conf.au 2004. I think the reality is that Linux is not taking off on Tablets. Android is taking off on tablets. Linux should be focusing desktop efforts on pulling the rug out from under Microsoft. We already have the server market, Android has the phone/tablet market. Once Linux has the desktop, then there'll be a lot more developers for Linux on handhelds and it'll be taken more seriously.

hmm it has different problems. but the biggest are on driver level, even intel tablets have big problems with 32bit uefi not to mention the several incompatible arm versions where you have to write for each one a seperate bootloader or programm as OS developer stuff that is normaly in a bios, and also other drivers with touch screen, AND as example highDPI support where Gnome did deliver as first, there is nothing from gnome, I am not even shure if ubuntu-gnome-make-it-again-but-bad-unity supports high-dpi the garbage phone they now support has very low resolution. and even if so the desktop version will not support 4k monitors with highdpi stuff or did they merge the patches from the redhat guys that made highdpi support for gnome(shell) ? And made a big hipe out of it how great they are?

[DMJC]

Didn't Sun spend like $200 million on usability testing which went into Gnome 2, then the community threw it all out for Gnome 3? and now they wonder why people hate the new UI.... I remember they presented information about it at Linux.conf.au 2004. I think the reality is that Linux is not taking off on Tablets. Android is taking off on tablets. Linux should be focusing desktop efforts on pulling the rug out from under Microsoft. We already have the server market, Android has the phone/tablet market. Once Linux has the desktop, then there'll be a lot more developers for Linux on handhelds and it'll be taken more seriously.

[skurk]

GNOME3 annoyances

I have been using XFCE for many years, but the project is starting to feel stale, and several of my must-have applications use GTK3 so things break constantly (client side decorations today, something else tomorrow etc). Because of this, I too have switched to using GNOME3 for the time being. While it has certainly improved since it's early days it is by no means perfect for my use case.

#1 Gnome Tweak Tool is a requirement no matter if you want desktop icons or not. Personally I have not used the concept of desktop icons in years and it is among the first things I disable no matter the desktop. For the most part they remind me of an older persons ultra messy desktop. Or Jen from the IT Crowd :-)

#2 One of the first things I did was ditch Nautilus in favor of Nemo. Nautilus has been reduced to a square window where you can look at your files, but not do anything to them. Like the floating status bar that covers the file that is at the bottom when renaming? Or the incredibly stupid recursive search since a few versions back? It feels like it was designed to work with folders that have at the most 3 files. Or not at all, like Finder that feels like it is still there only for legacy reasons.

#3 Not a problem for me.

A month ago I came across a free HP EliteBook with a broken hard drive that I fixed. Because of all the stuff that is found in a business class laptop I decided to give OpenSuSE/KDE4 a spin since HP officially supports SuSE Enterprise. I am not normally a KDE (or SuSE) person but I have to say it is working as expected and I am thinking of switching my main system to KDE as well. After a month of trouble free usage without stupid things like the above KDE has grown on me.

[blackiwid]

That isn't true, Microsoft performed usability testing during the development of Windows 95, and the evolution of the UI is quite obvious if you look at the various builds of Windows Chicago (the development builds of Windows 95).

Windows 3.1 and prior used an Application oriented interface, while Windows 95 introduced a document/object oriented interface, something which Mac OS, OS/2 and RISC OS already used. One of the man reasons for adopting this is that a document oriented interface creates natural affordances with how people work in the real world.

I thought it was the matter about asking the users, not having a few people instead of the (all) users testing on them what they say. I am shure microsoft made the same usability testing with windows 8 or did this Trillion Dollor comany not made this I dont think so, so this method seems to be not really the same as "asking the users" like you wanted it, right?

I used on my netbook for a year or so gnome 3 in a early version and was VERY happy with it. loved it. now as tiling wm user, I would install maximus2 and such extentions, but that waste of monitorspace was worse in gnome2 so I cant complain about it, and its clearly no point of beeing usable or not. Gnome is very usable without extensions.

Gnome is maybe not usable for everybody, but can be made usable by everybody with this extensions, other Desktop environments are also not usable by everybody like kde, but there are no extensions to make it usable or make it stable. So just because you are in a minority that dont find gnome usable makes it not unusable for everybody.


I think its a myth, you maybe did outgrow gnome, I did so too, use tailing wms, but I outgrow gnome 2 much more then gnome 3, and I doubt that most of that who complain about gnome 3/shell would be happy with gnome 2 ish gui today.

[danielnez1]

You have to be right, right? When Microsoft released their Windows 95, and made nearly everything extremly different then in Windows 3.x they were paternalistic too? Still people liked this massive changes, they did not ask "the users" at all, on this time this was a small company from a few (ex)students.

That isn't true, Microsoft performed usability testing during the development of Windows 95, and the evolution of the UI is quite obvious if you look at the various builds of Windows Chicago (the development builds of Windows 95).

Windows 3.1 and prior used an Application oriented interface, while Windows 95 introduced a document/object oriented interface, something which Mac OS, OS/2 and RISC OS already used. One of the man reasons for adopting this is that a document oriented interface creates natural affordances with how people work in the real world.

Now I'm all for trying new ideas, however the "its our way or the highway" approach the GNOME developers have taken is wrong to me. If there is a desire to change from well established, proven interaction methods, then I'd say that they should be incremental and optional to the end user. Therefore I can't understand why the GNOME developers abandoned GNOME panel etc al. instead of incrementally argumenting it with their new ideas. The very fact a end user would need to install 3rd party extensions (with no guarantee they'll work in the next version) in order to perform what should be basic customisations is simply ridiculous, and shrieks of a "token gesture".

[blackiwid]

The idea that upstream devs know any user's workflow and needs better than the users themselves do is paternalistic and I find it insulting. It's the kind of attitide that gets people fired-literally. How many people lost their jobs over Windows 8, not only at Microsoft but also at computer makers whose busieness was dragged down by it?

Things like a DE that won't let me have icons on my desktop simply won't be used. Even GNOME knows that, which is why you can bring them back in Nautilus and have been able to ever since the default install did not use them. The "clean desk" cult is not for everyone, nor is any other UI concept.

You have to be right, right? When Microsoft released their Windows 95, and made nearly everything extremly different then in Windows 3.x they were paternalistic too? Still people liked this massive changes, they did not ask "the users" at all, on this time this was a small company from a few (ex)students.

I hate this attitude. And like you said gnome allowed for people that have brain problems and cant change behaviour at all even the new way is better, to activate it back, so mention it even makes no sense to even talk about it.

I found it even funny, microsoft maybe in some parts they did not change so fast, in others they was to fast or wrong direction (windows 8 ui), but on others they tried to be hyper conservative and now accept that they did desite wrong, now 100 years after it was a thing, they come with windows-apt-get and workspaces. I heard so many times from people workspaces are not needed, windows works fine... etc etc.

Its a view of amateurs, what they cant understand in the first 10 hours of using a pc must be bad. I hate this pseudo-"intuitiveness" shit. you cant target as developer only the retarded. you need to give the people a way to get more productive. And gnome was a step in this direction because its better usable by keyboard, but in my opinion not enough but thats because its a compromise between this 2 groups.

But there are enough windows clones so new linux users can get used to it gnome has to be no windows clone anymore.

[horizonbrave]

#1 I don't like desktop icons at all, but you can add them back easily as you stated.
#2 This behavior is going to go back to using just Del for deleting files in Nautilus 3.16 last I heard.
#3 Never really bothered me. I think most DEs have Set as Wallpaper on RMC?

Well, if Gnome 3 pushes the "no desktop icons" lifestyle, what's then the Desktop folder in /home for? Just a heritage sign of the old good times?
And where's then the "show desktop" button if they want to let users tweak-on the icons back on the desktop?

[horizonbrave]

Thanks Micheal,
finding that all the time I have to launch an application I have to go all the way down for clicking on (show all application).. well, I'd love to use the search bar, but I'm not sure yet about application names and which are present in the system.

Ok, I started reading the "help pages" on Gnome website and things got a bit better, but still pissed off by the total lack of a link on the desktop enviroment itself... such a poor and arrogant choice a for a DE targeted to desktop/novice users.

So I also discovered the "super+A" shortcut the see all of the applications (and the related button cannot be moved/dragged... why?!?).
Of course when it shows you all the application, having mountain sized icons spread in 2 pages (when they could conveniently sit on the same one for a better overlook) doesn't really help... but I hope it will be fixed (anybody listening? =)

Tweak Tool should be there in the main settings editor.. considering that it doesn't give you so many extra options, thanks gods most of the distros install it by default.

I wonder if one day the gnome developers would share what's going in their minds and their vision of the future... it could be intersting

[Luke]

Sorry, I won't let upstream devs tell me how to use my computer

that you can support with special key combination, 99% of users dont use most of the time more than one window open per workspace or arange them wild around ever 5 minutes. and even then a tiling wm like ui is better, if you make the app smaller you are using the other gets bigger, having a hole between them makes no sense so do as second step making the other windows bigger after you made the first window smaller ist just retarded.

Its good when DAU private users get supported but it should at the linux standard desktop always scale to more professional users and developers too. multimonitor support in gnome is not that good. making fullscreen at least the first app that you start on one workspace should be default. Of course even with good defaults you dont get every usecase covered but allow it to configure it differently is ok.

I kind of get it, if they would have changed more even faster, they would have lost even more users you have to change stuff slow, maybe my wished changes come for gnome 4.0

The idea that upstream devs know any user's workflow and needs better than the users themselves do is paternalistic and I find it insulting. It's the kind of attitide that gets people fired-literally. How many people lost their jobs over Windows 8, not only at Microsoft but also at computer makers whose busieness was dragged down by it?

Things like a DE that won't let me have icons on my desktop simply won't be used. Even GNOME knows that, which is why you can bring them back in Nautilus and have been able to ever since the default install did not use them. The "clean desk" cult is not for everyone, nor is any other UI concept.

[horizonbrave]

Go Gnome! (go away!)

Thanks Micheal,
your article comes at the right moment, and I agree with your points of criticism.

I'm back to running Linux, as a desktop machine since I'm not a developer and don't have an IT related job, after having dumped Windows ages ago and finally having got ridden of MacOsX. Regarding the latter: a ok and polished OS, but no much freedom (the license, configurability), sick of the MAC-religion-Universe.. I was very appealed by Linux since many years when I firstly tried it (but no time for "learning" it back then) so Apple had already lost all of his appeal compared to the penguin.

In the meanwhile even if not using it (and after that past and brief Linux experience) I always regarded Gnome as "the choice". Simply by the look and feel of things KDE was and is not an option (so ugly, confusing, bloated and Windows reminding... sorry!) and Gnome just felt so polished and fresh.. I was already a fanboy waiting for the moment that I could finally use it again (not even scared by the rage-creating Gnome 3 introduction). I'm not considering for a moment other simpler and low-resource-demanding desktop/WM but ironically after my reconnection with Gnome and the consequent disappointment they might be the way to go! (openbox/i3/whatever...)

I'm somewhat annoyed by the topbar. They have this big topbar but they don't do anything interesting with it. So I hide it. In the beginning I used autohide so it unhide when you get near it. But after some times I completely inactivated it in normal mode. If I need it I go out in the overview mode.

True. That bar looks good and minimalistically sexy but... when for example I open Firefox (which has his own shitty and space taking title bar) all the sexyness disappear, what a mess! And this is also the first element reminding me of Mac Os X, but why not using the same bar for the applications menu? to scared of getting too similar to Mac when you already look like a half/clone?

The big question is "How many versions of Gnome will be needed for people to understand that just mimicking MacOS i not enough".
Until now it is obvious that first tree versions are enough.
It's seems that more and more people understand that and move away from this "usable" DE!

True. How many people got the same feeling?

And the people who say the top bar is useless need to get some things to make it usefull. like the Weather app, EasyScreenCast, Lock keys, Places status indicator, Remove dropdown arrows, Settingscenter, Shutdowntimer, Volume mixer, Applications Menu.
There are plenty of extensions that make the top bar very useful.

Well.. first for a minimum of user-friedliness, should be there a link somewhere (settings?) or by right-clicking the top bar? Unbelievable, because those extensions provide BASIC functions

https://extensions.gnome.org
You'll discover the top bar very useful, with the right extensions.

Well.. that official Gnome extensions web page doesn't even subdivide them in categories or just present the main/basic/most popular choice/ I know I can reorder them by some criteria, but that's just not enough for new users and for a desktop who promote itself for being ""simple"".


Now seriously, when I first landed back on Gnome I had a good feeling about.
Even more simple, even more polished.. but I didn't imagine most of customisation and friendliness was compromised.

I firstly tried what are regarded as vanilla gnome installations (or mostly) like Fedora, Antergos, OpenSUSE.
So as you landed to this new beautiful desktop (which offers you also new UI paradigms) you are basically left to yourself:
- no welcome screen
- not a brief introduction on how the DE works or is intended to be used
- not a list of the main shortcuts
- NOT A LINK TO AN (even external!!!) HELP PAGE!

So I'm just left with the mouse in my hand, finding that all the time I have to launch an application I have to go all the way down for clicking on (show all application).. well, I'd love to use the search bar, but I'm not sure yet about application names and which are present in the system.

And the dialogs/menu.. so much emptly/blank/black space between choices/options, again: a lot of mouse movements!

I stop now, you can see the frustration mostly come from the fact that I'd love to love Gnome, but I can't.
Not giving up yet.. just hoping it's a bad dream and to wake up in Gnome 3.18 (or maybe 4.0).

Thanks all of your comments, they didn't make me feel alone