GNOME Shell UX Continues Improving For GNOME 40

[duby229]

Huh, nope. Not a chance in the world. Vanilla Gnome gets too much in my way. I need to improve it. And I'm 2-3x faster with Dash-to-dock.
It has nothing to do with KDE/Mate/Windows 95 or even Gnome 2 (I started with it 15 years ago), since I'm more of a Unity fan, which is the same modern metaphor as Gnome 3 (but it was 10 years ahead of Gnome 3). Also, adwaita looks as old as Windows 95, so you're contradicting yourself a bit there.

The dude compared everything else to win95, obviously that guy has no clue at all what he's talking about. Clearly he's a fanboy to an extreme.

[Khrundel]

And I'm 2-3x faster with Dash-to-dock.

I'm pretty fast with two-finger typing, much faster than when I'm trying 10 finger typing. That doesn't mean 2 fingers typing is any better.
I was an Unity fan. After Ubuntu had switched to the Gnome, I tried to recreate same experience too. Half year later I've switched to vanilla.

It has nothing to do with KDE/Mate/Windows 95 or even Gnome 2 (I started with it 15 years ago), since I'm more of a Unity fan, which is the same modern metaphor as Gnome 3 (but it was 10 years ahead of Gnome 3).

Moving taskbar to the left doesn't create some new metaphor, it still will be same windows 95. Stacked windows + taskbar + systray, no matter where they are. Ubuntu is still trying to mimic even deprecated behavior. Files on desktop for example, in windows 95 they've used desktop icons as favorites list, mostly because start menu was awful, then MS invented quick launch, making desktop icons useless. And now Canonical doesn't update Nautilus for years just to save these icons.

Also, adwaita looks as old as Windows 95, so you're contradicting yourself a bit there.

It is not how it looks (still adwaita + CSD are farther from windows 95 than anything else), it about how you interact with windows.

[Mez']

Moving taskbar to the left doesn't create some new metaphor, it still will be same windows 95. Stacked windows + taskbar + systray, no matter where they are. Ubuntu is still trying to mimic even deprecated behavior. Files on desktop for example, in windows 95 they've used desktop icons as favorites list, mostly because start menu was awful, then MS invented quick launch, making desktop icons useless. And now Canonical doesn't update Nautilus for years just to save these icons.

Moving taskbar to the left isn't. Although it's not frequent. The dash with the app grid was though, same as Gnome but way more advanced (categories 9 years ahead of Gnome - 2012 Vs 2021, interactive scopes, spelling error search....), the title bar going into the top bar, the global menu + LINs, etc... It's clearly a very different metaphor than the old Windows one.
I wasn't a fan of global menu, but on a laptop I don't even know how can one not use the Unite extension, it's such a waste of vertical space in a time of wide screens. Plus it's easier to grab the window (to resize it down or move to a different screen by just going all the way to the top than to target and calibrate your movement to a specific area underneath. Another thing Unity and now Unite do faster.
Desktop icons are not useless. I prefer my desktop uncluttered and don't need them, but please have some respect for the many people who like to work with them. You seem very well in line with Gnome devs dictatorship, trying to impose your single version of a workflow to everyone. It's crazy how Gnome hardcore (vanilla) users have some serious closemindedness issues, a lot of them (fortunately not all) refuse to acknowledge that everyone has different preferences. "They should just adapt their workflow, they refuse to change", blah blah. What a bunch of intolerant people.

[Klassic Six]

Moving taskbar to the left isn't. Although it's not frequent. The dash with the app grid was though, same as Gnome but way more advanced (categories 9 years ahead of Gnome - 2012 Vs 2021, interactive scopes, spelling error search....), the title bar going into the top bar, the global menu + LINs, etc... It's clearly a very different metaphor than the old Windows one.
I wasn't a fan of global menu, but on a laptop I don't even know how can one not use the Unite extension, it's such a waste of vertical space in a time of wide screens. Plus it's easier to grab the window (to resize it down or move to a different screen by just going all the way to the top than to target and calibrate your movement to a specific area underneath. Another thing Unity and now Unite do faster.
Desktop icons are not useless. I prefer my desktop uncluttered and don't need them, but please have some respect for the many people who like to work with them. You seem very well in line with Gnome devs dictatorship, trying to impose your single version of a workflow to everyone. It's crazy how Gnome hardcore (vanilla) users have some serious closemindedness issues, a lot of them (fortunately not all) refuse to acknowledge that everyone has different preferences. "They should just adapt their workflow, they refuse to change", blah blah. What a bunch of intolerant people.

The problem with Gnome devs is they don't care about other people's opinion, if something work for them, it must work for everyone, and it's not just about the design, bugs and lack of features that other DEs like KDE have for over a decade. I'm a Fedora user myself, but it doesn't mean I don't have any problem with it, nautilus sucks, screen lock doesn't work, customization is simple and dull, they optimize and refresh the app grid but still you can't change the size of app grid icons. They still have discussion on adding an option for selecting between dark and light theme.

[JackLilhammers]

The problem with Gnome devs is they don't care about other people's opinion, if something work for them, it must work for everyone, and it's not just about the design, bugs and lack of features that other DEs like KDE have for over a decade. I'm a Fedora user myself, but it doesn't mean I don't have any problem with it, nautilus sucks, screen lock doesn't work, customization is simple and dull, they optimize and refresh the app grid but still you can't change the size of app grid icons. They still have discussion on adding an option for selecting between dark and light theme.

They'd need a good reality check to assess their attitude, but that's not gonna happen...

I find kind of funny that everybody here diminishes Microsoft, but at the very least Windows has desktop icons, system tray, movable taskbar, and a dark theme.
All out of the box!!
And a couple of bonus points:

• When you press the win key and start typing it works like Gnome, but way better.
  The mouse does not stutter while searching and you even have web search
• The lock screen is actually nice
  I'm not asking for an automatic slideshow with integrated info and feedback, but being able to change the background easily should be the very least

[tildearrow]

They'd need a good reality check to assess their attitude, but that's not gonna happen...

I find kind of funny that everybody here diminishes Microsoft, but at the very least Windows has desktop icons, system tray, movable taskbar, and a dark theme.
All out of the box!!
And a couple of bonus points:

• When you press the win key and start typing it works like Gnome, but way better.
  The mouse does not stutter while searching and you even have web search
• The lock screen is actually nice
  I'm not asking for an automatic slideshow with integrated info and feedback, but being able to change the background easily should be the very least

The problem with Windows: Slow, and has lots of legacy. Windows 10 icons here, Windows 8 icons there, Windows 7 icons over here, Windows XP icons over there.... It's a mess.
The problem with macOS: Restrictive.
The problem with GNOME: Horrible UX that takes the Apple design and makes it worse.
The problem with KDE: It is a minefield. Constant crashes, usually on programs.

The only "legacy" thing I may find on Linux is the DejaVu fonts, but otherwise both GNOME and KDE feel fresh when compared to Windows...

[JackLilhammers]

tildearrow what's slow in Windows?
Linux is faster for some workloads, but I can't think of anything where Windows is just too slow.
I wouldn't say that legacy stuff is intrinsically bad, and is part of what makes Windows so familiar.

I agree on mac os though. The moment you step out of the intended path, you're got to tinker even for simple stuff

[Klassic Six]

The only "legacy" thing I may find on Linux is the DejaVu fonts, but otherwise both GNOME and KDE feel fresh when compared to Windows...

Say that to someone who recently start to use computers. I get what you're saying but GNOME/KDE can be both fresh and usable.

[Khrundel]

categories 9 years ahead of Gnome - 2012 Vs 2021,

"Categories" isn't a new invention, KDE, GNOME, even FVWM95 had used them somewhere in 90s. Removing of categories in gnome 3 was a "new metaphor".
I mean, I'm not against categories per se, but placing icons into some tree-like structure was again just mimicking ugly windows95 UX, Windows had a tree-like menu with app groups containing multiple items like app itself, uninstallation, eula, help, link to website, they had to have such grouping. Linux DE didn't have such many icons, but because they were using tiny start menus and because they tried to be like windows, they added these categories. Most time user launches some app which he familiar with so he already knew where in all apps list to look, he need no categories. When user starts some new application, categories tree doesn't help him, he must guess, what is it, utility, service app, or network app. Categories may exist as some kind of filter for tags, like "what messengers do i have installed", but in most case flat list of apps is better, because eyes are faster than fingers.
Implementing ability to create groups within Gnome was actually a step back.

It's crazy how Gnome hardcore (vanilla) users have some serious closemindedness issues, a lot of them (fortunately not all) refuse to acknowledge that everyone has different preferences. "They should just adapt their workflow, they refuse to change", blah blah. What a bunch of intolerant people.

GNOME isn't something mandatory, you can use another DE. And even if you have to, they offering windows95-like "GNOME classic" session. May they have one little place where they can implement a desktop of their vision without having to support an ability to revert everything?
And I really think giving users choice in features that matter is a bad decision. Did you ever heard a phrase "I've hired X not to do this work myself"? Same is true for DE. You selecting DE and later using it as was intended. Good specialist doesn't allow customer to mess with his project, he asks about wallpapers color, but not about size of foundation.
Usually UX architect looks how users work with his program, then he searches for problems, then thinks how to fix them, then does some kind of prototyping, tests how people work with it, returns to blueprints. User just goes to extension shop and randomly selects anything looking pleasant. Look at yourself, for example, you've installed extensions to move a clock closer to corner!

[dragon321]

You can fanboy all you want bro, I don't have to prove shit to you. It's common knowledge, has been for years. Google, Duckduckgo, Yahoo, MSN... Choose one....

You can choose to be ignorant all you want...

EDIT: The sky is blue, Water is wet, Gnome sucks ass.... All facts... I don't have to prove shit to you... You wouldn't believe the truth even if your eyes were forced open and it was dumped on you...

Hate something without any reason and call others fanboys and ignorant. Hilarious.

Just because you don't like something doesn't matter in real world, because your opinion is still only your opinion, not a fact. Trying to change opinion to a non-debatable fact is fanboy way I'm afraid. But as you said, you can fanboy all you want bro.

I'm never extrapolating my own little case to everyone. If I indulge myself in generalizing my criticism to some extent, it comes from a huge deal of concurring opinions I've read about everywhere.
Also, I always offer so many arguments that I feel like it's too much compared to the little or total void I face in the other direction. So, your assumption is just laughable.

There are many positive opinions about GNOME as well but for some unknown reason you assumed that these are fanboys opinions and negative opinions are real. Why not assume that positive opinions are real and negative opinion are haters opinions? Or maybe assume that people preferences are different than yours and not every different opinion is fanboy opinion? Also as I said many times - just because something is different doesn't mean it's bad. Of course you don't have to accept it but saying it's bad because it's behaving differently is simply nonsense.

Well, I could think otherwise. Look at my previous answer - despite the fact I said what I don't like about GNOME (and I can add more to this list) I was called fanboy with closed eyes that don't believe "truth". So despite I'm offering arguments I can face "total void" like "GNOME sucks you fanboy". Reading such answers and your assumption that "negative opinions are more real" is really hilarious.

PS: Looking at your other answer to another user: "It's crazy how Gnome hardcore (vanilla) users have some serious closemindedness issues, a lot of them (fortunately not all) refuse to acknowledge that everyone has different preferences."

You are not that good with accepting different preferences as well. You don't accept vanilla GNOME users preferences (calling somebody "fanboy" or "hardcore" doesn't look like acceptance) and talking about accepting different preferences. Well.