GNOME 40 Approaches Its UI Freeze, Easy Means To Start Testing It

[hsci]

Well, I tried the VM and I have to say that I'm very disappointed to have to change my habits *again*.
I used to love Gnome, now they're making me hating it.

I'm using - like a lot of touch typers - GNOME because it's incredible good keyboard usage. But I'm also not happy.

The dash shall be at the top, where the keyboard search is already located to keep the spatial travel for users small (both visually and mouse travel). The window overview is incredible small now. Considering high resolution monitors the first one is a problem, considering the second one laptop screens are a problem.

Moving the dash to the bottom makes no sense at all. I have the bad feeling, that GNOME is again trying to copy stuff from MacOS. MacOS is a bad example regarding usability - the menus are not part of the Windows but at the very top, the Windows cannot be maximized effectively and the dash is at the very bottom. Feel like a high pressure operation because "they want something new" after GNOME finally got really polished after years, but they don't want take time to reconsider bad decisions. Does remember anyone the awful concept of "application menus"? Straight from MacOS. And the need years to revert that design decision.

[Sesivany]

Making polls and acting on them might be an example of what it means to have an open design.

Doing design based on polls? That I can tell you is a really bad idea.

I hope the new design brings more people to GNU, but I doubt it will be successful in doing that. We know close to zero about the usability tests that have apparently been conducted with a handful of US citizens that are not representative of most markets worldwide. Completely opaque.

Yet you want them to make changes based on polls.

[Alexmitter]

You know that meritocracy, especially in the open source world, is a joke, right?

It boils down to "the people who actually step up and do the work decide" and that at core is a meritocracy

[Mez']

"If my desktop does not feel, look and work like microwaved Windows 95, I am not gonna be happy"

Everything that is not Gnome is a Windows 95 rehash, right?

[gens]

I hope the new design brings more people to GNU, but I doubt it will be successful in doing that. We know close to zero about the usability tests that have apparently been conducted with a handful of US citizens that are not representative of most markets worldwide. Completely opaque. They acted fast and furious based on those tests, and "discussions" on GitLab have revolved around the same core idea with little (and mostly stupid) changes.

Yep. I read the original Gnome3 design document, and the grand majority of sampled people were USA students. That's why it turned out to be a bad copy of OSX.

I can't find that original design document anymore. 144Hz do you have a copy to post ?

I, personally, have never heard the GNOME3 team to ever take feedback on major issues. But i have read some of them to be very... let's say opinionated.

[Alexmitter]

Everything that is not Gnome is a Windows 95 rehash, right?

No, but you have a great choice of microwaved Windows 95's to choose from.

[Alexmitter]

Yep. I read the original Gnome3 design document, and the grand majority of sampled people were USA students. That's why it turned out to be a bad copy of OSX.

I wonder where you get that weird idea from. The original Gnome Shell in 3.0 looked nothing like OSX. Neither does any other Gnome 3 version.

[Hibbelharry]

Everything that is not Gnome is a Windows 95 rehash, right?

Windows 95 did set a new desktop standard for millions of users. The introduction of the start menu, the desktop itself, the taskbar were new to millions of people and appreciated by many users. I would also say that Windows 95 UX and workflow was well better than windows 3.1.

But: KDE and others never really tried to go any further past that in my eyes. They kept the status quo auf Windows 95 to a huge degree. You need to have a taskbar, it's got to be there. You need to have desktop icons, it's got to be there. You've got to have a giant clunky launcher menu, it's got to be there. Do you think KDE or others did really advance their UX paradigms past that?

I personally happen to like many of the thoughts the gnome people had for gnome 3. I don't want any oldschool taskbar anymore, I like selecting window previews or alt tabbing. I don't want desktop icons back, because they're always hidden behind windows. There are some more UX shifts i like, so I use gnome 3. In my opinion gnome did go on to make things even better past windows 95 paradigms.

I don't think everybody needs to like gnome UX paradigms. I do, but others might and will think different. I think liking windows 95 workflow alikes is also ok. If you need your taskbar, your desktop icons, your application menu, go on. But I would also say that naming for example KDE or cinnamon a windows 95 like usability paradigm isn't wrong, that's just the way it is.

[mppix]

Everything that is not Gnome is a Windows 95 rehash, right?

DEs that try to change and improve their paradigms risk alienating people.
Some others don't and just try to support vast amounts of use case - imo often at the expense of being elegant or truly functional.
Lucky us, Linux offers both.

[CochainComplex]

"If my desktop does not feel, look and work like microwaved Windows 95, I am not gonna be happy"

made my day ...for me KDE is just a more or less a Windows UI remake.
Like on windows, Users start to complain when the startbutton is rectangular instead of a bubble.

Once you have multiple monitors (4 in total) with different orientation and workspaces combined with PopOS Autotiling and stacking features - gnome is a pleasure.
I don't know how I would make this much space usable in a Win 95 like WM.