Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 41 Alpha Released With Many Desktop Changes Accumulating

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rastersoft
    replied
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post

    Just install the next version of GNOME and... BANG! Extensions gone; have to upgrade them all and good luck with obscure/abandoned extensions
    Touche :-)

    Leave a comment:


  • Mez'
    replied
    Originally posted by finalzone View Post
    It is a bug from Microsoft Teams application running on a desktop environment for a Linux distribution. Microsoft Teams developers seem failing to adhere to the freedesktop.org notification guideline and GNOME version meaning they needs to fix those issues mentioned above.


    Define users.


    Which functionality and what is exactly the needs given the choice that specific user made.


    GNOME Classic was made to ease the transition for enterprise users who are mainly conservative, Ubuntu approach was to create the feel from their legacy Unity interface. Both showcased the flexibility of GNOME Shell with availability of extensions advanced users /companies can customize to suit their need. The reality is majority of ordinary users care less about extra functionality as long their favourite applications are available on their system (mostly set up by their friends, relatives or retailers).

    Let reminds GNOME Shell was made with a minimal distraction in mind as possible.
    Man, just go back up from your bunker to the ground. Or get your your head out of the sand.
    As mentioned, if Teams works properly on other DEs regarding the system tray, the issue is at Gnome level. You can nitpick all you want, that's what it is. There is no reason to change the way it works just because one DE (Gnome is roughly used by 40% of a 2% linux userbase) decided to go on their own.Gnome has to adapt, not the other way around.

    And Gnome shell might have been made with minimal distraction in mind, but the end result leaves you with as many distractions as it can get, due to its limitations and how you end up doing more clicks, inputing more shortcuts, finding more workarounds to manage the not-so-odd use cases in everyone's workflow.
    Gnome is just not very flexible, it might not be distracting to you on a standard developer workflow, but the moment it reaches normal users, it's cracking from every seam as it cannot contain the stress of the variety of use cases and workflows. The design is too much of a monolithic communist block for that.

    Leave a comment:


  • lakerssuperman
    replied
    Originally posted by finalzone View Post
    It is a bug from Microsoft Teams application running on a desktop environment for a Linux distribution. Microsoft Teams developers seem failing to adhere to the freedesktop.org notification guideline and GNOME version meaning they needs to fix those issues mentioned above.


    Define users.


    Which functionality and what is exactly the needs given the choice that specific user made.


    GNOME Classic was made to ease the transition for enterprise users who are mainly conservative, Ubuntu approach was to create the feel from their legacy Unity interface. Both showcased the flexibility of GNOME Shell with availability of extensions advanced users /companies can customize to suit their need. The reality is majority of ordinary users care less about extra functionality as long their favourite applications are available on their system (mostly set up by their friends, relatives or retailers).

    Let reminds GNOME Shell was made with a minimal distraction in mind as possible.

    1) Microsoft Teams Notifications work so I'm not sure what your links are about. Obviously, Linux support is not their top concern, but if I run it on KDE or Mate or Cinammon I will have the icon tray and the necessary functionality from the icon tray menu. Not sure what you're talking about here with notifications.

    2) This is what we're doing? Define users? Stop it. People that use computing devices that use icons on the desktop. A not insignificant amount of people. That's an awful response. Everyone that uses MacOS and Windows as well as that use smartphones rely on icons on the "desktop" to some degree. If you are someone that wants it clean, ok great, but people that use iPhones and Android devices have icons on their screen just as Windows and Mac users do. This functionality spans the gamut of popular mobile and desktop operating systems. I think you know exactly who and what I mean.

    3) Which functionality? I specifically focused on things that Gnome doesn't have by default like a system tray and the accompanying functionality.

    4) You're proving my point for me. Gnome Shell was and probably still is incompatible with the conservative business desktop culture many people work in. People weren't clamoring for a new paradigm and want something that looks and works like they are used to. Red Hat knew this and moved to make sure they could offer an experience people were used to. The current RHEL does rely on Gnome without Classic, but if you look at the RHEL 8 how-to it specifically tells you how to enable things like desktop icons and it also covers the classic shell environment as much as the standard shell so it seems the idea of the classic desktop and paradigms like desktop icons are still very much alive over there. Also,

    Ubuntu did adapt Gnome to make it more like Unity, but again, Unity still offers the basic things users expect such as a visible dock and a system tray area.

    5) It's kind of hard for you tochampion the idea of extentsions and their popularity while dismissing the functionality they bring back and the clear popularity of having such functions in the system.

    6) The reality of it is, we're talking about fundamental things that users (people that use computing devices, see point #2 above), expect basic things out of the system. The two most popular desktop operating systems have these functions. The two most popular mobile operating systems have them. These aren't extra functions. These are expected features of the a modern computing system. If Gnome doesn't want to include them, ok fine, but users (people that use computing devices, see point #2 above)

    I'm all for distraction free computing, but at some point you have to come to the conclusion that some of these pieces of functionality should be left in and then if you want them off make that an option. You also have to eventually acknowledge that extensions are often being used to bring back expected core functionality. A quick look on the Gnome Extensions website shows that three out of the top four extensions by popularity are user themes, application menu and AppIndicator and KStatusNotifierItem Support which gives Gnome a system tray. Those aren't exotic things, those are core functions that people want and have gone to extensions to get. That the reality of the situation.

    Leave a comment:


  • finalzone
    replied
    Originally posted by lakerssuperman View Post
    I have to use Microsoft Teams for work and when I use the Linux native client the system tray icon is necessary for certain functionality. Sure, blame Microsoft but the reality is that Gnome hasn't come up with a better solution for this use case and doesn't have the ability to get people on board by leveraging market share.
    It is a bug from Microsoft Teams application running on a desktop environment for a Linux distribution. Microsoft Teams developers seem failing to adhere to the freedesktop.org notification guideline and GNOME version meaning they needs to fix those issues mentioned above.

    As for things like desktop icons. Gnome doesn't want them. Ok fine. But clearly users do.
    Define users.

    The answer seems to be use something other than Gnome. That's kind of frustrating to have to go to a different DE because this functionality is lacking and whether it's ugly or cluttered or not, a lot of users use the desktop in this way.
    Which functionality and what is exactly the needs given the choice that specific user made.

    It's all well and good that Gnome wants to do things a certain way, but they also have to be realistic about user expectations for a computer and the functions at their disposal. Extensions and alterations to Gnome by Red Hat (Shell Classic) and Ubuntu (the default extensions they use) would seem to indicate that there is a desire for these functions to be included by more than a few users.
    GNOME Classic was made to ease the transition for enterprise users who are mainly conservative, Ubuntu approach was to create the feel from their legacy Unity interface. Both showcased the flexibility of GNOME Shell with availability of extensions advanced users /companies can customize to suit their need. The reality is majority of ordinary users care less about extra functionality as long their favourite applications are available on their system (mostly set up by their friends, relatives or retailers).

    Let reminds GNOME Shell was made with a minimal distraction in mind as possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • lakerssuperman
    replied
    On the one hand, I respect Gnome having a vison for things and wanting to stick to it. On the other hand, some of their choices around things like the system tray just seem to be them being stubborn. Using third party programs that expect a system tray is problematic. I have to use Microsoft Teams for work and when I use the Linux native client the system tray icon is necessary for certain functionality. Sure, blame Microsoft but the reality is that Gnome hasn't come up with a better solution for this use case and doesn't have the ability to get people on board by leveraging market share.

    As for things like desktop icons. Gnome doesn't want them. Ok fine. But clearly users do. The answer seems to be use something other than Gnome. That's kind of frustrating to have to go to a different DE because this functionality is lacking and whether it's ugly or cluttered or not, a lot of users use the desktop in this way.

    It's all well and good that Gnome wants to do things a certain way, but they also have to be realistic about user expectations for a computer and the functions at their disposal. Extensions and alterations to Gnome by Red Hat (Shell Classic) and Ubuntu (the default extensions they use) would seem to indicate that there is a desire for these functions to be included by more than a few users.

    Leave a comment:


  • Danielsan
    replied
    Originally posted by tomas View Post

    It does not run Gnome 3 (Shell and Mutter).
    It runs Phosh which has been written from scratch:

    https://puri.sm/posts/phosh-overview/
    https://developer.puri.sm/Librem5/So...nts/Phosh.html
    https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/phosh

    ​​​​​For the apps it is running Gnome apps (gtk4 etc), but that is not a ptoblem. It is snappy, especially when considering newer apps using gtk4 which support HW-acceleration through Open GL ES.
    Fair enough! Hence that best thing in Gnome just happened outside Gnome, clearly.

    Leave a comment:


  • halo9en
    replied
    Haters: "Gnome is so different from KDE, it sucks! hahahahaha!!"

    also:

    User: "I don't like feature X in software Y !"
    Haters: "So what? Linux is all about choice, just use a different program, also did you ever contribute to open source???"

    Leave a comment:


  • tomas
    replied
    Originally posted by Danielsan View Post

    That is cool but for a mobile perspective although Gnome 3 is not that snappy DE I would recommend for a device with low computational power...
    It does not run Gnome 3 (Shell and Mutter).
    It runs Phosh which has been written from scratch:

    https://puri.sm/posts/phosh-overview/
    https://developer.puri.sm/Librem5/So...nts/Phosh.html
    https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/phosh

    ​​​​​For the apps it is running Gnome apps (gtk4 etc), but that is not a ptoblem. It is snappy, especially when considering newer apps using gtk4 which support HW-acceleration through Open GL ES.

    Leave a comment:


  • horizonbrave
    replied
    if Gnome removed the desktop icons, why the need of a wallpaper at all, isn't it distractive and obsolete?
    Especially when you call the overview.. it just feels weird. Unless you offer by default some icons functionality

    Leave a comment:


  • finalzone
    replied
    Originally posted by Mez' View Post
    Bull.
    Split pane is better than snapping in every possible way. Nemo does it though. Majority of ordinary users want to be able to sort and transfer files easily and properly (photos would be a great example in this holiday period). At this point, Nautilus can barely do that.
    Nautilus (Files) allows tab or new window as an alternate approach with minimal clutter as basic functionality. Open a folder you wish to import files as tab/new window then drag the existing files to that folder. Having two Files windows to transfer files flow better in this case. Ordinary users are actually creative with available tools and will mostly use mentioned method without the need of split pane, an optional functionality hardly missed.

    And that's why many users have switched to Nemo even for simple file transfers, as it is much more featured and professional looking than what Nautilus has become.
    Define which users. Ordinary users who rarely visit a forum don't know about Nemo nor Nautilus as they use the default file management i.e Nautilus on GNOME Shell which is the topic.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X