Re: List / Support [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 16:46 -0400, jordan wrote: On this point, is there such a distinction for gnome-shell? I'd love to be able to distinguish between devel and user discussions in my mail client... Actually, the #gnome-shell IRC channel and Bugzilla play the role of a development list, so very few discussions between core developers usually happen on this list. It's more used to help users and occasional developers (extensions), or to get feedback. Thanks for the clarification Milan, that makes total sense, as IRC is used commonly used in development projects ~ an excellent way to do things in realtime...and obviously any bug reporting/tracking is commonly used in software development. So i would suppose that the distinction would be; the Gnome-Shell-list is mainly a user list, but also has shades of grey ~ as it is also used by the odd gnome-developer, and sometimes checked for feedback... gnome-shell doesn't not specifically have a devel-list, as other avenues are used instead... that's good to know. ~ as i do belong to other lists - where the distinction between user-lists and devel-list, is much more clear as in, there is a user-list and a devel-list. lol. :) anyways, thanks again - you have a great day! jordan Hmm. I'd not be quite happy - as i wrote some time ago using IRC makes gnome-shell look like developed behind closed doors as causal developers and/or observers don't have resources to track IRC. Additionally IRC is not logged so it is sometimes hard to track what was decided and why. Regards signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: List / Support [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
Do no one in particular: thread is closed. Discussion is going nowhere in particular and several requests have been made to make the mailing list a bit more productive. Don't forget that every mail you sent to this list is read by 570 people; please no endless discussions. -- Regards, Olav (moderator) ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: List / Support [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
Le lundi 23 mai 2011 à 12:24 +1000, Tim Cuthbertson a écrit : On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Adam Tauno Williams awill...@whitemice.org wrote: Why? This is normal. Most projects have -devel lists / forums and user lists / forums. On this point, is there such a distinction for gnome-shell? I'd love to be able to distinguish between devel and user discussions in my mail client... Actually, the #gnome-shell IRC channel and Bugzilla play the role of a development list, so very few discussions between core developers usually happen on this list. It's more used to help users and occasional developers (extensions), or to get feedback. Cheers ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: List / Support [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
On this point, is there such a distinction for gnome-shell? I'd love to be able to distinguish between devel and user discussions in my mail client... Actually, the #gnome-shell IRC channel and Bugzilla play the role of a development list, so very few discussions between core developers usually happen on this list. It's more used to help users and occasional developers (extensions), or to get feedback. Thanks for the clarification Milan, that makes total sense, as IRC is used commonly used in development projects ~ an excellent way to do things in realtime...and obviously any bug reporting/tracking is commonly used in software development. So i would suppose that the distinction would be; the Gnome-Shell-list is mainly a user list, but also has shades of grey ~ as it is also used by the odd gnome-developer, and sometimes checked for feedback... gnome-shell doesn't not specifically have a devel-list, as other avenues are used instead... that's good to know. ~ as i do belong to other lists - where the distinction between user-lists and devel-list, is much more clear as in, there is a user-list and a devel-list. lol. :) anyways, thanks again - you have a great day! jordan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 22 May 2011 04:25, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 05/21/2011 12:42 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: The *only* potentially good reason I've heard for, say, wanting a window list, is that some users like using the mouse and don't want to have to use the keyboard. In some (not all) cases this is the fault of the user for not trying to use both of their hands, but in other cases, such as if the user has only one hand or rarely has two hands available, it can be worked around with an extension. There are many, many extensions that enable a GNOME 2-like experience (application menu, icons on the top panel, moving the clock, etc.) and if GNOME 3 *cannot possibly fit into a user's workflow*, some extensions can help remedy that. It's extremely difficult to discuss anything if you think things are the user's fault in user interfaces. I'm more inclined to believe that everything is the user interfaces fault at least that's the better way to look at it since you can get people to adapt to anything if they absolutely have to with enough learning. Can you imagine a sour faced Mr Clippy appearing in your window saying, looks like you didn't do that right, bob, and it's your fault for not pressing ctrl-alt-f, just remember that for next time ok, because ctrl-al-f is much better than clicking like you used to ok? It's a visual user interface and some people may find it easier to stay in visual thinking mode and like to be able to see all their options so that they can save their brain space for what they're actually doing. Perhaps people don't work the way you do. How are you going to trash this argument? I am sure you'll find some way which is why it doesn't seem worth the effort to try and argue about these specific things. They *are* matters of preference and it's rare to be able to convince anyone to give up what they like and you certainly have not appeared to want to do so. Finally, saying things can be fixed with extensions is basically program it yourself if you don't like it, which is the standard response in OSS and in the end I think theres something fair about that. It is much easier to install XFCE though and it seems to suit me hence I've lost my motivation for continuing this discussion. Regards, Tim -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/ ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 12:27 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote: On 22 May 2011 04:25, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 05/21/2011 12:42 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: The *only* potentially good reason I've heard for, say, wanting a window list, is that some users like using the mouse and don't want to have to use the keyboard. In some (not all) cases this is the fault of the user for not trying to use both of their hands, but in other cases, such as if the user has only one hand or rarely has two hands available, it can be worked around with an extension. There are many, many extensions that enable a GNOME 2-like experience (application menu, icons on the top panel, moving the clock, etc.) and if GNOME 3 *cannot possibly fit into a user's workflow*, some extensions can help remedy that. It's a visual user interface and some people may find it easier to stay in visual thinking mode and like to be able to see all their options so that they can save their brain space for what they're actually doing. Perhaps people don't work the way you do. How are you going to trash this argument? Trashing that argument is simple - you can do that in GNOME3. *NOTHING* in GNOME3 prevents you from doing that. Really - all this harping seems to be primarily about one issue: launching applications. If anyone *really* sits at their computer and launches applications all day... they don't. Or actually some do. As an admin with 200+ users I watch them do it. Open an application, open a file, do something, close the application, repeat/ Can a DE really help these people? NO. The problem is the user, full-stop. That use will do exactly that in any environment you place them in. I am sure you'll find some way which is why it doesn't seem worth the effort to try and argue about these specific things. Because it isn't. If you watched GNOME3 development these things *were* [past-tense] discussed at length. That was the time to discuss them. Using your approach nothing could ever be developed since the request-for-comment period never closes. I think the decisions made were sound and the reasons for those decisions are available online. https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/ They *are* matters of preference and it's rare to be able to convince anyone to give up what they like and you certainly have not appeared to want to do so. Yep. Finally, saying things can be fixed with extensions is basically program it yourself if you don't like it, Which was *exactly* the same model used with GNOME2, and every other DE. That is why a significant percentage of GNOME2 users, and GNOME2 distributions, installed GNOME-Do [to make GNOME2 more like what GNOME3 is]. There were/are a myriad number of extensions to GNOME2. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 06:27, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: It's extremely difficult to discuss anything if you think things are the user's fault in user interfaces. To make it absolutely crystal clear; you haven't been speaking to anyone who represents GNOME in any way. The signal-to-noise ratio on this list has gotten so bad that actual GNOME contributors have largely stopped reading it. Owen asked this thread to stop for precisely this reason. And yet here we are several days later... ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Em Dom, 2011-05-22 às 13:58 -0400, jordan escreveu: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Jason D. Clinton m...@jasonclinton.com wrote: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 06:27, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: It's extremely difficult to discuss anything if you think things are the user's fault in user interfaces. To make it absolutely crystal clear; you haven't been speaking to anyone who represents GNOME in any way. The signal-to-noise ratio on this list has gotten so bad that actual GNOME contributors have largely stopped reading it. Owen asked this thread to stop for precisely this reason. And yet here we are several days later... WOW! ~ that is not a good sign. it seems almost pointless to even have a gnome-shell list then, if gnome-developers don't even follow it..?!? ...and I probably shouldn't have even bothered with my last comment, being as it will fall on deaf-ears/blind-eyes. - anyone who really matters anyway.. I guess this list is just like the GnomeDesktop youtube channel. Please read: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2011-May/msg00434.html Cheers, Evandro ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Hi Ryan, I hoped that it stopped a long time ago; this thread it just going in circles, as I said. Person A comes in and complains GNOME is unusable, Person B that may or may not represent GNOME (as I don't, to be honest) comes in and says suggestions and clarifies the design, and then Person A says, in general, no, the desktop should be like X, and then Person B (and/or C, another person trying to help) asks why and says that the current setup should work fine, and it keeps going on and on like that. yup, pretty much. I wasn't going in circles, just pointing out some observations. I didn't bother being like Gnome-Shell should have this feature or that one - mostly i was stating that in a few ways, gnome-shell is designed for a particular user in mind (so far), and maybe isn't the best desktop environment for many users who clearly fallout of this scope. I wasn't really making suggestions so much, or trying to start a fight - but to get to my point, i first needed to make some examples. In doing so, I was also trying to point out to Tim, that he can run G3 without gnome-shell. it's totally doable. for those who feel the shell isn't ready, or for whom it's just not the right environment... I was also trying to show there are many ways to efficiently use a gnome desktop. Hopefully, GS will incorporate being just as customizable with any interface - not just keyboards... Anyways, to clarify the user's fault thing (I did not mean to sound rude): lets say you had someone who asked a major car manufacturer why their cars didn't have pedals like a bike. They say, This is a completely different design; it was designed so you do not need pedals to move forward. The user of the vehicle doesn't try to get used to the whole accelerator/brake combo found in cars today, and complains about how their vehicles are unusable and restricting by only allowing this setup. Likewise, I find that the window list is completely unnecessary; if you still use the mouse a lot, you can just flick your mouse to the corner and click the window you wish. lol you're going in circles... and AFAIK stylus' are extremely hard to use in corners! I had given very clear examples, as to why using the keyboard for every task/shortcut isn't good for certain types of users/applications. using a hotkeys is old news - not some new design/model/feature that takes adjustment. Your example again, is not good - you're using the repetitive doesn't try to get used it/give it a chance routine. and that is certainly going around in circles. AFAIK lots of people have given gnome-shell plenty of time. - so, saying the user doesn't try to get used to it, is just as rude and insulting, as saying it's the user's fault. I do agree with you though, that a window list is sort of unnecessary in gnome-shell. but then again, i don't use a panel and use a single dock on my desktop, so it's a moot point for me, really :) That said, as Jason mentioned, I do not represent GNOME. I just really want this thread to die because we get these same threads so often that go around in circles about the same issues that were discussed at length a long time ago (and many times recently as well). I think part of the problem here Ryan, is that it almost really doesn't matter that some of these issues were discussed and resolved a long time ago ~ the reason being - right now gnome 3 is being tested by the majority, not a year ago, or even six months ago. If gnome 3 is to be successful - it is important to consider the masses, not just the 100's that worked on Gnome-Shell. Because naturally, a few hundred people or even 1000 - are not going to notice what a million users would, albeit if much of it is noise ~ you can also bet lots is quite valid - and like i said before - there have been many valid concerns, ignored and treated as noise... i would argue that some of the reason these conversations/issues keep coming up - is because they are valid (not all, or even the vast majority - but many are valid). anyways, Ryan - i am not trying to start some war, you have a great day! :) jordan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
List / Support [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 15:18 -0400, jordan wrote: thanks Evandro, 1. WOW! ~ that is not a good sign. - This is me saying that i am surprised that more gnome-developers don't follow the list. - nothing more... :) Why? This is normal. Most projects have -devel lists / forums and user lists / forums. 2. it seems almost pointless to even have a gnome-shell list then, if gnome-developers don't even follow it..?!? - this was a valid concern as to the usefulness of the gnome-shell list, not sarcasm. Why? Ask a question about the Shell; there are knowledgable users here. 3. ...and I probably shouldn't have even bothered with my last comment, being as it will fall on deaf-ears/blind-eyes. - anyone who really matters anyway.. I guess this list is just like the GnomeDesktop youtube channel. Why would you consider a YouTube channel to be a support channel or development commentary channel. It isn't. Expecting developers to monitor every venue is ridiculous. this is also stating valid concerns of the usefulness of list that isn't even followed by the gnome project developers. This, even if true, doesn't degrade the usefulness of the list. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: List / Support [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
Hi Adam, 1. WOW! ~ that is not a good sign. - This is me saying that i am surprised that more gnome-developers don't follow the list. - nothing more... :) Why? This is normal. Most projects have -devel lists / forums and user lists / forums. As Ryan pointed out, there has been so much noise in this list, that compared to the past, much fewer developers follow this list. this list is also neither defined as a devel-list or user-list - it is the gnome-shell-list... 2. it seems almost pointless to even have a gnome-shell list then, if gnome-developers don't even follow it..?!? - this was a valid concern as to the usefulness of the gnome-shell list, not sarcasm. Why? Ask a question about the Shell; there are knowledgable users here. actually, that's valid Adam. However, it still creates a huge disconnect between users and developers if they don't follow the list to some degree or another. 3. ...and I probably shouldn't have even bothered with my last comment, being as it will fall on deaf-ears/blind-eyes. - anyone who really matters anyway.. I guess this list is just like the GnomeDesktop youtube channel. Why would you consider a YouTube channel to be a support channel or development commentary channel. It isn't. Expecting developers to monitor every venue is ridiculous. did I say that i thought the GnomeDesktop channel was a support channel, or development commentary channel no, i did not. FYI - youtube is exactly tha - a place to view content, interact and comment on content. once upon a time, there was commenting on their channel, but because of the negativity, they disabled it. Much in the same way as Ryan stated there is so much noise on this list, developers no longer follow it. that is the comparison, that i was making. this is also stating valid concerns of the usefulness of list that isn't even followed by the gnome project developers. This, even if true, doesn't degrade the usefulness of the list. It doesn't degrade it for the user who is trying to get some quick info on how to fix something or news on some extension, but it does certainly degrade it, in terms of the disconnect between users and the developers. jordan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: List / Support [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 15:18 -0400, jordan wrote: thanks Evandro, 1. WOW! ~ that is not a good sign. - This is me saying that i am surprised that more gnome-developers don't follow the list. - nothing more... :) Why? This is normal. Most projects have -devel lists / forums and user lists / forums. On this point, is there such a distinction for gnome-shell? I'd love to be able to distinguish between devel and user discussions in my mail client... that was my point, to my knowledge their is no gnome-shell-devel-list, there's only the gnome-shell list. jordan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 19 May 2011 05:01, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 05/18/2011 09:47 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: On 17 May 2011 20:55, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net mailto: slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I've had to acclimatise to all sorts of horrible interfaces after using better ones e.g. to Windows after Linux and you can get used to almost anything. I can even get to the point where it's difficult to get back into the thing you prefer because you have hardwired all the Windows crap ways of doing things. Is that all there is to say about it ? This is a huge reason why so many people dislike GNOME 3. Instead of getting used to how it works, they complain that it's not exactly how they're used to using it. Many people have approached it with an open mind and, for the most part, enjoy it very much. If we enjoy it, then GNOME Shell has to be at least somewhat good, yes? Just because you do not see it as so does not make it bad. You miss my point. I'm saying that if it takes a long time to get used to something and to accept its warts it then it's no better than e.g. Windows. As I said, it took a very short time for me, my family, and several other users. Nowhere is it set in stone that GNOME 3 takes a fortnight to learn how to use. The article never said that it took him a fortnight to get used to it; the article *did* say, however, that he had been using GNOME 3 for a fortnight and got used to it within that time. It can take minutes to days to get used to GNOME 3, and as I said, your mileage may vary. It's not as large of a change as many people suggest, really. If you have to keep telling people they are wrong and you are right for weeks then you have failed to make something that is obviously any good. You're assuming that every one of their complaints is valid. In another post in this thread, I described the difference between a valid and invalid complaint. A good majority of the complaints boil down to the desktop isn't exactly how I'm used to using it. You can still do everything you could do in GNOME 2 (almost), and for a lot of users, it's faster. It takes a while to get used to, not because it was designed like that, but because the standard way of using the desktop is stuck in many users' minds and it takes some time, whether it's a few minutes to a few days, to adjust. This is how it always is when switching to something new; this isn't GNOME 3-specific. It would be like me trying to give you a lecture on why you ought to like Atonal music and that's it's only because you listen to so much ordinary music that you don't like it. Perhaps I should explain to you why it's wrong to not like spinach? Food is a valid preference. You don't choose what foods you like (though I admit some are an acquired taste). You do choose how you use the desktop, however. Saying that some preferences are analogous to food preferences is essentially saying that we were born to use a desktop a certain way, which is rather unscientific. Wanting an omnipresent window list (one of the popular complaints) when that functionality has been improved upon by GNOME 3 in many ways (overview, Alt+Tab/Alt+[above tab], dash, etc.), though, is not a valid preference because it shows that the user is still attached to the way things used to be done. A window list is completely unnecessary, and any flaws in the current design that make a window list seem better should be fixed (assuming that there are flaws). Does Windows have new releases every six months? Is Windows a rolling release? On the most popular GNU/Linux operating systems, changes come very quickly. On Mac or Windows, changes are incremental and major updates are considered separate from the older software. This is how GNOME 3 wants to be treated; not as an incremental update that's forced upon the users like you suggest, but as a completely new desktop, and it must be seen as that or else a user's first impression will be sub-optimal. That would be cool if there was actually a choice but people who want to keep their kernels and applications and compilers current are forced to take the gnome-shell or switch to XFCE. Fallback mode is always there, though it's less than optimal since you have to configure it with dconf-/gconf-editor. GNOME 3 had to make the jump to innovate eventually, and it's better sooner than later. GNOME 2 had a long life and many parts of it became hard to maintain and buggy. GNOME 3 fixes that by having a fresher design. Concepts are one thing and daily use is another. It's rare to actually come across something that is such an improvement that it's worth a lot of upheaval but here are a couple of examples of instant wins: ... I hope that the shell will become like that and I don't see why it can't but it doesn't feel like those other things at the moment to me
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 18:42 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote: No, design new stuff as much as you want - just: 1) Don't think you're right and they're wrong 2) Shove it down their throats and expect a thank you from all of them I find it funny that it's apparently considered shoving things down users throats when we don't listen to their every demand. Some things are valid, some are not. I'd personally like to thank the GNOME developers for this significant innovation in the DE UI. Good work all around, Shell is a solid and practical improvement. Anyhow good luck and I hope good new things will come out of all this somehow later on. I think that there's a lot of revolution required in the rest of UIs as even the concept of an Application strikes me as being highly retrograde and I am sure that there is a lot yet to happen which will make some of this moot. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/21/2011 12:42 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: On 19 May 2011 05:01, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net mailto:slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I'm sure that the development and design team would love to hear some specific examples of how GNOME 3 is a regression. I've heard a few before; launching several applications in succession, for example, is slower in GNOME 3 than in GNOME 2 with panel launchers, though this is overcome with an extension or simply launching the applications on startup. Another regression that I can think of off the top of my head is how the file manager/recent documents list aren't quite as integrated as GNOME 2 was, though these are things that are being worked on. The reason it seems like so many complaints fall on deaf ears is that they have already been discussed and the users making the complaints and suggestions can't provide concrete examples of why their suggestions are valid. As I've said, I've heard some good suggestions. The most popular complaints, though, are invalid, baseless, and without examples, as has been proven to death in this mailing list many times over. Apparently they don't listen and repeat robotically, use a hotkey or you aren't giving it a chance. You have heard ample complaints but brush off every one of them. why bother to discuss? I'm only motivated to reply to this because I want to show how utterly resistant you are. ...I'm sorry, but who's being robotic here? I've given examples of valid regressions and bugs (I believe). The devs/designers listen to every bug and regression report that they can find time for, and there are several things that will be fixed for 3.2. The reason we, as you say, brush off every one of them is because the most popular questions, concerns and suggestions have been discussed to the end of the world and back. We know for certain after many, many discussions that GNOME 3 is staying mostly the same. As I've said many times before, the popularity of a complaint *does not* make it any more or less valid, and there is no definite correlation; basic logic. Right is right if nobody is right, wrong is wrong if everybody is wrong, as said by Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. I'm not saying that there's one true way to use the desktop, but I am saying that some things are more efficient and better than other things and that is a fact. I admit that was a bad analogy (I should have thought of a more solid one). Bicycles are cheaper than motorcycles and are used for exercise, while motorcycles are used for quickly moving around. The difference here is that GNOME 3 and GNOME 2 are meant to do the same thing, which is not the case with this analogy, so it's a bad one as I said, and I apologize. GNOME 3 aims to be better than GNOME 2 at the same job (and in many areas it already is), so a what's good for you might not be good for me argument isn't really appropriate here. No it was a good analogy because it absolutely indicates the kind of assumption that there UIs can be ranked on some single axis in order of superiority and that all others are wrong to complain that what they used is blown to bits or degraded in usefulness or accessibility by a change that seeks other tradeoffs. If you don't want complaints then it's best to stick to your branding. Create a new brand for a new thing and don't disenfranchise the people who liked and use the tradeoff balance that they have got. Prove your idea is better by convincing people and seeing them choose it. I highly suggest you read the reply by Matthew Planchard (apparently titled Re: gnome-shell-list Digest, Vol 31, Issue 89 by mistake, it seems). He gives a much better analogy than mine. Also, does Apple still support the OS9 interface? If a lot of users of Apple software, when switching from OS9 to OSX, asked over and over for the desktop to behave the old way, should Apple have to listen to them? Of course not. For there to be innovation, stability and consistency in GNOME, we have to make decisions like, is this really necessary?, or is there a better way we can do this?. What you're describing leads to preference overload: including many useless and inefficient options and increasing the probability of bugs. For GNOME to move forward, we have to ditch the old way of using the desktop (though it, as of now, is not completely ditched). You can't run forward while staying in the same place. There may be an answer to every query and it could possibly even be an answer that would satisfy the people who are complaining but even their invalid complaints are telling you that something is not right. And that something is that they often fail to provide evidence of a regression, and many (but not all) complaints boil down to I want the old UI back because I'm used to it. That is to say, they are forced them to re-learn and
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thursday, 19 May, 2011 03:54 AM, Gerald Henriksen wrote: Also, the critics saying that GNOME Shell is one size fits all must have never looked at the extensions or third-party programs yet. There are already places menus, drive menus, alternative status menus, docks, launchers on the panel, an applications menu, removing the accessibility icon, launching applications on specific workspaces... the possibilities, like with Firefox's Add-on system, are nearly infinite. If we really we do need stuff like this rather than the default, some must become an official release from GNOME Shell. Not third party for the sake of end users and stability of the DE. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 17 May 2011 20:55, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I've had to acclimatise to all sorts of horrible interfaces after using better ones e.g. to Windows after Linux and you can get used to almost anything. I can even get to the point where it's difficult to get back into the thing you prefer because you have hardwired all the Windows crap ways of doing things. Is that all there is to say about it ? This is a huge reason why so many people dislike GNOME 3. Instead of getting used to how it works, they complain that it's not exactly how they're used to using it. Many people have approached it with an open mind and, for the most part, enjoy it very much. If we enjoy it, then GNOME Shell has to be at least somewhat good, yes? Just because you do not see it as so does not make it bad. You miss my point. I'm saying that if it takes a long time to get used to something and to accept its warts it then it's no better than e.g. Windows. If you have to keep telling people they are wrong and you are right for weeks then you have failed to make something that is obviously any good. It would be like me trying to give you a lecture on why you ought to like Atonal music and that's it's only because you listen to so much ordinary music that you don't like it. Perhaps I should explain to you why it's wrong to not like spinach? Imagine trying to sell people a product that took 14 days to like? I think that's really part of the issue. People are not encountering gnome shell because they want it but because someone has put it there like a hump in the road and your alternative is to take the dirt track diversion after you read the faq that tells you how to unpick the lock on the gate. Does Windows have new releases every six months? Is Windows a rolling release? On the most popular GNU/Linux operating systems, changes come very quickly. On Mac or Windows, changes are incremental and major updates are considered separate from the older software. This is how GNOME 3 wants to be treated; not as an incremental update that's forced upon the users like you suggest, but as a completely new desktop, and it must be seen as that or else a user's first impression will be sub-optimal. That would be cool if there was actually a choice but people who want to keep their kernels and applications and compilers current are forced to take the gnome-shell or switch to XFCE. Concepts are one thing and daily use is another. It's rare to actually come across something that is such an improvement that it's worth a lot of upheaval but here are a couple of examples of instant wins: 1) Mercurial after using CVS 2) bash after using cmd.exe 3) TortoiseHG after using the commandline to try to understand branches. 4) Linux after DOS - you allocate a 4MB array and nothing crashes even though you only have 2MB free RAM. Bash and Mercurial are really quite complicated and different but with a few neat things thrown in like completion, a nice branch view/whatever one feels immediately that one is in a better situation than before and excited about starting off on an exploration. I hope that the shell will become like that and I don't see why it can't but it doesn't feel like those other things at the moment to me personally. It just feels like a change to a different set of tradeoffs which in too many cases are opitmised away from me. I don't need to be told I am wrong or old fashioned here - I am letting you know that your conclusions are not valid for everyone and I keep getting the impression that this falls on deaf ears. I don't know if it's helpful to continue posting but perhaps representing a contrary point of view is worthwhile sometimes. Also, let me give you an analogy: say that GNOME 2 is a bicycle and GNOME 3 is a motorbike. Naturally, it still does the same things, but it does them in a different way that requires some re-learning. For some it might be a short period of time, for others, a long period of time. The requirement of fuel could be considered analogous to the hardware acceleration requirement; some people cannot afford it, but it's necessary for the design (and arguably, in the case of the motorbike, the addition of fuel and an engine is much nicer than having to pedal yourself). Arguably, the motorbike would take a bit of getting used to, and it doesn't have some advantages of a bike (faster start-up, easier customization, etc), but it gets you to your destination faster and much more elegantly than a bike does. I ride a motorcycle but lots of people ride bicycles into work and don't want a motorcycle. They keep fit on their bike whereas I get fat and unhealthy and stressed from the extreme traffic in London. When you come along and say your bicycle now has an engine, praise be, you would not get a round of applause from the cyclists. There has not and won't be a definitive answer ever about whether bikes or motorcycles are best. In London they are both
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/18/2011 08:00 PM, Allan E. Registos(x-mail) wrote: On Thursday, 19 May, 2011 03:54 AM, Gerald Henriksen wrote: Also, the critics saying that GNOME Shell is one size fits all must have never looked at the extensions or third-party programs yet. There are already places menus, drive menus, alternative status menus, docks, launchers on the panel, an applications menu, removing the accessibility icon, launching applications on specific workspaces... the possibilities, like with Firefox's Add-on system, are nearly infinite. If we really we do need stuff like this rather than the default, some must become an official release from GNOME Shell. Not third party for the sake of end users and stability of the DE. I never said extensions were needed; sorry if it came across that way. What I meant to say is that, if GNOME Shell feels incomplete for you, you can extend it with extensions. The only extension that I'm currently using right now is the places menu (and I don't even use it, so I might remove it). I'm very content with how GNOME 3 works as-is, and the only thing I've used GNOME Tweak Tool for was changing my GTK3, Mutter, and icon themes. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/18/2011 02:54 PM, Gerald Henriksen wrote: On Tue, 17 May 2011 09:40:09 -0500, you wrote: Because your blog won't let me directly comment for some reason (maybe it's an add-on), I'm responding here: I'm very glad that you gave GNOME 3 a chance! It's a well-known fact around here that comments like there's no taskbar, or you need to click a lot, or there's no minimize/maximize buttons, or even the ever-popular If I wanted to use a smartphone interface, I'd use a smartphone show that the writer of those comments has given little-to-no effort whatsoever to enjoy GNOME 3. A yes, the semi-official standard Gnome 3 response that if you don't like Gnome 3 its because you haven't given it a chance. Rather arrogant really. You're leaving out a *gigantic* part of what I said: there are many valid complaints. For example, there's a bug report I read where some settings dialogs were constructed in a way that, when used with the default GNOME 3 theme (which has a lot of padding), they are completely unusable on smaller screens because they extend beyond the limits of the screen. Another valid complaint is lack of proper VPN support (if I remember correctly). These are all valid complaints. Complaining about the lack of a feature that isn't even necessary (minimization) or complaining about having to move the mouse to the left instead up upwards (as in why are there no icons on the panel; it's just as fast to tap the windows key and click an app on the dash), though, are invalid complaints that have been discussed to death and back again after many, many discussions. Not every complaint is valid; sometimes bugs, regressions, or feature requests are not valid at all, or could at least be looked at a different way. Say, for example, you developed an IDE. You just added a feature to the latest stable release of it to automatically insert closing parentheses, quotes and brackets when it would be convenient to do so. For some users, this is great, but for others, it interferes with their habits. The latter group asks for this new feature to be a preference. You could do that, but that preference would make the IDE harder to debug in the long run and make it more complex than necessary to use. An alternative that would please both groups of users would be to cancel out the closing parentheses/quotes/brackets when a user manually types them in. GNOME 3, instead of simply caving in and adding preferences left and right, tries to think outside of the box like this. I'm not saying it's perfect, but you can see how it's better. Also, the critics saying that GNOME Shell is one size fits all must have never looked at the extensions or third-party programs yet. There are already places menus, drive menus, alternative status menus, docks, launchers on the panel, an applications menu, removing the accessibility icon, launching applications on specific workspaces... the possibilities, like with Firefox's Add-on system, are nearly infinite. How very damning, Gnome 3 hasn't even been released to the masses (no major distro has released with it yet) and already we have multiple attempts to fix the UI. Guess that kind of throws out the Gnome philosophy of taking the time to do it right instead of quick, messy hacks. Arch Linux does, what I'm currently using, and it works great. I'm not sure if you could consider it a major distro, but I think it's reasonably popular to be considered major. The extensions aren't attempts to fix the UI, but rather exercises in extending the interface. There are legit reasons to want launchers on the panel, for example (launching several applications in sequence), or implementing a devices/places menu (something that the Shell team didn't have a chance to work on, as they were busy with making Shell stable). GNOME does try to do things right; they don't advocate quick, messy hacks at all. In fact, extensions and theming the Shell aren't officially supported at all; they're bound to break with each major release as they haven't settled on a standard, reasonably frozen structure yet. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/18/2011 09:47 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: On 17 May 2011 20:55, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net mailto:slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I've had to acclimatise to all sorts of horrible interfaces after using better ones e.g. to Windows after Linux and you can get used to almost anything. I can even get to the point where it's difficult to get back into the thing you prefer because you have hardwired all the Windows crap ways of doing things. Is that all there is to say about it ? This is a huge reason why so many people dislike GNOME 3. Instead of getting used to how it works, they complain that it's not exactly how they're used to using it. Many people have approached it with an open mind and, for the most part, enjoy it very much. If we enjoy it, then GNOME Shell has to be at least somewhat good, yes? Just because you do not see it as so does not make it bad. You miss my point. I'm saying that if it takes a long time to get used to something and to accept its warts it then it's no better than e.g. Windows. As I said, it took a very short time for me, my family, and several other users. Nowhere is it set in stone that GNOME 3 takes a fortnight to learn how to use. The article never said that it took him a fortnight to get used to it; the article *did* say, however, that he had been using GNOME 3 for a fortnight and got used to it within that time. It can take minutes to days to get used to GNOME 3, and as I said, your mileage may vary. It's not as large of a change as many people suggest, really. If you have to keep telling people they are wrong and you are right for weeks then you have failed to make something that is obviously any good. You're assuming that every one of their complaints is valid. In another post in this thread, I described the difference between a valid and invalid complaint. A good majority of the complaints boil down to the desktop isn't exactly how I'm used to using it. You can still do everything you could do in GNOME 2 (almost), and for a lot of users, it's faster. It takes a while to get used to, not because it was designed like that, but because the standard way of using the desktop is stuck in many users' minds and it takes some time, whether it's a few minutes to a few days, to adjust. This is how it always is when switching to something new; this isn't GNOME 3-specific. It would be like me trying to give you a lecture on why you ought to like Atonal music and that's it's only because you listen to so much ordinary music that you don't like it. Perhaps I should explain to you why it's wrong to not like spinach? Food is a valid preference. You don't choose what foods you like (though I admit some are an acquired taste). You do choose how you use the desktop, however. Saying that some preferences are analogous to food preferences is essentially saying that we were born to use a desktop a certain way, which is rather unscientific. Wanting an omnipresent window list (one of the popular complaints) when that functionality has been improved upon by GNOME 3 in many ways (overview, Alt+Tab/Alt+[above tab], dash, etc.), though, is not a valid preference because it shows that the user is still attached to the way things used to be done. A window list is completely unnecessary, and any flaws in the current design that make a window list seem better should be fixed (assuming that there are flaws). Does Windows have new releases every six months? Is Windows a rolling release? On the most popular GNU/Linux operating systems, changes come very quickly. On Mac or Windows, changes are incremental and major updates are considered separate from the older software. This is how GNOME 3 wants to be treated; not as an incremental update that's forced upon the users like you suggest, but as a completely new desktop, and it must be seen as that or else a user's first impression will be sub-optimal. That would be cool if there was actually a choice but people who want to keep their kernels and applications and compilers current are forced to take the gnome-shell or switch to XFCE. Fallback mode is always there, though it's less than optimal since you have to configure it with dconf-/gconf-editor. GNOME 3 had to make the jump to innovate eventually, and it's better sooner than later. GNOME 2 had a long life and many parts of it became hard to maintain and buggy. GNOME 3 fixes that by having a fresher design. Concepts are one thing and daily use is another. It's rare to actually come across something that is such an improvement that it's worth a lot of upheaval but here are a couple of examples of instant wins: ... I hope that the shell will become like that and I don't see why it can't but it doesn't feel like those other things at the moment to me personally. It just feels like a change to a different set of tradeoffs which in
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:55 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Micah Carrick wrote: ... It gives the impression the the core team has not answered (which of course is not the case) or does not care about what *we* think (we being the existing user-base and power users). Doesn't give me that impression at all. Decisions were discussed, and made. The point I am making is that while this list has answered some of these same questions and complaints over and over and over--the unanswered posts and blogs seem to drown out the answers. And they always always will. Nature of the beast. This weekend I intend to spend some time writing a very positive BLOG post about GNOME3. A bit late, but I finally got around to it - http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2011/05/fortnight-with-gnome3.html My feedback after using GNOME3 full time for 14 days. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/17/2011 08:18 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:55 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Micah Carrick wrote: ... It gives the impression the the core team has not answered (which of course is not the case) or does not care about what *we* think (we being the existing user-base and power users). Doesn't give me that impression at all. Decisions were discussed, and made. The point I am making is that while this list has answered some of these same questions and complaints over and over and over--the unanswered posts and blogs seem to drown out the answers. And they always always will. Nature of the beast. This weekend I intend to spend some time writing a very positive BLOG post about GNOME3. A bit late, but I finally got around to it - http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2011/05/fortnight-with-gnome3.html My feedback after using GNOME3 full time for 14 days. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list Because your blog won't let me directly comment for some reason (maybe it's an add-on), I'm responding here: I'm very glad that you gave GNOME 3 a chance! It's a well-known fact around here that comments like there's no taskbar, or you need to click a lot, or there's no minimize/maximize buttons, or even the ever-popular If I wanted to use a smartphone interface, I'd use a smartphone show that the writer of those comments has given little-to-no effort whatsoever to enjoy GNOME 3. About minimize/maximize, the reason minimize was removed was due to it being unnecessary; workspaces automatically create themselves, there are no desktop icons (that could be done better by a favorites list/recent documents list/zeitgeist), and accessing minimized windows in GNOME Shell is rather clunky. As for maximize, there's already two other ways to do it (double-clicking and dragging to the top), which are easier to do due to a lack of specific aiming (especially on touch screens, where a couple pixels' difference could mean closing your window and maximizing it). Work is being done on a hypothetical minimization replacement that better fits the Shell design, such as moving to another workspace with a button, but we probably won't see that until, at the very least, 3.4 (from what I can tell). Also, the critics saying that GNOME Shell is one size fits all must have never looked at the extensions or third-party programs yet. There are already places menus, drive menus, alternative status menus, docks, launchers on the panel, an applications menu, removing the accessibility icon, launching applications on specific workspaces... the possibilities, like with Firefox's Add-on system, are nearly infinite. However, the problem is keeping compatibility between releases, which I don't believe is a current goal due to the ever-changing nature of the project. It's possible for this to happen eventually, though. I apologize if this response is rather long-winded. I'm very glad you've given GNOME 3 a chance instead of reviving this annoying thread (and I'm very thankful for that :P). - Ryan Peters ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Fornight [Was: We want task bar back. Pretty please.]
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 09:40 -0500, Ryan Peters wrote: On 05/17/2011 08:18 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:55 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Micah Carrick wrote: ... It gives the impression the the core team has not answered (which of course is not the case) or does not care about what *we* think (we being the existing user-base and power users). Doesn't give me that impression at all. Decisions were discussed, and made. The point I am making is that while this list has answered some of these same questions and complaints over and over and over--the unanswered posts and blogs seem to drown out the answers. And they always always will. Nature of the beast. This weekend I intend to spend some time writing a very positive BLOG post about GNOME3. A bit late, but I finally got around to it - http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/2011/05/fortnight-with-gnome3.html My feedback after using GNOME3 full time for 14 days. Because your blog won't let me directly comment for some reason (maybe it's an add-on), I'm responding here: Huh, I thought that was enabled. I'm very glad that you gave GNOME 3 a chance! It's a well-known fact around here that comments like there's no taskbar, or you need to click a lot, or there's no minimize/maximize buttons, or even the ever-popular If I wanted to use a smartphone interface, I'd use a smartphone show that the writer of those comments has given little-to-no effort whatsoever to enjoy GNOME 3. Agree, those arguments are what I specifically hoped to counter. About minimize/maximize, the reason minimize was removed was due to it ... Also, the critics saying that GNOME Shell is one size fits all must Agree. For clarification I've added the following update to my post: quote [UPDATE: I should have included a link to sloshy's very helpful post How To Tweak GNOME 3 To Your Needs. So I've now rectified that error. Please note that I don't actually tweak GNOME3 much or install the various GNOME Shell extensions which are available. I recommend you really give GNOME3 vanilla an honest try. His post 10 Things I Love About GNOME 3 is also an interesting read - and helps explain some of the GNOME3 ideology. I should also point out that there are at least two ways to maximize a window in vanilla GNOME3 so the removal of maximize button seems reasonable. Minimization in GNOME3, lacking a task bar, is awkward - so removal of the minimize button in order to discourage the behavior seems reasonable as well. As I said originally: I never minimize anyway.] /quote no desktop icons (that could be done better by a favorites list/recent documents list/zeitgeist), and accessing minimized windows in GNOME Yes, I'm really looking forward to zeitgeist. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
First of all, I'd like to ask you to respond to the mailing list please. Add gnome-shell-list@gnome.org to the list of recipients of your emails so all of us, not just me, can get them. This is the second time you've done this so far, so I thought I'd let you know. On 05/17/2011 10:46 AM, Tim Murphy wrote: Because your blog won't let me directly comment for some reason (maybe it's an add-on), I'm responding here: I'm very glad that you gave GNOME 3 a chance! It's a well-known fact around here that comments like there's no taskbar, or you need to click a lot, or there's no minimize/maximize buttons, or even the ever-popular If I wanted to use a smartphone interface, I'd use a smartphone show that the writer of those comments has given little-to-no effort whatsoever to enjoy GNOME 3. I dispute the fact part of that claim. I also think that given the level of trouble required to acclimatise to Gnome Shell, is it really all that great? Your mileage may vary. As I said earlier on the mailing list (not sure which thread), it took less than five minutes to explain the concept to my family, all of which immediately picked up the concept (and my family is 5 people besides myself, ranging from 9 to 42). I've had to acclimatise to all sorts of horrible interfaces after using better ones e.g. to Windows after Linux and you can get used to almost anything. I can even get to the point where it's difficult to get back into the thing you prefer because you have hardwired all the Windows crap ways of doing things. Is that all there is to say about it ? This is a huge reason why so many people dislike GNOME 3. Instead of getting used to how it works, they complain that it's not exactly how they're used to using it. Many people have approached it with an open mind and, for the most part, enjoy it very much. If we enjoy it, then GNOME Shell has to be at least somewhat good, yes? Just because you do not see it as so does not make it bad. Imagine trying to sell people a product that took 14 days to like? I think that's really part of the issue. People are not encountering gnome shell because they want it but because someone has put it there like a hump in the road and your alternative is to take the dirt track diversion after you read the faq that tells you how to unpick the lock on the gate. Does Windows have new releases every six months? Is Windows a rolling release? On the most popular GNU/Linux operating systems, changes come very quickly. On Mac or Windows, changes are incremental and major updates are considered separate from the older software. This is how GNOME 3 wants to be treated; not as an incremental update that's forced upon the users like you suggest, but as a completely new desktop, and it must be seen as that or else a user's first impression will be sub-optimal. Also, let me give you an analogy: say that GNOME 2 is a bicycle and GNOME 3 is a motorbike. Naturally, it still does the same things, but it does them in a different way that requires some re-learning. For some it might be a short period of time, for others, a long period of time. The requirement of fuel could be considered analogous to the hardware acceleration requirement; some people cannot afford it, but it's necessary for the design (and arguably, in the case of the motorbike, the addition of fuel and an engine is much nicer than having to pedal yourself). Arguably, the motorbike would take a bit of getting used to, and it doesn't have some advantages of a bike (faster start-up, easier customization, etc), but it gets you to your destination faster and much more elegantly than a bike does. It's ugly to read the putdowns on this list - telling people that what they think is wrong and trying to put the onus on them to like your software rather than the other way around. We wouldn't do that *if they weren't wrong*. You have the false assumption that every complaint a user has is valid. Some things, like, where is the taskbar? are not considered regressions because GNOME 3 replaces it with a dock, Expose-style overview, and a greatly improved Alt+Tab mechanism. It is simply unnecessary. Also, a good majority of these complaints about regressions have no good examples. Every once in a while I do read a good example of a regression and I agree that it needs to be fixed, but most of the complaints are the most immature things. Expecting GNOME 3 to be like GNOME 2 is like expecting a roller coaster to be like a tricycle. It's a completely different beast and requires re-thinking the way you use the desktop. And no, this is not a bad thing, and in most cases takes much, much less time than 14 days. How long would it take to explain how to use Windows to somebody that has never used a computer? How about GNOME 3? The argument you have, if I'm reading this correctly, is essentially we shouldn't have to re-learn how to use the desktop. Why
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 17:26 -0500, Jason D. Clinton wrote: This is a perfect example of why people should feel comfortable using suspend-to-RAM on Linux. And that's why we made it the default if the kernel tells us that your laptop hardware is known to suspend successfully. For the record, there is nobody AFAIK was against using Suspend being put on the user menu, but being forced to use it is quite and blatantly wrong especially on a Linux desktop. Just add a line with Turn Off and we will be fine. You can bold the text of suspend in any size you want(an indication that you promote the use of it), but just add a Turn Off so that we can make a wiser choice for our machines, remember _our_ computer machines. Regards, Allan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
What we're really talking about now is batch launching, so there were better solutions in gnome 2 and there are better solutions in gnome shell 1) install alacarte if you haven't 2) open alacarte and click new item 3) create a launcher with name e.g. Work Batch 4) write the command e.g. as: su -c firefox evolution xchat gnome-terminal 5) select an icon if you want, save and exit You can have different batch launchers for home, for when you're working on the road or whatever situations. In Gnome 2 you could have embedded them in a panel, thus going to 1 click instead of N for each set of N applications. In Gnome Shell you tap windows key and type work b (or even less letters) and press enter. If you name them with some criteria you can display all your batch launchers by typing something like batch. The fact that you found a workaround to your real needs (batch launching) in gnome 2 ( click on N icons in sequence ) that was marginally better for you than gnome shell's way (tap window key, drag N icons in sequence, tap again) in my opinion doesn't make it a very interesting case for displaying N icons all the time in a system bar. At best, it makes the case to allow easily building batch launchers without resorting to advanced tools. As an expert user, you can deal- other users might find useful an extension or extra core features developed in the future. On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 21:19 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. ..and you cut out the bit where I recommended the actually-sane solution - if you know you're always going to launch the same four apps, just set them to launch automatically on login. Since this is possible, it's understandable that 'launch a known set of multiple apps in quick succession' is not a key design target for Shell's launching behaviour, since if you're going to do that all the time there are better ways to do it anyway. These four apps are: Firefox, Evolution, Xchat2 and terminal. I don't want to launch and terminal every time 100% of time. I do it when I came *to work*. I don't do it at home. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list -- Elia ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Elia Cogodi elia.cog...@gmail.com wrote: What we're really talking about now is batch launching, so there were better solutions in gnome 2 and there are better solutions in gnome shell 1) install alacarte if you haven't 2) open alacarte and click new item 3) create a launcher with name e.g. Work Batch 4) write the command e.g. as: su -c firefox evolution xchat gnome-terminal 5) select an icon if you want, save and exit You can have different batch launchers for home, for when you're working on the road or whatever situations. In Gnome 2 you could have embedded them in a panel, thus going to 1 click instead of N for each set of N applications. In Gnome Shell you tap windows key and type work b (or even less letters) and press enter. If you name them with some criteria you can display all your batch launchers by typing something like batch. Isn't it the same to make a script that launches all those in ~/.local/bin, then Alt-F2 script-name enter? One less extra app. -- Duy ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please
I think that you have pretty much ignored the solution offered by another poster of using the click and drag method. I didn't even know that this was possible until I read the post, but it seems to be very nearly as fast as four clicks, especially if you're using a mouse. On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 12:22 AM, gnome-shell-list-requ...@gnome.org wrote: Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. -- Take a few minutes just to sit and breathe. The world will wait for you. My Google Profile http://www.google.com/profiles/msplanchard Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/#!/coda1229 ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
When I have a problem with something, my common first step is to use google. http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2011-April/thread.html Justin Edwards Telelanguage Inc Network Manager On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 18:00 -0500, Justin Edwards wrote: I've been taskbar free for 4 years. I use workspaces wisely and would never want any taskbar ever again. People really need to hold their tongue if they have something bad to say and had to subscribe to a list that many people are on and have talked about issues for years. If you don't like it, don't use it. Stop being counter productive to the group. If you want to be helpful, team up with some other non happy people and make an extension. Gnome 2 to 3 is a major change. Yes, it is. And now it starts to reach the majority of Gnome users, through distribution upgrades. That's why I'm here. I'm not a Gnome fan or developer, as many of you probably are. I am merely a Fedora user. I used Gnome only because it is a default UI in Fedora. My home computer still runs ancient version of KDE 3. On my previous installation - Fedora 13 - it was Gnome 2. I just installed Fedora 15 and it uses Gnome 3. Oops. Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. What should I do if I find some changes to be regressions (from my POV, of course)? I thought I need to let developers know what users (in this case, me) think. How else would they know? Your suggestion seems to be to shut up, or write an alternative. Nice. Of course you are entitled to choose how to treat your users. Consider, though, that users will take only certain amount of abuse before they leave. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
He also said he ran KDE at home and was happy with that. Here's a solution to your problem. yum install @kde-desktop People really can help make change if they want to be beneficial. Creating extensions / patches is not magic or asking too much. If you really feel so passionately about the problems, you can help! And I agree on the twisting people's replies to be insulting. Want to help? If so, great! We'll be rooting for you. Otherwise, if you just bring negativity and poison to hopeful people, you just need to leave. The people who put hours/weeks/years of their lives into open and free software to possibly make my and others lives more enjoyable deserve a lot of credit. People like this inspire me and get me out of a rut. Your definition of acceptable is unacceptable. What do people get rewarded with for your acceptance? Silence? I really wished we could remove these flame threads, because they put me in a bad mood. Most of us are busy people who are willing to help and/or give positive feedback. The only thing I'm glad for is that these threads are archived on the internet and when I do an internet search on the people who apply for a job with me, I will find this kind of stuff and know that person will be poison to my team and move on. Justin Edwards Telelanguage Inc Network Manager On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 05/06/2011 11:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On my previous installation - Fedora 13 - it was Gnome 2. I just installed Fedora 15 and it uses Gnome 3. Oops. Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. If you don't want to learn a new UI, *do not upgrade*! This should be obvious. It should be even more obvious that Fedora 15 *isn't even released as stable yet*. If you have better things to do than learn a new UI, why on Earth did you switch and somehow expect it to be exactly the same as before? What should I do if I find some changes to be regressions (from my POV, of course)? I thought I need to let developers know what users (in this case, me) think. How else would they know? Your suggestion seems to be to shut up, or write an alternative. Nice. Our suggestion is to *learn how to use the interface* and to stop insulting the developers and designers. If you change to a new version of a desktop environment which has a new design, you should *not*, under any circumstances, expect it to be the same as previous versions. If you have work to do, do it in a stable, familiar environment instead of fiddling around with GNOME 3. Do that when you have time to learn how to use it, please, instead of begging us to reverse a good portion of the design work. Of course you are entitled to choose how to treat your users. Consider, though, that users will take only certain amount of abuse before they leave. *ahem*: 1. You twist everything we say and make it sound like we're insulting you, when it's clearly the other way around. 2. You say things are regressions, even after we make substantial effort to prove to you that they are not, in fact, regressions. Some things might be regressions, like your example where you launch four applications, but that can also be sped up by pressing the windows key instead of using the hot corner. 3. Some of what you do consider regressions are some of the most trivial things possible. Where favorites can be located, moving those dialogs that don't even need to be moved, and the existence of a permanent window list are so easily overcome as long as you approach GNOME 3 with an open mind. 4. You somehow think that we're treating you badly by not changing things back to the way they were. What you call abuse, everyone else on this mailing list calls support. If you have better things to do than use GNOME 3, don't use it until you can find time to learn it and get used to it. If you can't approach GNOME 3 with an open mind, this mailing list will not hep you. That is something you need to do on your own. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Am Freitag, den 06.05.2011, 22:51 +0200 schrieb Denys Vlasenko: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:25 +0200, David Prieto wrote: Denys, Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. You do realize that you've spent more time complaining on the ML than it would have taken you to learn the new UI, right? Not a valid argument. A million or so of future Fedora 15 users will need to go through the same thing when they upgrade. Yes, they will also have to invest a little time, and they gain an even better desktop than the one they knews. Anyhow, you are simply trolling. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/07/2011 01:13 AM, Allan E. Registos wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 17:26 -0500, Jason D. Clinton wrote: This is a perfect example of why people should feel comfortable using suspend-to-RAM on Linux. And that's why we made it the default if the kernel tells us that your laptop hardware is known to suspend successfully. For the record, there is nobody AFAIK was against using Suspend being put on the user menu, but being forced to use it is quite and blatantly wrong especially on a Linux desktop. You are not forced to use it; the preferred behavior is that, when you want to shut off your computer (which is a very trivial thing to do if you think about it, especially considering how often it even needs to be done), log out first. The option to Power Off is still in GDM. From what I've read, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the reason suspend is encouraged so much is so it matches the default behavior of the power button and closing the laptop lid, for consistency purposes. The only problem I have with the current setup is that you have to hold Alt to make Suspend change to Power Off, as it's considered a Power User feature. No, I don't mind this at all, but what I do mind is how it's not discoverable to new users and I think that might change with GNOME 3.2 (at least as far as making it discoverable). I can't say though as I have no authority within the project whatsoever. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 22:12 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: Nice help page. Just having a look at it for the first time. Ummm wonder if that's bad... Using Gnome-Shell for over a month now and only now noticing the help pages... Fantastic; I didn't know it had help pages either [although I knew about yelp there wasn't any obvious way to launch it]. Apparently my default key bindings were messed up (I also had no key-binding to access the activities view, originally); so once I assigned a key binding to launch-help-browser... Maybe there's an idea. Have a check box in the help page to open at startup. Then the user can de-select it. (or is that like screaming RTFM?) ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:26 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? I think the point is that many people do initially complain but after test driving for a a length of time end up actually liking it after they adapt. Or switching to fallback mode. The temptation was very strong, I tell you. Or switching to a different desktop. I am thinking about giving KDE a shot. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Le vendredi 06 mai 2011 à 13:37 +0200, Denys Vlasenko a écrit : I don't like disruptive innovation when it is not presented as an option, but showed down my throat by force. Tell me, how the particular bit of innovation which removed the possibility to have app launch icons in top panes is useful? Why this new thing (or rather, absence of old, perfectly working thing) is not optional? Nobody forces you to use the Shell. Just go to User menu-System Settings-System information-Graphics card and enable fallback mode. You'll get a revamped gnome-panel that supports (almost) everything you're used to. Granted, this option should be more discoverable - but it's here, and fallback mode isn't going to die in the next releases. Cheers ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:20 +0800, Allan E. Registos wrote: Adam: Does your GNOME Shell environment provides a Welcome to Your New Desktop kind of thing and then points to gnome3.org for tutorial videos? No. I don't recall a splash screen. I am just responding to a post that suggests a Welcome dialog box in a freshly installed distro with GNOME Shell as the desktop. Does the stable GNOME 3 provides that? I don't think so; it is a reasonable idea IMO [but I doubt it will make much difference, people in a hurry click-through splash pages]. If not, then your gnome3.org point is moot as this has something to do with new users to get them informed of what's new and what's not. It isn't moot; GNOME3 being a mysterious surprising and haphazard change-for-the-sake-of-change has been claimed several times. When... http://www.bing.com/search?q=gnome3go=form=QBLHqs=nsk= - note the *first* result. That site is also a prominant link from http://www.gnome.org/. That site is the first link found at http://live.gnome.org/ThreePointZero (which is the third search result). If someone is shocked by GNOME3 or claims they don't know the reasoning for the changes - they did not take any time at all to go look [so not knowing is a rather inevitable condition]. So anyone coming here [Hey, they found this list!] and making that claim is bogus IMO. They can disagree with GNOME3, but claiming it is surprising or unexplained is just pure crap. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:51 +0200, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote: Le vendredi 06 mai 2011 à 13:37 +0200, Denys Vlasenko a écrit : I don't like disruptive innovation when it is not presented as an option, but showed down my throat by force. Tell me, how the particular bit of innovation which removed the possibility to have app launch icons in top panes is useful? Why this new thing (or rather, absence of old, perfectly working thing) is not optional? Nobody forces you to use the Shell. Just go to User menu-System Settings-System information-Graphics card and enable fallback mode. You'll get a revamped gnome-panel that supports (almost) everything you're used to. Granted, this option should be more discoverable - but it's here, and fallback mode isn't going to die in the next releases. Fallback mode *is* going to die in one of the next releases. At least that's the stated plan. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Le vendredi 06 mai 2011 à 14:06 +0200, Denys Vlasenko a écrit : Fallback mode *is* going to die in one of the next releases. At least that's the stated plan. Pointers? I don't remember hearing anybody saying the panel would die, and now that it's got rid of all deprecated dependencies, there's no reason to kill it (at least for now). Maybe it won't get as much love as the Shell, but it should continue to work more or less as before. There's even been much work put into it this cycle, and we don't want to waste it. See http://www.vuntz.net/journal/post/2011/04/13/gnome-panel-is-dead% 2C-long-live-gnome-panel! Regards ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
I was wondering about the Alt+[key above Tab, usually `], i read about it, but it doesnt work here (german keyboard german language setting, self compiled shell on ubuntu natty). Same here (german language, Natty, Gnome Shell from PPA). However you can still navigate between multiple windows of the same application. After pressing ALT-TAB, keep holding ALT and use the cursor keys. Regards, Marc ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 02:06:07PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Fallback mode *is* going to die in one of the next releases. Regarding fallback mode: - there's no promise as to active development - but it should still run fine and at least critical bugs should get fixed - no plan to remove it during 3.x (no idea about 4.x; think we'd need a different maintainer) - prefer software rendering as fallback, but not available atm and doesn't mean gnome-panel suddenly goes away - a few more applets have been ported since 3.0 (you'll get them in 3.2) At least that's the stated plan. If you tell me where you read this we'll (release-team) correct it. -- Regards, Olav ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Yeah perfect, thnx it was deactivated! (alt + [key above tab]) now this works like a charm ! 2011/5/6 Aurélien Naldi aurelien.na...@gmail.com On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Marc Fouquet marc.fouq...@gmx.de wrote: I was wondering about the Alt+[key above Tab, usually `], i read about it, but it doesnt work here (german keyboard german language setting, self compiled shell on ubuntu natty). Same here (german language, Natty, Gnome Shell from PPA). However you can still navigate between multiple windows of the same application. After pressing ALT-TAB, keep holding ALT and use the cursor keys. Hi, it also did not work for me, them I discovered that the shortcut was disabled in the preferences, now it works like a charm :) Probably a problem when migrating from old settings which did not have this shortcut (it worked on a fresh fedora 15 install) As I send my first mail in this thread, let's add some extra comment: I have been using the shell for a while and I also disliked the lack of task bar then realised I do not miss it at all. I would not go as far as saying it is useless though but if the overview is fast enough I prefer the new way when I'm not using alt-tab. Anyway, this being my first post here, I'll add some comment of the main topic of the thread! Nothing new here, I would just like to encourage people not to overreact about the lack of task bar in a NEW desktop environment, it is not a feature that was removed to piss you off, just a feature that was not implemented as the designers thought it did not fit within the shell! * the old panel is still here, and got some love so it is not going anywhere. It even seems possible ti run it within the shell after some tweaks! * you are not forced to upgrade right now, but indeed this is not a long term solution * if you really love gnome so much and this is the only thing refraining you, do not forget that the shell is a brand new experiment! Extensions will show up before the old panel is removed. Maybe a different shell can be designed on top of the same architecture, but the gnome-shell designers and devs did an amazing job and they are free to make choices. You may not like them but these choices have been made for some reason. The very fact that it is different is what makes it interresting! * Nothing is taken away from you, it is open source... Anyway, if the need for a task bar is big enough, it may be added to the shell itself, but complaining about being forced to use a crappy desktop won't make it happen Best regards. -- Aurélien Naldi ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/06/2011 06:37 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 17:36 -0500, Ryan Peters wrote: Somebody needs to take this thread out back behind the shed and put a bullet through it's head for the good of humanity, so I volunteer to do so. Denys, GNOME 3 is a radical change and you have a right to be upset, but your responses have been rather rude. Asserting that the designers made the change for no reason insults their intelligence; just because you didn't read the design documents/pages that outlined what problems GNOME 3 would fix with it's design doesn't mean that they changed for the sake of it. I *don't have to* read design documents every time I upgrade to a new version of software. If I do, then said software is user unfriendly. You misread me. What I *said* was that you claimed that they changed the way things were simply for the sake of change; something proven false as soon as you read any design pages they have. I did not say that you have to read design pages to know how Shell works. It's very discoverable on it's own, but you can always use the built-in help application yelp to tell you how to use GNOME 3. Expecting GNOME 3 to be the same as every other OS is unrealistic; GNOME 3 is not a straightforward upgrade from GNOME 2 and requires re-training. I thought that was understood. Second, imitation isn't always the way to go. If GNOME simply stood the same for years without changing, there would be no innovation. I didn't say I am against any innovation. Scaled-down windows in window switching are useful. Combining app launch icon and switch to a running app icon is useful. ...Which GNOME 3 does, if I'm not mistaken. I don't like disruptive innovation when it is not presented as an option, but showed down my throat by force. Tell me, how the particular bit of innovation which removed the possibility to have app launch icons in top panes is useful? Why this new thing (or rather, absence of old, perfectly working thing) is not optional? Explain to me how it's so hard to move your mouse to the left instead of upwards. All it takes to switch windows is an easy, fast tap on the windows key and clicking the window or icon you want. As I explained in my previous email, this can even be faster and more efficient than the GNOME 2 way of doing things if you get used to it. In addition, your claim that GNOME gives users no choice is incredibly false: you can enable Forced Fallback mode in System Settings to a GNOME 2-like UI which is meant for setups that cannot run the new GNOME 3. Wrong. Fallback mode is not a choice, it was stated numerous times it exists only because not every GPU supports features necessary for Gnome 3. Whoever took refuge in fallback mode (most of my colleagues did) is in for a nasty surprise a year from now or so. ...So, it's not a choice, yet it's a user-configurable option? Do you understand what the word choice means? I don't mean to sound rude; it really is a choice. Simply because it runs by default if you don't have a modern GPU doesn't mean that it isn't a choice. GNOME 3 is a modern desktop, and thus requires modern hardware. It's better in the long run to be this way. Most desktops and laptops (and even some netbooks) made in the last 5, maybe 7 years should be able to handle GNOME 3 without Fallback Mode just fine. However, it's called Fallback Mode for a reason; it's deprecated, won't receive future updates unless they're extremely important, and Exactly. It's not a viable long term choice. I never said it was. If you want a viable, long term choice then I'd HIGHLY suggest to stop upgrading your Fedora install or get something like Red Hat or CentOS. Fedora, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE and the like are all semi-bleeding-edge distros (as opposed to, say, Arch, which is bleeding-edge). You don't *have* to upgrade every six months if you don't want to. The older versions are supported for a little while, but you'll get much more time out of Red Hat or CentOS, which are meant for enterprise deployment (and thus have slower release cycles). GNOME gives you choice: either try GNOME 3 as it is now (which has been suggested several times), use the Fallback Mode (which is discouraged), or simply wait until 3.2, 3.4, or another milestone later down the line where GNOME 3 will be more usable and configurable. Do you remember the backlash when KDE4 came out? Vista? Even XP? Everybody loves Windows XP; there's a huge resistance to upgrade because people are so used to it. And yet, XP received a lot of negative backlash at first. Even GNOME 2 got a lot of negative comments when it was first released, but now that GNOME 2.32 is out and people are used to GNOME, they're now defending it as if it's the perfect desktop environment. If GNOME 3 truly isn't fit for you right now, there's a very good chance that it will be down the road. GNOME 3's default desktop is much better for a variety of reasons. To me statements like these sound like
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
I've been taskbar free for 4 years. I use workspaces wisely and would never want any taskbar ever again. People really need to hold their tongue if they have something bad to say and had to subscribe to a list that many people are on and have talked about issues for years. If you don't like it, don't use it. Stop being counter productive to the group. If you want to be helpful, team up with some other non happy people and make an extension. Gnome 2 to 3 is a major change. Justin Edwards Telelanguage Inc Network Manager On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Ryan Peters slosh...@sbcglobal.net wrote: Somebody needs to take this thread out back behind the shed and put a bullet through it's head for the good of humanity, so I volunteer to do so. Denys, GNOME 3 is a radical change and you have a right to be upset, but your responses have been rather rude. Asserting that the designers made the change for no reason insults their intelligence; just because you didn't read the design documents/pages that outlined what problems GNOME 3 would fix with it's design doesn't mean that they changed for the sake of it. As Henry Ford allegedly said, If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse.. The automobile was awkward and totally different at first relative to horses, but it eventually caught on because it was a better choice than horses for most people. Second, imitation isn't always the way to go. If GNOME simply stood the same for years without changing, there would be no innovation. In addition, your claim that GNOME gives users no choice is incredibly false: you can enable Forced Fallback mode in System Settings to a GNOME 2-like UI which is meant for setups that cannot run the new GNOME 3. However, it's called Fallback Mode for a reason; it's deprecated, won't receive future updates unless they're extremely important, and GNOME 3's default desktop is much better for a variety of reasons. I, as well as the people working on developing and marketing GNOME 3, firmly believe that GNOME 3 is the future, which is a good thing and not bad like you suggest. You can switch windows with Alt+Tab and Alt+[key above Tab, usually `], the former switching applications and the latter switching windows in an application. It works very well and you should try it! Also, switching windows is much more flexible than in GNOME 2: with the older GNOME, you only had Alt+Tab and a tiny window list. With GNOME 3, you get an Exposé-like view where you have nice, easily clickable thumbnails of every window on that workspace (especially useful on a laptop), fling gesture support to switch workspaces on touch devices, a dock-like window list on the left, a workspace switcher on the right with drag-drop support, and a search bar that works without clicking it; just start typing! If that doesn't satisfy you, I'm not sure what will. Of course, you can always write an extension that enables the behavior you like, but GNOME 3 should be given a fair chance first. You can access the Activities overlay three ways: a hot corner (flinging your mouse to the top-left), clicking the Activities button, or a keyboard shortcut (Windows/Super/Meta key, Alt+F1, or whatever you set it to). I use the keyboard shortcut as it makes it much faster for me. I just tap it, click the window I want, and I've switched in less than a second, arguably about as fast as the task list on GNOME 2 (and in some cases faster because you don't have to scan a tiny list of windows like in GNOME 2). Your claim that GNOME doesn't let you add launchers is also false: right-click any running application (or any application in the Applications menu or Search function) and click Add to Favorites. Then, just open the overlay and click it to launch. It's just as easy as the icons from GNOME 2, and they take up less screen space as well since they don't take up valuable panel real-estate. You can also manually organize them by dragging them up and down, which is much better than right-clicking the launcher, unlocking it, right-clicking it again, clicking move, then moving the mouse along a gigantic panel to place it in a usable place (this was the GNOME 2 behavior). Also, it's faster to start an application that you didn't add to favorites in GNOME 2; just search for it by opening the overlay and typing. It's keyboard-navigable so you can press up and down to move through the list. The Applications Menu isn't really intended to be used constantly and is only there for when you either don't know an application's name, don't have it on your favorites list, or are using a touch-device (like a tablet). If you have any more problems with GNOME 3, please say so, but don't be rude about it. Also, check out gnome-tweak-tool and gnome-shell-extensions for some tweaks that let you customize GNOME 3 to how you want it to be. I hope I've helped make things more clear, and it would be very nice if
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 18:00 -0500, Justin Edwards wrote: I've been taskbar free for 4 years. I use workspaces wisely and would never want any taskbar ever again. People really need to hold their tongue if they have something bad to say and had to subscribe to a list that many people are on and have talked about issues for years. If you don't like it, don't use it. Stop being counter productive to the group. If you want to be helpful, team up with some other non happy people and make an extension. Gnome 2 to 3 is a major change. Yes, it is. And now it starts to reach the majority of Gnome users, through distribution upgrades. That's why I'm here. I'm not a Gnome fan or developer, as many of you probably are. I am merely a Fedora user. I used Gnome only because it is a default UI in Fedora. My home computer still runs ancient version of KDE 3. On my previous installation - Fedora 13 - it was Gnome 2. I just installed Fedora 15 and it uses Gnome 3. Oops. Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. What should I do if I find some changes to be regressions (from my POV, of course)? I thought I need to let developers know what users (in this case, me) think. How else would they know? Your suggestion seems to be to shut up, or write an alternative. Nice. Of course you are entitled to choose how to treat your users. Consider, though, that users will take only certain amount of abuse before they leave. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Denys, Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. You do realize that you've spent more time complaining on the ML than it would have taken you to learn the new UI, right? It certainly doesn't look like you have other work to do. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I never said it was. If you want a viable, long term choice then I'd HIGHLY suggest to stop upgrading your Fedora install How viable for me. s/How/Not/ ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 09:33 -0500, Ryan Peters wrote: Expecting GNOME 3 to be the same as every other OS is unrealistic; GNOME 3 is not a straightforward upgrade from GNOME 2 and requires re-training. I thought that was understood. For me, Gnome 3 appears as part of Fedora 13-15 upgrade. I didn't elect to try this new UI. It is sort of forced on Fedora 15 users, unless they want to be left on soon-to-be obsolete unsupported Fedora 13 (not a realistic option for me). Very different situation from one installs Gnome 3 because he hates Gnome 2 and needs something newer and different. I don't like disruptive innovation when it is not presented as an option, but showed down my throat by force. Tell me, how the particular bit of innovation which removed the possibility to have app launch icons in top panes is useful? Why this new thing (or rather, absence of old, perfectly working thing) is not optional? Explain to me how it's so hard to move your mouse to the left instead of upwards. Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. All it takes to switch windows is an easy, fast tap on the windows key and clicking the window or icon you want. As I explained in my previous email, this can even be faster and more efficient than the GNOME 2 way of doing things if you get used to it. Alt-tabbing seems to work mostly similar to Gnome 2. This isn't what I'm complaining about. In addition, your claim that GNOME gives users no choice is incredibly false: you can enable Forced Fallback mode in System Settings to a GNOME 2-like UI which is meant for setups that cannot run the new GNOME 3. Wrong. Fallback mode is not a choice, it was stated numerous times it exists only because not every GPU supports features necessary for Gnome 3. Whoever took refuge in fallback mode (most of my colleagues did) is in for a nasty surprise a year from now or so. ...So, it's not a choice, yet it's a user-configurable option? Do you understand what the word choice means? I don't mean to sound rude; it really is a choice. I did my homework: googled about this stuff and understood that fallback mode isn't going to be supported in the long term. So if I switch to it, it means I will be in the same spot (Gnome 3 Shell), just a bit later, when it will be even more difficult to convince developers to change anything. However, it's called Fallback Mode for a reason; it's deprecated, won't receive future updates unless they're extremely important, and Exactly. It's not a viable long term choice. I never said it was. If you want a viable, long term choice then I'd HIGHLY suggest to stop upgrading your Fedora install How viable for me. How can I develop software for Fedora if I don't upgrade my Fedora? Developing includes testing. Testing for F15 requires F15. eating your own dog food etc. Do you remember the backlash when KDE4 came out? Vista? Even XP? I use none of these. I, as well as the people working on developing and marketing GNOME 3, firmly believe that GNOME 3 is the future, which is a good thing and not bad like you suggest. Don't you think that a bit of listening to your customers may be a good thing? Of course it is. When your customers refuse to learn a new way to use the desktop and demand that we drop everything we've done and go back to the old days, no matter what responses they've been given, though... Do you get my point? WHERE did I said that drop everything part? I point out SPECIFIC things which seem to be usability regressions. I assure you that the things I'm NOT complaining about are fine with me. The Expose, for example. It's neat. I'm trying as hard as I can to answer your concerns, and I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. So far the list of things I am annoyed by is rather short: * nuked launch icons at the top * nuked task bar * strange window behavior in some cases: - some windows are without [x] close button (big wtf moment) - some windows are glued to the parent (smaller nit) - window title bar having the same gray color as the menu line (makes it harder to figure out where is it, such as when I want to drag the window) Only 5 items are very far from alleged the whole Gnome 3 suxxx attitude you ascribed to me. You can switch windows with Alt+Tab and Alt+[key above Tab, usually `], the former switching applications and the latter switching windows in an application. It works very well and you should try it! You missed the point. I miss task bar because it was showing me what apps are running, not because it allowed me to switch between apps. Hit the windows key and you get the titles *and* thumbnails of every window on your current workspace.
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 09:33 -0500, Ryan Peters wrote: Expecting GNOME 3 to be the same as every other OS is unrealistic; GNOME 3 is not a straightforward upgrade from GNOME 2 and requires re-training. I thought that was understood. For me, Gnome 3 appears as part of Fedora 13-15 upgrade. I didn't elect to try this new UI. It is sort of forced on Fedora 15 users, unless they want to be left on soon-to-be obsolete unsupported Fedora 13 (not a realistic option for me). Very different situation from one installs Gnome 3 because he hates Gnome 2 and needs something newer and different. I don't like disruptive innovation when it is not presented as an option, but showed down my throat by force. Tell me, how the particular bit of innovation which removed the possibility to have app launch icons in top panes is useful? Why this new thing (or rather, absence of old, perfectly working thing) is not optional? Explain to me how it's so hard to move your mouse to the left instead of upwards. Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. What about a compromise like not kicking you out of the overview after launching apps? ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 05/06/2011 11:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On my previous installation - Fedora 13 - it was Gnome 2. I just installed Fedora 15 and it uses Gnome 3. Oops. Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. If you don't want to learn a new UI, *do not upgrade*! This should be obvious. It should be even more obvious that Fedora 15 *isn't even released as stable yet*. If you have better things to do than learn a new UI, why on Earth did you switch and somehow expect it to be exactly the same as before? What should I do if I find some changes to be regressions (from my POV, of course)? I thought I need to let developers know what users (in this case, me) think. How else would they know? Your suggestion seems to be to shut up, or write an alternative. Nice. Our suggestion is to *learn how to use the interface* and to stop insulting the developers and designers. If you change to a new version of a desktop environment which has a new design, you should *not*, under any circumstances, expect it to be the same as previous versions. If you have work to do, do it in a stable, familiar environment instead of fiddling around with GNOME 3. Do that when you have time to learn how to use it, please, instead of begging us to reverse a good portion of the design work. Of course you are entitled to choose how to treat your users. Consider, though, that users will take only certain amount of abuse before they leave. *ahem*: 1. You twist everything we say and make it sound like we're insulting you, when it's clearly the other way around. 2. You say things are regressions, even after we make substantial effort to prove to you that they are not, in fact, regressions. Some things might be regressions, like your example where you launch four applications, but that can also be sped up by pressing the windows key instead of using the hot corner. 3. Some of what you do consider regressions are some of the most trivial things possible. Where favorites can be located, moving those dialogs that don't even need to be moved, and the existence of a permanent window list are so easily overcome as long as you approach GNOME 3 with an open mind. 4. You somehow think that we're treating you badly by not changing things back to the way they were. What you call abuse, everyone else on this mailing list calls support. If you have better things to do than use GNOME 3, don't use it until you can find time to learn it and get used to it. If you can't approach GNOME 3 with an open mind, this mailing list will not hep you. That is something you need to do on your own. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
If you don't want to leave the overview you can just drag each app you want to launch. It hardly takes longer than clicking, I can probably launch 4 apps in my dash in about 3 seconds - hit windows key - drag icon 1 - drag icon 2 - drag icon 3 - click icon 4 If I'm really organized it will take slightly longer because I'll drag them to some combination of workspaces, but not longer than workspace management upon launching would have taken in a standard gnome 2. On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Jasper St. Pierre jstpie...@mecheye.net wrote: On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 09:33 -0500, Ryan Peters wrote: Expecting GNOME 3 to be the same as every other OS is unrealistic; GNOME 3 is not a straightforward upgrade from GNOME 2 and requires re-training. I thought that was understood. For me, Gnome 3 appears as part of Fedora 13-15 upgrade. I didn't elect to try this new UI. It is sort of forced on Fedora 15 users, unless they want to be left on soon-to-be obsolete unsupported Fedora 13 (not a realistic option for me). Very different situation from one installs Gnome 3 because he hates Gnome 2 and needs something newer and different. I don't like disruptive innovation when it is not presented as an option, but showed down my throat by force. Tell me, how the particular bit of innovation which removed the possibility to have app launch icons in top panes is useful? Why this new thing (or rather, absence of old, perfectly working thing) is not optional? Explain to me how it's so hard to move your mouse to the left instead of upwards. Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. What about a compromise like not kicking you out of the overview after launching apps? ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list -- Elia ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. If you run the same four apps every time you boot, why not just set them to auto-start? That's what I do. gnome-session-properties can do that for you. As I said, hit the windows key My Windows key switches Latin/Cyrillic keyboard layout for last 10 years. I prefer to not have to unlearn/relearn that too, so I'll keep it bound the old way. So, use alt-f1, or bind some other key for the overview. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:30 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 09:33 -0500, Ryan Peters wrote: Expecting GNOME 3 to be the same as every other OS is unrealistic; GNOME 3 is not a straightforward upgrade from GNOME 2 and requires re-training. I thought that was understood. For me, Gnome 3 appears as part of Fedora 13-15 upgrade. I didn't elect to try this new UI. It is sort of forced on Fedora 15 users, unless they want to be left on soon-to-be obsolete unsupported Fedora 13 (not a realistic option for me). Very different situation from one installs Gnome 3 because he hates Gnome 2 and needs something newer and different. I don't like disruptive innovation when it is not presented as an option, but showed down my throat by force. Tell me, how the particular bit of innovation which removed the possibility to have app launch icons in top panes is useful? Why this new thing (or rather, absence of old, perfectly working thing) is not optional? Explain to me how it's so hard to move your mouse to the left instead of upwards. Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. What about a compromise like not kicking you out of the overview after launching apps? This would be a step in the right direction, yes. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 12:37 -0500, Ryan Peters wrote: On 05/06/2011 11:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On my previous installation - Fedora 13 - it was Gnome 2. I just installed Fedora 15 and it uses Gnome 3. Oops. Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. If you don't want to learn a new UI, *do not upgrade*! This should be obvious. It should be even more obvious that Fedora 15 *isn't even released as stable yet*. I *can't*. I develop software for Fedora/RHEL, I must test it. Therefore I must upgrade to a new Fedora from time to time. Moreover, I am participating in Fedora distribution testing before it is released. Someone does this work, I'm sure you know it. I'm one of those guys. If you have better things to do than learn a new UI, why on Earth did you switch and somehow expect it to be exactly the same as before? See above. What should I do if I find some changes to be regressions (from my POV, of course)? I thought I need to let developers know what users (in this case, me) think. How else would they know? Your suggestion seems to be to shut up, or write an alternative. Nice. Our suggestion is to *learn how to use the interface* and to stop insulting the developers and designers. If you change to a new version of a desktop environment which has a new design, you should *not*, under any circumstances, expect it to be the same as previous versions. If you have work to do, do it in a stable, familiar environment instead of fiddling around with GNOME 3. That' what I was doing for a long time. Now it is the time to upgrade. For me, it's not something I can avoid. I can only postpone it for a week or a month. Do that when you have time to learn how to use it, please, instead of begging us to reverse a good portion of the design work. Of course you are entitled to choose how to treat your users. Consider, though, that users will take only certain amount of abuse before they leave. *ahem*: 1. You twist everything we say and make it sound like we're insulting you, when it's clearly the other way around. I came with *specific* complaints (not blanket Gnome 3 sucks statement) *and some proposals how to change it*. So far I got dozens of RTFM-class responses and *only one* response which proposes a small, partial step towards improving UI in a direction I want. Who is more rude? 2. You say things are regressions, even after we make substantial effort to prove to you that they are not, in fact, regressions. Regression in UI is a somewhat subjective term, I think. Some things might be regressions, like your example where you launch four applications, but that can also be sped up by pressing the windows key instead of using the hot corner. 3. Some of what you do consider regressions are some of the most trivial things possible. Where favorites can be located, moving those dialogs that don't even need to be moved, and the existence of a permanent window list are so easily overcome as long as you approach GNOME 3 with an open mind. 4. You somehow think that we're treating you badly by not changing things back to the way they were. What you call abuse, everyone else on this mailing list calls support. If you have better things to do than use GNOME 3, don't use it until you can find time to learn it and get used to it. If you can't approach GNOME 3 with an open mind, this mailing list will not hep you. That is something you need to do on your own. What I do not see in the above is how do developers actually accept some user input. As you described, I have only two options: use Gnome 3 as-is (no matter how inconvenient is it), or use something else. Where is option 3: give developers feedback so that they can make it more convenient? And yes, feedback sometimes (even mostly) takes form of negative comments: I don't like X, Y is broken, and so on. I don't think you need to be offended by it. I as developer receive such comments from my users every day. I think that my responsibility as a user/tester is to make sure I'm not simply venting my frustration at software not working as I need it to, but talk about *specific* elements which can be improved. I think I'm doing exactly this. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Denys, If you talk to any group of people (grouped by a practice or philosophy) and say what their practice is unacceptable. Prepare to be treated in a way that is unacceptable. Your language came in a way that was insulting, so people respond accordingly. If this is your only machine and you needed to get a lot of work done, I would say that you should have known better to upgrade to a distribution known for being near bleeding edge that just incorporated a bleeding edge version of user interface. People have exhausted these subjects. People are listening to the ideas that have been put out, and in later versions some things will be addressed. I think the taskbar is going to stay out of core. I for one when using a taskbar and workspaces together, hate how when you click on things your workspaces jump around. I'd much rather not have another bar anywhere when it is redundant. You can auto hide it, but in my opinion other launchers behave better and are more aesthetically pleasing than a task bar. I think it would be beneficial for you to try one of the docks. Justin Edwards Telelanguage Inc Network Manager On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 21:19 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. ..and you cut out the bit where I recommended the actually-sane solution - if you know you're always going to launch the same four apps, just set them to launch automatically on login. Since this is possible, it's understandable that 'launch a known set of multiple apps in quick succession' is not a key design target for Shell's launching behaviour, since if you're going to do that all the time there are better ways to do it anyway. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 21:19 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. ..and you cut out the bit where I recommended the actually-sane solution - if you know you're always going to launch the same four apps, just set them to launch automatically on login. Since this is possible, it's understandable that 'launch a known set of multiple apps in quick succession' is not a key design target for Shell's launching behaviour, since if you're going to do that all the time there are better ways to do it anyway. These four apps are: Firefox, Evolution, Xchat2 and terminal. I don't want to launch and terminal every time 100% of time. I do it when I came *to work*. I don't do it at home. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 22:46 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 21:19 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. ..and you cut out the bit where I recommended the actually-sane solution - if you know you're always going to launch the same four apps, just set them to launch automatically on login. Since this is possible, it's understandable that 'launch a known set of multiple apps in quick succession' is not a key design target for Shell's launching behaviour, since if you're going to do that all the time there are better ways to do it anyway. These four apps are: Firefox, Evolution, Xchat2 and terminal. I don't want to launch and terminal every time 100% of time. I do it when I came *to work*. I don't do it at home. If you want to launch them *VERY* easily assign a keybinding to the apps. I assign a keybinding to GNOME Terminal for instance. System - Keyboard - Shortcuts ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Also for terminal, this is my favorite behavior. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilda_(software) Justin Edwards Telelanguage Inc Network Manager On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Adam Tauno Williams awill...@whitemice.orgwrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 22:46 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 21:19 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. ..and you cut out the bit where I recommended the actually-sane solution - if you know you're always going to launch the same four apps, just set them to launch automatically on login. Since this is possible, it's understandable that 'launch a known set of multiple apps in quick succession' is not a key design target for Shell's launching behaviour, since if you're going to do that all the time there are better ways to do it anyway. These four apps are: Firefox, Evolution, Xchat2 and terminal. I don't want to launch and terminal every time 100% of time. I do it when I came *to work*. I don't do it at home. If you want to launch them *VERY* easily assign a keybinding to the apps. I assign a keybinding to GNOME Terminal for instance. System - Keyboard - Shortcuts ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:25 +0200, David Prieto wrote: Denys, Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. You do realize that you've spent more time complaining on the ML than it would have taken you to learn the new UI, right? Not a valid argument. A million or so of future Fedora 15 users will need to go through the same thing when they upgrade. Perhaps we should ask Ubuntu how the experience of moving to Unity worked for them. Ubuntu's popularity pretty much exceeds just about every other distros out there. Unity is even more different than GNOME 3 is arguably. I think most people are fairly saavy about what they'll expect. I assume that Fedora is advertising GNOME 3? For instance, Adam and I both did a session on GNOME 3 and Fedora 15 at a recent Linux conference this past weekend. There hasn't been that many questions out of those sessions regarding the UI. Your statement does not take into account that GNOME has spent a large amount of time marketing GNOME 3 through social networks, press releases, magazine articles and so forth. It is also well known that Fedora uses GNOME as a default. So I think by now people are aware that change is coming. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 15:46, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. ..and you cut out the bit where I recommended the actually-sane solution - if you know you're always going to launch the same four apps, just set them to launch automatically on login. Since this is possible, it's understandable that 'launch a known set of multiple apps in quick succession' is not a key design target for Shell's launching behaviour, since if you're going to do that all the time there are better ways to do it anyway. These four apps are: Firefox, Evolution, Xchat2 and terminal. I don't want to launch and terminal every time 100% of time. I do it when I came *to work*. I don't do it at home. This is a perfect example of why people should feel comfortable using suspend-to-RAM on Linux. And that's why we made it the default if the kernel tells us that your laptop hardware is known to suspend successfully. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 15:51, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:25 +0200, David Prieto wrote: Denys, Having suddenly to learn a new UI is not what I planned to do this weekend. I have some other work to do. You do realize that you've spent more time complaining on the ML than it would have taken you to learn the new UI, right? Not a valid argument. A million or so of future Fedora 15 users will need to go through the same thing when they upgrade. I see this thread as having a few valid points which we already knew about but otherwise being largely about resisting change. To your credit, you are one of the more coherent people complaining in this thread. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Another feature i didnt know, and i use gnome for 3 years now ! tnx a lot! Cheers phil 2011/5/6 Adam Tauno Williams awill...@whitemice.org On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 22:46 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 21:19 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:07 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Explaining: Now I need to move it upwards, then downwards. If I want to start four apps in a row, which I do every day in the morning, I can't go up and click-click-click-click, I need to go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click, go up, go down and click. You really want to be using the keyboard shortcut to access overview. It's much nicer than using the mouse, on a typical desktop/laptop. Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. ..and you cut out the bit where I recommended the actually-sane solution - if you know you're always going to launch the same four apps, just set them to launch automatically on login. Since this is possible, it's understandable that 'launch a known set of multiple apps in quick succession' is not a key design target for Shell's launching behaviour, since if you're going to do that all the time there are better ways to do it anyway. These four apps are: Firefox, Evolution, Xchat2 and terminal. I don't want to launch and terminal every time 100% of time. I do it when I came *to work*. I don't do it at home. If you want to launch them *VERY* easily assign a keybinding to the apps. I assign a keybinding to GNOME Terminal for instance. System - Keyboard - Shortcuts ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: Trying. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #1 launches. Need to open Expose again, so: Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #2 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #3 launches. Alt-F1, click - Expose closes, app #4 launches. This is still much slower than click-click-click-click in Gnome 2. What about holding Ctrl and touch the left edge to show up the dash without overview mode and the dash stays until your mouse leaves it. You can then click^4? No it's not implemented, just an idea. -- Duy ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 5:26 AM, Jason D. Clinton m...@jasonclinton.com wrote: These four apps are: Firefox, Evolution, Xchat2 and terminal. I don't want to launch and terminal every time 100% of time. I do it when I came *to work*. I don't do it at home. This is a perfect example of why people should feel comfortable using suspend-to-RAM on Linux. And that's why we made it the default if the kernel tells us that your laptop hardware is known to suspend successfully. That eases the problem but not solve it. Xorg, firefox and evolution tend to eat more and more memory over time. After a month or so, I need to restart X, so click click click again. -- Duy ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 06:10 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: If someone is shocked by GNOME3 or claims they don't know the reasoning for the changes - they did not take any time at all to go look [so not knowing is a rather inevitable condition]. So anyone coming here [Hey, they found this list!] and making that claim is bogus IMO. You have a point here, when people start complaining things in the Shell that are obviously made according to the designs and eventually finding this list just to complain, is quit off the line and bogus. For it is easier to click on the link/sites of gnome3 explaining the changes than subscribing to this list. Regards, Allan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:37 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: In addition, your claim that GNOME gives users no choice is incredibly false: you can enable Forced Fallback mode in System Settings to a GNOME 2-like UI which is meant for setups that cannot run the new GNOME 3. Wrong. Fallback mode is not a choice, it was stated numerous times it exists only because not every GPU supports features necessary for Gnome 3. Whoever took refuge in fallback mode (most of my colleagues did) is in for a nasty surprise a year from now or so. Given that they cannot run the new GNOME 3, how can they activate the Fallback mode in System Settings inside GNOME 3 when in the first place they cannot run it? ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 18:51 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I never said it was. If you want a viable, long term choice then I'd HIGHLY suggest to stop upgrading your Fedora install How viable for me. How can I develop software for Fedora if I don't upgrade my Fedora? Developing includes testing. Testing for F15 requires F15. eating your own dog food etc. And this is the key for Linux desktop to prosper, application support and existing app compatibility. Developers need to think about these things. Microsoft being notorious for application compatibility between major Windows releases, yet was heavily criticized. I hope GNOME developers will do the same. Regards, Allan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
We want task bar back. Pretty please.
I just installed F15 (Rawhide). It uses Gnome 3. I resisted the temptation to switch to Fallback mode, because quick googling showed me that Fallback mode will be phased out in not-so-distant future. Therefore I am using the new interface. My general impression as a user is negative. A lot of things have changed for no apparent reason, even those things which worked just fine. Why? To facilitate a more productive discussion, I will limit my rants^W feedback to one per email. So, here it goes: Where is the task bar? I am one of those guys who likes to see the bar with all running apps, so that I can find out what runs and what doesn't by simply looking at it, without any clicking and/or mouse movement. Alt-Tabbing or go-to-upper-left-corner'ing is a usability regression for me. I do understand that some people don't find it that important/useful, and they consider task bar removal a good thing which freed a bit of screen real estate. However, I am sure I am not alone. There are people who like the task bar. Since limiting the interface to only one of these choices will make a fraction of user population unhappy, and (I presume) Gnome wants to have a wide user base rather than narrow one, I propose to bring it back from the dead, but make optional. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: I just installed F15 (Rawhide). It uses Gnome 3. I resisted the temptation to switch to Fallback mode, because quick googling showed me that Fallback mode will be phased out in not-so-distant future. Therefore I am using the new interface. My general impression as a user is negative. A lot of things have changed for no apparent reason, even those things which worked just fine. Why? To facilitate a more productive discussion, I will limit my rants^W feedback to one per email. So, here it goes: Where is the task bar? Most of the answers regarding the design can be found here: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/FAQ GNOME 3 is designed to be task oriented and distraction free. Feel free to peruse the FAQ as it explains some of the reasoning behind the design decisions that were made. You have access to the task bar in the overview. I realize it is a large change from what you're used to but I suggest you stick with it and try it for a week to 10 days. That will give you a chance to absorb things being done the new way. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 08:30 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: To facilitate a more productive discussion, I will limit my rants^W feedback to one per email. So, here it goes: Where is the task bar? Most of the answers regarding the design can be found here: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/FAQ Sure. From the FAQ: Why no window list or dock? The Shell is designed in order to minimise distraction and interuption and to enable users to focus on the task at hand. A persistent window list or dock would interfere with this goal, serving as a constant temptation to switch focus. The separation of window switching functionality into the overview means that an effective solution to switching is provided when it is desired by the user, but that it is hidden from view when it is not necessary. I disagree. Not all people are the same. Task bar does not distract me. I find its removal counter productive. Again, I have no problem if it would be made configurable and can be turned off. Freedom and choice is good (when not taken to the extremes). Is it a policy of Gnome Desktop to shoehorn users into fixed UI style instead of offering them reasonable choice? What next, hardwired window title color and size? -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
I too was put off by this initially. But, as was mentioned. give it a try and you may find you don't need it. I typically have a dozen applications going for work and I have adapted quite quickly. Took me about 4 days. That being said, I think it would be crazy not to have a good taskbar extension with nice, smooth integration (perhaps from somebody other than the core shell team) in future versions--I get why it's not there but that doesn't mean people don't want it and perhaps need it. That being said, you can install a dock extension and the tint2 taskbar also works (at least in F15): http://www.micahcarrick.com/gnome3-shell-taskbar-dock.html http://www.micahcarrick.com/gnome3-shell-taskbar-dock.html On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: I just installed F15 (Rawhide). It uses Gnome 3. I resisted the temptation to switch to Fallback mode, because quick googling showed me that Fallback mode will be phased out in not-so-distant future. Therefore I am using the new interface. My general impression as a user is negative. A lot of things have changed for no apparent reason, even those things which worked just fine. Why? To facilitate a more productive discussion, I will limit my rants^W feedback to one per email. So, here it goes: Where is the task bar? I am one of those guys who likes to see the bar with all running apps, so that I can find out what runs and what doesn't by simply looking at it, without any clicking and/or mouse movement. Alt-Tabbing or go-to-upper-left-corner'ing is a usability regression for me. I do understand that some people don't find it that important/useful, and they consider task bar removal a good thing which freed a bit of screen real estate. However, I am sure I am not alone. There are people who like the task bar. Since limiting the interface to only one of these choices will make a fraction of user population unhappy, and (I presume) Gnome wants to have a wide user base rather than narrow one, I propose to bring it back from the dead, but make optional. -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list -- *Green Tackle* - *Environmentally Friendly Fishing Tackle* www.GreenTackle.com http://www.greentackle.com Email: mi...@greentackle.com Phone: 971.270.2206 Toll Free: 877.580.9165 Fax: 503.946.3106 ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:05 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: Assigning a hot key for the activity view helps [I mapped Windows+Space, like GNOME-Do used to use] then if I need to I can pop in an out of that view without using the odd [I still find it odd] gesture/position scheme. Just out of curiosity - why do you change the default hot key from Super to Super+Space? Muscle memory? Florian ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? That some user's don't read the documentation? That's is half a joke, and half serious. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:17 +0200, Florian Müllner wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:05 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: Assigning a hot key for the activity view helps [I mapped Windows+Space, like GNOME-Do used to use] then if I need to I can pop in an out of that view without using the odd [I still find it odd] gesture/position scheme. Just out of curiosity - why do you change the default hot key from Super to Super+Space? Muscle memory? Hmmm. There was no hot-key assigned when I went into the keybindings; it was Disabled. I wasn't aware there was a default. I looked about and couldn't find documentation of the 'official' default key bindings. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:25 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? That some user's don't read the documentation? That's is half a joke, and half serious. Wrong. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:26 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:17 +0200, Florian Müllner wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:05 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: Assigning a hot key for the activity view helps [I mapped Windows+Space, like GNOME-Do used to use] then if I need to I can pop in an out of that view without using the odd [I still find it odd] gesture/position scheme. Just out of curiosity - why do you change the default hot key from Super to Super+Space? Muscle memory? Hmmm. There was no hot-key assigned when I went into the keybindings; it was Disabled. I wasn't aware there was a default. I looked about and couldn't find documentation of the 'official' default key bindings. By default, super and alt-f1 should both trigger the overview. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? That negative reaction to change is common. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:25 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? Means we're only seeing part of the story?How many people are complaining on this list because they like Gnome 3? There are just as many people who like the current layout. The fact it keeps coming up again and again means people just can't let go or are close minded? That some user's don't read the documentation? That's is half a joke, and half serious. Wrong. Well right, in my opinion, as far as the don't read. This discussion is in the archives of this list many many times. Why does it have to come up again? [?] ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list 330.gif___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:31 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? That negative reaction to change is common. I have to agree here. It always happen. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Damn it gnome 3 developers. Because of you I'm getting work done faster and spending less time dicking around with my computer everyday. I know your thinking oh well we did our job then Well maybe you did it a little too well. What would have normally taken me all day is getting done in two hours. So now i just sit at my computer most of the day staring at it trying to look busy so my boss will leave me alone. There, now you have someone complaining about how much better gnome-shell is. Foor On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:36 PM, G. Michael Carter mi...@carterfamily.cawrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.comwrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:25 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? Means we're only seeing part of the story?How many people are complaining on this list because they like Gnome 3? There are just as many people who like the current layout. The fact it keeps coming up again and again means people just can't let go or are close minded? That some user's don't read the documentation? That's is half a joke, and half serious. Wrong. Well right, in my opinion, as far as the don't read. This discussion is in the archives of this list many many times. Why does it have to come up again? [?] ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list 330.gif___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:31 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? That negative reaction to change is common. To a needless change - sure. A few examples I recently saw. Mignight Commander changed the order of the Save? [Yes] [No] [Continue editing] buttons in the editor exit dialog. One my colleague was bitching like a sailor after he lost his 20th edit - because his hands remember that to save file, press esc,left arrow,enter, but now this sequence does exit WITHOUT saving! New Firefox's right click menu order changed from (1) Open in new Window (2) Open in new Tab to the opposite one - I am opening new windows instead of new tabs for the third day in a row. WTF?! Why was it changed? For what purpose? -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
RE: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Subject: Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please. From: dvlas...@redhat.com To: awill...@redhat.com Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 19:47:47 +0200 CC: gnome-shell-list@gnome.org On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:31 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? That negative reaction to change is common. To a needless change - sure. A few examples I recently saw. Mignight Commander changed the order of the Save? [Yes] [No] [Continue editing] buttons in the editor exit dialog. One my colleague was bitching like a sailor after he lost his 20th edit - because his hands remember that to save file, press esc,left arrow,enter, but now this sequence does exit WITHOUT saving! New Firefox's right click menu order changed from (1) Open in new Window (2) Open in new Tab to the opposite one - I am opening new windows instead of new tabs for the third day in a row. WTF?! Why was it changed? For what purpose? I don't know about midnight commander, but I do know the reasoning for Firefox. It was seen that more users open links in new tabs instead of new windows, much like yourself. Therefore Open in new Tab was put first to reduce mouse movement and make the more common action quicker. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: Is it a policy of Gnome Desktop to shoehorn users into fixed UI style instead of offering them reasonable choice? What next, hardwired window title color and size? -- There is no policy as such. As I said earlier, why not try it first and see how it works before criticizing the design? I'm a systems administrator I have a ton of windows open, I used to use the taskbar, and I don' and it's been okay for me. While something was taken away, another method was added that hopefully will be better than what you had before. It does require that you keep an open mind and try it. There are plenty of people who have similar anecdotes. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
I keep doing that... forgetting to hit reply-all, let's try again: Here's a thought. What about a dialog welcome box for the first users. (have a check box to go away forever) Then have links or info on how to use Gnome 3? Maybe a video giving a quick tutorial? Tips of the day? Then it eliminates the need to google for anything. On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Micah Carrick mi...@greentackle.com wrote: I'll give you a quick answer to that... When we first switch to GNOME 3, many of us did not realize we were not upgrading, but switching to a completely new beast. I actually had to take a day off work to comb the internet learning about what's going on and why (we aren't all in the loop with GNOME Journal and Planet GNOME and the like). GNOME 3 is a radical shift away from what we are used to. So we do a few Google searches and we find a much larger percentage of un-resolved complaints and the same ones over and over. It gives the impression the the core team has not answered (which of course is not the case) or does not care about what *we* think (we being the existing user-base and power users). It can be difficult to navigate through the GNOME Wiki. The point I am making is that while this list has answered some of these same questions and complaints over and over and over--the unanswered posts and blogs seem to drown out the answers. There is a lot of information to sort through. I think some more work can be done on FAQ and that the marketing could do more to reach out to existing GNOME user-base. On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:36 AM, G. Michael Carter mi...@carterfamily.cawrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.comwrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:25 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 19:22 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? Means we're only seeing part of the story?How many people are complaining on this list because they like Gnome 3? There are just as many people who like the current layout. The fact it keeps coming up again and again means people just can't let go or are close minded? That some user's don't read the documentation? That's is half a joke, and half serious. Wrong. Well right, in my opinion, as far as the don't read. This discussion is in the archives of this list many many times. Why does it have to come up again? [?] ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list -- *Green Tackle* - *Environmentally Friendly Fishing Tackle* www.GreenTackle.com http://www.greentackle.com Email: mi...@greentackle.com Phone: 971.270.2206 Toll Free: 877.580.9165 Fax: 503.946.3106 330.gif___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Micah Carrick wrote: I'll give you a quick answer to that... When we first switch to GNOME 3, many of us did not realize we were not upgrading, but switching to a completely new beast. I actually had to take a day off work to comb the internet learning about what's going on and why (we aren't all in the loop with GNOME Journal and Planet GNOME and the like). GNOME 3 is a radical shift away from what we are used to. Yes, it is. It is revolutionary. And I believe that GNOME3-is-a-big-change was very heavily publicized. So we do a few Google searches and we find a much larger percentage of un-resolved complaints and the same ones over and over. Of course - search on *anything* and this is true; it is the nature of the beast. People post complaints, they don't post works awesome (because the are busy using whatever it is). In my experience positive posts are often taken as counter productive. This approach to measuring is right up there is counting bugs - sophisticated or popular software has so many *more* bug reports than other software. Of course. It gives the impression the the core team has not answered (which of course is not the case) or does not care about what *we* think (we being the existing user-base and power users). Doesn't give me that impression at all. Decisions were discussed, and made. The point I am making is that while this list has answered some of these same questions and complaints over and over and over--the unanswered posts and blogs seem to drown out the answers. And they always always will. Nature of the beast. This weekend I intend to spend some time writing a very positive BLOG post about GNOME3. There is a lot of information to sort through. I think some more work can be done on FAQ and that the marketing could do more to reach out to existing GNOME user-base. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 5 May 2011 18:55, Adam Tauno Williams awill...@whitemice.org wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Micah Carrick wrote: I'll give you a quick answer to that... When we first switch to GNOME 3, many of us did not realize we were not upgrading, but switching to a completely new beast. I actually had to take a day off work to comb the internet learning about what's going on and why (we aren't all in the loop with GNOME Journal and Planet GNOME and the like). GNOME 3 is a radical shift away from what we are used to. Yes, it is. It is revolutionary. And I believe that GNOME3-is-a-big-change was very heavily publicized. So we do a few Google searches and we find a much larger percentage of un-resolved complaints and the same ones over and over. Of course - search on *anything* and this is true; it is the nature of the beast. People post complaints, they don't post works awesome (because the are busy using whatever it is). In my experience positive posts are often taken as counter productive. There are hidden negatives too - the linux users in my office, for example, tried it and gave up or gave it no chance at all - they are using XFCE or just not updating their distros or are trying out Ubuntu instead or they are using the fallback for the moment now that they have found out how to do it. They haven't emailed this list though. Regards, Tim -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/ ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Micah Carrick wrote: I'll give you a quick answer to that... When we first switch to GNOME 3, many of us did not realize we were not upgrading, but switching to a completely new beast. This is ...interesting. Perhaps in new release of busybox I'll switch dd from if=FILE of=FILE syntax to -i FILE -o FILE one. And of course, I will make sure old way doesn't work. I bet my users would *love* that. This new syntax is more consistent, more UNIX-like, etc... And stupid old-hatters can go screw themselves. Right? So we do a few Google searches and we find a much larger percentage of un-resolved complaints and the same ones over and over. It gives the impression the the core team has not answered (which of course is not the case) or does not care about what *we* think (we being the existing user-base and power users). It can be difficult to navigate through the GNOME Wiki. The point I am making is that while this list has answered some of these same questions and complaints over and over and over--the unanswered posts and blogs seem to drown out the answers. There is a lot of information to sort through. Yes, when you get many complaints about something, one possibility is bad or misplaced documentation. Another possibility is that they do see a problem which is not apparent to the developer. Example: Recently, one user complained that DHCP client I maintain sends packets with secs field set to 0. I read the RFC and it basically says that the rationale behind this field proved to be dubious and this field can be set to 0. So I told the user that this is not a bug, and in order to keep things simpler, I'm going to leave it as-is. Then a month later another user again complained about the same thing. This rang a bell for me. Something is fishy here. One pedantic idiot insisting on filling up this field is imaginable, but two? I asked for details. BINGO! It _is_ a real problem, because Mac OS has an idiotic DHCP server which can be configured to answer only to the packets with secs = CONFIGURABLE_NUMBER, and worse, by default this CONFIGURABLE_NUMBER is not 0, but 2!!! Thus, my DHCP client never works when DHCP server runs on Mac OS! I think some more work can be done on FAQ and that the marketing could do more to reach out to existing GNOME user-base. I don't see how improving docs will allow me to find or open IRC window in tho operations: look at the screen bottom... click there, or click icon in the top bar. It simply doesn't work anymore. For some unfathomable reason, app icons in the top bar are nuked too. Moreover, the space where they sat IS NOT REUSED FOR ANYTHING, it is just empty now. I don't get it. Why?? -- vda ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 May 2011 18:55, Adam Tauno Williams awill...@whitemice.org wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:48 -0700, Micah Carrick wrote: I'll give you a quick answer to that... When we first switch to GNOME 3, many of us did not realize we were not upgrading, but switching to a completely new beast. I actually had to take a day off work to comb the internet learning about what's going on and why (we aren't all in the loop with GNOME Journal and Planet GNOME and the like). GNOME 3 is a radical shift away from what we are used to. Yes, it is. It is revolutionary. And I believe that GNOME3-is-a-big-change was very heavily publicized. So we do a few Google searches and we find a much larger percentage of un-resolved complaints and the same ones over and over. Of course - search on *anything* and this is true; it is the nature of the beast. People post complaints, they don't post works awesome (because the are busy using whatever it is). In my experience positive posts are often taken as counter productive. There are hidden negatives too - the linux users in my office, for example, tried it and gave up or gave it no chance at all - they are using XFCE or just not updating their distros or are trying out Ubuntu instead or they are using the fallback for the moment now that they have found out how to do it. They haven't emailed this list though. Is their objection that it is different? Office workers are generally vulnerable to change. The reason being that they don't copious amount of time to learn a new interface in the face of deadlines and what not. A transition plan is generally required for those.. so they get a chance to learn the new interface while at the same time be able to switch back in case there are issues with bad behaviour with important applications. My co-workers don't particularly like the new interface just from the presentation I did (they were my guinea pigs). But then these people are people who use fvwm2 over VNC on windows laptops or desktops. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:08 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: Is it a policy of Gnome Desktop to shoehorn users into fixed UI style instead of offering them reasonable choice? What next, hardwired window title color and size? There is no policy as such. As I said earlier, why not try it first and see how it works before criticizing the design? I'm a systems administrator I have a ton of windows open, I used to use the taskbar, and I don' and it's been okay for me. While something was taken away, Why something has to be taken away? I mean, unconditionally? There is a better way: (a) make it configurable, (b) make it off by default. If almost no one switches it back on, great, it means practice proved that the replacement is better, and it can be removed altogether. If many people switch it back on, then perhaps it needs to stay. The default configuration is bare.. it's been like that even with GNOME 2. Your distro puts a bunch of stuff in there to enhance the experience. It's relatively the same with GNOME 3. As someone mentioned earlier, there are extensions that can put a taskbar on your screen or you can use any number of third party apps like Docky or AWN that can give you similar features. My GNOME 3 setup still runs docky because there are some things that GNOME 3 doesn't provide that I require. You're not going to get the perfect desktop from just the default setup. A combination of extensions, and third party apps and I'm a happy camper. So somethings that you might be taken away, in favour of something better. However, there are applications, extensions, a tweak tool will put back most of the experience back. The point though is that you should try it for a week as is. You might learn something. If there is something you're missing then discuss it here. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:03 -0400, G. Michael Carter wrote: When F15 is release we should put this DL on auto-reply. So many of these I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails and they all end the same way. Does it ring some sort of bell when you receive 'many I don't like Gnome 3 e-mails'? The key word is many. I've seen the lack of a menu come up so many times What does it tell to a developer when he sees the same complaint coming up again and again? I think the point is that many people do initially complain but after test driving for a a length of time end up actually liking it after they adapt. We do get a lot of complaints but people do end up liking it. It does mean that you need to honestly look at your workflow and see if you can adapt. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:29 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I'm a systems administrator I have a ton of windows open, I used to use the taskbar, and I don' and it's been okay for me. While something was taken away, Why something has to be taken away? I mean, unconditionally? There is a better way: (a) make it configurable, (b) make it off by default. If almost no one switches it back on, great, it means practice proved that the replacement is better, and it can be removed altogether. Or (c) install a task switcher, as has already been pointed out. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 5 May 2011 19:29, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: There are hidden negatives too - the linux users in my office, for example, tried it and gave up or gave it no chance at all - they are using XFCE or just not updating their distros or are trying out Ubuntu instead or they are using the fallback for the moment now that they have found out how to do it. They haven't emailed this list though. Is their objection that it is different? Office workers are generally vulnerable to change. The reason being that they don't copious amount of time to learn a new interface in the face of deadlines and what not. A transition plan is generally required for those.. so they get a chance to learn the new interface while at the same time be able to switch back in case there are issues with bad behaviour with important applications. No, they are software engineers who go out of their way to use Linux in a fairly Linux hostile environment because it builds their code faster than when they were building on windows (cross compilation for mobile devices) and because they find it a better day-by-day environment. I would say that their resistance to change is fairly minimal as they started trying out gnome-shell before it was the default and before I did, actually. It was rejected then by choice because they could try it out as an option and they removed it. But you guys can't watch what everyone does, obviously. In any case, there is a lot of reliance on the inability to change argument and it does remind me of how people at my work used to defend what is now an infamous product worldwide against the competition that has recently slaughtered it. Basically they thought that a lot of explaining would help and they had a reason why every complaint was invalid or was important or why it was unavoidable for some other reason. I think that instant delight is the kind of reaction that you actually need to have in something that you are selling and just because the gnome shell is not being sold doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. My co-workers don't particularly like the new interface just from the presentation I did (they were my guinea pigs). But then these people are people who use fvwm2 over VNC on windows laptops or desktops. Well there I was thinking that people who wanted to use fvwm were missing out because GNOME with Nautilus was really rather slick and that speed was not so relevant anymore as it was when I had a much less powerful computer. But now I'm in worse position than them with a way of organising my life that was friendly seeming being about to disappear. I cannot now make the new thing do what I could do before which, in my case, was to create a kind of substitute user interface that suited me using my desktop and shortcuts on the panel. 98% of the applets that were out there were of no interest but a couple of them were very useful to me in particular. I have used a lot of GUIs from GEM (ST and PC), Geos, Amigas, RiscOS, one my pal designed, NextStep, The Mac, OpenDesktop etc etc. There are innovative concepts that have not made it to Linux yet even though they are years old. I don't really believe that revolutionary is a word that can be applied here to the change in the user experience and that's why the changes are contentious - they are not really amazingly good enough to make up for the disruption (to some of us). Having said all that I look forward to investigating the extension mechanism to see how much I might be able to make things right and also to trying out the ROX Desktop once more :-). Regards, Tim --- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/ ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 May 2011 19:29, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: There are hidden negatives too - the linux users in my office, for example, tried it and gave up or gave it no chance at all - they are using XFCE or just not updating their distros or are trying out Ubuntu instead or they are using the fallback for the moment now that they have found out how to do it. They haven't emailed this list though. Is their objection that it is different? Office workers are generally vulnerable to change. The reason being that they don't copious amount of time to learn a new interface in the face of deadlines and what not. A transition plan is generally required for those.. so they get a chance to learn the new interface while at the same time be able to switch back in case there are issues with bad behaviour with important applications. No, they are software engineers who go out of their way to use Linux in a fairly Linux hostile environment because it builds their code faster than when they were building on windows (cross compilation for mobile devices) and because they find it a better day-by-day environment. I would say that their resistance to change is fairly minimal as they started trying out gnome-shell before it was the default and before I did, actually. It was rejected then by choice because they could try it out as an option and they removed it. But you guys can't watch what everyone does, obviously. Yes, similar to why I use Linux as a desktop in a windows centric world. We work with linux all the time as a batch farm. Going between windows and linux was always awkward and so when I aligned what I do at work with was on my desktop I was more efficient. Perhaps they can try a live cd now and see if it works again? In any case, there is a lot of reliance on the inability to change argument and it does remind me of how people at my work used to defend what is now an infamous product worldwide against the competition that has recently slaughtered it. Basically they thought that a lot of explaining would help and they had a reason why every complaint was invalid or was important or why it was unavoidable for some other reason. You will notice that my arguments did not implicitly say that you're afraid to change. It is in fact the wrong argument to tell someone that they are afraid to change because it puts them on the defensive like somehow something is wrong with that and by extension something is wrong with you. I always push for try it for a week or try it for ten days. Design choices aren't apparent at first glance until you start employing your muscle memory. People adapt at different rates. Some people as you further below say will suddenly be delighted, otherwise are trying to use the muscle memory from a previous version and find it difficult to cope. The week sink period is to give people time to figure out and play around like you would with any new item you get. The difference is that you're sink time should be on a computer that you're not using for work or something that requires real work to be done as you'll just induce stress. I think that instant delight is the kind of reaction that you actually need to have in something that you are selling and just because the gnome shell is not being sold doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. instant delight is not something that easily happens. Someone's instant delight is someone else nightmare. There are plenty of people if you read the GNOME facebook page that express delight like that. There are a smaller number that have a wtf reaction. You'll never get a universal reaction that way. The sink time helps in adapt or people. My co-workers don't particularly like the new interface just from the presentation I did (they were my guinea pigs). But then these people are people who use fvwm2 over VNC on windows laptops or desktops. Well there I was thinking that people who wanted to use fvwm were missing out because GNOME with Nautilus was really rather slick and that speed was not so relevant anymore as it was when I had a much less powerful computer. But now I'm in worse position than them with a way of organising my life that was friendly seeming being about to disappear. I cannot now make the new thing do what I could do before In this particular case, you should make a switch until you are mentally ready to try something new. GNOME 3 should be installed on a separate partition something to play with until you've used it enough that you're ready to mentally accept the new interface or when extensions and new features gives you the notification to want to do change. which, in my case, was to create a kind of substitute user interface that suited me using my desktop and shortcuts on the panel. 98% of the
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Boy i wish I read my responses more carefully.. my English is generally better than this :P sri On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 May 2011 19:29, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: There are hidden negatives too - the linux users in my office, for example, tried it and gave up or gave it no chance at all - they are using XFCE or just not updating their distros or are trying out Ubuntu instead or they are using the fallback for the moment now that they have found out how to do it. They haven't emailed this list though. Is their objection that it is different? Office workers are generally vulnerable to change. The reason being that they don't copious amount of time to learn a new interface in the face of deadlines and what not. A transition plan is generally required for those.. so they get a chance to learn the new interface while at the same time be able to switch back in case there are issues with bad behaviour with important applications. No, they are software engineers who go out of their way to use Linux in a fairly Linux hostile environment because it builds their code faster than when they were building on windows (cross compilation for mobile devices) and because they find it a better day-by-day environment. I would say that their resistance to change is fairly minimal as they started trying out gnome-shell before it was the default and before I did, actually. It was rejected then by choice because they could try it out as an option and they removed it. But you guys can't watch what everyone does, obviously. Yes, similar to why I use Linux as a desktop in a windows centric world. We work with linux all the time as a batch farm. Going between windows and linux was always awkward and so when I aligned what I do at work with was on my desktop I was more efficient. Perhaps they can try a live cd now and see if it works again? In any case, there is a lot of reliance on the inability to change argument and it does remind me of how people at my work used to defend what is now an infamous product worldwide against the competition that has recently slaughtered it. Basically they thought that a lot of explaining would help and they had a reason why every complaint was invalid or was important or why it was unavoidable for some other reason. You will notice that my arguments did not implicitly say that you're afraid to change. It is in fact the wrong argument to tell someone that they are afraid to change because it puts them on the defensive like somehow something is wrong with that and by extension something is wrong with you. I always push for try it for a week or try it for ten days. Design choices aren't apparent at first glance until you start employing your muscle memory. People adapt at different rates. Some people as you further below say will suddenly be delighted, otherwise are trying to use the muscle memory from a previous version and find it difficult to cope. The week sink period is to give people time to figure out and play around like you would with any new item you get. The difference is that you're sink time should be on a computer that you're not using for work or something that requires real work to be done as you'll just induce stress. I think that instant delight is the kind of reaction that you actually need to have in something that you are selling and just because the gnome shell is not being sold doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. instant delight is not something that easily happens. Someone's instant delight is someone else nightmare. There are plenty of people if you read the GNOME facebook page that express delight like that. There are a smaller number that have a wtf reaction. You'll never get a universal reaction that way. The sink time helps in adapt or people. My co-workers don't particularly like the new interface just from the presentation I did (they were my guinea pigs). But then these people are people who use fvwm2 over VNC on windows laptops or desktops. Well there I was thinking that people who wanted to use fvwm were missing out because GNOME with Nautilus was really rather slick and that speed was not so relevant anymore as it was when I had a much less powerful computer. But now I'm in worse position than them with a way of organising my life that was friendly seeming being about to disappear. I cannot now make the new thing do what I could do before In this particular case, you should make a switch until you are mentally ready to try something new. GNOME 3 should be installed on a separate partition something to play with until you've used it enough that you're ready to mentally accept the new interface or when extensions and
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On 5 May 2011 21:44, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: Boy i wish I read my responses more carefully.. my English is generally better than this :P sri Please don't worry on my account - my fingers tend to write whole words that my brain did not specify or miss out ones that it did and I am quite shocked when I re-read my own messages. I also want to say thank you for your reply - I feel listened to and it might be pathetic of me to like that but it makes all the difference. Regards, Tim -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/ ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 May 2011 21:44, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: Boy i wish I read my responses more carefully.. my English is generally better than this :P sri Please don't worry on my account - my fingers tend to write whole words that my brain did not specify or miss out ones that it did and I am quite shocked when I re-read my own messages. I also want to say thank you for your reply - I feel listened to and it might be pathetic of me to like that but it makes all the difference. Part of GNOME 3 is a new attitude. Our community outreach from GNOME 1 to GNOME 2 was poor to non-existent and suffered from it to some extent. Consider 3.0 to not be only be a better desktop but a better attitude. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
Somebody needs to take this thread out back behind the shed and put a bullet through it's head for the good of humanity, so I volunteer to do so. Denys, GNOME 3 is a radical change and you have a right to be upset, but your responses have been rather rude. Asserting that the designers made the change for no reason insults their intelligence; just because you didn't read the design documents/pages that outlined what problems GNOME 3 would fix with it's design doesn't mean that they changed for the sake of it. As Henry Ford allegedly said, If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse.. The automobile was awkward and totally different at first relative to horses, but it eventually caught on because it was a better choice than horses for most people. Second, imitation isn't always the way to go. If GNOME simply stood the same for years without changing, there would be no innovation. In addition, your claim that GNOME gives users no choice is incredibly false: you can enable Forced Fallback mode in System Settings to a GNOME 2-like UI which is meant for setups that cannot run the new GNOME 3. However, it's called Fallback Mode for a reason; it's deprecated, won't receive future updates unless they're extremely important, and GNOME 3's default desktop is much better for a variety of reasons. I, as well as the people working on developing and marketing GNOME 3, firmly believe that GNOME 3 is the future, which is a good thing and not bad like you suggest. You can switch windows with Alt+Tab and Alt+[key above Tab, usually `], the former switching applications and the latter switching windows in an application. It works very well and you should try it! Also, switching windows is much more flexible than in GNOME 2: with the older GNOME, you only had Alt+Tab and a tiny window list. With GNOME 3, you get an Exposé-like view where you have nice, easily clickable thumbnails of every window on that workspace (especially useful on a laptop), fling gesture support to switch workspaces on touch devices, a dock-like window list on the left, a workspace switcher on the right with drag-drop support, and a search bar that works without clicking it; just start typing! If that doesn't satisfy you, I'm not sure what will. Of course, you can always write an extension that enables the behavior you like, but GNOME 3 should be given a fair chance first. You can access the Activities overlay three ways: a hot corner (flinging your mouse to the top-left), clicking the Activities button, or a keyboard shortcut (Windows/Super/Meta key, Alt+F1, or whatever you set it to). I use the keyboard shortcut as it makes it much faster for me. I just tap it, click the window I want, and I've switched in less than a second, arguably about as fast as the task list on GNOME 2 (and in some cases faster because you don't have to scan a tiny list of windows like in GNOME 2). Your claim that GNOME doesn't let you add launchers is also false: right-click any running application (or any application in the Applications menu or Search function) and click Add to Favorites. Then, just open the overlay and click it to launch. It's just as easy as the icons from GNOME 2, and they take up less screen space as well since they don't take up valuable panel real-estate. You can also manually organize them by dragging them up and down, which is much better than right-clicking the launcher, unlocking it, right-clicking it again, clicking move, then moving the mouse along a gigantic panel to place it in a usable place (this was the GNOME 2 behavior). Also, it's faster to start an application that you didn't add to favorites in GNOME 2; just search for it by opening the overlay and typing. It's keyboard-navigable so you can press up and down to move through the list. The Applications Menu isn't really intended to be used constantly and is only there for when you either don't know an application's name, don't have it on your favorites list, or are using a touch-device (like a tablet). If you have any more problems with GNOME 3, please say so, but don't be rude about it. Also, check out gnome-tweak-tool and gnome-shell-extensions for some tweaks that let you customize GNOME 3 to how you want it to be. I hope I've helped make things more clear, and it would be very nice if you tried to wrap your head around the way things are now before going back to Fallback Mode. It might take a day, or even a week, but you might find that it improves your work flow a lot if you give it a chance. - Sincerely, Ryan (not a Shell developer; just a user) ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: We want task bar back. Pretty please.
On Friday, 06 May, 2011 02:37 AM, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: As someone mentioned earlier, there are extensions that can put a taskbar on your screen or you can use any number of third party apps like Docky or AWN that can give you similar features. My GNOME 3 setup still runs docky because there are some things that GNOME 3 doesn't provide that I require. You're not going to get the perfect desktop from just the default setup. A combination of extensions, and third party apps and I'm a happy camper. This is not something you need if you run Windows or OS X. But I understand. Regards, Allan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
