Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com) [LWN.net]

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 25, 2006 19:42 UTC (Mon) by tjc (guest, #137)
Parent article: Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Metacity, GNOME's default window manager, now features several 3-D extensions to its composite engine. These extensions allow you to add some eye candy to your desktop by enabling window effects and different types of transparency.

My "crackrock" detector is going off. ;-)

(Log in to post comments)

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 25, 2006 21:54 UTC (Mon) by ajross (subscriber, #4563) [Link]

This isn't crackrock, it's eye candy. The subtle difference is that one is designed to appeal to the normal human desire for ornamentation and ostentation, the other appeals only to the hard core geek's love of customizability and configurability. Eye candy is annoying to the geeks, but crackrock is a disaster for normal users.

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 26, 2006 7:16 UTC (Tue) by djao (subscriber, #4263) [Link]

The thing is, window transparency is actually useful. It enables the user to read text from two windows at once without having to worry about overlapping windows. There are many many situations where you need to read text from two windows at once, or type something in one window based upon the text being displayed in another window. Transparency lets you overlap windows to a greater degree than you would otherwise be able to overlap the windows. I mean, yes, transparent overlapped windows can be hard to read, but opaque overlapped windows are impossible to read.

Almost every desktop environment in the world is screen-constrained in some way and will benefit from the ability to overlap transparent windows. Window transparency ranks right up there with subpixel font antialiasing in the category of things that most people think are eye candy but in reality are useful beyond all expectation.

Eye candy for me is something like Expose in OS X, which is not only inferior to virtual desktops but actively encourages unknowing users to develop bad window organizational habits which later on prevent the user from adopting virtual desktops.

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 27, 2006 8:56 UTC (Wed) by fergal (subscriber, #602) [Link]

type something in one window based upon the text being displayed in another window

I don't know if any window manager has it anymore, but it makes sense to distinguish between which window has focus and which window has been raised to the top. That way your key strokes can go to one window while you have a clear view of another. The Amiga used to have this and (with some extension) you had single click to focus, double click to raise. Using transparency for this depends on both windows have visually compatible contents.

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 27, 2006 11:29 UTC (Wed) by djao (subscriber, #4263) [Link]

Focus policy can let you type in one window while reading from another window, but it doesn't let you see both the window you're reading from and the window you're typing into simultaneously, unless the windows are so small that both windows can fit on the screen without overlap. Even when no overlap is possible, one often has so many windows that it is inconvenient to keep every particular pair of windows from overlapping.

Transparency isn't a panacea, and it isn't always the best solution, but it does give you one more option that you didn't have before, and that option is a useful one.

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 27, 2006 14:29 UTC (Wed) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

I don't know if any window manager has it anymore, but it makes sense to distinguish between which window has focus and which window has been raised to the top. That way your key strokes can go to one window while you have a clear view of another.

Pretty much any window manager with a "focus follows mouse pointer" option can be configured this way.

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 26, 2006 15:14 UTC (Tue) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

...crackrock is a disaster for normal users.

I think you're overstating your case considerably.

An example of a disaster would be having one's hard drive fail without a recent backup. Or having one's house hit by lightening and frying all the computers.

On the other hand, accidently clicking a window's maximization icon with the wrong mouse button and having the resulting window maximize along a single axis and not both is not a disaster. But this feature in particular has been in the past classified as "crackrock."

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 26, 2006 15:29 UTC (Tue) by ajross (subscriber, #4563) [Link]

accidently clicking a window's maximization icon with the wrong mouse button and having the resulting window maximize along a single axis and not both is not a disaster.

Semantic arguments about what I meant by the word "disaster" (in a post that was supposed to be tongue in cheek, no less) aside, you should consider tatooing that statement on your forehead for posterity and explaining it to everyone you meet on the street.

I can think of no more persuasive argument against crackrock than a zealous proponent. :)

Good bits in GNOME 2.16 (Linux.com)

Posted Sep 26, 2006 16:43 UTC (Tue) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

I can think of no more persuasive argument against crackrock than a zealous proponent. :)

Thanks for the label.