The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience [LWN.net]

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 16, 2011 17:11 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to: The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience by me@jasonclinton.com
Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

it is not the intention that there will ever be permanent workspaces

FWIW, a number of older window managers (including the venerable fvwm2) have much the same underlying implementation. I have never seen a single user of these window managers (who use workspaces at all) who does not immediately congeal into a standard layout of workspaces and move from it only when forced: and I've seen a lot of users of fvwm.

I've been using the same workspace layout for more than eight years now, and its change from the layout I started with seventeen years ago is not great. There are 'spare' workspaces on it, but a core set of applications remain on the same workspaces forever. This is wired into my fingers and wired into my wm hotkeys: I can get to any of them, and navigate between them, in very nearly no time at all, without conscious thought.

It seems to me that you're destroying this working pattern. This if nothing else would render GNOME 3 forever unusable for me, no matter what other nifty features it gained. From experience, I can relearn *typing* more easily than I can relearn this.

to post comments

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 16, 2011 17:19 UTC (Wed) by me@jasonclinton.com (subscriber, #52701) [Link] (9 responses)

As a happy fvwm2 user, I submit that there will *never* be anything that makes you happy except it.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 16, 2011 17:48 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Oh no, fvwm2 has big problems. I use it mostly out of inertia. (The biggest of its problems are an absence of proper programmability and a deep-seated architectural inability to handle double-buffering, which rules out compositing forever. Compositing bling may be pointless but a little subtle bling -- not giant desktop cubes, just things like subtle glows around active window edges and the like -- *does* make the desktop look prettier and slightly easier to use.)

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 16, 2011 17:49 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (3 responses)

btw, I note that you totally ignored the actual point I was making, which was not 'I am a total stick-in-the-mud' but rather 'constant workspaces wire themselves into your fingers and mind, promote the formation of unconscious habits, and thus improve working speed'.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 17, 2011 13:10 UTC (Thu) by Tet (subscriber, #5433) [Link] (2 responses)

I note that you totally ignored the actual point I was making

Welcome to the wonderful world of GNOME. One of the reasons I still use fvwm, despite its faults, is that GNOME and other similar desktop projects have no desire to cater to my needs, and whenever I've asked how to do something I've been told that I'm wrong to want it. By all means provide defaults that you think will work for the majority of users. But it's my computer, and I want it to work the way I want it to work, not the way some desktop developer thinks I should want it to work. Fvwm lets me do that. People are not the same, no matter how much some might wish it so. The GNOME project in particular is unwilling to acknowledge that point. They're wrong. But they've made it clear they have no intention of changing their viewpoint.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 17, 2011 15:59 UTC (Thu) by Frej (guest, #4165) [Link] (1 responses)

You are wrong to demand *your* needs from others. The 'developer' tries to cater to as many as possible, i doubt fvwm does that. Remember, you are not more important than anyone else, and free software is not about solving *your* needs.

But you are free to *create on your own* whatever extension you need.
With metacity there was devilspie, the shell should be much easier to extend.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 22, 2011 7:55 UTC (Tue) by blujay (guest, #39961) [Link]

> You are wrong to demand *your* needs from others. The 'developer' tries to cater to as many as possible, i doubt fvwm does that. Remember, you are not more important than anyone else, and free software is not about solving *your* needs.

You're wrong about GNOME developers: they are not trying to cater to as many as possible--this whole article is about that very point.

You're ignoring the fact that GNOME devs (and "designers") are claiming to be making software for other people to use--people besides said devs and "designers." They *want marketshare*, yet they stubbornly refuse to cater to the voiced needs of the market.

They aren't catering to as many as possible--they are catering to an imagined user, one who's nearly computer-illiterate, and is unable to learn or adapt, too. Self-proclaimed "designers" are "designing" based on "research" and ignoring in-their-face, real-world, practical problems brought to their attention by their *actual* audience.

They are being hypocrites: they claim to be making software for others, yet they're actually just pleasing themselves.

And that's fine: we're not paying them--they should scratch their own itches if that's what they want to do.

The problem is that they are either dishonest or delusional. They should just admit that they are going to do what *they* want to do, so that other people can stop wasting their time trying to convince them that GNOME 3 isn't what anyone besides GNOME devs and "designers" want.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 17, 2011 10:56 UTC (Thu) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link] (3 responses)

So, have you anything else to say about his *actual* complaint and insight? Which is not fvwm-related whatsoever.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 17, 2011 16:13 UTC (Thu) by Frej (guest, #4165) [Link] (2 responses)

You assume it will never happen, assmuning we are talking about fixed workspace for app X. There is a real usability case for keeping the same workspaces open across sessions.

Also, i'm sure a simple extension/plugin can be made to force certain apps opening on certain workspaces. Just because it won't be enabled or distributed by default, doesn't mean it's not appreciated.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 17, 2011 16:30 UTC (Thu) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link] (1 responses)

Sorry, but I don't get the gist of your message. Might be because I'm not a native English speaker.

Do you agree with nix that the ability to have fixed static workspace arrangements is important, or do you disagree?
(FTR, I agree. That's exactly my MO, too.)

Or do you agree with the GNOME3 developers that workspaces should be dynamic all the time, only created as needed? (At least that seems to be their assumption that's reported here. That's why I asked Jason if he could please stop with his cheap fvwm shots, actually react to nix's argument, and confirm or deny that this reported viewpoint is true or not.)

Actually, I don't use GNOME. But I try to keep educated in the design decisions of the various Linux desktop environments. And this is an important design decision, IMHO.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 18, 2011 0:54 UTC (Fri) by Frej (guest, #4165) [Link]

I'm no native English speaker either :).

I think i missed what you meant with fixed workspaces. If it's app X in workspace Y at all times, i'm sure an extension is doable.

I was agreeing that the workspace layout should be remembered across sessions (login/logout, boot etc.). That's fixed enough for me..

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 17, 2011 4:49 UTC (Thu) by nevets (subscriber, #11875) [Link] (2 responses)

I have a 4x2 workspace layout, and I usually fly from one workspace to another by zipping my mouse to the edge, wait a half second and then pop to the next workspace. This has long been deprecated by the gnome folks, which I've been using sawfish to take over. Lately, since sawfish is now pretty much unmaintained, I've been using xfwm4.

Gnome3 scares the crap out of me. My box doesn't support 3D (I build my boxes, and always buy the cheapest video card I can find). It sounds like I can't even use most of the new features that come with it.

I'll have to remember to press "HOLD" in aptitude on gnome (like I did for grub) and stick it out for as long as possible. By the time I'm forced to go to gnome3, I think I may be switching to KDE.

As I believe Linus once said: You make a desktop environment made for idiots, only idiots will use it.

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 17, 2011 16:07 UTC (Thu) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

> Lately, since sawfish is now pretty much unmaintained, I've been using xfwm4.

There's a new release, 1.8.0, but I haven't tried it yet. Recent versions in the Unbuntu repository have been broken, so I've been using something quite old. There's something about writing themes in lisp that I can't seem to give up. :)

The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

Posted Mar 19, 2011 8:22 UTC (Sat) by cas (guest, #52554) [Link]

This has long been deprecated by the gnome folks, which I've been using sawfish to take over. Lately, since sawfish is now pretty much unmaintained, I've been using xfwm4.

I stuck with sawfish for years but ended up switching to openbox (after briefly trying metacity) for the same reason.

i'm pretty happy with it. can't say i really miss anything from sawfish. OB gives me a no-fuss WM without forcing animation and other annoying & distracting bling on me.

i'm going to have to look for a decent replacement for gnome-panel sometime soon. i expect it will be "deprecated" to force people into gnome's Glorious Vision whether they like it or not. Unfortunately, I haven't yet found one that is an adequate replacement.

My box doesn't support 3D (I build my boxes, and always buy the cheapest video card I can find).

even the cheapest video cards available these days can do 3d acceleration. and that's been true for years (but until fairly recently only if you're willing to install proprietary drivers for them)

not that that is an excuse to force 3d crap in your WM on you if you don't want it.

and that, i believe, is the reason why Gnome's changes generate so much hostility - they come up with what is, to them, an amazing idea and expend all of their development effort on it. but instead of making it available as an option to allow people to try it and gradually get used to it (or decide "it's not for me, i'll stick with what i like") they force it on everyone...and not even as the default option, but as the ONLY option

personally, i'd rather they concentrated on fixing existing bugs than go chasing shiny new things all the time, but volunteers have the right to work on what they want to.