LWN: Comments on "GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released"

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

nye — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:46:19 +0000

>Is that really how we ought to be designing user interfaces for adults? Assume they lack the neuroplasticity to learn a new idea?

Well, my last few years have been spent as a sysadmin, slowly eroding all hope and faith in humanity culminating in a total breakdown last year followed by the prescription of powerful antidepressants, so my perception is doubtless skewed, but my take-home observation is 'yes'. A significant minority - if not the majority - of adults indeed lack the neuroplasticity to learn a new idea, or to take an old idea and apply it in new contexts. They also lack the ability to reason, read, count, produce coherent sentences, and work cooperatively. Frankly, I'm amazed that some of the people I support can manage to feed themselves.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

dneary — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:00:01 +0000

I can live with that - if it's a way to get something definitely better than what was in 2.x eventually. There's general agreement that we got settled into 2.x, maybe a little too comfortable, and that change was needed. Now change is here, and I for one welcome our designer overlords.

Dave.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

jzbiciak — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 22:53:59 +0000

For some reason, your comment immediately reminded me of this.

Is that really how we ought to be designing user interfaces for adults? Assume they lack the neuroplasticity to learn a new idea?

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

BenHutchings — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 21:31:56 +0000

And so do metacity and compiz. It's hardly a rare feature.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

nye — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:04:50 +0000

>how many _non IT-professionals_ do you know that uses minimize in their desktop's workflow? (most people I know do)

Actually my experience is that a good proportion of people don't use minimize, and often don't understand the difference between minimize and close, because they lack the mental model that is required to grasp the concept.

Years from now...

blujay — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 07:49:39 +0000

...will these comments be seen as genius or madness? As thin as the line may be, I'm betting on the latter.

"I don't think it's generally a big deal to remove the maximize button." --one GNOME hacker

"I think having a second option 'Close Window' in the application menu if the application has multiple windows would solve this problem and allow us to get rid of **the visual clutter of a lone close icon in the titlebar**." --another GNOME hacker [emphasis mine]

I can't help but imagine these parallels:

"I don't think it's generally a big deal to remove the steering wheel." --GNOME hacker from 2111, when "the year of FOSS automobiles" is "approaching"

"I think having a second option 'Stop Car' in the automobile menu if the automobile has multiple speeds would solve this problem and allow us to get rid of **the visual clutter of a lone brake pedal in the floorboard**."
--another GNOME hacker from the future, shipping out new driver UI theories without having done studies, testing, or thinking

Now is when we "Rejoice for Choice," that we can let GNOME shoot itself in the foot and choose to move on to other software that gives its users power and control and freedom (like KDE and others).

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

GhePeU — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:12:13 +0000

That's what any reasonable person would think, but for GNOME 3 "designers" there's no "classic-mode", there is only a "fallback mode" that should be as uncomfortable as possible to force people to use the new shell.

So the panels should be locked down to resemble the pseudo-panels of the shell, the applets shouldn't exist anymore (there were calls to completely remove them, even after they had been ported), etc. etc.

Just check the mailing list archives (desktop-devel and gnome-shell), this was discussed in January IIRC. Or https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=631553

I quote from the bug:

User: "Please don't diverge too much from how gnome-panel 2.32 works/looks. A lot of the people who will be using the gtk3 port are interested in it because it is a familiar setup, look and feel and not because of concerns over whether gnome-shell will work on their machines or not. In my setup for example, I have deleted one of the two panels (the top one)."

Designer: "Sorry, that is not what the fallback mode is designed for."

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

jthill — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:48:38 +0000

I actually quit on gnome because I got tired of trying to make it do what I want. The phrase that sticks in my mind from the linked email is "the GNOME 3 workflow". That says to me it's far from a joke: they're going down Apple's road.

More power to'em, it's a worthy effort, but the thing about limiting people's choices is you have to be right.

So I pretty much agree with you. The alt-space, "N" remark was just answering your question.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

cyd — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:12:44 +0000

For better or worse, every computer user knows what a minimize button is and what it does. Replacing it with a cryptic key combination turns Gnome's goal of usability into a joke.

Why do people minimize windows?

dag- — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:30:24 +0000

Is this possible with metacity too ? It looks very useful.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

jmalcolm — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 07:01:18 +0000

I do not feel this is a 'show us the code' comment at all. The key word for me in the original comment is 'modular'.

Unity is essentially a competing GNOME environment that, although providing a completely different user experience, shares the majority of it's ecosystem with GNOME 3.

XFCE is also a GTK+ based environment as is LXDE I believe. You can use these for the desktop experience if you like and still enjoy pretty much everything that GNOME has to offer and it will still feel pretty native.

In fact, I believe that one of the environments competing with GNOME Shell will be updated versions of Metacity and the GNOME panels. You can run the exact desktop you are used to now with GNOME 2 but with upgraded GTK+ and a lot more.

Beyond all that there are many different Window Managers and other environments. There is an embarrassment of riches when it comes to how you want to consume the parts of GNOME that you do find useful.

Demanding that we want to be able to configure and then wining that we would have to configure something to get back the behaviour we want seems silly. "I am a POWER USER dammit so you should design the system exactly as I like right out of the box!"

Pretending that GNOME is as restrictive and prescriptive as something like OS X or even Windows is misleading to my mind. I can run GNOME platform features and GNOME applications a lot of different ways without writing a line of code. I can also write a bunch of complimentary code pretty easily if I like. Thanks GNOME team.

I may or may not like the GNOME Shell. I will probably give it a try. I have not loved Unity based on the little I have tried it. I will probably run GNOME in a 'classic' configuration because, as with others here, that is what I am personally used to and feel productive with. What I will not do is to throw a tantrum because the GNOME developers feel the desktop can be done better and are trying to give it a shot.

After all, as far as I can tell, the GNOME team is explicitly providing the option to stay with the old metaphor if that is what you prefer.

I believe this is what the original poster was getting at.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

Frej — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:50:03 +0000

Please check up your facts. You can keep using the old workflow/design. Just use gnome-panel/metacity instead of gnome shell. It still works, nothing has been taken away from you. It has even been updated to use gtk3.

Why are you writing all this without checking up on the facts? You might actually influence others who then could make a misinformed descision. What's your motive?

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

dlang — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:56:11 +0000

the problem is that you may still make additional M releases, either before N is shipping, or even afterwords as a transition.

do you really want to have to explain to people how 3.4.5 is newer than 2.99?

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

jthill — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:53:59 +0000

Window menu's still there, right? So alt-space, "N" should still work.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

ThinkRob — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:48:46 +0000

> Because the changes were so drastic (I think some things had basically been rewritten from scratch) that it couldn't reasonably be called 3.anything. (Sadly, one can't get away with calling things "X.-1". ISAGN.)

Fair point. That certainly makes sense. I do remember reading about how drastic the changes were.

Still, I can't help but wonder if maybe the versioning scheme that GNOME (and other projects) have used/are using wouldn't be better PR-wise (i.e. M.99 etc., where M is the current major version, becoming N.0 (N=M+1) when ready for general consumption).

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

dskoll — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:46:51 +0000

I'm trying to keep an open mind, but removing the minimize button sounds like catastrophically bad judgment.

Indeed. I use minimize and maximize a lot. In fact, I use them so frequently I have them bound to keys (the exact same F-keys that the ancient SunView windowing system used in 1990... talk about imprinting!)

But I use XFCE, an environment designed to let you get things done rather than GNOME or KDE which seem designed to annoy the hell out of you while their creators fiddle about with dumb UI concepts...

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

cyd — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:55:15 +0000

> Remove minimize and maximize buttons from the titlebar

I'm trying to keep an open mind, but removing the minimize button sounds like catastrophically bad judgment. How exactly is one supposed to temporarily dismiss a window? By shuffling it around to other parts of the desktop and/or another workspace? Yeah, that sounds a lot easier than clicking on a "minimize" button *rolls eyes*.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

mpr22 — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:37:03 +0000

(Of course why they chose to bump the major version for what was essentially a development milestone release is beyond me... but they did.)

Because the changes were so drastic (I think some things had basically been rewritten from scratch) that it couldn't reasonably be called 3.anything. (Sadly, one can't get away with calling things "X.-1". ISAGN.)

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

debacle — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:24:12 +0000

Well, I will definetely upgrade to GNOME 3 and give it a chance for at least two, three weeks. If I'm not satisfied, I can still switch to XFCE.

I really like GNOMEs idea of not having too many choices, buttons etc. since I'm working as a full-time system administrator for my mother (in parallel to my paid job, of course). We computer people don't have a clue how clueless people can misuse GUIs! Every removed choice or button is good.

However, I have my own preferences, which I can set in GNOME 2 via gconf, and I hope this choice is not taken away in GNOME 3. E.g. I like "focus follows pointer" and I hate "focus auto-raise", such things, that most people don't want.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

halla — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:12:23 +0000

Well, you don't need to stick with fvwm2 for that. KWin does horizontal and vertical maximizing as well. In fact, it was my first patch for KDE which enabled that for some windecos, way back in the KDE2 days.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

fmuellner — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:21:12 +0000

For the time being it's still gconf, but yeah - the "removal" of the buttons is actually a changed default setting, so nothing fancy is required to get them back.

Why do people minimize windows?

tjc — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:23:04 +0000

> what window manager?

Sawfish

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

cruff — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:02:30 +0000

I've only seen one person using workspaces in my experience, and I don't personally.

Many people use both the minimize and maximize functions daily. I even run FVWM so that I can use the horizontal maximize and vertical maximize variants as well, with the vertical maximize winning in frequency over the horizontal.

I also heavily use the GNOME window list to manage the occasional gazillion terminal windows.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

ThinkRob — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:39:54 +0000

> How much this mirrors the sentiments of KDE 3.5 users a few years back is not even funny.

Sort of. KDE 4.0 got trashed for being a buggy, incomplete mess. That was true -- it was buggy and incomplete -- but that was kind of by design. The KDE devs stated numerous times that 4.0 was not meant to be a stable release for general use! (Of course why they chose to bump the major version for what was essentially a development milestone release is beyond me... but they did.)

GNOME 3, on the other hand, is getting trashed not for being buggy, but for adopting a variety of new UI approaches, killing off long-time features and flexibility left and right, all with (seemingly) little concern for what the core, long-time user base wants.

Now I'm not averse to trying new UI concepts, and I'm willing to bet a good bit of cash that anything that the GNOME designers can come up with is slicker than anything I've ever designed or will design... but I still don't think that change for the sake of change is a good thing. Who is asking for these new designs? What users are clamoring for a wild break from many of the conventions established over the last decade or so of computing? Why is this break so urgent, so crucial that it *must* immediately be implemented as the sole design of one of the largest DEs in the open source world?

</rant>

Adopting a whole slew of new UI styles and forcing a bunch of new UI principles on users all in a single release with no option to keep using the current design(s) seems to me to be tantamount to saying "we've decided this is better for you, so use it or leave".

My prediction is that many of the long-time GNOME users will do just that: leave. I expect XFCE and other DEs will see an influx of new users when GNOME 3 starts making its way into the major distros.

Alternatives?

hp — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:37:58 +0000

windows 7 and os X were about as radical if not more so if you ask me.

also gnome 3 still has the old WM/panel as an option

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

AlexHudson — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 13:11:08 +0000

Putting "the button back" is probably little more effort than tweaking a dconf variable. I've no idea if this specific thing has a documented code tweak, but there's a good amount about the scripting setup here: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Development

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

sorpigal — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:22:27 +0000

Great. Can you use javascript to put the minimize button back? Also, where is this documented?

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

Rehdon — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:58:00 +0000

I'm utterly unconvinced by the "innovations" that will take place in Gnome 3 (sound like change for the sake of change to me, sadly), but I'll have a go at both Gnome Shell and Unity. I'm afraid they wouldn't last that much on my main box, so first of all it'll be a bootable CD/USB key, then we'll see.

Rehdon

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

nix — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:05:55 +0000

It's actually quite useful. It means you can stick monitoring stuff and things on the side of the screen and your maximized windows automatically avoid them: that you can rapidly irregularly tile windows by maximizing one of them, shrinking it in one dimension as much as you like, then maximizing the other one...

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

MisterIO — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:29:18 +0000

If the DE doesn't have a maximize option, I'm not gonna use it, simply because I wouldn't like it. I always maximise almost everything, because I prefer it that way.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

AlexHudson — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:16:10 +0000

GNOME Shell has javascript built in to do all that scripting stuff. So you wouldn't have to start from scratch. This is a lot more power-user friendly than GNOME 2 imho.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

russell — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:05:26 +0000

No they won't come out and shoot anyone in the head. With the diminishing set of settings there won't be anything but the default settings.

>No. If you want to make your own 'shell' and let people use it Gnome isn't >doing anything to stop you. It's all open source, modular, and you can do >whatever you like with it.

Typical, show us the code comment... Yeah I'll just knock one up in my lunch time to suit the job I've got to do in the afternoon. It will probably take my entire lunch because I have to start from scratch.

Really, I would like to just change a few configuration files instead. Maybe script some behaviour into the window manager, you know the stuff that you can do in a lunch time and share with your friends and colleges.

Eventually certain scripted behaviour, settings, themes, etc would become popular, highlighting what people really want. This works better than an academic process of predicting what people want.

Alternatives?

patrick_g — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 08:54:19 +0000

Debian Squeeze.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

nix — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 08:19:43 +0000

I'm fairly sure editors don't know how wide they should be. Certainly my Emacs never could: I can split the screen at any time. (And my web browser can do the same, though I'll admit that ability is rarer.)

I suppose this should really be an ability owned by a Sufficiently Smart Window Manager... but it isn't, it's part of the apps.

Alternatives?

lkundrak — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 08:09:06 +0000

Just pick last Ubuntu LTS, no?

Alternatives?

Cato — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 08:04:56 +0000

I'm hoping most distros are going to stay with GNOME 2.3x until 3.x is really sorted out, without the sort of issues mentioned in comments - it sounds like the KDE 4.x story all over again but with more UI designer push.

Not sure why this has happened with these projects - perhaps focusing on usability without enough weight given to compatibility? MacOS X and Windows haven't been through quite such radical revamps, probably because the product managers wouldn't let it happen.

Can anyone recommend a good alternative distro, ideally .deb based and a derivative of Ubuntu (which is out for me because of Unity in next release)? Maybe Linux Mint?

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

obi — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:08:18 +0000

Not me that's for sure. Window management on OSX is properly broken without third-party hacks. Maximizing never does what I want it to do. It's never predictable, and I've learned never to touch that button when I'm on OSX, because I know there's a good chance I'll get frustrated.

Glad I'm on Gnome 90% of the time :)

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

eduperez — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 06:41:05 +0000

AMEN! If I wanted somebody else to tell me how to use my own computer, I would install Windows.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

tonyblackwell — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 06:10:52 +0000

Gnome user.
Minimize/maximize use description follows.
< Your option to page-down out of here! >

I tend to have a lot of things opened and minimized, available at a single mouseclick. Perhaps not all at once, but often including my email, the browser while logged in to internet banking, my openoffice log of internet banking transactions into which I paste what I've been doing, a terminal for a myriad things, a terminal su'd, the next iso I'm downloading, the software update windows. Currently there is a nice index at bottom of screen as to what is what. Workspaces don't have that and icons within them are small and not all distinctive.

Maximize for movies, to get instant full-screen without having to muck around dragging it to the edge, still having other stuff distracting around the edge, having aspect ratio taken care of. Spreadsheets and file-browsing windows also benefit from maximize.

I like control of where I put stuff, and although not a Ubuntu user have shied away from the enforced dictates I hear of there.

Can gnome developers can be so wedded to an idea that they are comfortable just amputating tools I use every couple of minutes? I've the impression they ignore bug reports and feedback, so I guess this is only a little step down the road.

GNOME Shell 2.91.90 released

AndreE — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 05:48:27 +0000

Kde 4 was slammed for being incomplete and buggy. It didn't do anything as obnoxious as GNOME 3 wrt to UI design.