Linux

8193 readers

166 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
No NSFW adult content
Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

MigratingtoLemmy

Gnome: Rethinking Window Management (blogs.gnome.org)

submitted 1 year ago by cx0der to c/linux

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t get why most comments here are so negative. It’s Linux, if GNOME no longer fits your needs, you can always switch to another desktop. There are lots to choose from!

Which don't mean that we cannot criticize GNOME while discussing 😉

I can agree that there could be a problem with too many windows on a desktop but the solution they propose is the worst possible one.

For a user it make no sense that when you add a window to the desktop (say open a terminal) all the other window move to other places (or you switch to another workspace entirely)

Aside the fact that usually I (and people in general) remember where a window is, the big problem is that I positioned the applications as I need and I want them to stay there because I need them that way, even when I add another one. It is my problem where to put the new window, and I will probably put it where I need it.

Put it that way: it would be a good idea if in a IDE every time you open a new panel, all the already open panels change their arrangement ?

It is just another case of "we know better than the user what the user needs" from the GNOME developers (remember when they remove the advanced option of the printers because "users would be confused" ?)

[+] linuxisfun 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

No, but I think one should try something first and then criticise. Sometimes new stuff just has a learning curve because it is different to what you are used to, but after learning it, it turns out that you actually like it better.

Maybe, but then you should convince me that what I am going to try can be potentially better than what I already have. And the idea behind what GNOME are going to do is not that good. Then this is my idea, no problem if someone like it. btw, I am not a GNOME user anyway, so I could just say "who cares" 😀

Personally I actually hate having to manually re-arrange my windows. If a window manager managed to do this for me in an intuitive way, working on my PC would be more pleasant for me. That’s why I think that I might like GNOME’s new idea.

That's fine. But to me the problem is that I normally put my windows how I need them (and I suppose I am not the only one) so a window manager that thinks it know better is a no start for me. Now, I accept if a window manager put a new window is a empty area, but the idea to move the other windows is just awful to me.

No, it is just another case of GNOME trying to improve the user experience on regular computers.

Problem is they are using the wrong users groups to make their decisions. They are saying that since older people and kids may be confused from the current behaviour then they must change it for everyone. I see two big problems here:

they are underestimating one of their users group (the kids) which are much more smarter with a PC then they seem to think
the other users group probably has not the problem since they already use just one app at the time

I would argue that there shouldn’t be two settings menus for printers. There should be one that is able to do all common tasks. So I agree with the decision to remove one of them, but I disagree with not offering essential settings (e. g. Sound Juicer lost the ability to specify compression ratio).

I would argue that I'd like that my OS allow me to use all the features of my hardware. I would have understood that they moved the least common used options to another dialog (to be open with a button or any other solutions, it does not matter) but I not accept that they just remove it "because users could be confused". Fine, someone could be confused, but what about the users that are not confused and need to use the feature ?