2 ms·

I agree with you that newer interfaces (Windows 10 in particular) are mostly not very good. But I wouldn't say personally that KDE is a good example of 2000s er

I agree with you that newer interfaces (Windows 10 in particular) are mostly not very good. But I wouldn't say personally that KDE is a good example of 2000s era design. I think Gnome 2 was the absolute pinnacle of PC GUI design, actually. Having instantaneous access to Applications / Places / System (with text labels!) makes so much sense; it's one of the few desktop environments that pretty much any competent computer user could sit down at and immediately use. Actually, I have my KDE set up to be an approximation of Gnome 2 with a few tweaks that work better for me, but I'm not under any impression that it approaches the immediate usability of Gnome 2. It even looked nice! https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/Ubuntu_8.04_Live_CD.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/Ubuntu_8...

mort96 8y ago
> Having instantaneous access to Applications / Places / System (with text labels!) makes so much sense I don't really get that. I suppose I've just never gotten used to it, but I just find that typing the name of the application is so much easier and faster. If I know I want to e.g launch Nautilus, why would I first spend time thinking about whether it's a "place" or an "application" or a part of the "system"? Is my text editor an "educational" program or an "office" program or an "accessory"? Or maybe _that_ is a "system" tool? I'm actually genuinely curious about this; how is it better to mouse through hierarchical categories and look for an application, instead of just hitting super and typing the first couple of characters? Especially something like KDE's start menu, where you can hit super and start typing, or hit super (or click the icon) and mouse through similar categories to not lose the discoverability benefits of categories.
- bscphil 7y ago
  >I don't really get that. I suppose I've just never gotten used to it, but I just find that typing the name of the application is so much easier and faster. If I know I want to e.g launch Nautilus, why would I first spend time thinking about whether it's a "place" or an "application" or a part of the "system"? Is my text editor an "educational" program or an "office" program or an "accessory"? Or maybe _that_ is a "system" tool? Well, there are several aspects to this. For an ordinary user, who's just started with the system, they don't even know the file manager is named "nautilus", so they wouldn't know to type it in. The Gnome 2 system aids discovery. Second, a user might not even know they could search for things, or be less comfortable with the keyboard. (Personally I do set things up this way: I have caps lock mapped to KDE's search widget, in the style of Chromebooks. I don't have a "Application" menu at all.) But maybe most importantly, one usually thinks "I want to look at my pictures", not "I want to open the file manager." In Gnome 2, you would open the Places menu and click Pictures. Which, of course, would open Nautilus already pointed at the correct directory. I have a Places widget with a folder icon on my KDE taskbar for this purpose.

mort96 8y ago

> Having instantaneous access to Applications / Places / System (with text labels!) makes so much sense I don't really get that. I suppose I've just never gotten used to it, but I just find that typing the name of the application is so much easier and faster. If I know I want to e.g launch Nautilus, why would I first spend time thinking about whether it's a "place" or an "application" or a part of the "system"? Is my text editor an "educational" program or an "office" program or an "accessory"? Or maybe _that_ is a "system" tool? I'm actually genuinely curious about this; how is it better to mouse through hierarchical categories and look for an application, instead of just hitting super and typing the first couple of characters? Especially something like KDE's start menu, where you can hit super and start typing, or hit super (or click the icon) and mouse through similar categories to not lose the discoverability benefits of categories.

bscphil 7y ago
>I don't really get that. I suppose I've just never gotten used to it, but I just find that typing the name of the application is so much easier and faster. If I know I want to e.g launch Nautilus, why would I first spend time thinking about whether it's a "place" or an "application" or a part of the "system"? Is my text editor an "educational" program or an "office" program or an "accessory"? Or maybe _that_ is a "system" tool? Well, there are several aspects to this. For an ordinary user, who's just started with the system, they don't even know the file manager is named "nautilus", so they wouldn't know to type it in. The Gnome 2 system aids discovery. Second, a user might not even know they could search for things, or be less comfortable with the keyboard. (Personally I do set things up this way: I have caps lock mapped to KDE's search widget, in the style of Chromebooks. I don't have a "Application" menu at all.) But maybe most importantly, one usually thinks "I want to look at my pictures", not "I want to open the file manager." In Gnome 2, you would open the Places menu and click Pictures. Which, of course, would open Nautilus already pointed at the correct directory. I have a Places widget with a folder icon on my KDE taskbar for this purpose.