3 ms·

I wish Gnome would stop rethinking things and just reimplement the basic desktop features every major competitor has, and that Gnome 2 had.

silon42 3y ago
including replaceable WMs
hactually 3y ago
what's missing that was removed in 2->3?
- soulofmischief 3y ago
  If you have used GNOME 2 for an extended period of time and then moved to GNOME 3, I think you'd find the shorter list of what wasn't removed. The idea was a vast plugin ecosystem which would allow development of desktop features to be more distributed. The problem was, some of the most basic features (like a taskbar for displaying open windows, or panels, or applets, or sane window management tools) were left out. At some point it becomes a security and performance nightmare when the idea is that to achieve a normal desktop experience, you need dozens of user-supplied scripts. Of course that's not a problem in practice, because even with user plugins, several basic features continue to be missing. And the fact that most of these plugins are just recreating functionality that already previously existed should really tell you something about GNOME team's design philosophy. To quote Linus Torvalds, GNOME 3 is a "total user experience design failure". https://www.datamation.com/open-source/gnome-2-vs-gnome-3/ https://www.datamation.com/open-source/gnome-2-vs-gnome-3/
  - moojacob 3y ago
    For more context Linux Torvalds moved back to GNOME in 2013, a year after that article was posted. From https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTMxNj https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTMxNj: > He says that GNOME 3.x has been improving and that when pairing the desktop with the right extensions, it's a rather pleasant desktop. He specifically points out Frippery and GNOME Tweak Tool as making a huge difference to his experience.
    - soulofmischief 3y ago
      Thank you, I didn't know that and didn't mean to misconstrue his opinion. GNOME Tweak Tool is a critical part of a usable GNOME experience, but I wouldn't dare call that a good user experience because it's a non-starter for the majority of casual users.
    - pmontra 3y ago
      I stayed for a long time on Gnome Flashback, the Gnome 2 look alike. I moved to Gnome 3 when I was sure that there were enough extensions to recreate a sane Gnome 2 desktop. Did they waste all their work? Mostly. Did they waste the time of the people that had to undo their work? Definitely.
elteto 3y ago
Starting with something as basic as bringing back the path input textbox in file dialogs. I mean... it's a file dialog! What else but inputting file _paths_ is it good for?
- soulofmischief 3y ago
  I recently got a macbook pro m2 in order to do local ML dev, and Finder has got to be one of the worst, most user-hostile programs I've ever used. It's not a good look when fucking windows explorer offers a better user experience.
  - roryokane 3y ago
    In case you weren’t aware, though macOS’s Finder doesn’t show an editable file path control in each window like Windows Explorer does, Finder does support these path-related features: • View > Show Path Bar (⌥⌘P) toggles visibility of a bar at the bottom of the window that shows the path to the currently open folder or currently selected file. The path is displayed as a series of folders, including their icons. You can hover over each these folders to see their full names, drag files into them, or drag them into other windows. • Go > Go to Folder (⇧⌘G) pops up a text field where you can type the path of a folder or file to navigate to. The text field has tab completion. This shortcut works in any file dialog, not just the Finder. • Edit > Copy “…” as Pathname (⌥⌘C) copies the absolute path to the currently open folder or currently selected file. Another tip: in any file dialog, to navigate to the same folder as an open Finder window, start dragging the folder by pressing and holding on the proxy icon of the window (it’s in the title bar, left of the title), then drop the folder onto the dialog.
- fomine3 3y ago
  Lack of this is insane. Gnome3 has a few such bad points iirc, that makes me to avoid it.
- diffeomorphism 3y ago
  ctrl+l? Or am I misunderstanding what you are asking for?
chrissoundz 3y ago
Why not just use Mate (Gnome 2 fork)?

silon42 3y ago

including replaceable WMs

hactually 3y ago

what's missing that was removed in 2->3?

soulofmischief 3y ago
If you have used GNOME 2 for an extended period of time and then moved to GNOME 3, I think you'd find the shorter list of what wasn't removed. The idea was a vast plugin ecosystem which would allow development of desktop features to be more distributed. The problem was, some of the most basic features (like a taskbar for displaying open windows, or panels, or applets, or sane window management tools) were left out. At some point it becomes a security and performance nightmare when the idea is that to achieve a normal desktop experience, you need dozens of user-supplied scripts. Of course that's not a problem in practice, because even with user plugins, several basic features continue to be missing. And the fact that most of these plugins are just recreating functionality that already previously existed should really tell you something about GNOME team's design philosophy. To quote Linus Torvalds, GNOME 3 is a "total user experience design failure". https://www.datamation.com/open-source/gnome-2-vs-gnome-3/ https://www.datamation.com/open-source/gnome-2-vs-gnome-3/
- moojacob 3y ago
  For more context Linux Torvalds moved back to GNOME in 2013, a year after that article was posted. From https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTMxNj https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTMxNj: > He says that GNOME 3.x has been improving and that when pairing the desktop with the right extensions, it's a rather pleasant desktop. He specifically points out Frippery and GNOME Tweak Tool as making a huge difference to his experience.
  - soulofmischief 3y ago
    Thank you, I didn't know that and didn't mean to misconstrue his opinion. GNOME Tweak Tool is a critical part of a usable GNOME experience, but I wouldn't dare call that a good user experience because it's a non-starter for the majority of casual users.
  - pmontra 3y ago
    I stayed for a long time on Gnome Flashback, the Gnome 2 look alike. I moved to Gnome 3 when I was sure that there were enough extensions to recreate a sane Gnome 2 desktop. Did they waste all their work? Mostly. Did they waste the time of the people that had to undo their work? Definitely.

elteto 3y ago

Starting with something as basic as bringing back the path input textbox in file dialogs. I mean... it's a file dialog! What else but inputting file _paths_ is it good for?

soulofmischief 3y ago
I recently got a macbook pro m2 in order to do local ML dev, and Finder has got to be one of the worst, most user-hostile programs I've ever used. It's not a good look when fucking windows explorer offers a better user experience.
- roryokane 3y ago
  In case you weren’t aware, though macOS’s Finder doesn’t show an editable file path control in each window like Windows Explorer does, Finder does support these path-related features: • View > Show Path Bar (⌥⌘P) toggles visibility of a bar at the bottom of the window that shows the path to the currently open folder or currently selected file. The path is displayed as a series of folders, including their icons. You can hover over each these folders to see their full names, drag files into them, or drag them into other windows. • Go > Go to Folder (⇧⌘G) pops up a text field where you can type the path of a folder or file to navigate to. The text field has tab completion. This shortcut works in any file dialog, not just the Finder. • Edit > Copy “…” as Pathname (⌥⌘C) copies the absolute path to the currently open folder or currently selected file. Another tip: in any file dialog, to navigate to the same folder as an open Finder window, start dragging the folder by pressing and holding on the proxy icon of the window (it’s in the title bar, left of the title), then drop the folder onto the dialog.
fomine3 3y ago
Lack of this is insane. Gnome3 has a few such bad points iirc, that makes me to avoid it.
diffeomorphism 3y ago
ctrl+l? Or am I misunderstanding what you are asking for?

chrissoundz 3y ago

Why not just use Mate (Gnome 2 fork)?