4 ms·

Unity and gnome-shell might be OK on a netbook. Or a notebook. Or maybe on a single monitor desktop. For a triplehead setup this concept is just not bearable.

by dlsym 14y ago

Unity and gnome-shell might be OK on a netbook. Or a notebook. Or maybe on a single monitor desktop. For a triplehead setup this concept is just not bearable. I think this really bad design-decision goes back to the days when there was this "Linux the great netbook / eee-PC OS hype". The good thing is: Nobody is forced to use this . There is Mate (http://mate-desktop.org/ http://mate-desktop.org/), or KDE, or XFCE, or ... The only thing that I find a bit pity, is that so many resources are spent on Gnome3 and Unity :-/

rbanffy 14y ago
20+ people on my team are using Unity on dual-head setups and it works very well. There was some pain in the transition from Gnome 2 to Unity, but, in general, people are happy and productive. Most have split their desktops into 9 spaces and run all apps full-screen, usually with a terminal on the notebook screen and something else (Eclipse, Emacs) on the larger LCD.
- BenoitEssiambre 14y ago
  How is the multiple spaces experience? This is my biggest fear. If this isn't very streamlined my productivity is going to go down. It is my biggest gripe with OSX that the "Spaces" functionality requires multiple clicks with lengthy animations in between to navigate the spaces. I could setup keyboard shortcuts but, damn it, a one click panel or dock widget is what I am used to and what I like. This has been included in unix type IDEs since the early 1990s (except Apple who managed to break it) the lack of it is a deal breaker for me. Do we get one in unity.
  - rbanffy 14y ago
    Multiple desktops work as expected under Unity - you move between them and both heads follow. It's a very easy way to organize your stuff when you are a spatial thinker. This makes it natural to keep working contexts on separate spaces (editor + terminal, editor + browser, browser + terminal, email + IRC + IM) and easily switch between. On the Mac, I like the Lion way to deal with it, despite it being unidimensional. The only thing is that you'll need to get rid of the mouse and buy a trackpad (assuming you are on a desktop or with the notebook docked). I find it confusing when both heads move independently between their own spaces.

by dlsym 14y ago

rbanffy 14y ago

20+ people on my team are using Unity on dual-head setups and it works very well. There was some pain in the transition from Gnome 2 to Unity, but, in general, people are happy and productive. Most have split their desktops into 9 spaces and run all apps full-screen, usually with a terminal on the notebook screen and something else (Eclipse, Emacs) on the larger LCD.

BenoitEssiambre 14y ago
How is the multiple spaces experience? This is my biggest fear. If this isn't very streamlined my productivity is going to go down. It is my biggest gripe with OSX that the "Spaces" functionality requires multiple clicks with lengthy animations in between to navigate the spaces. I could setup keyboard shortcuts but, damn it, a one click panel or dock widget is what I am used to and what I like. This has been included in unix type IDEs since the early 1990s (except Apple who managed to break it) the lack of it is a deal breaker for me. Do we get one in unity.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  Multiple desktops work as expected under Unity - you move between them and both heads follow. It's a very easy way to organize your stuff when you are a spatial thinker. This makes it natural to keep working contexts on separate spaces (editor + terminal, editor + browser, browser + terminal, email + IRC + IM) and easily switch between. On the Mac, I like the Lion way to deal with it, despite it being unidimensional. The only thing is that you'll need to get rid of the mouse and buy a trackpad (assuming you are on a desktop or with the notebook docked). I find it confusing when both heads move independently between their own spaces.