41 ms·

Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

• lol768 2y ago
  These complaints aren't invalid, but I do wonder how many users actually get tripped up on these things. If you want a list view, clicking on the icon that looks like a list isn't a crazy thing to do. I agree the dropdown behaviour is a bit strange. Equally, it's accepted that a bunch of today's Gnome apps have title bars with controls inside them. I don't think it's that jarring that if you don't click on a control accurately and then start dragging the mouse, you're going to move the window.
  • Gualdrapo 2y ago
    The sort of mental process the author related to find that list view was pretty much the same I went through, so at least there's two people. But, as they said and the author quoted, "Our software is built to be usable by everyone. We care deeply about user experience." Though there are already TONS of critiques to GNOME (hell, even I have written some stuff about them here) and so much has been said about it that saying something else seems like a waste of time in my humble opinion. Its devs won't change their mind because they have a laser-sharp vision of what they want to achieve. Its users won't change their mind because they like it and feel at home using it. We the people that don't (or no longer) like it won't change our minds either because it can feel really strange, confusing and even limiting. It's been more than 10 years since they went to that route but they will do little to nothing about that because, as the author correctly asserted, "it's also a project that's very vocal - opinionated, as the saying goes - about how to do things." So either you like the GNOME way of doing things or you just can go somewhere else. Which, again, it's a bit contradictory taking in account their "Our software is built to be usable by everyone" motto.
    • righthand 2y ago
      I think one day it will be a sword they fall on as fewer people become interested in working with such aggressive position, the developers will look elsewhere instead of wait for GNOME to implement something or be reasonable.
  • gibbetsandcrows 2y ago
    The worst part about controls inside the titlebar is things like Firefox and Chromium which implement their own decorations and window design with the tabs ending up in 95% of your draggable titlebar area, so you often end up moving the tab instead of moving the window. I'm not sure who will blink first with the lousy design situation, but the users are paying the price. (Honestly browsers just need to change this...Gnome is most people's default and they've shown themselves to be pretty damned stubborn)
    • derkades 2y ago
      In Firefox, you can choose whether to use the system titlebar it its own "merged" titlebar. I expected Chrime has a similar setting.
    • exe34 2y ago
      i gave up entirely and went with xmonad. normally window placement is automatic and predictable, but if I really want to resize something, it's Super+Right Drag.
      • okasaki 2y ago
        This works in GNOME too, it's Super + left mouse. Super + right mouse anywhere in the window presents a window management menu, including resize/move options
  • tuna74 2y ago
    Yeah, especially as the two different buttons get highlighted separately and has different tooltips as you hover over them.
• nextos 2y ago
  I don't use Gnome since the days of version 2, which was really nice and friendly. But I was impressed by how well the latest iteration works in a tablet. That's a great advantage, because it's the same UI as a desktop. Plus, they have made sure all core applications work well using a touch UI.
  • uniq7 2y ago
    From the article's summary: > Some common features are only accessible - and discoverable - through keyboard shortcuts. The keyboard shortcuts listing is non-interactive, modal, and incurs a substantial mental context switch.
    • nextos 2y ago
      That's something natural, touch interfaces need to be simpler. I didn't miss any normal functionality without access to a keyboard.
      • mixmastamyk 2y ago
        Not my experience: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41481555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41481555
    • mananaysiempre 2y ago
      This part was about the location bar, I believe. For what it’s worth, on my machine (with Files 46.2) clicking on the name of the current directory or on empty space to the right of it in the location bar does turn it into a text box. (I always use Ctrl-L in practice so I had to actually go and check. It might be that clicking did not work in earlier versions?..)
    • horsawlarway 2y ago
      He's just wrong though. Clicking anywhere on the bar immediately turns on the edit for me (and has for years). So either debian is turning on some odd defaults (maybe? It's been a long time since I used debian with a DE). Or... (and this is my guess) he mucked around running commands he didn't understand trying to fix his "solid color desktop" issue and broke it himeself. I'm very suspicious of the lack of anti-aliasing in his screenshots as well.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• comex 2y ago
  Decent critique, but it mixes together two things: the design language, and UI papercuts showing a lack of attention to detail. Consider the current macOS Finder: https://a.qoid.us/20240907-finder.png https://a.qoid.us/20240907-finder.png Finder's design is extremely similar to GNOME Files! And so the inherent downsides of the design language are present in Finder too, such as it being harder to drag windows around or click to activate windows. But macOS does avoid most of the UI papercuts the author points out. It's not perfect, but let's go through the list. - View Options: Finder has a similar-looking icon that does the same thing. But in Finder, the little arrows on the right of an icon are always part of the same button as the icon itself. Finder doesn't use split buttons in the way the author complains about. - Help: The macOS User Guide explains all the icons and what they do. But you don't actually need to go that far, because macOS has a feature where if you click Help and start typing, it will show menu items (from any menu) that match what you typed. In this case, if you start typing "list", it will show the "as List" menu item, which achieves what the author wants. (I guess I should point out that macOS does have a menu bar at the top of the screen, and all the actions you can take by clicking icons can also be taken through the menu bar.) - Tooltips: Finder doesn't have tooltips for the locations on the left pane, only for the icons in the toolbar. Even there they take a while to appear. - Navigation: I'd ding Finder here because there is no location bar at all (only an 'open by path' dialog that's kind of buried). Even going to the parent directory is not exposed in a particularly obvious way. Still, at least Finder doesn't have something that looks editable but isn't. - Scrolling: macOS has hidden scrollbars by default, but they stay at the right of the window. They don't jump to the left like the author is complaining about.
  • LeoPanthera 2y ago
    Finder does have a location bar, which it calls a “path bar”, but it’s off by default. There’s a menu item to turn it on.
  • nitinreddy88 2y ago
    And macOS finder has one of the pathetic designs in similar to Apple simplicity but its supposed to be used for other way. Taking inspiration from that design is shooting yourself and half baking it is like making sure you screw in both ways
• 3np 2y ago
  As someone who can't cope with Gnome Files, I've been pleased with worker as desktop file manager recently. http://www.boomerangsworld.de/cms/worker/ http://www.boomerangsworld.de/cms/worker/ https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/worker https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/worker Still on the lookout for a reasonable FileChooserDialog replacement... Easily the worst part of GTK and a great candidate for its own dedicated article (hint hint :)). Supposedly it takes some LD_PRELOAD fudging to override it and while there is the linked previous work from KDE I'm not aware of anything else at this point. Anyone know of any recentish attempts? Would it be a good idea with a "libgtkfilepicker" which provides a more accessible API for implementations to interface with? https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/743931/can-i-somehow-use-a-different-file-picker-dialog-than-gnome-gtks-own https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/743931/can-i-someho...
  • kuschku 2y ago
    It used to be relatively easy to override the filechooser by forcing portal mode, but Gnome actually disabled that because people aren't supposed to use it. (See https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/merge_requests/4829 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/merge_requests/4829 and related discussions) But while they did remove that option, they didn't implement an option to do it properly. So now even though I use KDE, Firefox drops me in the shitty Gnome filechooser which is entirely useless. (Luckily firefox ended up making that an option on their side instead: widget.use-xdg-desktop-portal.file-picker)
• superkuh 2y ago
  The worst part of GNOME, files included, is the gtkfilechooserwidget.c, in both gtk3 and gtk4, having a bug which errors out and pops up if you paste a file path into a file->open dialog. Gtk devs say the filechooser code is so spaghetti no one wants to work on it to make filename-entry location-mode work by default again. And I agree, I tried for a year on and off to patch it myself in gtk 3.22 and 3.24 and I could only ever fix it for the first launch of File->Open for a given process. Subsequent Opens would error out again. GNOME UI, and now Gtk since 2014, is not written with people who use the keyboard in mind. That's it's biggest UI weakness.
  • jdiff 2y ago
    File Chooser gripes, I get. It's one of many pain points of GNOME, and one that's haunted GNOME for ages. But GNOME is highly (primarily even) keyboard-driven. The meme since 3.0 is that it's built for touch first, but nobody who's said that has ever used GNOME on a touch device, it is a nightmare. GNOME's primary controls are through keyboard shortcuts or the occasional broad mouse gesture that has a faster keyboard alternative.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• jrm4 2y ago
  Glad to see someone go deep on this in a way that I've felt while using it but was unable to fully articulate why it's so bad. Again, I'll keep saying it, I'm not the biggest Apple fan in the world, but however many Gnome devs in a trenchcoat will never equal a Steve Jobs and it's weird, borderline pathetic, for them to keep trying -- when all they end up doing is changing things for the sake of changing them.
  • inferiorhuman 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • webkike 2y ago
    I have actually had more problems with the Mac OS finder then I have the gnome one, and all of my problems stem from answering the question “how do I go up a directory from where I am?” Never bothered to figure out the actual right way. Might be easy. But hard to figure out
    • inferiorhuman 2y ago
      But hard to figure out Have you tried the keyboard shortcut listed next to the Go -> Enclosing Folder menu item?
      • webkike 2y ago
        Wow… this sucks
    • horsawlarway 2y ago
      I'm with you. Modern macOS is... just not good for the basics right now. I have to use it for work, and I genuinely like Gnome more most of the time (files/settings/gestures/workspaces - all better on gnome). Mac is doing what Windows is doing "The user is stupid and must not be allowed to understand what the computer is doing - we will guess what they want instead and show them that". Basic nav in finder is painful by default (100% agree about not being able to consistently move up).
    • 2y ago
• gertlex 2y ago
  Was happy to read this, as I've often imagined doing this myself (i.e. thoroughly hashing out commentary on a bunch of nits in a GUI that annoy me and I'm convinced should be better). I agree that ctrl+L is a weird shortcut in a vacuum, but it's one I've known for 15 years, originally from using browsers. And it always makes me happy that Windows and Gnome (and Nautilus, which isn't the gnome default but is still present) all share it, which is nice for old/power-users. (but actually, on re-read, the complaint may not be with the shortcut at all, and purely with the "no other way") There's something in the room (I think it's an elephant), but not mentioned in the post, which is that the current Gnome UI is very Windows 11-like, while screwing up a lot of the details (hover-text, location bar being clickable). (After using Gnome with 14.04 and 20.04, I had stability issues in 22.04 and am now happily on XFCE; long-term stability ftw)
  • PeakKS 2y ago
    The writer is just using an old version, you can just click the bar to enter edit mode.
    • ddtaylor 2y ago
      For context "old" here is within the last 6 months.
      • kaanyalova 2y ago
        The Gnome version that the writer uses is Gnome 43 which was released 2 years ago.
        • donatzsky 2y ago
          And for how long has it had this "broken" behaviour for? When Microsoft introduced a similar path bar in Explorer (in Vista or 7, don't remember), it had the double functionality right from the beginning. The fact that Gnome Files didn't is frankly baffling.
• horsawlarway 2y ago
  In no particular order, running arch with gnome and trying to reproduce the author's complaints: - List view and view options buttons, while combined, have a visually distinct hover state, highlighting each half of the button on hover, and making it very obvious (at least to me, as a 35 year old power user) that they are different. (you can see this in his screenshots). Perhaps the author has visual issues and contrast is an issue? If so - agreed, perhaps my largest complaint with gnome is that contrast is low by default in the light view. - Author complains that the recent and starred sections in the left nav have tooltips that are duplicative. No argument... except... he conveniently leaves out that for the vast majority of the default items (Downloads, Documents, Home, Music, Videos, etc) it shows the exact system path of that shortcut. Compared to the shenannigans that MSFT is playing with things like onedrive - it's delightful that the system paths are displayed there. I am never confused by where a shortcut actually lives. The only duplicative items are items that don't have a path (they are internal groupings in files, like recent) - I simply cannot reproduce not being able to get the path bar in edit state by clicking. I'm on a different distro - so maybe this is a debian thing? Single click or tap on the path display always opens the text editor for me. No shortcuts required. - Shortcuts lists the keyboard shortcut for shortcuts for me in the dropdown menu. I have honestly never cared to check for it before, so maybe this is a valid complaint about an older version still in debian? - He's completely right: Search in the files shortcuts menu sucks. It misses a lot of keywords that it shouldn't. - For the scrollbar... come on man, at least try the thing that is easy. Yes - the scrollbar visually enlarges when you mouse over it, and yes - this leaves your mouse visually pointing at some new padding. That padding works for scrolling just fine (seriously - just complete the action you were intending, it works...) So he is very incorrect with this "meaning that my mouse pointer is now pointing at... nothing. Thanks, Gnomebama." It's pointing at the scrollbar and it works just fine. Better yet - don't ever click and drag the scrollbar to scroll. It's... not the done thing with the new kids these days. Use your fingers (gestures) or use the mousewheel. The scrollbar is a visual marker for progress and for quick jumps. I am also on team "Show me the scrollbars all the time!" but I understand the goal of returning real estate on limited viewports. --- I have a TON of complaints about gnome, but these just feel... forced. Made worse by the fact the author admits he's run a bunch of customization in the console to fix his "solid color desktop" stuff first (I'm suspicious of whether he broke his own path bar... I use it all the time, and I don't ever remember it not just being a click away to edit, even 5+ years back). This is the kind of thing I appreciate that the Gnome team mostly ignores.
• horsawlarway 2y ago
  I want to add - outside of the technical discussion here. read in the voice of jeff foxworthy --- You might be a boomer if... you unironically think "thanks gnomebama" is a good thing to make a pun out of in a ui discussion the chef's kiss is the complaint is incorrect.
  • rossant 2y ago
    As a non American person I'm unfamiliar with this expression, what does it mean and where does it come from?
    • flohofwoe 2y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanks,_Obama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanks,_Obama
    • horsawlarway 2y ago
      It's a derogative remark from republican demographics about Barrack Obama. "Thanks nobama" was a good way to identify yourself as a maga loving fool... Typically coming from elderly white men.
• throwaway2037 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • deafpolygon 2y ago
    The author does not seem unreasonable with their critique. The response to any critique shouldn't have to be, "write your own software, if you don't like it!". You know, just as well as any of us, that writing software is hard. UI is also hard. It would be good to learn from any critique.
  • zaphirplane 2y ago
    Like all of us the author is busy opening a bank, insurance company, an Asian restaurant, an ebay replacement, a car factory and an adobe replacement. The google replacement is on the cards Be real, when the article is a spray of incoherent criticism its irrelevant, constructive criticism good, ignoring feedback bad, Your mileage may vary for this article
  • 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
    From a gods-eye view, it's less work to accept criticism and use it to improve GNOME, than to make a solo effort to replace it
    • kaba0 2y ago
      You need good criticism for that.
  • abtinf 2y ago
    You might benefit from watching the film “Born On The Fourth of July”. Telling people to love it or leave it says a lot about who you are.
  • db48x 2y ago
    Have you ever actually looked to see how many file managers there are? Writing a new one is pointless; you can almost always find one that isn’t terrible. Personally I prefer Nemo to GNOME Files.
  • 2y ago
• Spivak 2y ago
  I wish folks critiquing GNOME would go after any app other than Nautilus. It's just not a great showcase of the best they have to offer. I would certainly hope no one judges the macOS desktop by Finder because the review probably wouldn't be favorable. If you're going to judge the design system Text Editor, Terminal, Videos, Epiphany, Music would all be better choices. I can't say I know anyone who likes GNOME who would recommend Nautilus anything but the most basic usage.
  • troad 2y ago
    But surely interacting with files is a key component of what people expect from a DE? If a DE can't handle that well, a well-designed 'Videos' app offers small consolation. I can only speak for myself, but it was a Nautilus regression that was the final straw that got me to move to KDE. (And years before that, the rapidly regressing Finder was a key factor in getting me to finally move from Mac to Linux.) Very happy with KDE, though. I feel like when the Videos app is well designed and the file manager isn't, that says a lot about the priorities of the team behind the DE. In Apple's case, this is understandable from a business perspective - they have cloud services to sell, and would much rather you forgot all about files. In Gnome's case, I've always found it kind of baffling. Apple's design follows Apple's business imperatives, and Gnome's design... also follows Apple's business imperatives, for some reason. Monkey see, monkey do?
    • kaba0 2y ago
      You do realize that you can use any kind of file manager from GNOME, right? It’s just a program, just as Dolphin, which you can easily install instead. Changing DE for that is just dumb, imo.
      • keyringlight 2y ago
        Defaults and first impressions matter though. As much as I think the matter of a personal computer you can make your own is worth fighting for, when a new user lands in the DE and doesn't have a great experience it's not a good solution to then say something along the lines of "go and explore N alternatives or dig through their configurations to find one that suits you" for each aspect of the DE they're going to be regularly interacting with. As much as they will be regularly means to an end of whatever task they do on their machine, it's a large up-front burden.
• rtpg 2y ago
  Always a reminder for people who are frustrated with the state of Gnome... I've found KDE to be _very good_ for people who want to see options up and center. In a way KDE is definitely more Windows-like and Gnome more Mac-like in its approaches, and you can see this very directly with the screenshotter tools packed into the various environments. Definitely worth it for people frustrated at Gnome's cleanliness-to-a-fault. (Full disclosure: I donate to both and apprecaite them both existing)
  • flohofwoe 2y ago
    > Definitely worth it for people frustrated at Gnome's cleanliness-to-a-fault. For me it's not that. I don't mind white space, and I don't mind flat design. It's simply that Gnome is too 'chaotic'. If Gnome would simply copy macOS instead of trying to invent their own UI paradigms it would mostly be fine (not that macOS is perfect though, it has been regressing massively too in the last decade, and some things never were great - most notably the OSX Finder). But yeah, on my Linux laptop I switched to KDE a couple of months ago and it's great. Also much snappier than Gnome.
    • timlatim 2y ago
      > It's simply that Gnome is too 'chaotic'. Just to offer a different point of view, I see it as the opposite. I like a lot of things the KDE community is doing and I think it's particularly good at power user oriented apps like Krita and Kdenlive, which may be the best open-source tools in their respective areas and which don't really fit in the modern Gnome framework. As a desktop environment, however, I feel KDE is too visually chaotic to be usable. This post [1] illustrates some problems, but the lack of design cohesion permeates KDE and cannot be fixed without a long concerted effort. I imagine it's never been a priority because most users can shrug these inconsistencies off as something inconsequential, but for me (and I don't believe I'm alone in this) they're instantly noticeable and distracting eyesores. Gnome has its own problems, but it is very visually consistent and clean, especially as of late when most of the standard apps are moved to GTK4/libadwaita. The GP's comparison of KDE being closer in spirit to Windows while Gnome to Mac is spot on IMO. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/kde/comments/tffr4l/some_kde_plasma_uiux_problems/ https://www.reddit.com/r/kde/comments/tffr4l/some_kde_plasma...
• cycomanic 2y ago
  > It's worth mentioning that I agree that the modern design paradigm probably is friendly to beginner users in many ways. But at some point, people stop being beginners. People who use computers several hours per day, performing a wide variety of tasks in many different programs, should also be taken in to account when designing software. As such, my critique comes from the point of what's usually called a "power user". It's also worth considering that the more an interface hides, the less it offers by way of opportunities for a user to grow and learn. After that I find it a bit rich to complain that one has to use a keyboard shortcut (even as others have said that's even incorrect), especially for a function that requires using the keyboard anyway. I also find the arguments about no up button and the list view unconvincing. The list button was immediately obvious to me from the screenshot (and I don't use gnome or any filemanager) and I actually appreciate a window that does not put lost of buttons that present duplicate functionality everywhere (and it's harder to hit? What argument is that, by his own admission he's been using computers for 35 years, but can't use a mouse to hit a path?). This really just reads like one of the typical rants where someone become somewhat proficient with some system, now considers themselves a "power user" and expects everything else to work exactly the same. The same people often complain that terminals break with "standard shortcuts" because they can't copy with ctrl-C...
  • hedora 2y ago
    I would have clicked the down arrow that’s attached to the list icon to get the list options. It wouldn’t even occur to me that the icon could be a toggle (both because it is not rendered as one, and because I’d expect more than two view options).
    • kaba0 2y ago
      It does have a hover effect though. Design is always about discoverability. If you have seen something similar, you will try to apply that solution. If you haven’t, you try different stuff and see what happens.
  • baybal2 2y ago
    [dead]
• hedora 2y ago
  Have they fixed the save dialog box yet? If I type <ctrl>-s filename <enter>, then I expect the current file to be saved with filename (perhaps with an extension appended). The gtk-2 behavior was to start searching the list of files/directories when you type filename, then select whatever is highlighted when you press enter. Anyway, I’m not going to install gnome to find out. It’s not surprising the file browser is as bad as described in the article. After all, jwz’s cadt (cascade of attention deficit teenagers) model of software engineering was meant to explain the behavior of the gnome project.
  • kaanyalova 2y ago
    It still seems to search for files/directories when entering the file name but it doesn't select the first file, it saves with the filename you entered. So it was fixed.
  • tuna74 2y ago
    "Have they fixed the save dialog box yet? .... Anyway, I’m not going to install gnome to find out." Then why do you care?
    • uniq7 2y ago
      He is asking because if they fixed it then he may consider installing it again?
    • frankvdwaal 2y ago
      If being interested in something was contingent on whether or not you're planning on using it, this would be one dead website.
• quaintdev 2y ago
  Windows Explorer >> Gnome >>> Mac finder What the hell they were thinking while building finder?
  • dxroshan 2y ago
    LXQt's PCManFM is a pretty good file manager. I have been using it for couple of months now.
  • tuna74 2y ago
    I like Gnome and I totally agree!
  • sunaookami 2y ago
    Finder is way better than Windows Explorer. Explorer suffers from a myriad of bugs like constantly re-caching thumbnails, lag when opening folders (since Windows 11) and TWO context menus. No bulk rename, search is way too slow and annoying. Also, can't delete words from the file name with CTRL + Backspace, it inserts some hidden character instead. Also the whole OS hangs while an external hard drive spins up, which doesn't happen on macOS.
    • quaintdev 2y ago
      Finder does not have option to move a file. Nor you can resize the window.
      • sbuk 2y ago
        Yes it does. You can use the mouse, or shortcuts cmd-c, followed by cmd-option-v. And what on earth do you mean “Nor you can resize the window.” Nonsense. You’ve clearly never been within 6 feet of a Mac!
      • roryokane 2y ago
        Neither is true. In Finder you could always drag and drop a file to move it. (In certain cases I forget the details of, holding Command is necessary to move instead of copy, as indicated by the cursor.) Since about 8 years ago, you can also move a file via the keyboard by selecting the file, hitting Command-C to Copy, navigating to the new folder, and hitting Option-Command-V to Move the pasted file. This doesn’t match Windows’s Cut/Paste workflow, but I think Copy makes more sense as a first step. For consistency with Cut elsewhere, one would expect Cut to delete the file until it is pasted, but on Windows it doesn’t. Finder windows are resizeable in the same way as all other macOS windows. In older versions you had to drag the drag handle in the bottom right. For a while now, you can drag on any window border, when the cursor turns into a double arrow. You can also click or Option-click the green window button to make the window full-screen or zoom it to show all contents.
• fracus 2y ago
  One thing I can't stand with Ubuntu is the panel position at the top. 90% of users will be browsing the web. If I'm on reddit for example, I will literally have at minimum 3 browser bars (tabs, toolbar, reddit enhancement suite) but also the panel. Consider we read top to bottom, the panel shouldn't be at top since it is almost never being used or read. It should default to the bottom but at the very least you should have the option to move it where you want without having to install a 3rd party extension.
  • peheje 2y ago
    I 100% agree. It's weird. I Use 'Dash to Panel's GNOME extension, and to me that should be the default. From there I really like how GNOME merges the app bar with maxize minimize close with the title etc. At least most applications.
  • worble 2y ago
    As consider that because monitors are typically 16:9 there is so much extra horizontal space compared to vertical. Personally on KDE I have my app panel on the right then hide browser tabs with some css and have Tree Style Tabs on the right as well. It frees up so much of the limited vertical space, it's refreshing.
    • fracus 2y ago
      I would like it on the sides but the clock never looks right in that config IMO.
• butz 2y ago
  Oh GNOME, hiding "Power off" option under additional submenu, that user wouldn't accidentally click it, and then putting "Format" right next to "Safely remove drive" in Files.
  • tveyben 2y ago
    Same kind of thing exists on Windows - for eg USB mass storage devices, ‘Eject’ and ‘Format’ are listes next to each other in the menu… One is harmless - the other potentially destructive
    • ivanjermakov 2y ago
      My favorite UX is when on Windows you mount a drive of unknown partition type (e.g. ext4) there is a popup suggesting to format it with "confirm" selected by default.
      • eviks 2y ago
        That's very dumb indeed, and no way to disable properly, I think (had to use a script that watches for the window with this same prompt texts and autoclose it to avoid catastrophic results)
        • account42 2y ago
          Dumb or malicious? Not the first time Microsoft happens to "accidentally" break foreign systems.
  • rollcat 2y ago
    Meanwhile macOS: hold "opt" to shutdown/restart without confirmation: 2 clicks, instant action; vs GNOME's 4 clicks and janky animations. Meanwhile both: cramming so many controls into title bars there's nowhere left to click to move the window. I recently spent a week with OS X 10.5 on a G4, I think it was peak desktop.
    • 2y ago
• cetu86 2y ago
  I get it that gnome is nowadays an experimental desktop environment, that tries a lot of new approaches. I just don't understand why many distributions use it as their default DE.
  • wao0uuno 2y ago
    Because it’s the only modern Linux DE that looks good and doesn’t break constantly.
    • pona-a 2y ago
      KDE? Cinnamon? MATE? LXQt? When I was in the GNOME bubble, I too thought GNOME was the be-all and end-all of Linux DE usability, with everyone else being savages slapping together UIs without so much as a style guide. Perhaps at some point this may have been partially true. Today, all major DEs are fine. Plasma did not crash once since 2019 for me and I think its UX is quite nice, in the case of Dolphin in particular visibly better than GNOME's. At the same time, GNOME had routine issues with extensions, semi-frequent crashes, and odd non-compliant bits like refusing to use tray icons, breaking apps that depend on them, and the last time I checked, scaling was a mess. I do think the GNOME/libadwaita ecosystem is a fantastic achievement and agree with many of their ideas, but it would be dishonest to say all other DEs are inferior and don't deserve any consideration as a default.
      • wao0uuno 2y ago
        Only KDE and Gnome offer proper Wayland support making them in my eyes the only truly modern DEs on your list. Out of these two, Gnome is the only one that doesn’t glitch constantly. It’s true that Plasma finally stopped krashing every time you look at it funny but it’s still a bloated, glitchy mess of a DE. You really can’t count on KDE to provide updates without introducing major bugs and stability issues as proven by recent Plasma 6 release. Believe me I hate Gnome for how poorly managed and anti user it is but at the same time I see no real alternatives.
        • 2y ago
• MrDresden 2y ago
  A personal annoyance with Gnome Files is that every time a file is deleted it shows an annoying toast over the tabs notifying you about the files being deleted.
• manmal 2y ago
  As someone totally out of the loop, what’s the status of font rendering in Gnome? The screenshots don’t look any better than 20 years ago, a jarring difference to what I‘m used to from macOS.
  • toberoni 2y ago
    I use Gnome on multiple PCs and my first thought was they use a bitmap font or a 720p screen because everything looks off. The screenshots are not representative of how Gnome's font rendering looks like with a font like Inter & HiDPI.
  • wongogue 2y ago
    It depends on the distribution.
  • 0x_rs 2y ago
    You might even find it to have regressed after pango 1.44 released, but human eyesight is not a metric contemplated by its developers.
  • Jnr 2y ago
    Look at the official screenshots, it looks great: https://release.gnome.org/46/ https://release.gnome.org/46/ Font rendering on Linux has been fixed for >10 years but the OP has obviously forgot to update his font configuration or has turned off anti-aliasing and hinting for the legacy look and feel. :)
  • bigfatkitten 2y ago
    It's distribution dependent. It's been a solved problem for years, but some of the better rendering methods in FreeType are/were patent encumbered, and so it comes down to what each distro's lawyers are comfortable with. Gnome's out of the box font choices don't help either. Cantarell renders terribly on anything but high DPI displays.
• n3storm 2y ago
  Maybe the arrogance is the worst feature of GNOME approach. They make this studies and constantly repeat how focused are they on usability that when an individual finds it not usable (not in that words) it's double frustating cause is like GNOME saying: "our average users are happy so you must to be handicaped"
  • tuna74 2y ago
    Yeah, if you want a make a point you can just invent/hallucinate what other people (like Gnome devs devs) say.
  • stuaxo 2y ago
    It's a shame SUN isn't still around, they did actually usability studies on GNOME, it would be great if one of the distros would step up here.
    • n3storm 2y ago
      Yes! I am a Sun fan. But GNOME team did say they have done tons of ux studies long after SUN. https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/Studies https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/Studies
      • account42 2y ago
        Have they done "studies" to justify the changes they want to make or have they done real studies to find out what changes they should/should not make?
        • bigfatkitten 2y ago
          The most recent 'study' was conducted by someone largely responsible for the UX as it is now.
  • jampekka 2y ago
    No shame in needing a special UI if you're handicapped.
• jiehong 2y ago
  This reminds me of not being able to right click in Files in list view for creating a new document or pasting something, because it only accepts a right click in an empty area. Yet, in list view, as soon as you have a few files and the window is full, you’re given no empty area to click in. I saw some people have the same issue [0] in the past, and it’s not really been fixed either [1]. [0]: https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1150025 https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1150025 [1]: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/issues/3445 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/issues/3445
  • mixmastamyk 2y ago
    Common issue. In this situation I use the main menu/hotkeys instead. Ctrl-N, Ctrl-C etc.
  • Lukas_Skywalker 2y ago
    I often try to open a new Terminal window in my current folder like that. Which often is impossible for the same reason. So I navigate up, until I find a folder that is not full, open the Terminal there, and ‚cd‘ down to the folder i wanted…
    • cocoto 2y ago
      You can click on the three dot menu at the right of the path, there is an option to open a terminal. You can also switch to icon view and right-click between icons to open a terminal. You can also go to parent folder, right click the folder you were before and open it in a terminal. Many workarounds but I agree it’s not really good UI.
      • KETHERCORTEX 2y ago
        > You can click on the three dot menu at the right of the path, there is an option to open a terminal. I use Black Box as a terminal app, but Nautilus will open only default distro-provided terminal application with its menu.
• IshKebab 2y ago
  I couldn't agree more. The Gnome devs have a very long track record of imposing universally hated UI/UX design on people. I'd wonder why KDE isn't more popular, but I'm pretty sure the main reason is that the Gnome devs also have way better aesthetic taste than the KDE devs. Gnome simply looks much nicer in screenshots. They understand spacing. That and KDE had it's own major UI/UX fuck up with Plasma.
  • tuna74 2y ago
    I really like the Gnome UX, so it can't be "universally hated". I'm gonna assume most devs and users like it as well (otherwise they would use and/or develop something else).
  • criticalfault 2y ago
    That's not completely true. They are hated by some users, loved by some. For example, in general, I really like what gnome does. Desktop use is not something that is useful outside starting other apps, so I like its simplicity and the fact that it gets out of the way. Default apps could use maybe a bit more features, but I generally don't find too much wrong with e.g. files. The only confusing thing for me is which hamburger to click when I want to create a new directory. So instead of guessing, I just right click the file list. One positive example in gnome is when you try to access e.g. smb:// shares in files and try to open a movie from the share... It works with no issues. But, kde with gazillion features does not support that. (Opinion) KDE is not more popular since it's buggy as hell. At least it was. But not only that, their visuals are a disaster. Believe what you will, but visual consistency and attention to detail is what gnome has. They are not perfect, so there are some issues as OP points out, but they are on a different level from kde. KDE looks like it was frankensteined, while gnome it looks like it was designed. Think just login process and sddm, how many time it blinks? KDE is proud to enable tinkering, and this is good - there are people that like to do that. Thinking back, this was when I was teenager. Now that I'm older, I want things well thought out, designed well that dont get in my way so I can do my work and not think about desktop. And this is gnome. What I hate about gnome is JavaScript and python focus for apps. And now, suddenly we need a stupid app for everything.
• jampekka 2y ago
  Just to make clear to the Gnome developers: you've created by far the best desktop DE there is. I hope you don't get discouraged by the constant whining of a minority clamoring for some clunky ad-hoc 90's interfaces whose suckiness is just glossed over with nostalgia and incapability to learn new and more poweful ways of using computers.
  • _cenw 2y ago
    I like the GNOME experience, but to say that it's a more powerful way to use computers is just plain wrong. The only reason I use KDE instead is the inability (or additional hoops) to configure GNOME. That starts at fractional scaling and ends with something as trivial as setting different time to suspend on battery or switching to suspend-then-hibernate. It probably is enough for the vast majority of computer users. But the ones that aren't likely to run Linux to begin with.
    • jampekka 2y ago
      If you want to configure Gnome, learn to read and write text files and use dconf/gsettings. And possibly write Gnome shell extensions. Gnome though usually just works and has well thought out defaults, so you're usually just hampering yourself with changing them. For navigating the desktop and windows I rarely have to touch the keyboard, and it works so well I don't even have the need for a secondary or larger display. KDE et all OTOH have tend to have poorly thought out defaults leading to inconsistent mess of an inteface littered with random configuration options. A big reason for this is likely the user community who like to be "power users" by clicking buttons and refusing to learn text configuration, let alone extensions. And the DE devs then give in to the users demanding a configuration option to select a specific cat picture as the menubar background.
      • _cenw 2y ago
        You could've at least checked if the examples I listed are configurable via the mechanisms listed. Aside from fractional scaling (which was my example for "hoops"), they're not. You can replace suspend with suspend-then-hibernate by linking over the suspend systemd unit. But that's most definitely not a GNOME option and prevents you from suspending. Not to mention the numerous settings that have appeared and disappeared over the years in GNOME, not just from the graphical configuration, but also from code. I don't understand why you want an easy to use DE with intuitiveness and then are okay with hiding configuration away somewhere between the Arch Wiki and the GNOME source code. But hey, I'm glad it works for you. Doesn't for me though, even though I wish it did!
• yoavm 2y ago
  this is anecdotal, but I just asked three non-techie friends who never seen GNOME before to change my Nautilus app to list view. Neither of them needed more than 5 seconds to do it.
  • mixmastamyk 2y ago
    Non-disabled folks can hit all toolbar buttons sequentially in under five seconds. The point are the hieroglyphics and misleading clues.
    • yoavm 2y ago
      I was looking at what they were doing, and they were not clicking on all the toolbar buttons. They clicked on correct button, except one of them that first clicked on the dropdown next to it, and then on the button. My point is that even non-technical users, without any prior knowledge of the GNOME design language, don't seem to actually find it difficult to figure this out.
      • mixmastamyk 2y ago
        You may have a uncommon idea of non-technical people. Such folks don’t know what a list view even is, and would have to have it explained. Not to mention a filesystem.
        • yoavm 2y ago
          I told them something like "I'm going to show you an app showing files as a bunch of icons, can you try to make it show the files as a list instead?". You seem to be very skeptical - did you try asking someone around you and got a different result?
          • mixmastamyk 2y ago
            Yes—we can see it's a suboptimal design on its face.[1] Bunch of repetitive dots and lines, with misleading clues. Not everyone is going to respond to it the same way of course. Some folks don't bother with clues. The main point is that this problem has been solved already, better and in the past, by products delivered to tens of millions of seats. Merely copying prior art would have sufficed. Responding with, "I found some non-techies who didn't have a problem" is not a direct response to the idea that the design could be improved. Folks can persevere and ultimately succeed through poor designs... in fact we all do it every day. Some of us would like to use products that are a little more thoughtful than the bare minimum attainable-through-perseverance functionality, however. [1] https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1795/when-to-use-icons-vs-icons-with-text-vs-just-text-links https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/1795/when-to-use-icon...
• NayamAmarshe 2y ago
  Nautilus is a very barebones file manager. I really love Dolphin compared to it, it can be made simple or complicated depending on your needs.
• userbinator 2y ago
  I don't get the obsession with "clean" UIs, nor how hiding everything and replacing it with tons of whitespace and nondescript icons can be "calming". It's sterile and unwelcoming like an empty house or unused workshop.
  • jampekka 2y ago
    Clean and well thought out UI is like clean and well thought out plumbing. Just works, doesn't need fiddling and stays out of the way.
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    • KETHERCORTEX 2y ago
      It isn't about GNOME apps. Their UI actually stands in the way and require fiddling. In GNOME Clocks: - You cannot set the name for a timer when creating iy. You need to set the time and start it first, then either pause and reset it or wait for completion. And only then the text field for timer's name appear. - Timer sound is just a single bell that's easy to miss when you are busy with something like cooking. No repeats, no additional dialogs or highlights. Just a single notification and timer resets. Nautilus (Files): - Does not focus a file/folder for keyboard navigation after entering a folder using keyboard navigation (arrow keys and Enter). Maybe I'm missing something,but that's my experience with resorting to mouse or pressing Tab. - "Open in Terminal" opens folders only in GNOME's default terminal. There's no way in GNOME Settings to set the default application for terminal either. GNOME Weather: - The width of hourly weather graph/chart is limited. Even if you have a big monitor and will maximize it, you will have to scroll horizontally to see the further than ~10 hours.
    • consteval 2y ago
      Right, but UI is just the interface the user interfaces with to do stuff. Less buttons means you can do less stuff, necessarily. Nautilus (or gnome-files, whatever it's called now) can't do a quarter of the stuff Dolphin can. For some use cases and some users that's fine. For others... not so much. I mean, imagine if you took out 80% of the buttons in photoshop. Could a pro still edit a photo? Probably not. But the UI will be clean.
• arnaudsm 2y ago
  Gnome isn't perfect, but is the closest thing to Apple's minimalistic mindset, and surpasses MacOS imo. And it's customizable! If you're a power-user that likes having many toolbars, don't use gnome, there are other amazing DEs made for you The main strength of the Linux desktop is its diversity
  • pshirshov 2y ago
    Try to compare Mac UI of Lion times with modern one. Modern one is an unorganised mess full of artifacts.
    • arnaudsm 2y ago
      I agree. Nothing is worse than a minimalistic UI with a pile of unstructured afterthoughts. Just like trees, you can date an app by counting how many toolbars it has That's what happens when 20 PMs overrule each other and fight for exposure instead of caring for UX
  • ginko 2y ago
    >If you're a power-user that likes having many toolbars, don't use gnome, there are other amazing DEs made for you The problem is that Gnome has infected GTK to the point that it's really hard to avoid all their (imo) poor design choices (like lack of menu bars, hidden scrollbars, dialog dismiss buttons on top right) if you're using a GTK based DE like XFCE.
    • tristan957 2y ago
      GTK has a menubar widget. GtkDialog is deprecated. Just use a GtkWindow and design it how you feel.
      • dxroshan 2y ago
        The menubar widget is removed in GTK 4. There is GtkPopoverMenubar in GTK 4, but it is not equivalent of traditional menubar. https://www.reddit.com/r/GTK/comments/xdfgjr/api_changes_in_gtk4_removal_of_gtkmenu/ https://www.reddit.com/r/GTK/comments/xdfgjr/api_changes_in_...
• w4rh4wk5 2y ago
  Do Alt+ shortcuts still not work for navigating the hamburger (and other) menus? Or did they finally fix that across GTK applications? I stopped using most GNOME application due to this decline in accessibility features.
• ruuda 2y ago
  I switched to Nemo after I got tired of Nautilus moving all the buttons for no particular reason every Gnome release, but a few versions ago they had a pattern that was genuinely good: a dropdown next to the current directory in the navigation bar, with everything you can do in the current directory (paste, create directory, open terminal, etc.). This was really neat, traditionally you have to access those by right-clicking some whitespace in the list/grid view, but in the list view there is only a narrow band of empty space to right-click, usually you accidentally click a file. So this was a genuine innovation in UI design. Unfortunately they since removed it again.
  • modzu 2y ago
    ^^ this is bonkers that its gone
  • dylan-m 2y ago
    > This was really neat, traditionally you have to access those by right-clicking some whitespace in the list/grid view, but in the list view there is only a narrow band of empty space to right-click, usually you accidentally click a file. So this was a genuine innovation in UI design. Unfortunately they since removed it again. Wait, no? It hasn’t. I’m looking at a fresh build from the main branch right now. The menu doesn’t have Paste in it in this version, which might be what you’re referring to, but I don’t think it was ever there. (Alas, copy and paste UIs are sad). But otherwise it is very much there. And arguably better because the other big menu has moved somewhere else :) If you’re finding it’s completely gone, um, what distro are you using so I can quietly judge them?
    • ruuda 2y ago
      Yeah those others are in the triple dots menu, but paste is gone. Maybe I’m hallucinating that it was ever there, but I notice that I miss it which would be weird if it was never there in the first place.
• skriticos2 2y ago
  As a GNOME user, I kinda understand what they want to achieve, but they are seriously short on resources, so there is really little substance to all the rosy aspirations. They are also very oppinionated, which then turns away a lot of liberal developers that just want to scratch their own itches. As for file manager usability, I grew up with Norton commander and pretty much gave up on ever seeing power user addressed file manager. It's fine for simple office type stuff that I bother few times a month on my Linux system but that's basically it. When I have any more elaborate needs I fall back to plain old terminal with something like git or maybe even midnight commander, because that's what's getting the job done. What I find really sad is, that they have like a million bindings to every programming language there is (including one that they made up) and I have no idea how they want to maintain that codebase. The basic API still looks somewhat antiquated and disjointed, but now it's in JavaScript and Vala. So even the more OCD type developers that would accept the design language constraints are frustrated that it looks so sad under the hood. But I mean, I get it. Building a consistent desktop environment with a clean design language is hard and especially expensive. I'm impressed by what GNOME actually manages to get done with the few resources that they have. Is it anywhere close to being consistent and complete. I don't think so. But than again, I mostly just use the desktop environment to open Chrome and the terminal, so for me it's perfectly fine.
  • bobajeff 2y ago
    >What I find really sad is, that they have like a million bindings to every programming language there is (including one that they made up) and I have no idea how they want to maintain that codebase. I believe that's to do with gobject introspection (see *). From what I understand they mostly generate bindings through gir files. It's actually really cool what they've pulled off with it. * https://viruta.org/the-magic-of-gobject-introspection.html https://viruta.org/the-magic-of-gobject-introspection.html
  • mixmastamyk 2y ago
    CADT strikes again. With so few resources they’d have been much better served refining gnome2 than bulldozing it.
• 0rzech 2y ago
  Similar post and discussion, but related to Gnome 46 design in general: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41409215 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41409215 .
• washadjeffmad 2y ago
  I think a salient point is the reduction in hackability in modern open source interfaces, driven by reductive centralized developer-centric consolidation. There's no right design ontology. Each user's need is unique, and the utter abandonment of principle over the past decade (I use GNOME 3 as the turning point) has been deleterious to the ethos that once defined Linux as the platform for those who prize ownership of their systems above closed, committee-design decision making over creating user-first interfaces. I've returned to the BSDs in part because of it. My main system is, of course, Linux at its core, but I don't feel close to it like I did when I'd have a half dozen WMs and DEs installed, the sessions easily switchable by TTY for whatever workflow that required them. GNOME 3 is a triumph of bureaucracy over stakeholders, developed antagonistically to the historical consideration of its users. It's a core product that satisfies no one completely, and can't, which I'm sure makes the lives of its developers easier as their stance on shutting down any dialog with users over the years has reinforced.
  • washadjeffmad 2y ago
    Perhaps someone could share how else the diversity of features of 2.32 vs 3 is a non-explanation after more than a decade, despite a pluritude of bug reports and feature requests for functionality that hasn't been replaced? This isn't reddit. It's safe to express yourself here.
• thastings 2y ago
  Since it hasn't been mentioned yet, I must add COSMIC here, as most comparisons seem to occur between GNOME and KDE. I've used the former for years, but slowly realized that needing to use various extensions to achieve a usable desktop is just plain wrong. Then I switched to KDE Plasma for a year or two, and it also felt off a bit, partly due to the overwhelming number of options with often odd defaults. Fonts were awesome though, and so was Dolphin compared to Nautilus. Finally, the week the alpha was released, I installed the COSMIC version of Pop, and never looked back. Why? Because it has the correct amount of desktop-related settings for me (and hopefully many others as well). These settings are: - dock or panel or both? - place them anywhere - populate them however you want In this sense, GNOME is too strict and inflexible. Plasma, on the other hand, lets me create the look I'm used to without adding extensions, but also feels "wobbly." This wobbliness comes from the overwhelming amount of tickboxes, radio buttons and whatelse almost calling for interaction to change stuff. COSMIC fixed my problems of the duopoly and feels stable enough for daily use even in its alpha state.
• mixmastamyk 2y ago
  I don’t like most of what gnome did to its UI over the years, as I use titlebars, scrollbars, and menus heavily. But I consoled myself with the idea that at least it was done to make it more friendly for touch devices—that I didn’t happen need at the time on my PCs. Guess what? Fast forward a decade. Just got a new linux tablet and come to find out gnome is often shitty and unusable there too. Menus tiny, often keyboard only interfaces! Phosh is decent but none of the video players have a UI in the ballpark of Netflix/Android. All the touch targets are TINY, no tap in the center to play/pause, no tap on sides to skip either. Often have state bugs where the UI won’t hide after an interaction. Won’t stay full screen. I had to install a new file manager named Portfolio that was actually touch friendly. Making things round is not enough. So much was lost and we didn’t even get a good touch interface out of the bargain! And their broken interfaces have infected mate, xfce, cinnamon as well.
• eviks 2y ago
  > My personal conclusion is that if this is the result of inventing "something better from first principles" But it just isn't, for example, which first principle mandate that buttons look confusingly similar to a list so that an experienced user can't find a list view? It's just "marketing speak" the author is right to call out, but seems like getting a bit hung up on: I mean, why would you expect some list of thoughts on design achieve this > But shouldn't this new design paradigm produce something better?
• dostick 2y ago
  Great UX review! Author mentions “designers and developers”, I get the suspicion that there’s no designer involved. At least no UX designer. Do open source projects, even most notable like this one, ever employ UX designers? From experience trying to contribute UX expertise to open source, I always end up finding out that the developer considers it their reward to have freedom to make UI decisions and shape UI fit their personal taste. I try to demonstrate and make prototypes and compelling examples and arguments, but since usually the UX problem we trying to fix is in something that’s already implemented, there’s little will to make those changes, when there’s 100s of issues that can be worked on in that time. And yes, I end up learning WXwidgets or whatever programming framework used, in order to contribute the UXUI changes, knowing that pull request may not ever be accepted for reasons that’s again someone’s personal taste overrules UX. There is a misguided culture of treating UX decisions like programming algorithms decisions: as long it’s possible to get user from A to B, developer allowed to play around and invent different ways and optimisations. You can’t treat UX is such way. UX is a different skill set. To take a Car analogy, it’s letting engine designer make decisions about car body and aerodynamics. Mechanic would design every car as F1 because obviously to them it’s the fastest car and easy for them to use with 80 buttons on steering wheel. And then you see the their F1 car design and it’s “Homer” car.
• Abishek_Muthian 2y ago
  For all it quirks, Gnome's Nautilus has worked for me without crashing or making my computer an oven with faulty indexing.
• steakscience 2y ago
  There are many valid critiques of GNOME but this isn't one of them. A split button is an accepted and widely used pattern.
  • lifthrasiir 2y ago
    A split button where a dropdown is not a superset of what is achievable by a button is, however, not common. It is a direct violation of user expectation.
    • hulitu 2y ago
      But still a "widely used pattern".
• giancarlostoro 2y ago
  Having used Gnome for years, my favorite version was Gnome 3 in its early hated days, and a lot of what I liked disappeared. Gnome seems to be inconsistently changed. I would much prefer to just default to using MATE, though these days I use mostly KDE because the UI is consistent across its many apps.
• kabushawarib 2y ago
  Hello, Files developer here, just posting my personal thoughts, opinions and anecdotes. Not speaking on behalf of any other GNOME contributor: Seems hacker news don't allow long comments, so I will put it in an external link: https://pastebin.com/bqjqbVqs https://pastebin.com/bqjqbVqs TL;DR I agree with some opinions, I disagree with others. Few of the complaints were either very recently rectified, or seems to be just bugs because I can't reproduce or understand them.
• sunny_sigara 2y ago
  Gnome File’s is like 25 years behind Mac’s Finder. When Finder can now rename your screenshots based on content with the help of apple ai(!! Yup no more IMG_0027.jpg), Gnome is still struggling with basic navigation. Linux on desktop simply doesn’t work.
• sunny_sigara 2y ago
  Those who are asking add any right click context menu to Finder, it is now very easy with BTT. https://maverickmac.github.io/2024-07-28/finder-context-menu-with-btt https://maverickmac.github.io/2024-07-28/finder-context-menu...