as a Gnome 3 user I dislike the move away from title bars but I am sure there will be a switch somewhere to restore them.
But overall I have to say (after reading only this article) I don't really see any compelling reason to upgrade because I feel rather "meh" about the changes in 3.4
GNOME 3.4 doesn't eliminate all title bars; it just introduces the ability for applications to specifically mark themselves as not needing a title bar when maximized. Specific GNOME applications do so when they have appropriate levels of integration and UI such that the title bar really does become fully redundant.
> Having the application's functionality split across two completely separate menus does not constitute a usability improvement.
That's putting it mildly. A split menu may be correct from some design point of view (e.g DRY principle) but from a usability point of view, it's recipe for frustration.
On a more general note, does no one else consider Mac-style "alt-tab switches apps" and "global menu" usability mistakes? (on grounds of being modal)
With both Unity and Gnome adopting these, I no longer have a compelling reason to switch from Mac back to Linux.
Which is a pity really, because Gnome 3 is one of the prettiest and most usable desktops I've seen: I love how the windows key gives you access to the dock, all windows, workspaces and search at the same time.
"I no longer have a compelling reason to switch from Mac back to Linux."
Even if you assume that the only thing Linux has to offer is graphical windowing environments; there are a lot of other enviornments besides gnome/unity...
> On a more general note, does no one else consider Mac-style "alt-tab switches apps" and "global menu" usability mistakes? (on grounds of being modal)
Au contraire, I now consider gnome usable for the first time. The fact that apps didn't really exist but as a collection of individual windows drove me crazy.
I do miss cmd-`, toggle through currently focused app windows from Mac, one of the few features that I did not get in my switch to Fedora 3 years ago.
Of course, so much more was gained, the point of no return has long been reached ;-) Now the question, to Gnome 3 or not to Gnome 3?
Am I going to freak out as a gnome-do + compiz + dual monitor (laptop + external) user, or, with time, one adjusts, and, like an arranged marriage, learns to love the other?
You may want to wait a bit if you are happy with gnome 2, since there are still stability and perf issues (at least in 3.1) the really bog difference is that window switching has mostly become a modal thing, which honestly isn't as bad as you would think once you get used to it
I know that the grievance is on the design decision, which is a point of a trend which the dev team will follow, but as for the window switching, there are several extensions you can install for that; just flip the switch on the webpage and it'll get installed and activated immediately:
I'm quite happy with GNOME 3 on an 11" MBA. Most things, like browsers running fullscreen, gvim and terminal side-by-side, each taking half of the screen, no need to fuss with resizing and moving windows.
This might not be optimal for large displays and desktop computers, but if with Windows 8 the future of computers looks like [1], then GNOME might have made a very smart move with the shell.
I've been forcing myself to use GNOME-shell for the past few months, just to see if it was as bad as most people make it out to be, and I have to grudgingly admit that some of the design choices are elegant.
For example, I find myself liking the activities overview more and more since it combines together functionalities that you'd have to access separately on other desktop environments, namely a keyboard based application launcher, windows scale (or exposé for the Mac crowd) and virtual desktop manager. It's problematic that each environment maxes out at 8-9 windows before it becomes unmanageable, but the philosophy seems to be new desktops on demand, which are quick to create (just drag a window to the blank desktop or middle click an application to launch it in a clean desktop)
And the new Alt+Tab behavior does have a silver lining in that it scales much better for large number of windows since it allows you to drill down much quicker to the window you're looking for: Alt+Tab until you reach the application, Alt+<above tab> to reach the specific window you want. Or Alt+Tab, then use the mouse to highlight the application and then the specific window.
Another little know functionality is that the shell comes with a screen recorder: Ctrl+Shift+Alt+R to start recording, again to stop, the video is saved as WebM on the root of your home dir.
It's far from perfect, some functions take way too many motions to execute, and I wish they allowed you to bind mouse shortcuts (it would be perfect to enter the overview), but the basis for what could become a pretty decent desktop environment are there.
I completely agree, it's much better than GNOME 2.x. Another major thing that's changed in my workflow is that I never use the menus to find programs anymore, it's now much faster to use the built-in search engine to launch applications. E.g. launching a terminal is Windows key + typing "Ter" + pressing Enter.
I've always used alt+F2 to launch apps that I already know are installed on my system. I find menus are great for browsing/scanning applications that I don't know. And they are quick to use.
Whereas the app menus in Gnome 3, are really hard on my head. The icons, just don't really add anything for me, it feels cluttered.
Another agree here, I really feel like its elastic workspaces and brain-dead simple "expose" are killer features that should be in every desktop environment. It's a shame so many people lump Unity and Gnome 3 together.
I like it too, but the big things for me (after stability issues) are
1) the notification area feels not well done. I am constantly triggering it when I don't want to, and I find it is a pain to trigger when I do want it.
2) the search function in overlay mode is really choppy, which is funny because I would consider this a solved problem in gnome (with gnome-do)
I think its a definite improvement over gnome 2, but it probably needs another 2-3 years of dev time before things are as polished as what you would expect nowadays.
Browse the gnome-usability mailing list archives— you will see that there are barely more than a dozen threads each month, none of them really touching major usability issues that would come with significant design changes.
I used to be involved with Gnome a long time ago (pre 2.14), and have lost touch since— so maybe the accessibility mailing list is now outdated and I'm looking in the wrong place — but I feel like there's a huge disconnect between the various teams, and that design decisions are taken by isolated groups of developers, with little regard for system coherency or good, consistent usability.
Linux-world developers are good at many, many things— but in my humble opinion, good usability and design are not amongst them.
No title bars when maximized, and menus in the top panel? They should seriously consider merging back with Unity.
> Windows are maximized by default
Thanks again for catering to tablet users at the cost of the rest of us! How many times do we need to remind these people that there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all user interface?
I really hate nit picking on open-source software, but... Gnome 3.X is without a doubt one of the worst pieces of UI design I have ever spotted (KDE 4 included). Almost everything looks like it was done by someone that does not have the slightest clue. It's sad, Clearlooks on Gnome 2 was quite good.
I was in the same boat as you. I looked long and hard and realized that 1) KDE has truly magnificent window management and customizability and 2) the only environment comparable to Gnome 2 in resource footprint is XFCE.
I chose KDE but your requirements may vary. The cool part about linux is Live CDs/USB drives. It's not difficult to try out new things.
Yeah, good point, live usb has been a life saver beyond os install and preview.
I've intentionally been sitting on the fence for over a year now. Once Fedora 14 goes EOL, going to have to make the move.
What I have now is a dream setup (gnome 2, gnome-do, compiz, emerald theme mamnager), so have been in no rush. Was hoping Gnome issues would get sorted out; i.e. they'd listen to the power users screaming bloody murder. Apparently not, or not entirely.
I'll take gnome 3 for a spin, it can't be thaaaat bad (I hope); if I'm appalled, check out XFCE, and then, if need be, KDE (KDE felt complex/clunky compared to Gnome 2 when I made the comparison a couple of years ago, maybe things have changed)
Yes. For how smart the shell looks, the windows and its contents look very bleak, sterile in the best of cases. I guess they aimed for neutrality there, but I can't say I dig the paper-polypropylene look.
Icons haven't been changed in a long time yeah. Terribly boring. I used an icon theme which made those icons blue. It made it at least a bit interesting.
I think the title is misleading about the significant change of gnome. it still looks conservatively out of date.
open source applications generally have had a history of ugly user interfaces. the reason behind it has understandably been: well it's open source and free, we don't have the resources of microsoft and apple to get a topnotch designer.
it's competitor kde is no better. kde's look can best be described as mimicking windows ui done wrong.
these facelifts are not significant changes. it's time for a serious re-design.
Applications now start maximized? Why the continual push for small screen sized low input phone paradigms for big screen rich input desktop interfaces? It doesn't make sense and it's incredibly limiting. We're trading rich desktops for phone interfaces? Why?
If that is your conclusion, it is incorrect. Some applications start maximized by default. Only some, and they'll remember their size. Meaning: if you do not use them maximized, next time they won't be maximized.
Does the Gnome foundation think they'll acquire users because they're resembling the user interface of tablet? They won't they'll continue to lose users who are annoyed with trying to use a tablet interface where a desktop environment should be. I'm so sick of the horrible design innovation coming to the Linux Desktop. Fact of the matter is, the Linux Desktop is still for power users, becoming more and more different without innovation will only aggravate those power users and they'll switch to other alternatives. When KDE4 came out, many switched to Gnome 2, and now those users are switching to XFCE or looking for other nice alternatives, such as tiling window managers.
Power user is just meaningless. Explain what you're doing and why. Saying "power user" and expecting that to mean something is not going to work. Design needs use-cases to consider.
43 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 83.8 ms ] threadThat's putting it mildly. A split menu may be correct from some design point of view (e.g DRY principle) but from a usability point of view, it's recipe for frustration.
On a more general note, does no one else consider Mac-style "alt-tab switches apps" and "global menu" usability mistakes? (on grounds of being modal)
With both Unity and Gnome adopting these, I no longer have a compelling reason to switch from Mac back to Linux.
Which is a pity really, because Gnome 3 is one of the prettiest and most usable desktops I've seen: I love how the windows key gives you access to the dock, all windows, workspaces and search at the same time.
Even if you assume that the only thing Linux has to offer is graphical windowing environments; there are a lot of other enviornments besides gnome/unity...
Xfce, awesome, kde, xmonad, lxde, fvwm95(joke), etc....
Au contraire, I now consider gnome usable for the first time. The fact that apps didn't really exist but as a collection of individual windows drove me crazy.
Note that I'm not arguing against having an app concept or a "switch app" action. The problem is killing the "switch window" action.
Of course, so much more was gained, the point of no return has long been reached ;-) Now the question, to Gnome 3 or not to Gnome 3?
Am I going to freak out as a gnome-do + compiz + dual monitor (laptop + external) user, or, with time, one adjusts, and, like an arranged marriage, learns to love the other?
No, modal can be good.
https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/38/windows-alt-tab/
https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/97/coverflow-alt-tab/
This might not be optimal for large displays and desktop computers, but if with Windows 8 the future of computers looks like [1], then GNOME might have made a very smart move with the shell.
1: http://liliputing.com/2011/12/samsung-series-7-slate-pc-revi...
For example, I find myself liking the activities overview more and more since it combines together functionalities that you'd have to access separately on other desktop environments, namely a keyboard based application launcher, windows scale (or exposé for the Mac crowd) and virtual desktop manager. It's problematic that each environment maxes out at 8-9 windows before it becomes unmanageable, but the philosophy seems to be new desktops on demand, which are quick to create (just drag a window to the blank desktop or middle click an application to launch it in a clean desktop)
And the new Alt+Tab behavior does have a silver lining in that it scales much better for large number of windows since it allows you to drill down much quicker to the window you're looking for: Alt+Tab until you reach the application, Alt+<above tab> to reach the specific window you want. Or Alt+Tab, then use the mouse to highlight the application and then the specific window.
Another little know functionality is that the shell comes with a screen recorder: Ctrl+Shift+Alt+R to start recording, again to stop, the video is saved as WebM on the root of your home dir.
It's far from perfect, some functions take way too many motions to execute, and I wish they allowed you to bind mouse shortcuts (it would be perfect to enter the overview), but the basis for what could become a pretty decent desktop environment are there.
Whereas the app menus in Gnome 3, are really hard on my head. The icons, just don't really add anything for me, it feels cluttered.
I like it too, but the big things for me (after stability issues) are
1) the notification area feels not well done. I am constantly triggering it when I don't want to, and I find it is a pain to trigger when I do want it.
2) the search function in overlay mode is really choppy, which is funny because I would consider this a solved problem in gnome (with gnome-do)
I think its a definite improvement over gnome 2, but it probably needs another 2-3 years of dev time before things are as polished as what you would expect nowadays.
I mean seamless installation and control of desktop extensions from the browser? awesome!
2) reading of .desktop files is not well done. It has been like that for many years, just wasn't that noticeable in 2.x.
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/usability/
I used to be involved with Gnome a long time ago (pre 2.14), and have lost touch since— so maybe the accessibility mailing list is now outdated and I'm looking in the wrong place — but I feel like there's a huge disconnect between the various teams, and that design decisions are taken by isolated groups of developers, with little regard for system coherency or good, consistent usability.
Linux-world developers are good at many, many things— but in my humble opinion, good usability and design are not amongst them.
> Windows are maximized by default
Thanks again for catering to tablet users at the cost of the rest of us! How many times do we need to remind these people that there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all user interface?
Gnome 2 + Compiz + Gnome-Do completely and utterly rocks, particularly with a dual monitor setup.
KDE was a bit of a mess last I checked. Some people are saying XFCE is maybe somewhat Gnome-2-ish?
I chose KDE but your requirements may vary. The cool part about linux is Live CDs/USB drives. It's not difficult to try out new things.
I've intentionally been sitting on the fence for over a year now. Once Fedora 14 goes EOL, going to have to make the move.
What I have now is a dream setup (gnome 2, gnome-do, compiz, emerald theme mamnager), so have been in no rush. Was hoping Gnome issues would get sorted out; i.e. they'd listen to the power users screaming bloody murder. Apparently not, or not entirely.
I'll take gnome 3 for a spin, it can't be thaaaat bad (I hope); if I'm appalled, check out XFCE, and then, if need be, KDE (KDE felt complex/clunky compared to Gnome 2 when I made the comparison a couple of years ago, maybe things have changed)
open source applications generally have had a history of ugly user interfaces. the reason behind it has understandably been: well it's open source and free, we don't have the resources of microsoft and apple to get a topnotch designer.
it's competitor kde is no better. kde's look can best be described as mimicking windows ui done wrong.
these facelifts are not significant changes. it's time for a serious re-design.