Tim: >> Too CPU intensive (I don't have a fancy graphics card). Samuel Sieb:> I would be very surprised if your graphics device didn't have enough > acceleration to run Gnome at a completely reasonable level. What CPU > usage do you think is involved? Sure, it can run it, but it's noticeably slower than other things. Why would I deliberately choose to use something slower? Especially as it's slower because it's doing a hoard of things I don't need. It's only on-board Intel chipset, i915 if I remember correctly. > I find menus annoyingly slow. I love how I can press one key and just > start typing to get the application I want. No mouse involved at all. I don't (find them slow, except for the crap ones). The new Gnome menu (if you add it) is an example of a bad menu system. The old one is a good example of simple, clean, quick. Typing the program names is all very well, *if* you know the name of the command you want to use. But adds another round of messing around when you're not already sitting at the desktop. But when you're already using the mouse, draw, click, scroll, follow link, move something on the page, hopping back and forth between the mouse and keyboard is a usability nuisance. There's a very good reason Windows (quite crap) Start menu was so well liked. But if only they knew what better ones were like. Let's put EVERYTHING in one programs folder! And in a stupid order. >> Icons, icons, icons! I can't find a damn thing by icons. The pictures >> are a very poor clue. I might remember one or two of highly regular >> use, but most mean nothing to me, and if they're in a different place >> than last time, I have to go hunting for it. > Not sure what you're referring to here. A screenful of icons, like an Android tablet, none of their imagery gives a clue to which one you want. They're far too abstract. Their positions change as you install extra things, or if you have one of those systems that puts what it thinks you want to use near the top, continually changing its mind about that. Alphabetical ordering makes no sense to grouping related things together. It becomes an Easter egg hunt to find the one you need. >> My Android phone and tablet, which these kinds of interfaces are meant >> for, are a pain to use when you have lots of applications. I watch >> friends scroll through multiple screenfulls trying to find what they're >> after. Mine's organised, one screen with categorised folders in it, >> and appropriate programs inside that. > There are some different interfaces for Android phones. But at some > point, there has to be a full list of applications so you can find them. > But there's also usually a search field and once you find it, you can > put it on your home screen to find it easier later. I have to say that tablets and phones are the worst interfaces to use. Laboriously scroll through large numbers of things you don't want, and often can't remove. Or, laboriously try to type something into its midget keyboard. And again, that depends on you knowing its name. Yes, I do put regular apps on the homescreen, but that's only practical up to a point. It also soon becomes a "whoops, I didn't mean to press that," while holding your phone. And the full list of apps, is what I reorganised into one screen with folders of categorised apps, instead of 5 screens of everything in an illogical order. >> I actually like taskbars. I can put status info I want to keep an eye >> on in them, I can remove crap that I don't care about. They're thin, >> and on the edges of the screen. I can easily switch between the half >> dozen apps I've got running simultaneously. Whacking great big squares >> of apps on the desktop are next to useless (they're behind other >> things). > I have too many windows for a taskbar to be useful. ALT-TAB and ALT-` > work great. I don't have that many open, but I always find the navigate by thumbnail approach to be poor. It usually involves half a gazillion presses, as you try to find the one you want, go past it, have to cycle through again. I find it only ever practical when you have as little as two or three things open. The taskbar is far easier to go straight back to the email program, straight over to the web browser, etc. > Also multiple desktops, so I can put certain applications > on particular desktops making them easy to access. I certainly do that, too. > I'm mostly happy with the path that Gnome has taken and it does keep > improving in general. I can't say that I am. The move from Gnome 2 to 3 was an abomination. Their "you can't adjust anything" attitude is worse than Mac. But their persistent "we are right, you are wrong," attitude to any complaints has pissed off no end of users. -- uname -rsvp Linux 3.10.0-1160.88.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 7 15:41:52 UTC 2023 x86_64 Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
