Gnome Shell: Worth all the hype?

[A_T]

It will happen like it or not too much time has been spent developing it for anyone to admit it's no good.

[LKjell]

I think they need to change the resize and minimize of windows. It is huge inconvenient to juxtapose two windows. And once you have minimize a window there is no way to get it back unless you tab through a lot of programs or go to the expose window. And when you do a tab it should go through what you have in the virtual desktop and not globally.

[Meep3D]

Why does everyone assume the developers of FOSS apps are competent, know what they are doing and know better than anyone who dares question them? The defence of criticism is commonly 'the developers know what they are doing' but there is virtually no skill overlap between usability and programming, it's like comparing fine art to architecture. The assumption is always that there is a grand plan but as a UI guy I generally don't really see it.

One of the most basic rules of UI development is that the more common the function/information the more easily accessible and visible it is. It's why Apple added the dock, it's why windows got a dedicated close button on the switch from Win 3.1 to Win95. It's why MS added the dock-esque taskbar with grouping and hover-previews as the old grouping style required two clicks to get to a running app rather than one and did not provide enough information to identify what app was what. It's why wireless and battery status are always a system tray prerequisite and why the volume control is always one-click adjustable on almost all systems. It's why the Start Button was green and said 'Start', inviting people to click on it.

One of the most common actions on a modern day system is to switch between applications and essentially what Gnome Shell has done has replaced the old one-click fitts-law friendly bottom bar with a click, a wait for animation, then click on the program you want. All so you can get a fancy Expose/Spaces hybrid who's sole purpose is managing virtual desktops* which 90% of people will probably never use and get confused by.

As someone else said Gnome Shell should be a panel applet used beside the normal way of doing things for people who like multiple desktops. Replacing the simple and obvious 'oh, click on your running app' with a fancy animated all-in-one virtual desktop manager looks cool, but it is terrible for usability.

* Virtual desktops are a solution to desktop clutter, not the solution. There are many approaches to this issue that do not involve the downsides of virtual desktops such as theoretical 'dock groups' where dragging icons/programs into a group will only show the programs in the current group while still allowing you to move programs from one group to another easily giving the same functionality as virtual desktops but without the downsides.

[antenna]

I wouldn't try and defend criticism exactly.. I would say that you can criticise as much as you want but ultimately it's their project, it's free in source and cost and they are entitled to do whatever they want, as we are free to use something else if it doesn't suit.

As far as virtual desktops go, perhaps most people don't use them currently but I think people could get used to them if Gnome Shell turns out to be any good. It was one of the first things that excited me about Linux, after using it for just 5 minutes or so. They are fairly easy to ignore with the current implementation of Gnome but maybe this isn't for the best, they are a great feature and even Apple introduced them.

[dyltman]

Why does everyone assume the developers of FOSS apps are competent, know what they are doing and know better than anyone who dares question them? The defence of criticism is commonly 'the developers know what they are doing' but there is virtually no skill overlap between usability and programming, it's like comparing fine art to architecture. The assumption is always that there is a grand plan but as a UI guy I generally don't really see it.

One of the most basic rules of UI development is that the more common the function/information the more easily accessible and visible it is. It's why Apple added the dock, it's why windows got a dedicated close button on the switch from Win 3.1 to Win95. It's why MS added the dock-esque taskbar with grouping and hover-previews as the old grouping style required two clicks to get to a running app rather than one and did not provide enough information to identify what app was what. It's why wireless and battery status are always a system tray prerequisite and why the volume control is always one-click adjustable on almost all systems. It's why the Start Button was green and said 'Start', inviting people to click on it.

One of the most common actions on a modern day system is to switch between applications and essentially what Gnome Shell has done has replaced the old one-click fitts-law friendly bottom bar with a click, a wait for animation, then click on the program you want. All so you can get a fancy Expose/Spaces hybrid who's sole purpose is managing virtual desktops* which 90% of people will probably never use and get confused by.

First of all, how do you know of this rule? I've never heard on such rule before. Second off all windows does not a green start button except for windows XP and before that, it's just a button with windows logo.

Second, in Gnome shell you do not even click more then you would on previous versions. all you do is move the mouse to the top left corner (wait for the animation) and then click on the thing you want to open, it's easier to see which item you want to click as it fills the entire screen. I'm sure that you will be able to set the duration of the animation if future versions. And when you want to open a common used app you don't really have to think about browsing to get the program you want to as it is in the favorites. If you want to open a noncommon program then it will most likely not take you longer then it would to open a program in the current menu.

[Mblackwell]

I didn't much care for the practicality of shell previously and found it didn't work too well with the ATI open drivers in Karmic (was using the 32 kernel and xorg-edgers for the extra kick) but it's working wonderfully in Lucid and it's actually very well thought-out. Missing a few bits like volume applet etc but I like where it's going and while I'm waiting I can come up with work-arounds. Overall I'm impressed and look forward to watching it progress.

apt-get install gnome-volume-control-applet and launch it at start. It was removed due to notify-osd/indicator-applet taking over this functionality, but there are no applets, except those that run under the notification tray.

[Merk42]

First of all, how do you know of this rule? I've never heard on such rule before. Second off all windows does not a green start button except for windows XP and before that, it's just a button with windows logo.

Because by the time Vista was released, Microsoft already trained people on XP to click on the lower left corner

Second, in Gnome shell you do not even click more then you would on previous versions. all you do is move the mouse to the top left corner (wait for the animation) and then click on the thing you want to open.

Saying you don't click for the overlay is so pedantic. Hey if I set my mouse to dwell click everything, have I made every UI require 0 clicks and therefore better?

Regardless, using the overlay to switch tasks involves more mouse movement. Going up to the Activities button then to the app, which is actually harder to click since it doesn't have "Infinite Height" like it does with the panel's task switcher.

[[h2o]]

One of the most common actions on a modern day system is to switch between applications and essentially what Gnome Shell has done has replaced the old one-click fitts-law friendly bottom bar with a click, a wait for animation, then click on the program you want. All so you can get a fancy Expose/Spaces hybrid who's sole purpose is managing virtual desktops* which 90% of people will probably never use and get confused by.

I am not going to defend the current implementation of application switching in Gnome Shell.
But I just have to chime in and say that the bottom bar, while familiar, is not always a good way to switch between applications.
In my work I often end up having multiple windows of the same application open. I click on the wrong one more often than the right one, and ALT-Tab is actually a faster way for me to get the correct window. Don't have GS installed on the work machine, but I am considering it since I believe it might actually present me with a better way to switch apps than the Gnome Panel.

But, to reiterate, I am certain that there exist even better ways for application switching.

[Meep3D]

I am not going to defend the current implementation of application switching in Gnome Shell.
But I just have to chime in and say that the bottom bar, while familiar, is not always a good way to switch between applications.
In my work I often end up having multiple windows of the same application open. I click on the wrong one more often than the right one, and ALT-Tab is actually a faster way for me to get the correct window. Don't have GS installed on the work machine, but I am considering it since I believe it might actually present me with a better way to switch apps than the Gnome Panel.

But, to reiterate, I am certain that there exist even better ways for application switching.

I hated that grouped windows thing. Windows 7 is actually a great example of how to do this properly - the windows stack and with peek and preview you can easily know which one is the one you want.

[dyltman]

Because by the time Vista was released, Microsoft already trained people on XP to click on the lower left corner

Ok, Activities could be changed to start here.

Saying you don't click for the overlay is so pedantic. Hey if I set my mouse to dwell click everything, have I made every UI require 0 clicks and therefore better?

To a certain edge it is better. Basicly Alt+tab is quicker for changing windows yet people choose not do so. I know I avoid it because I'm to lazy to move my hand to the board and click the combination. I think the same goes when clicking the mouse button, yes it's right at the left finger however most people do one thing at the time, like you move your mouse and then click.

Regardless, using the overlay to switch tasks involves more mouse movement. Going up to the Activities button then to the app, which is actually harder to click since it doesn't have "Infinite Height" like it does with the panel's task switcher.

Well, it's less complex movement then opening a new app with the current menu. I didn't quite get the points in Fitts' law so I won't reply to that.