I disagreemillpond wrote:Its all about choice
Also:
mhat wrote:The only places for icons is in a church, a burning church at that.
I disagreemillpond wrote:Its all about choice
mhat wrote:The only places for icons is in a church, a burning church at that.
By Jove, that was hilarious!dasein wrote:Obligatory link to DistroWatch's "preview" of GNOME 4 (from 2012): https://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issu ... 402#humour
etc.I was soon greeted by the cheerful GNOME 4 default screen which, I can confidentially say, has the cleanest interface I've ever seen on my monitor except when it's turned off.
GNOME developers have really outdone themselves this time. It's obvious that they've given the whole "desktop" metaphor a complete rethink. Gone are menus, icons, task bars, minimize and maximize buttons, the archaic Start button, wallpapers or even a command prompt. Rather, we are presented with a pleasant default blue screen (note that the color is non-configurable). It is the bold simplicity of this approach that makes GNOME 4 so powerful.
Advocates for disability rights are particularly enthused by GNOME 4, believing that it could be the first GUI system that puts seeing and totally blind users on an equal footing.
As yet, there is no icon, menu or keystroke combination to turn off the machine. However, this does not mean that shutting down is difficult. Indeed, on a desktop computer, all you need to shut down is pull out the power cord from the wall socket. Sadly, the on/off button is disabled in GNOME 4, but the good news is that the developers have promised to add this feature to GNOME 5.
One of the first and most surprising issues to pop up soon after the first preview of the GNOME 4 desktop came in the form of a Cease and Desist letter from Microsoft's lawyers: "The design of the GNOME 4 default screen bears an uncanny resemblance to a patented design that Microsoft has used since at least 1995."
I don't know what "client side decorations" are, but I absolutely hate the new, spartan, dumbed-down, mobile phone UI -- the one in which menus and buttons with descriptive text are replaced with buttons that contain only symbols. And often when I hover the mouse cursor over a button, nothing happens. Sorry, but I'm not interested in playing the guess-what-this-button-does game.dust hill resident wrote: The client side decorations. All the Gnome apps have been redesigned to use them, and I think they're absolutely awful. Since I updated to debian jessie, I replaced the few Gnome apps I was still using with alternatives.
oops, it seems you missed the juicier parts of the gnome-bashing thenpcalvert wrote:I don't know what "client side decorations" are
the default "Press OK to continue" has been replaced by "Hit the screeen with your fist to continue".I absolutely hate the new, spartan, dumbed-down, mobile phone UI -- the one in which menus and buttons with descriptive text are replaced with buttons that contain only symbols. And often when I hover the mouse cursor over a button, nothing happens. Sorry, but I'm not interested in playing the guess-what-this-button-does game.
Linux is of course, merely a kernel. Written and controlle by a beer-bellied Finn.Head_on_a_Stick wrote:I disagreemillpond wrote:Its all about choice
Also:mhat wrote:The only places for icons is in a church, a burning church at that.
Yeah, I'm also sick of themacewiza wrote:I think it's funny how people on forums like this are always trying to explore new material for their confirmation bias. They find something they don't like for whatever reason, and make a poo-poo posts about it to see if they can get people to either agree with them, or flame the ones who don't. Hilarious.
On linux, normally, the window manager draws the window decorations (title bar and maximise/minimise/close/etc buttons) for graphical programs. With 'client side decorations', GUI programs draw their own window controls. This is what the latest versions of the Gnome programs do.pcalvert wrote:I don't know what "client side decorations" are
For stretch and onwards, Client Side Decorations can be disabled globally to allow users of simple window managers to employ GTK3 applications without a theme clash:dust hill resident wrote:So if you use a custom window manager and you use some Gnome programs, they won't fit in as well as other programs would, because they draw their own window controls which behave differently. For example, if you want to change what happens when you double click a window titlebar, before you could easily do that by configuring your window manager. But if you want to do that and you use any Gnome programs like gedit, it will be more difficult.
Ah, right, sorry for breaking your FUDdust hill resident wrote:@Head_on_a_stick
I was aware of that, it's good and I use it.
Because not everyone is you.dust hill resident wrote:Why?
I was asking Head_on_a_stick because I was actually genuinely curious about what he likes about csd, I'm not trying to argue with him.Ardouos wrote:Because not everyone is you.dust hill resident wrote:Why?
I am sorry if it came off as condescending, I put the smiley there to make it sound as nicely as possible. (Banter?)dust hill resident wrote: Why so condescending?
I find them more aesthetically pleasing than the traditionally bare titlebar, the efficient use of space appeals to me greatly.dust hill resident wrote:Why?
Head_on_a_Stick wrote:
Ah right, sorry. I have a tendency to misread tone on forums.Ardouos wrote:
I am sorry if it came off as condescending, I put the smiley there to make it sound as nicely as possible. (Banter?)
In my defense, I did read it differently to how you wanted to pass them message.
Fair enoughdebiman wrote:why not?