cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/57302675
an article explaining why GNOME should support SSD, but also arguing against the reasons often given for why they shouldn’t
If someone could repost this to r/GNOME I would appreciate it, since I don’t have a reddit account.
I’ve avoided Gnome since the shift to GTK 3, when it became apparent that the devs were hiding functionality in the name of some greater vision that was never explained to lesser mortals.
You don’t get to treat me as a moron, only my wife can do that.
XFCE and KDE have served me well, at least they don’t hide settings and functionality from me.
Seems like 5 gnome devs use lemmy.
I agree. GNOME 3 is completely unusable, and I can’t stand client side decorations because it leads to inconsistencies and ugly apps. Give me a standard title bar FFS
The whole notion of CSDs is a blueprint example of what happens when UI designers try to think things through too hard. They come up with grand solutions to trivial problems that are so poorly thought through that they create even bigger problems.
Realistically, nobody is going rewrite their entire application just because of what a tiny cabal of Gnome developers think. Just read this post that was linked elsewhere in this thread. At the end, Tobias is basically arguing that people should go out there and harass the developers of all Linux desktop applications (including the entire KDE project!) to follow through on this ridiculous idea:
Thus, our goal is for as many apps as possible to have the following properites [sic]
- No title bar
- Native-looking close/maximize/minimize icons
- Respects the setting for showing/hiding minimize and maximize
- Respects the setting for buttons to be on the left/right side of the window
Which apps are affected? Basically, all applications not using GTK3 (and a few that do use GTK3). That includes GTK2, Qt, and Electron apps.
If that alone doesn’t alert people of how out-of-touch the Gnome developers are, then I don’t know what would.
Because they’re objectively better on a desktop.
Your compositor should control the window - if the poorly implemented client hangs, you can just click the server-side close button a couple times and get the “shall I force close this?” popup
The only reason for CSD is touch interfaces on small screens. In that case, you still need some other interface to handle misbehaving applications, but they tend to be harder to use, e.g. the removal of home/back buttons on Android
Edit: If you’re trying to improve on SSD, you could consider some model where the client can register some actions it would like to have displayed to the compositor, and the compositor can relay clicks back to the client. In this scheme, the compositor still owns the title bar, but the client can request special decorations
personally I love the way gnome apps use CSD, but then I only ever use gnome. I’m not a fan of the absolute statements people make here, either saying CSD is terrible or superior, I feel like their actual usage is a personal preference.
that said, I would prefer if the gnome project made much more of an effort to integrate its apps into the wider ecosystem. They could add an option that GTK listens to that turns the title bar into just a menu bar, allowing SSD desktops to provide their own decoration. and the gnome desktop could also provide default decorations for apps that don’t have CSD. I think this would provide a better experience for both gnome users and users of other desktops
Gnome was my first WM. Modern Gnome provides the best macOS-like experience on Linux. I stopped using Gnome years ago because hostility to ANY customization means EVERY Gnome update breaks SOMETHING I want until Gnome Tweaks or whatever works around it 6 months later. It’s a really shitty altitude for a Linux WM to have, honestly. I use KDE now.
I’m a bit out of the loop,… but every time I hear about the gnome project it sounds a bit authoritarian and close minded. Maybe it’s because they’re spread thin ? but it seems more like they have tunnel vision. They remind me of Apple
I love Gnome, for me… their UI is the most beautiful of any desktop OS. But I had to move to KDE Plasma primarily for all the gaming related features that come out first on Plasma. That led me to see just how much flexibility I was missing.
Now I greatly value both desktop environments, both visions are valid, but they cater completely different minded users.
Good software should be handled like that, try looking at how the kernel does things.
Sadly for gnome doing so does not make you automathically good software
Should a desktop environment use the same philosophy as a kernel ? don’t they have different requirements ? I’m asking as a layman
The less options, the better for a new person to jump in. Modern Gnome is a DE I can recommend everyone. ‘It’s like Mac but simpler,’ I advertise it. I like it even as a pro user, though. But even if we, the pro users, couldn’t work with it, that’s okay. Many pro users hate modern Gnome, and use other environments. But having one with limited options and an opinionated design hurts nobody, and helps a lot. I can install it for an elderly parent or a friend, and they can use it without much assistance, as it’s not very far from their tablet or smartphone.
Yeah, I can’t stand GNOME. It’s completely unusable.
KDE is great and also the Linux Mint DE, Cinnamon.
Yes. While CSD are obviously better - because they enable the titlebar to contain useful things instead of being a gigantic waste of pixels - SSD also obviously need to be supported.
I use KDE. My configuration for the title bar includes a “keep on top” buttons (it’s one of my favourite little Linux things, along with middle click paste, which of course GNOME also wants to remove). On the left side near the application icon. CSDs, which I sometimes use (e.g. Firefox) never include this.
I also can’t just access the KWin menu by right clicking, as I would on a normal window, I have to right click the icon on the taskbar (I do use the windows grouping in the taskbar, and that means even more clicks) or I need to use Alt+F3. Which is not too hard, but it means needing two hands for something that should need one.
So there are applications that manage to make CSDs so useful that the drawbacks become acceptable, but it’s honestly not too often.
of being a gigantic waste of pixel
On todays resolutions?!
And with SSD, I say how it has to look/behave, while with CSS it’s the dev. Same problem like with web devs doing html font-size: 60%: it ignores my preferences.
Since when did CSD become accepted, let alone encouraged? Titlebars should only ever be drawn by the system. This trend of individual applications drawing their own titlebars is a disaster that results in fragmentation and inconsistent behaviour. The absolute disaster that is the titlebars is one of the main reasons I cannot bring myself to use GNOME, recently.
It creates a clear heirarchy of information too. The system owns the title bar, so any operations there are system operations.
At one point browsers did something similar for security awareness-- real permission prompts, etc. were set a few pixels over into the main UI to establist that they were “real” and not part of the page content.
Most of the time, we’re not so starved for pixels that we have tp be stealing from the title bar.
Hell, we lived thtough 640x480 desktops without even the cheat of hamburger menus.
This is the main argument the GNOME developers use to justify why they don’t support SSD. This is true, xdg-decoration is an “unstable” protocol, and wayland was originally designed with only CSD in mind.
This is the main argument they use but this is not the main reason. The main reason is “design”. SSDs are not a part of GNOME HIG or GNOME’s vision. It’s not that they just ‘don’t like it’. They actively want to kill it, at least in their own ecosystem.
The original 2018 “CSD initiative” blog post has TLDR on top saying, " Let’s get rid of title bars. Join the revolution!" so they consider this a “revolution”.
Because hamburger menus do not belong on any screen larger than a tablet
It’s funny how many GNOME people whine about the title bar wasting so much space when GNOME apps literally look like as if they’ve been made for touchscreen users. Also, what about the great black bar on the top of the system?
We should honestly just leave GNOME behind and have them deal with it. We won’t move forward much with their child-like stubbornness and toxic community.
GNOME looks like if Fisher-Price made a My First Linux Desktop baby toy, it just bothers me for some reason.
That’s because they’re engineering their desktop for first time users who look first, then click. Having things visually “tidy” without too much “clutter” or anything that might make them feel overwhelmed is what they’re looking for. Being predictable, consistent, or able to learn by muscle memory is less important. If you’re measuring success based primarily on increasing number of users, onboarding is by far the most important aspect of design.
Seasoned users of a piece of software know exactly where the button/menu/tool they want is, and their needs are often directly contrary to a first time user’s needs. These users want the element they’re looking for to be accessible in as few actions and little thought as possible.
The ideal software that you would use day to day is able to be approachable, but holds your hand while you become a seasoned user. Menubars were ideal for this. Every function is laid out for new users to look through. You have spacial memory for where each function is organized. On MacOS and a couple linux desktop environments functions with a keyboard command associated would have that command displayed beside them (and you can even set one if one doesn’t exist, or change one that does), gently assisting you to use the program more easily. Several desktops also offer searchable menubars which is just another layer of convenience. Big shiny buttons for common functions and a hamburger menu are simply a step backward from the traditional menu bar. You’re only a new user of a piece of software once.
At best, GNOME, the party in control of GTK and design for a huge swath of software, refuse to play ball and cooperate with the rest of the linux/FLOSS desktop ecosystem. At worst they want to throw out all the literature about muscle memory, predictability, and familiarity in UI design and impose their frankly annoying Fisher-Price design on everyone else while calling you an out of touch elitist for resisting this.
careful bud you are lacking empathy for gnome devs /j
Is this a reference to one of their crashouts I missed? I stopped paying attention to them lol
No, just someone that responded to my comment earlier. Apparently I need to start volunteering in my community more because I don’t think Gnome looks good, as if I didn’t just cook and distribute meals with my local food not bombs yesterday 🙄
