this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
239 points (97.2% liked)
Linux
47361 readers
1566 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
who even decides what's "modern" anymore?
can anyone, honestly, without reading the article (or guessing from the headline), tell me which of these is the "modern" design?
edit: people are getting confused by the fact that one is tree view, not icons view so i changed the image. old image here
Apparently "modern" means hiding options behind extra clicks
i may be blind but what exactly was hidden behind one or more clicks?
Notice Min/Max buttons missing from window bar?
That's the default.
The idea is that you're not supposed to minimize windows at all under Gnome's workflow, and you maximize by double-clicking the headerbar to save space. You get used to it.
That’s nothing new though, that’s been Gnomes thing for over a decade
tbh not the best choice but that's just their design language I guess. what I was asking about tho was this post's redesign specifically
I think "modern" can be interpreted as nice and clean UI which is beautiful to watch and only the absolutely most important stuff is shown and the rest is hidden. So, like apple design approaches, I guess. Say form over function. Microsoft tends to go that route as well. Luckily for user who like function over form, there are different flavors of Linux.
Clearly the dark mode is the modern one! Jokes aside, I just realized that there THREE menu options on that toolbar: hamburger, kebab, and waffle! I realize they do different things, but no wonder people are confused by and scared of computers. Also, now I'm hungry!
TIL of kebab and waffle menus.
as someone who's not scared of computers, i have no idea what they do. i assume the right one is icons/list/compact[^1] not a waffle menu, but the hamburger and kebab? i have no clue
[^1]: though why it's showing list when the current view is icons, i don't know either
as a GNOME user I also don't get the hype lol
hey as long as it has thumbnail preview I will be hyped.
It's just my opinion (since it's not in the article) but a thing that makes Gnome and Libadwaita a "modern design" is the fact that the production behind it tries to bridge the gap between a "mouse and keyboard" and a "touch screen" workflow.
None of the other DEs come even close to Gnome when used on a tablet
Agreed, I'm not an expert, kind of new to linux, but I could see being very comfortable on a Gnome based tablet.
meh, subjectively i find that creates a "worst of both worlds" situation. but this comment was more about the futility of the development time that went into this specific feature
yeah sorry, I should have been more specific with my answer: features like this are supposed to help you in a touch screen situation or in general with smaller screens.
When the window is resized under a certain size, the left panel becomes hidden and with it part of the top bar, to make it less cluttered and confusing.
but ...surely you could just do the same thing with the old design? artist's rendition:
in fact, now i look at it, it makes them look even more similar once i collapse the sidebar
The difference is minimal, in the newer version you have 1 less element when the sidebar is collapsed (the hamburger menu).
Generally speaking Gnome 44 is already well optimized, 45 is going to be a more "tweaks and small improvements" kind of update rather than a big design changes
Petition to force anyone talking about software to use "trendy" or "fashionable" instead of "modern".
Full height sidebar - from Mac OS 7 or so - must be modern?
The first one doesn't waste space in the title bar by expanding the locator and navigator buttons there.
Well the dark mode screenshot makes less efficient use of space so it must be the modern one.
List/grid view are in the top right. This is an unfair comparison having one in list and one in grid, when they both clearly have a button (in the same location even) to switch modes.
Dark is clearly the modern one though, but presumably you can switch between dark and light.
I was referring to the unnecessary header text on the sidebar, squeezing everything else up there. I am aware there are different display modes lol
It'd be kinda nice if they made these kinds of changes options rather than just deciding this is best
Could honestly take it or leave it, doesn't really add anything
Adding options
Gnome desktop
Pick one.
i'm not even sure it's worth having an option. i don't think i'd even have noticed a difference, apart from the menu button being in a slightly different place to every other gnome app. it's fine; but it wasn't worth the development time
The last thing I want is an option for this. My gosh, imagine the amount of options you would end up with if every single design choice was turned into an option. Who in the world would like that many options.
I'm happy to just have a design team work on whatever they think looks better and works best for the user experience, and implement it after some rounds of public review and testing. This looks neat enough to me - slightly less cluttered than what my current Nautilus window looks like while maintaining the same functionality.
KDE fans?
Awww, Plasma fans, you know I'm playin'.
yep, that's me
Seriously, I envy you guys. Every time I try to use Plasma, I end up spending all my time tweaking the desktop, and by the time I'm done, I realize I've just recreated the Gnome workflow...
I tried KDE, it's cool but I get the same thing of trying to recreate gnome/pantheon
It kinda sucks in GNOME when there's just one thing you would like to change though
Have been trying to get a tiling window manager on GNOME but all the gnome extensions that do it kinda suck
Really? I'm not a tiling WM kinda guy, but I thought Forge was decent.
I found it rather laggy. Maybe I should give it more of a chance just felt clunky and laggy to me (I assume because it's superimposed ontop of GNOME not integrated into it)
Edit: I gave it another chance and I actually really like it thank you for calling me out on that
Think it was only clunky because I already had a bunch of stuff open before turning it on
every time i try to use gnome, i end up spending all my time going "dammit, where are all the bleeding features"
(also the lack of fitts' law adherence due to that pointless bar at the top)
I had to look up Fitts's law, and I'm not sure I get it. Could you explain what you mean?
ETA: I kinda feel like mine was about KDE not being a fit for me personally, and yours was a slam on Gnome rather than a statement of personal preference.
basically; the speed that it takes to click a button is dependant on the size of the button and the distance from the cursor. however, buttons at the edge of the screen have effectively infinite size, as they can't be overshot. the most used actions should be placed there, as they are the easiest to click by muscle memory (particularly the corners, as they have infinite size in both dimensions)
on windows, kde, cinnamon, etc.; by default the bottom left is start, the bottom right is show desktop (this one i can't explain), and the top right is close maximised window. the top of the screen is also used for other window-related actions like minimise, restore, change csd tabs, etc.
gnome flouts this by having most of the top of the screen doing nothing (most of it is completely empty) apart from rarely used actions like calendar and power. and the bottom right and left doing nothing[^1]
did i explain well?
nah it was very much a personal thing: some people like having a minimal and clutter-free feature set; i like having as many features as possible, because then i find features i didn't even know i liked.[^2]
as for the top bar: this one confuses me - it just seems objectively bad. but obviously it's not as some people clearly like it. i haven't had anyone actually explain to me why, though
[^1]: i mean they also ignore it in other ways, too
[^2]: i didn't know how useful a terminal embedded in the file manager would be until i started using dolphin, now i can't do without it
Yes, thank you!
I personally love the feature set of Gnome, but I can see your point. Compared to other DEs, it might seem like a lot of wasted space. And I guess in a way it is, but I don't miss those other functions.
The top right corner doesn't even need a click to go to overview, which brings up my desktop view and the app launcher - that's the bottom left and bottom right functions you described in one place, which makes sense to me since in my head they're related.
The top right is still close maximized windows, but because of the way the Gnome workflow is structured, I don't really use minimize basically ever, so I don't miss it. Also in the upper right we have volume control and battery feedback.
I never have more virtual desktops than I'm actually using. Everything is exactly where I expect it to be. My brain is wired for the Gnome workflow, and extra options justbatent needed.
I've used Dolphin's terminal in file manager thing, and while I can see the utility, I prefer my right-click -> open in Console setup. That's just me, though.
Eh. It takes all kinds to make the world go round, I guess. FTR, I am a huge fan of the KDE project. Their contributions to the Linux world are massive and cannot be overstated. Krita alone is amazing, and I used calligre as my main office software for a few years.
I'm just not a Plasma guy. ¯_ (ツ) _/¯
@Zeus @s20 wow this is interesting and makes perfect sense.
I really like GNOME and the functionality I use the most is the top left overview. Incredibly useful and easily accessible.
GNOME really should use the other 3 corners.
Well I just switched to KDE Plasma last week and I'm pleasantly surprised just how many things are configurable via a menu and how well it runs on Wayland With a Nvidia GPU.
I used to despise KDE Neon, and used Gnome for a bit, but I don't think I can go back anymore until their design philosophy changes again.
I hope they stick to the design philosophy, having different choices in DE is a good thing.
Problem for me is KDE is dependant on configuration to get it to look nice, GNOME looks nice and works well out of the box but sucks if you want to do anything ontop of that base
The bottom one looks like a mobile app interface, so it must've been the "modern" one.
"Modern" means copying Mac OS or iOS.
Honestly, I haven't yet seen the article, the light theme one is probably newer because of tabs.
Anyways both look like an android app, I know most will hate reading this but Windows Explorer rules.
nah, i agree with you. win explorer with qttabbar, tortoisegit, and some tweaks from winaerotweaker
dolphin is pretty good though and it has some features that explorer doesn't, like a terminal pane