1. Try to open 3 maximized windows of Chrome, 3 maximized windows of LibreOffice, 2 Terminal windows and 1 Nautilus window.
2. Now switch between the windows of different applications. You can easily see that:
- In Gnome Shell: I hover the mouse to the top-left, which takes almost 1 second. Then all 9 windows are shown on the screen for me to choose from. This makes things simple and easier.
- In Unity:
+ The best way to switch between applications in Unity is using the keyboard.
+ Other than that, I will have to hover the mouse to the left and then "guess" "Where is my Chrome/Terminal/LibreOffice icon?" to click on.
+ This causes lots of confusion and time consuming since everytime I want to switch between DIFFERENT applications I have to "guess" the icon position again.
+ This should not be a problem if you keep the left panel always visible. However, Gnome Shell does not sacrifice any horizontal screen space and still achieve the result I need.
Lastly, please do not use the age of Unity as an excuse. I am tired of people saying that "Because Unity is just ... months old and Gnome Shell has been.... decades old so Gnome Shell is better".
Gnome Shell will always be older than Unity and Unity will always use this statement as an excuse for its weaknesses. Unity will hardly improve if its developers use age to say it is better or worse than Shell.
Weaknesses do not come from age. They come from the design philosophy of the developers.
If the philosophy is wrong from the start and left unchanged, Unity will hardly gets any better regardless of its age.
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Shane Fagan
<shanepatrickfagan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Phong Cao <
phngcv@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am too have been for a long time a Ubuntu's fan. However, I am not trying
> to be negative but... I would say that Unity's design is way far behind
> GNOME Shell in Fedora 15. I recommend anybody in this email list try out
> Fedora 15 & GNOME Shell and learn from their simplicity. (Just my thought,
> no offense). After couple days get along with Fedora 15 & GNOME Shell I feel
> that GNOME Shell is more newbie-friendly and productive than Unity. I think
> Ubuntu should reconsider going back to GNOME...
this thread haven't explained why you think shell is better.
Also it has to be said that Unity (compiz) isn't around very long
compared to Shell since it was made for 3 years and all and
Unity compiz anyway is only 6 months of work ish. The reason why im
mentioning that is there are still many many changes
and iterations to come for Unity in which it will get better. What you
can bank on though is Unity is faster and more stable.
The cool things about Shell are the really nice looking animations on
things there is a lot of nice finishes on everything and
that stuff comes with time. In terms of Unity and why it is better is
the simplicity you can do a lot more with the search in the
dash than you can with Shell and the sky is the limit on lenses and
all that nice stuff.
--fagan