unity-design team mailing list archive

[Jorge Ortega <jorge.ortega111@xxxxxxxxx>]

Christopher,

But the new app would open right in front of you...

The way I see it is: there wouldn't be any defined number of desktops, and
definitely you shouldn't be able to see several empty desktops. The point is
that a new desktop is created every time you start a new app.

A compromise would be to make it action-dependent: clicking on the icon
would open in new desktop and draging and droping the icon would open it in
a new dektop (or viceverse). But this is probably far too much of a
compromise...

On 14 April 2011 20:15, Christopher Kahn <christopher.kahn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hello Ayatana mailing list.
>
> This would cause a lot of confusion for users. When you're on a viewport
> and you click an icon you expect the program to open right in front of you.
> Whisking the user around to different viewports when he opens programs will
> cause confusion and frustration... it is not intuitive behaviour. And if I
> have 4 workspaces and open 5 programs, where does the 5th program open and
> why?
>
> My suggestion is to add an item to launchers' right-click menus: "Open in
> workspace X", when you click it you'd be be moved to that workspace with the
> new window open.
>
> --Chris
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jorge Ortega <jorge.ortega111@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>> Hi jamur,
>>
>>
>>  I don't want the shell to make arbitrary decisions for me
>>>
>>
>> the decision to open apps on the same workspace is as arbitrary  as the
>> decision to give them their own workspace.
>>
>> Now, I don't have hard data to support this but there it goes anyway: most
>> of the times, when people work with one app. they work with (focus on) just
>> one app at a time. This is even if they have several open: torrent client
>> downloading in the background, the music player playing in the background,
>> the browser open and ready for next time you check facebook or what not. I
>> know that the occasions when you actually need to interact with more than
>> one app at a time are not rare: but I would argue that they are the
>> minority.
>>
>> You are right to say  that just now mainly power users use multiple
>> workspaces. But this is mainly down to how badly designed this feature is.
>> There is nothing advanced in working in an orderly and and uncluttered way:
>> this is how it should be by default, no by hard-won skills.
>>
>> From a personal (and anecdotal) point of view: over the years every now
>> and again I've tried to incorporate the use of multiple workspaces in my
>> workflow. I was obviously trying to improve the clutter on the desktop like
>> everyone else. It's never worked for me in the current form.
>>
>> All the other stuff: what to do with multiple instances of an app. how to
>> switch between apps, etc is really just a matter of detail, meaning that
>> they can be worked out.
>>
>> On 14 April 2011 18:14, Jamu Kakar <jkakar@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jorge,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Jorge Ortega
>>> <jorge.ortega111@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> > I find Unity approach to multiple virtual desktops extremely
>>> half-hearted:
>>> > it just provides the option to used them and an icon which you can't
>>> remove
>>> > from the bar.
>>> >
>>> > Unity could use virtual desktop in a transparent way:
>>> >
>>> > 1-Don't show icon if only a desktop is being used.
>>> > 2-Apps. should open in a new virtual desktop each. (by default)
>>>
>>> I want to choose how I use workspaces.  I don't want the shell to make
>>> arbitrary decisions for me.  My impression is that workspaces are used
>>> primarily by power users who know what they want.  Putting a default
>>> in place that gets in the way of that sounds like a bad idea.
>>>
>>> > 3-When more than one app. is open then the icon to switch desktops
>>> appears
>>> > in the bar (it has to be very prominent)
>>>
>>> This is a bit like the pattern used to stick an icons in the launcher.
>>> You first have to start an application and only then can you make it
>>> sticky.  I find this behaviour in the launcher confusing.  When I
>>> started using Unity I expected to be able to drag applications from
>>> the application dash and stick them in the Launcher.
>>>
>>> I suspect having to do something before you know that workspaces exist
>>> would be similarly confusing.  Also, for those users that aren't
>>> familiar with them, they'd probably be confused as to why two icons
>>> appear in the launcher when they start an application instead of one
>>> (the desktop switcher and the application icon).
>>>
>>> Also, how will workspace focus behave?  If I have Firefox running on
>>> workspace one and I then start Evolution, will it magically take me to
>>> workspace two?  If so, I won't be able to Alt-Tab back to Firefox.  If
>>> not, Evolution will appear not to have started.  In the first case,
>>> this will force me to either (a) use the mouse to click on the Firefox
>>> icon or (b) know about Alt-Shift-Tab (which I think is not well
>>> known).  In the second case, I'll have to know that Evolution started
>>> somewhere else and figure out where and how to get there.
>>>
>>> > 4-Exceptions should be made, probably for configuration tools. For
>>> instance,
>>> > when you open pulseaudio sound preferences this window should appear in
>>> the
>>> > active dektop. The understanding is you are just checking on something
>>> or
>>> > carrying out a very transitory task and close the app straight away. A
>>> case
>>> > could be made for multiple isntances of the file manger as well: most
>>> of the
>>> > time we are transferring files between windows.
>>>
>>> This sounds tricky to get right.
>>>
>>> > 5-The transitions between desktops (apps. in fact) should be very
>>> smooth and
>>> > not sight-tiring.
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>> > In short:
>>> > current behaviour: apps open in the same space and the user has to put
>>> them
>>> > in different deskops.
>>>
>>> I usually move to the workspace I want before opening an application,
>>> if I want it to be on a different workspace than the one I'm on.
>>>
>>> > suggested behaviour: apps open in their own space and the user has to
>>> put
>>> > put them manually in the same desktops if they want to do it.
>>> >
>>> > Which such a behaviour the concept of virtual desktops becomes
>>> transparent:
>>> > people would use them without actually realizing, you don't decide to
>>> use
>>> > the feature or not, the feature is at the core of how your computer
>>> > works.The way to do this doesn't have to be the traditional zoom
>>> out/drag
>>> > and drop/zoon in: drag an icon onto other icon to move apps to the same
>>> > space/desktop and gain focus on this desktop immediately.
>>> >
>>> > In this context minimizing seems to loose any sense: why do you wan to
>>> > minimize an app that is not sharing its space with anything else?
>>>
>>> I minimize applications that are doing something useful, but that I
>>> don't want to deal with.  For example, I often use Movie Player to
>>> play a stream of the internet.  I minimize it so that it doesn't show
>>> up when I hit Super-w to get a view of all the active windows (and I
>>> like this behaviour).
>>>
>>> Removing the "get out of my way" behaviour that minimizing provides
>>> would result in useful functionality being lost.
>>>
>>> > The above proposal has far reaching consecuences but would go a very
>>> long
>>> > way towards simplifying how people use their computers.
>>>
>>> I disagree.  The suggestions above would go a very long way to making
>>> my computer harder to use and harder to reason about.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> J.
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
>> Post to     : ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>