unity-design team mailing list archive

[Toki Tahmid <oxwivi@xxxxxxxxx>]

@Ed, Super + W shows all the windows, but there's no mouse interaction
available to do that as far as I'm aware. Showing all the Firefox windows is
possible by clicking on the icon, but not all the windows.

On 29 April 2011 18:48, Ed Lin <edlin280@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Phong Cao <phngcv@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > About Unity & Gnome Shell... none of them is better than the other. It
> > depends on the users.
> > I am the kind of user that never open less than 5 windows at a time.
> >
> > As I explained above:
> > 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.
> >
>
> You sadly didn't reply to any of my points.
> The "expose view" in GNOME 3 can be done in Unity too: add a launcher
> icon for the scale view (=super+w) and you could do it with two clicks
> of the mouse (the keyboard will be faster of course in every case,
> exactly as fast as G3). A hot corner is a tiny bit faster but what if
> you have only one window of an application open and the launcher could
> be set to never hide?
> One click, one single straight movement of the mouse to the screen
> edge - Unity "wins".
>
> You forgot that launcher icons never move, they are predictable, a lot
> more so than the dynamic scale view.
>
> I'm going to represent my ideas for Unity 2.0/Oneiric which among
> other things could significantly improve on the window switching in
> your particular user case.
>
> > (I am just trying to explain my thought... no offense). I am sorry if any
> of
> > you guys feel hurt but i just say the truths...
> >
> Oh, if everything was that easy... ;)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> Post to     : ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>