unity-design team mailing list archive

[Phong Cao <phngcv@xxxxxxxxx>]

>
> Well I think using the amount of "clicks" to compare which desktop is
> faster or more efficient is not a good way of doing it.
>

> We disagree on this.

> The number of different things I have to do to accomplish task X has
multiplied in Gnome3.  I'm sure I could get used to it, and by doing so, get
_fast_ at doing it.
> but that isn't the point: the point is, Just about Everything was a single
click away before, and now its a Click then another click, or Click then
Gesture, or...

> Every time you add a step to the chain of events necessary to accomplish a
task, you by definition complicate things.

> That is a new level of complexity.  I also argue that finding out the
right combinations isn't very intuitive in G3, but that's something else
that would only serve to bloat the thread.



> - Open 3 maxmimized windows of Chrome, 2 maximized OpenOffice windows, 2
> terminals and 1 file manager (this is what I usually do for my work).
> - Now try to switch between these windows and count how LONG does it take
> in GNOME Shell and Unity. This is exactly what I meant "easier"
>

> Well, in G2, I place a single click on the dock icon I want to see to
switch to it.  This is _very fast_, faster than anything G3 offers out of
the box.
> This also works in Unity, provided your launcher isn't overloaded so that
the bottom collapses.

> In G3 it always takes me longer, especially since it uses thumbnails of
windows; squares filled with text tend to look alike after a while.
> This makes it take me _way_ longer than I'm used to to identify and switch
to my target window.

> I realize its a to-each-his/her own here, but I think it pretty much
beyond argument that G3 has tangibly complicated matters.  Untiy...
sometimes, but not by a lot.

hmm... I thought we are talking about Unity and G3, not including the dead
G2...

If you feel that Unity is optimal compared to G3 then it is your opinion and
the Unity developers team can keep that opinion and wait to see the result
of G3 vs Unity.

Again, it all depends on the users. I use G3 simply because I dont want to
hover the mouse to the left and
then spend 2+ seconds to guess "Where is my Chrome/Libre/Terminal icons at?"
to click on.

1 more second to choose "Which one of these Chrome/Libre/Terminal windows I
want to switch to?".

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 4:22 PM, GonzO Rodrigue <worlord668@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Phong Cao <phngcv@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>      Gnome3 is, in almost every way, a usability regression.  It simply
>> takes many times more work (clicks, drags, gestures, etc. etc.) to perform
>> almost any given action (opening an app, closing an app, finding an app,
>> etc. etc.) in G3 than it does in either Unity or G2.
>>
>> By way of example, window management in particular is a nightmare.
>>  Consider the following task: I want to, for a moment, get a window out of
>> my way (to see the window behind it) and then put it back.  In G2 or Unity I
>> would:
>> - minimize the app (one click)
>> - restore the app (one click in G2, one or two clicks in Unity, depending
>> on the number of open windows)
>>
>> In Gnome3, I can do this several ways, but the easiest involves:
>> - moving mouse to a hot corner, or using the keyboard shortcut to trigger
>> the expose-like feature
>> - pick the window I want to raise to the top
>> - go again to hot corner or use keyboard combination
>> - pick the original window
>>
>> Well I think using the amount of "clicks" to compare which desktop is
>> faster or more efficient is not a good way of doing it.
>>
>
> We disagree on this.
>
> The number of different things I have to do to accomplish task X has
> multiplied in Gnome3.  I'm sure I could get used to it, and by doing so, get
> _fast_ at doing it.  but that isn't the point: the point is, Just about
> Everything was a single click away before, and now its a Click then another
> click, or Click then Gesture, or...
>
> Every time you add a step to the chain of events necessary to accomplish a
> task, you by definition complicate things.
>
> That is a new level of complexity.  I also argue that finding out the right
> combinations isn't very intuitive in G3, but that's something else that
> would only serve to bloat the thread.
>
>
>
>> - Open 3 maxmimized windows of Chrome, 2 maximized OpenOffice windows, 2
>> terminals and 1 file manager (this is what I usually do for my work).
>> - Now try to switch between these windows and count how LONG does it take
>> in GNOME Shell and Unity. This is exactly what I meant "easier"
>>
>
> Well, in G2, I place a single click on the dock icon I want to see to
> switch to it.  This is _very fast_, faster than anything G3 offers out of
> the box.  This also works in Unity, provided your launcher isn't overloaded
> so that the bottom collapses.
>
> In G3 it always takes me longer, especially since it uses thumbnails of
> windows; squares filled with text tend to look alike after a while.  This
> makes it take me _way_ longer than I'm used to to identify and switch to my
> target window.
>
> I realize its a to-each-his/her own here, but I think it pretty much beyond
> argument that G3 has tangibly complicated matters.  Untiy... sometimes, but
> not by a lot.
>
> --G
>