I am going to go off on a tangent here and say that decisions like removing the maximize/minimize buttons take little time to execute, but go a long way in tarring the image of the product (Gnome shell).
I think the real question is not if removing those buttons is a good or bad decision, but what would have happened if Gnome devs had let it be? Users would simply have one less thing to talk/complain about, and this would be a great thing because it would move focus towards all the awesome features of the shell. I don't remember seeing heated discussions about the minimize button before. I don't know what started the rash that caused the itch to remove those buttons, but its causing everyone to talk negatively about the shell, while otherwise no one would have even cared if they remained there. Am I wrong? Are there people truly bothered by seeing the minimize button in the title bar? Maybe a gentler approach to removing tremendously familiar features is better... -- Akshay http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~akshay/ On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Robert Park <rbp...@exolucere.ca> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Adam Williamson <awill...@redhat.com> wrote: >> flow. I like a full-screen browser window, lots of people think this >> makes lines of text way too wide. Neither of us is correct or incorrect. > > What websites do you visit that actually use the full width of a > maximized window? It seems like every site on the internet is using > fixed-width columns these days. > > Not that I'm disagreeing with you -- I also maximize firefox on an HD > widescreen (1920x1080), and I love it. > > -- > http://exolucere.ca > _______________________________________________ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > _______________________________________________ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
