On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 08:46 +0200, David Prieto wrote: > For me it's not. It saves me the effort of managing windows half as windows > (obviously) and half as tiny taskbar list items.
Taskbar (i.e. Gnome 2) is not the only way to manage currently running windows. See Mac OS X and Windows 7. > It doesn't. Overview places windows according to their previous position. A > window you placed to the left will also be at the left in Overview. Plus, > there's an animation showing you where each window went. Animation? I already know where my windows are. Why do I need animation to show me where they went if they didn't move? Hint: they _did_ move. Also note that they changed size in exposé. > The taskbar, on the other hand, DID change item placement. It didn't place > windows according to their position but to the order in which they were > opened, forcing you to search for them (yet again). Again, Gnome 2 taskbar is not the only way to manage running apps or open windows. > No they haven't. Please, you said it yourself: animation shows me where they went. If they went, how can they be in the same place? > If they just want to start an app they can just ignore all that visual > change, I'd say. By closing their eyes, I guess :-) > as for the Applications menu itself, I don't think people > are even supposed to use it all that much. :-) > In my case, I use them to get out of the way windows that I'm not gonna use > for the time being. You know what is a good way to visually locate different > "activities" consistently? The Dash. You open the Overview, you go to the > Dash and there's everything, so you won't even have to stop and think if the > app you want to reach is in your current workspace or in a different one. Why do I need to go to the overview to see where my apps are? I can see them right now in Gnome 2 and I don't have to lift a finger. And that's for all workspaces. > Really, the tools are all there. I think the problem is that you're using > them from a Gnome2 perspective. Which is fine, it does take some time to > adapt. Er, no. I'm trying to understand why the system became less useful. I'm having a feeling that some stuff was done just because 3D cards could do cool effects. Well, that's not a very good reason, IMHO. > I suspect the Dash (what you call Dock) is there in order to be near the > Activities button (and the hot corner). If you were using just your mouse > you wouldn't want to take it to the top-left corner and THEN to the bottom > of the screen every single time, now would you? Yes, dash. And who says dash (dock, favourites, whatever) should be at the bottom like in OS X? > Again, no it doesn't. I can use my screen up to the bottom, that space has > not been taken. It's only the bottom-right corner that's taken by the > message tray. Not that you need to walk your mouse up and down either, > because opening the Overview will also show your notifications (hence the > name). You can take your cursor up OR down, depending on what's handier to > you at that moment. Well, if I want to go to the notifications in normal view, I need to go to the bottom right. All other notifications are on the top right. So, yeah, I need to walk to different places. -- Bojan _______________________________________________ gnome-shell-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
