I think it would be worth fleshing out some existing parts of the
design, like the application menu and launchers, before delving in to
gizmos as a separate component. In the end, if the rest is done to
cover the appropriate jobs, they may not be necessary.
One really dumb thing with gnome-panel
What I would die is two things that stem from the same concept:
A low operation mode that would be sent through a term signal
so that the application knows it only has to perform basic
operations. Like Rhytmbox only playing music and giving status
updates, basically suspending there graphical
On 21 Apr 2009, at 04:34, Travis Watkins wrote:
This one at least has been solved in Windows 7 by merging the
QuickLaunch area with running applications. A dock would also solve
this problem nicely. You'll notice OS X doesn't have a lot of
applets on the menu bar. The only one I've seen a lot
Hi Calum,
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Calum Benson calum.ben...@sun.com wrote:
On 21 Apr 2009, at 04:34, Travis Watkins wrote:
This one at least has been solved in Windows 7 by merging the
QuickLaunch area with running applications. A dock would also solve
this problem nicely. You'll
On 1 May 2009, at 00:00, William Jon McCann wrote:
On the plus side, the good thing about OS X menu extras (as they're
properly
called) is that they're all generally of a uniform size and
appearance (they
fit into a square, and they're monochrome)-- the 15 I have still
take up
less
I'm new to this (having just joined the gnome-shell-list, but I quite
like this suggestion, with one possible addition. I was wondering
whether all of them could be on a circular strip (think zoetrope
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoetrope) which could easily be rotated so
that you can choose and
Le lundi 20 avril 2009 à 16:10 -0700, Dylan McCall a écrit :
I do have a guess what could be done. Firstly, abolish applets as things
which must be run differently from other applications; the user should
not Ever see the word applet again. Enhance running applications and
how they connect
Hi,
possible solution, the golden one imho, could be to create new API for
applets, while redefining term applet. Applet could be equivalent to
widgets in macos x, or plasmoids (horrible naming) in kde. Small self
contained applications rendered either with gtk+ or some htmlview with
javascript
Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
While I agree your proposal would be a great enhancement for most
applications that abuse of the notification area (e.g. music players), I
don't think that could fully replace applets. Applets like timerapplet
or sticky notes are different from standard applications
I've found that I really like the plasmoid approach from KDE4. Most of
those things fit the description of infrequently needed for short
periods of time, or crack. From my point of view (a user), I mainly
want to be able to get to applets quickly. With the current small
format of applets on the
Just to throw my hat into the ring, I thought I'd link to some previous
discussion on applets.
http://davyd.livejournal.com/118545.html
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2004-September/msg00241.html
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2004-September/msg00384.html
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Owen Taylor schrieb:
[...]
The last thing I'll mention here is that I don't think we should be
overly concerned with porting and applet parity. If there was no system
monitor applet in GNOME 3.0, life would go on. What we should be
concerned
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:54:43PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
Crack
===
Brightness applet
Inhibit Applet
There will be often differences in opionions. I, for one, use above
two applets very often. First, because changing brightness keyboard
shortcut require two hands on my laptop, but
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 16:23 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:54:43PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
Crack
===
Brightness applet
Inhibit Applet
There will be often differences in opionions. I, for one, use above
two applets very often. First, because changing
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 16:23 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:54:43PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
One man's crack is another's basic functionality.
Note that Crack was in quotes. I think it's
2009/4/20 Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com:
The last thing I'll mention here is that I don't think we should be
overly concerned with porting and applet parity. If there was no system
monitor applet in GNOME 3.0, life would go on. What we should be
concerned about is creating the ecosystem where
Hey Owen,
The main open question for gnome-shell is not how to implement them.
It's the user interface question. And when we look at the user interface
question I think the label applet is a bit deceptive. We have all sort
of different things that are applets, and their only commonality is
Applets in general are broken because they are no different in
functionality from regular applications, or from each other (in terms of
desklets vs panel applets vs. the notification area). Many applets are
applets because they have very small, simple interfaces; too small to
justify having big
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Dylan McCall dylanmcc...@gmail.com wrote:
Similarly, all sorts of applications choose to hide within the
notification area because they want to stay out of the user's way and
window managers fail to provide the necessary functionality themselves.
Thus, they
[ Resend from a typo in the To: ]
On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 23:26 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
2009/4/19 Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com:
On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 14:34 +0200, Sebastian Pölsterl wrote:
I think it would be a big mistake to omit applets in the new gnome desktop
evolution.
On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 22:54 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
[ Resend from a typo in the To: ]
On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 23:26 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
2009/4/19 Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com:
On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 14:34 +0200, Sebastian Pölsterl wrote:
I think it would be a big mistake
21 matches
Mail list logo
