Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 13th May 2010 18:39 UTC, submitted by hotice
Gnome The problem with just about every virtual desktop implementation is just that - they're virtual. This means that beyond the ability to move windows to specific desktops, you're still looking at exactly the same desktop, no matter what virtual desktop number you switched to. A mockup for GNOME Shell is trying to take the virtual out of virtual desktop.
Thread beginning with comment 424261
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by phoenix
by phoenix on Thu 13th May 2010 21:20 UTC
phoenix
Member since:
2005-07-11

A mockup for GNOME shell tries to address these things by introducing the concept of multiple ~/Desktop folders. "Nowadays we have only one Desktop folder by user, that is located in /home/you/Desktop. This folder is displayed fullscreen on every workspace, and we can keep an eye on the docs on which we work the most. Unfortunately, this Desktop is single," the mockup's description reads, "So we suggest here to raise up the count of Desktop folders, and use the Gnome-Shell interface to handle them easily."


Wow! What a horrible way to do things. Instead of forcing the filesystem to fit the window manager, why not add the ability to point the "view" at any folder?

You know, like the KDE4 "folder view" widget.

Everyone complained so much about that new feature in KDE4 ... and here they are trying to re-create that feature in the most god-awful way possible.

NIH or what?

Edited 2010-05-13 21:21 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by phoenix
by WereCatf on Thu 13th May 2010 21:40 in reply to "Comment by phoenix"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Wow! What a horrible way to do things. Instead of forcing the filesystem to fit the window manager, why not add the ability to point the "view" at any folder?

You're missing the point: the KDE4 approach is all manual and not that easily accessible to complete newbies. The GNOME approach is all automated and as such much more beneficial to a larger audience. Of course they could add the ability of pointing the desktop to one or another folder manually, but it'd still have to automatically create and manage those folders for those desktops which do not have a manually set destination.

"and here they are trying to re-create that feature in the most god-awful way possible."

That's your opinion. I actually see it as they taking the KDE4 idea and improving it.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by phoenix
by phoenix on Thu 13th May 2010 21:55 in reply to "RE: Comment by phoenix"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

"Wow! What a horrible way to do things. Instead of forcing the filesystem to fit the window manager, why not add the ability to point the "view" at any folder?

You're missing the point: the KDE4 approach is all manual and not that easily accessible to complete newbies.


How is it not easily accessible? It's a folder view, as in "see the contents of a folder". By default, there's one folder view that shows the contents of the ~/Desktop folder, just like the default desktop everywhere. Want something different? It's a click away.

I have a desktop displaying 4 different folder views. How does one do that in GNOME?

I can setup 4 virtual desktops, each showing a different folder, without being locked into some horrible ~/Desktop1 ~/Desktop2 mess (or ~/Desktop/Work ~/Desktop/Whatever mess).

Forcing the filesystem to match a single window manager is just wrong. Period.

The GNOME approach is all automated and as such much more beneficial to a larger audience. Of course they could add the ability of pointing the desktop to one or another folder manually, but it'd still have to automatically create and manage those folders for those desktops which do not have a manually set destination.


Or, make it even simpler and make it configurable from the get-go.

[q]"and here they are trying to re-create that feature in the most god-awful way possible."


That's your opinion. I actually see it as they taking the KDE4 idea and improving it.
"

To each their own, but I still fail to see how forcing a user's filesystem hierarchy to fit a single WM is "improving" anything.

Reply Parent Score: 2