Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Apr 2011 17:50 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Gnome The day is finally here, the day that the GNOME team releases GNOME 3.0, the first major revision of the GNOME project since 2002. Little of GNOME 2.x is left in GNOME 3.0, and as such, you could call it GNOME's KDE4. We're living in fortunate times, what, with two wildly divergent open source desktops.
Thread beginning with comment 469376
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Sigh...
by Mystilleef on Wed 6th Apr 2011 23:36 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Sigh..."
Member since:

Most people are capable of multitasking. They're just bad at it. For
example, people are very capable of talking on the phone and driving.
However, the chances of an accident increases dramatically when they do
that. Add 2 more activities such as eating and brushing your hair and
then chances of having an accident becomes certain.

Can people talk on the phone, eat, brush their hair and drive at the
same time? Yes. How well will they perform all these tasks? Not too well.
Should people do this? No. Why? People are not good at multitasking.

There's an increasing consensus in the Nueroscientific community that
multitasking actually decreases productivity and not the other way
round. This is due to the expense of context switching and the energy
spent refocusing (entering into a state of flow) when switching to the
new tasks. And also due to the fact that the brain can't multitask as
far as we know.

You are better off readjusting your workflow to eliminate multitasking.
Multitasking is cool for computers (hence more ram and cpu power is
welcome, plus new software can't get enough of them), but not for us

The whole point of GNOME Shell is to reduce multitasking so you don't
have to switch focus too often. That's why, for example, instant
messaging is baked into the Shell. As more apps adopt this design
philosophy, hopefully in the near future switching back and forth to
different apps will become irrelevant. So also will starring at the
task bar.

This link shows articles and studies that show how multitasking is bad
for productivity.

Edited 2011-04-06 23:38 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[8]: Sigh...
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 7th Apr 2011 01:26 in reply to "RE[7]: Sigh..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:

"Most people are capable of multitasking. They're just bad at it. For
example, people are very capable of talking on the phone and driving."

Nice example of a type of "multi-tasking" that could mean serious injury or death to one or more people by an "accident". Which I wouldn't call an accident really--if someone was dumb enough to talk on the phone while driving and they really couldn't do it before they took off or after parking, they asked for it and deserve what happens to them. And they don't have the alcohol to blame--just their own sober stupidity.

Either way, I thought this whole "multi-tasking" thing was about computers specifically, not doing random things at the same time like: messing with your hair and watching the dog, while listening to the radio and making sure the food in the oven doesn't burn. All while keeping an eye on a lit candle so a cat doesn't bump it and burn the house down. Oh, and listening for the clothes dryer to be done for a new load to be put in. Multi-tasking on a computer is different, in that you do *not* need to constantly monitor everything that is going on. But you *should* still be able to quickly flip through programs if you need to.

I have Iceweasel opened with more tabs than you would care to know, but that doesn't mean I have to constantly monitor them like I would have to look at the road while trying to listen to/talk on the phone (using your example). Those tabs aren't going anywhere, until I choose to close them. I also have Geany running with several text files opened in tabs. A terminal emulator is also running, with wget downloading the newest Linux Mint Xfce release, just minding its own business. And PCManFM is sitting down there in its little corner with four tabs open.

Most traditional OSes and GUIs make it a simple click to quickly switch between programs. GNOME 3 is the one that decides to make things difficult.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: Sigh...
by Mystilleef on Thu 7th Apr 2011 03:32 in reply to "RE[8]: Sigh..."
Mystilleef Member since:

I don't understand your argument about multitasking then. Are you claiming that GNOME 3 does not support multitasking?

With regards to application switching, you're overreacting. Switching between applications is as easy as pressing alt+Tab. Anybody who finds that difficult to do shouldn't be using a computer.

If you want an overview of all running applications pressing the window key is all it takes. You can then visually select whichever application you want.

"It's so easy even a caveman can do it." - Geico Commercial

Once you've experienced the coolness of dynamic workspaces in GNOME Shell you won't miss or care for clicking on taskbars or multitasking or whatever. I know. I also thought it was the end of the world until I tried out. Now I don't care for bars, panels and docks. I even want them to get rid of that top panel.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Sigh...
by sdeber on Thu 7th Apr 2011 05:35 in reply to "RE[7]: Sigh..."
sdeber Member since:

Most people are capable of multitasking. They're just bad at it.

OK, but who cares? Smoking is bad, but people still smoke, drinking is bad, but people still get drunk. Loud noise is bad, but people still "rock-and-roll". Speeding is bad, people still speed. Why? because it makes people FEEL better. The same applies here. We are not talking about rocket science here, it is more about feeling. All we want is just comfort, and we do feel more comfortable when we do multitasking. That is it.

I don't really understand these designers. I think they should adopt a "no-policy, only mechanism" approach. They should only offer tools which are "primitive" enough so that users can use them to implement their own work flow. They are not supposed to enforce their policy.

Edited 2011-04-07 05:38 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Sigh...
by Mystilleef on Thu 7th Apr 2011 05:46 in reply to "RE[8]: Sigh..."
Mystilleef Member since:

Human preferences are numerous and subjective. I don't think the designers of GNOME Shell, or any good designer for that matter, believes in catering to individual preferences. After everybody's brain is mapped differently, however slight.

The objective of designers and engineers is to create the most efficient and effective way to accomplish a task. How you and I feel about it is absolutely irrelevant. We are just an amalgamation of emotions. And most of the time our emotions trump our rationality.

Mind you I don't agree with all the design choices in GNOME Shell. But I also vehemently disagree with the idea that the whole objective of software design is cater to individual preferences, yours and mine included. It isn't.

Reply Parent Score: 3