To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Instead of modes, I really like virtual desktops way more.
The implementations that exist are not perfect, e.g. I would like if applications would startup on the virtual desktop were you started it (double-click, terminal, whatever), but overally, I liked the my GNOME2, with 4x2 permament desktops.
Now I am not using virtual desktops anymore at all, because I permanently have to fight against GNOME3 creating and closing new desktops.
I am still homeless.
The argument is no longer "I choose Linux/Desktop because I love it the most", it has seriously become "I choose Linux/Desktop because it is the least evil" (mathematically the same, but you get it).
Edited 2012-10-01 11:39 UTC
I've never found DE virtual desktops to be particularly useful. In fact, whenever I use KDE, GNOME, or Xfce I turn them off.
Conversely, when using dwm I use tags all the time (I even set up apps to use specific ones.)
I wonder why my behavior is so different, it's not like KDE, GNOME, etc. have hard to use virtual desktops... I just find that I don't use them.




Member since:
2010-03-11
GNOME has a dock and that top bar thing. You'd need an extension to get CPU usage, but otherwise all of those are provided.
Modes are almost always a good thing. Modes make operation simpler and faster. They concentrate concepts into logical units and reduce the distance to access them. You don't have to remember what mode you're in because the UI should indicate what mode you're in.
Now, maybe GNOME doesn't do a good job of indicating mode, I don't know. I don't use it, but I don't remember having any issues.
So no, those aren't objective issues. It really does sound like you just can't adapt.