zeus ⁧ ⁧ ∽↯∼

nah, i agree with you. win explorer with qttabbar, tortoisegit, and some tweaks from winaerotweaker

dolphin is pretty good though and it has some features that explorer doesn’t, like a terminal pane

but …surely you could just do the same thing with the old design? artist’s rendition:

in fact, now i look at it, it makes them look even more similar once i collapse the sidebar

meh, subjectively i find that creates a “worst of both worlds” situation. but this comment was more about the futility of the development time that went into this specific feature

maybe; but if the location of menu buttons hints at their use then the hamburger should collapse the side drawer like the one on e.g. youtube, but i doubt it does

I had to look up Fitts’s law, and I’m not sure I get it. Could you explain what you mean?

basically; the speed that it takes to click a button is dependant on the size of the button and the distance from the cursor. however, buttons at the edge of the screen have effectively infinite size, as they can’t be overshot. the most used actions should be placed there, as they are the easiest to click by muscle memory (particularly the corners, as they have infinite size in both dimensions)

on windows, kde, cinnamon, etc.; by default the bottom left is start, the bottom right is show desktop (this one i can’t explain), and the top right is close maximised window. the top of the screen is also used for other window-related actions like minimise, restore, change csd tabs, etc.

gnome flouts this by having most of the top of the screen doing nothing (most of it is completely empty) apart from rarely used actions like calendar and power. and the bottom right and left doing nothing^[1]

did i explain well?

ETA: I kinda feel like mine was about KDE not being a fit for me personally, and yours was a slam on Gnome rather than a statement of personal preference.

nah it was very much a personal thing: some people like having a minimal and clutter-free feature set; i like having as many features as possible, because then i find features i didn’t even know i liked.^[2]

as for the top bar: this one confuses me - it just seems objectively bad. but obviously it’s not as some people clearly like it. i haven’t had anyone actually explain to me why, though

as someone who’s not scared of computers, i have no idea what they do. i assume the right one is icons/list/compact^[1] not a waffle menu, but the hamburger and kebab? i have no clue

every time i try to use gnome, i end up spending all my time going “dammit, where are all the bleeding features”

(also the lack of fitts’ law adherence due to that pointless bar at the top)

yep, that’s me

i’m not even sure it’s worth having an option. i don’t think i’d even have noticed a difference, apart from the menu button being in a slightly different place to every other gnome app. it’s fine; but it wasn’t worth the development time

who even decides what’s “modern” anymore?

personally, i wouldn’t

but maybe i’m biased

yeah i’m with you there. i understand why programmes do it, a one-off purchase often isn’t enough to support continued development and server costs, but i have never bought one in my life. i actually had bought pocketcasts pro, and then they went subscription only and i immediately moved to antennapod.

topically, sync for lemmy has just released and everyone’s going wild over it. it’s a £16/year subscription. or £2/month…

@Zeus finder is single pane.

ah fair enough, i misremembered. i don’t think i’ve ever used a mac system for more than 10 minutes whilst giving friends tech support

I just don’t get how they think that’s better. 😕

i know, it’s crap. i guess at least on mac most of the users aren’t even capable of pressing f3 to open split view (not only because macs no longer have an f3); but i don’t see why nautilus has gone down that route. it seems like such an oversight. especially as it used to exist and they removed it

fair enough; i didn’t know you were talking about lag^[1]

i’m fairly sure that xfce does this (or it might just have been the way mint sets it up), but i couldn’t tell you for certain

and the way I open apps - press super and start typing it’s name and enter. So simple, so fast.

that… is the way one opens apps on every mainstream de by default? be it a start menu (plasma, windows, cinnamon, etc.), list menu, (old plasma, many old de’s), or some other launcher, i think that’s pretty standard

plasma is definitely my favourite. i’m a great kde fan, i think all of their suite is much better than the gnome offering. particularly dolphin

i’m not sure single-pane is industry standard though - all 3rd party file managers on windows support dual pane to my knowledge, and every one i can think of for linux apart from nautilus.^[1] nemo’s pretty good though. i do quite like cinnamon all round, i think it beats gnome in every way (apart from wayland support)

i imagine it’s just that fewer options = easier to maintain. to my knowledge they were never keen on options: gtk was never officially themeable, their gtk theme is called “the only one”, they hide all their options on dconf like the windows registry, etc.

generally treat their users like children. but to be fair, it worked for apple and it’s sort of working for them, so what do i know?

hey so i’ve just seen this comment that reminded me of this thread, in case it’s helpful

(sorry it’s not an instance agnostic link, i’m not sure how to make those)

honestly i feel like that’s their attitude toward everything? maybe i missed the glory days of gnome, but now i see it as only useful if you’re A) a gnome developer, or B) have exactly the same workflow as a gnome developer. otherwise it’s useless unless you want a bunch of extensions that break every update

same. to be honest, that’s mostly why i’m on Debian - from what i could tell it had the largest repositories. i did try arch on my laptop and one markdown editor took over half an hour to compile so i just gave up