Re: Named, persistent workspaces

[Diego Fernandez <aiguo fernandez gmail com>]

I'm a bit confused about whether the argument against static desktops
is that of a philosophical point of view or a problem with
functionality and implementation?

I tried using gnome-shell for about a month, but I got sick of moving
windows around every time and forgetting where they were when I wanted
to switch between them.  For me personally, workspaces work the best
as a static grid like in pretty much every other WM out there.

I completely agree with you that there should be a way to provide
static workspaces for advanced users. The current behaviour should be
default and there should be a setting for static workspaces (even if
that means disabling dynamic ones) and a way to automatically place
windows (or use devilspie).  I love most ideas behind the shell except
for this, which unfortunately for me it's an absolute deal breaker.

Although I like your idea of the named workspaces, I feel that's still
not enough.  I know where things are based on their location, not
their name or number.  The grid system I have set up is engrained in
my mind and moving around is pretty much subconscious.  Whereas having
6+ workspaces in only one column becomes a pain to navigate between
them.

It's like the difference between driving a stick shift or a tiptronic.
 On a stick you always know exactly in which gear you are, and
switching gears takes no conscious thought.  On the other hand, a
tiptronic will sometimes automatically shift for you so you're never
fully certain of which gear you're currently in unless you check the
dash.



-- 
Diego Fernandez - 爱国