Re: The logic behind remove "Restart" and hide "Power Off" in User menu.
- From: Marcus Husar <marcus husar googlemail com>
- To: William Jon McCann <william jon mccann gmail com>
- Cc: gnome-shell-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: The logic behind remove "Restart" and hide "Power Off" in User menu.
- Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 19:39:41 +0100
Hi,
I didn't think this way before. Nevertheless your thoughts are
reasonable. I’ll try to adapt my behaviour to use software suspend
more often.
But people still may have a problem with „holding down a modifier key“
to switch between suspend/shutdown modes. It’s fine with me. I (now)
know that I have to hold down the alt key.
How do you want to teach people to hold down a modifier key, when they
can’t find the shutdown menu item in gnome shell? Without help they
perhaps never will discover this possibility. Everybody wants to
shutdown his/her computer sometimes.
The mockups in https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Whiteboards/SystemStopRestart
show a menu item called „Install Updates & Restart...". In my language
(German) it is „Installiere Updates und starte [das System] neu..."
(without „das System“ it sounds odd). That’s quite long and won’t fit
in the menu. I even think it is the wrong place. What about a
notification with an okay button?
What If people want/have to restart their computer manually? They have
to click „Power off..." to restart. That’s quide odd. It’s the same in
Gnome 2.xx (Shutdown -> Restart).
A solution like that would be fine:
normal:
Suspend
holding down modifier key:
Restart
Power off
Regards,
Marcus
2011/2/26 William Jon McCann <william jon mccann gmail com>:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Gendre Sebastien <korbe romandie com> wrote:
>> ...
>> And the choice to have Suspend but not Power Off in the User menu
>> encourages them to waste energy.
>
> I'm usually inclined to ignore claims like this that don't provide any
> supporting evidence. But since you're probably going to keep on
> saying it anyway...
>
> Encouraging the use of suspend will very likely result in a dramatic
> power savings for many people. If you only have the options: a)
> continue to run at full power b) stop everything you're doing, save
> all your work, close all your apps, lose all your state, wait for the
> system to power off; you have a problem. In this case, your selfish
> motivations are in opposition to low power consumption. That's not
> going to turn out well. And no amount of preaching will change that.
>
> What you need is something that doesn't have to make that trade.
> Maybe something that doesn't force me to abruptly and jarringly
> interrupt my activities and efficiently uses power at the same time.
> Do we have such a thing?
>
> It is also worth pointing out that you can't really measure waste in
> absolute terms anyway. Waste is subjective: it means to use
> carelessly or without value. I think it is pretty clear that, for
> many, there is value in suspending instead of stopping activities.
> So, we're spending a tiny tiny bit of energy here in the suspend case
> in order that we may save a tremendous amount of energy in others.
> That isn't waste - that is investment.
>
> We'll achieve even more impressive power savings when we enable
> suspend on system idleness. Which for portable systems will result in
> much improved battery run times. There's that win-win again.
>
> Jon
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]