Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell

[Julien Olivier <julo42 gmail com>]

> Er, no. Your point was that it should be kept because it exists, and
> proper solutions don't.
> 
> At least that was your point after you suggested cases in which it
> would be useful, and I suggested "perfect solutions" (those were your
> words) for them. Minimizing exists, those don't. Hence my reply.

You're right that, if applications were to be modified so that
minimization isn't necessary anymore, there are better solutions than
minimization. But I still think that minimization should be kept because
I'm 100% sure that at least some applications will never evolve the way
we expect them to (split into a daemon and a UI), or it might take
years. I hope I'm wrong though. And, for me, if minimization is not the
perfect solution, it is the best reasonable thing, as i see very few
problems with it (if any), and it already works today.

>  
>         Actually, if the application has several windows, among which
>         one is minimized, clicking the launcher icon will present one
>         of the windows of the application, not create a new one.
> 
> Just to be on the same page: I was talking about my mom's problems
> with minimization using Gnome 2. Are you talking about Gnome 2, too?

Err.. no. I was talking about GNOME 3 here :)

>  
>         Applications developers. If they fail to it properly,
>         distributions. Exactly like every other property in the
>         desktop files.
> 
> So, for example, you would make Firefox minimize when you hit the
> close button?

Absolutely not. I would do it for Banshee, Rhythmbox, Transmission,
Evolution and Empathy.

>  Were to? Would you create a notification icon for it, like the ones
> Empathy, Transmission or Banshee have? Because that would clutter the
> notification area even more.
> 

Clicking on the "close" icon would simply minimize it, the way it
currently works: the window is hidden but the launcher icon stays there,
and clicking on it restores the window. No abusing of the notification
area.

> Or would you just minimize it to the taskbar? Because it would create
> even more complexity: you would have some apps close when X is
> pressed, some others minimize to the tray, and yet a third group
> minimize to the taskbar. Do you realize the mess?
> 

Not really: to users, closing a window would do just that everytime: it
would destroy the window visually. The only difference is that some
applications would remain working in the background and others would
not, but it doesn't change a thing for users who don't care. The only
case where users might be confused would the case of a music player not
stopping when you close it. But I'm pretty sure it would help users more
than it would disturb them. Later, we could event add custom actions to
the launchers like "skip this track" or "stop music", exactly like it is
currently done in the notification area.

> Also, how would you decide which apps would need this? Specific ones?
> All of those which can have multiple windows? Don't you think it's too
> much of a hassle just to have minimization back?
> 

Only those who need to do things in the background but be accessed
occasionally: music player, download manager, email reader and instant
messenger mainly. When you think about it, it's quite straightforward to
decide in which category an application falls.