Christopher, But the new app would open right in front of you...
The way I see it is: there wouldn't be any defined number of desktops, and definitely you shouldn't be able to see several empty desktops. The point is that a new desktop is created every time you start a new app. A compromise would be to make it action-dependent: clicking on the icon would open in new desktop and draging and droping the icon would open it in a new dektop (or viceverse). But this is probably far too much of a compromise... On 14 April 2011 20:15, Christopher Kahn <christopher.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Ayatana mailing list. > > This would cause a lot of confusion for users. When you're on a viewport > and you click an icon you expect the program to open right in front of you. > Whisking the user around to different viewports when he opens programs will > cause confusion and frustration... it is not intuitive behaviour. And if I > have 4 workspaces and open 5 programs, where does the 5th program open and > why? > > My suggestion is to add an item to launchers' right-click menus: "Open in > workspace X", when you click it you'd be be moved to that workspace with the > new window open. > > --Chris > > > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jorge Ortega > <jorge.ortega...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi jamur, >> >> >> I don't want the shell to make arbitrary decisions for me >>> >> >> the decision to open apps on the same workspace is as arbitrary as the >> decision to give them their own workspace. >> >> Now, I don't have hard data to support this but there it goes anyway: most >> of the times, when people work with one app. they work with (focus on) just >> one app at a time. This is even if they have several open: torrent client >> downloading in the background, the music player playing in the background, >> the browser open and ready for next time you check facebook or what not. I >> know that the occasions when you actually need to interact with more than >> one app at a time are not rare: but I would argue that they are the >> minority. >> >> You are right to say that just now mainly power users use multiple >> workspaces. But this is mainly down to how badly designed this feature is. >> There is nothing advanced in working in an orderly and and uncluttered way: >> this is how it should be by default, no by hard-won skills. >> >> From a personal (and anecdotal) point of view: over the years every now >> and again I've tried to incorporate the use of multiple workspaces in my >> workflow. I was obviously trying to improve the clutter on the desktop like >> everyone else. It's never worked for me in the current form. >> >> All the other stuff: what to do with multiple instances of an app. how to >> switch between apps, etc is really just a matter of detail, meaning that >> they can be worked out. >> >> On 14 April 2011 18:14, Jamu Kakar <jka...@kakar.ca> wrote: >> >>> Hi Jorge, >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Jorge Ortega >>> <jorge.ortega...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > I find Unity approach to multiple virtual desktops extremely >>> half-hearted: >>> > it just provides the option to used them and an icon which you can't >>> remove >>> > from the bar. >>> > >>> > Unity could use virtual desktop in a transparent way: >>> > >>> > 1-Don't show icon if only a desktop is being used. >>> > 2-Apps. should open in a new virtual desktop each. (by default) >>> >>> I want to choose how I use workspaces. I don't want the shell to make >>> arbitrary decisions for me. My impression is that workspaces are used >>> primarily by power users who know what they want. Putting a default >>> in place that gets in the way of that sounds like a bad idea. >>> >>> > 3-When more than one app. is open then the icon to switch desktops >>> appears >>> > in the bar (it has to be very prominent) >>> >>> This is a bit like the pattern used to stick an icons in the launcher. >>> You first have to start an application and only then can you make it >>> sticky. I find this behaviour in the launcher confusing. When I >>> started using Unity I expected to be able to drag applications from >>> the application dash and stick them in the Launcher. >>> >>> I suspect having to do something before you know that workspaces exist >>> would be similarly confusing. Also, for those users that aren't >>> familiar with them, they'd probably be confused as to why two icons >>> appear in the launcher when they start an application instead of one >>> (the desktop switcher and the application icon). >>> >>> Also, how will workspace focus behave? If I have Firefox running on >>> workspace one and I then start Evolution, will it magically take me to >>> workspace two? If so, I won't be able to Alt-Tab back to Firefox. If >>> not, Evolution will appear not to have started. In the first case, >>> this will force me to either (a) use the mouse to click on the Firefox >>> icon or (b) know about Alt-Shift-Tab (which I think is not well >>> known). In the second case, I'll have to know that Evolution started >>> somewhere else and figure out where and how to get there. >>> >>> > 4-Exceptions should be made, probably for configuration tools. For >>> instance, >>> > when you open pulseaudio sound preferences this window should appear in >>> the >>> > active dektop. The understanding is you are just checking on something >>> or >>> > carrying out a very transitory task and close the app straight away. A >>> case >>> > could be made for multiple isntances of the file manger as well: most >>> of the >>> > time we are transferring files between windows. >>> >>> This sounds tricky to get right. >>> >>> > 5-The transitions between desktops (apps. in fact) should be very >>> smooth and >>> > not sight-tiring. >>> >>> Agreed. >>> >>> > In short: >>> > current behaviour: apps open in the same space and the user has to put >>> them >>> > in different deskops. >>> >>> I usually move to the workspace I want before opening an application, >>> if I want it to be on a different workspace than the one I'm on. >>> >>> > suggested behaviour: apps open in their own space and the user has to >>> put >>> > put them manually in the same desktops if they want to do it. >>> > >>> > Which such a behaviour the concept of virtual desktops becomes >>> transparent: >>> > people would use them without actually realizing, you don't decide to >>> use >>> > the feature or not, the feature is at the core of how your computer >>> > works.The way to do this doesn't have to be the traditional zoom >>> out/drag >>> > and drop/zoon in: drag an icon onto other icon to move apps to the same >>> > space/desktop and gain focus on this desktop immediately. >>> > >>> > In this context minimizing seems to loose any sense: why do you wan to >>> > minimize an app that is not sharing its space with anything else? >>> >>> I minimize applications that are doing something useful, but that I >>> don't want to deal with. For example, I often use Movie Player to >>> play a stream of the internet. I minimize it so that it doesn't show >>> up when I hit Super-w to get a view of all the active windows (and I >>> like this behaviour). >>> >>> Removing the "get out of my way" behaviour that minimizing provides >>> would result in useful functionality being lost. >>> >>> > The above proposal has far reaching consecuences but would go a very >>> long >>> > way towards simplifying how people use their computers. >>> >>> I disagree. The suggestions above would go a very long way to making >>> my computer harder to use and harder to reason about. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> J. >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana >> Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
