Gnome 40

#1

Post by pbui » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 3:30 PM UTC

Gnome 40
forty.gnome.org

Re: Gnome 40

#2

Post by WoodenChair » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:05 PM UTC

It looks heavily inspired by macOS. Especially if you scroll down to the “Core Apps” section. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Re: Gnome 40

#3

Post by greatgib » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:05 PM UTC

So not ergonomic and osx copycat compared to gnome 2.

So sad...

Re: Gnome 40

#4

Post by Shared404 » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:07 PM UTC

I like the look of a lot of these changes.

if the Pop!_Shell extensions get made mainline in addition to the changes here, I will probably go from disliking/tolerating vanilla GNOME to possibly daily driving.

Re: Gnome 40

#5

Post by calvinmorrison » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:11 PM UTC

What's with the change over to these '40' style naming schemes? I absolutely detest it if it's not done for a real reason.

Firstly, without major versions it does not single anything to end users and end developers. Is '40' still mostly compatible with the gnome 3.x.x API? Is there a major divergence between 40 and 41? Is 41 and 40 a total rewrite?

3.x.x works and there's a reason why. It conveys a lot of information quickly and is well understood.

reducing things down to a single number is meaningless and clearly branding drivel. I guess they want to obfuscate as much as possible and dumb things down for users like they have been doing for close to a decade.

Yawn

Re: Gnome 40

#6

Post by longstation » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:11 PM UTC

I just want to mention, if you feel there's some excessive padding and it's a waste of space (especially vertically), I suggest you take a look at a compact theme at GNOME Look.

Currently, not all themes work properly with GTK 4, but they will eventually get there. Personally, I use the Mojave-gtk-theme. It wastes no space and is beautifully designed.

[edited for grammar]

Re: Gnome 40

#7

Post by imbnwa » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:12 PM UTC

I dunno which it is, but the typography/font rendering is just jarring in these screens. I imagine there's a bunch of hacking you can do to make it look crisper/aligned but no way I'd have time for that.

Re: Gnome 40

#8

Post by dvirsky » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:13 PM UTC

calvinmorrison wrote: post #5

What's with the change over to these '40' style naming schemes? I absolutely detest it if it's not done for a real reason. Firstly, without major versions it does not single anything to end users and end developers. Is '40' still mostly compatible with the gnome 3.x.x API? Is there a major divergence between 40 and 41? Is 41 and 40 a total rewrite? 3.x.x works and there's a reason why. It conveys a lot of information…

Actually this numbering scheme conveys to me, intuitively, that changes are more gradual and hints at backwards compatibility. If there's no major/minor/patch semantics I just assume versions are small incremental additions. I could be wrong but that's what the browser versioning schemes have instilled in me.

Re: Gnome 40

#9

Post by zserge » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

WoodenChair wrote: post #2

It looks heavily inspired by macOS. Especially if you scroll down to the “Core Apps” section. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

As the one who works simultaneously with macOS and Linux, I would be happy to see some unification. I'm not speaking about visual differences or look-n-feel of the apps, but common tasks like desktop switching or window switching - things you do hundreds times a day. Those IMO should involve as little brain as possible and rely on muscle memory.

Re: Gnome 40

#10

Post by ungzd » Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

Topmost bar still consists of lots of unused space with clock in the center — a design decision surely copied from old mobile phones. Too much of screen space is wasted, in the most "expensive" area, where "Rule of the infinite edges" of Fitts's law applies.