Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rethinking Window Management

blogs.gnome.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 272 posts

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#121

Post by cesarb »

bpye wrote: post #52
adamrezich wrote: post #10

seems neat, but: how often do you launch a program that defaults to having a teeny-tiny window, like shown here?

I probably don’t want a calculator to be full screen, even a terminal full height might make sense but full width almost never does.

> even a terminal full height might make sense but full width almost never does.

I disagree; things like atop can make good use of a full width (and full height) terminal, and log lines (for instance from dmesg or journalctl) are often long enough that a full width terminal makes reading them more comfortable.

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#122

Post by spicyusername »

Love to see this amount of thought being put into something that nearly everyone encounters on a day to day basis.

I greatly miss using tiling window managers, like i3, but I don't miss having to fiddle with all the little temperamental settings to do things as common as set up my wifi.

Having something like this as a default would be a great middle ground.

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#123

Post by polyamid23 »

spicyusername wrote: post #122

Love to see this amount of thought being put into something that nearly everyone encounters on a day to day basis. I greatly miss using tiling window managers, like i3, but I don't miss having to fiddle with all the little temperamental settings to do things as common as set up my wifi. Having something like this as a default would be a great middle ground.

If you use gnome, I can recommend Pop-Shell

https://github.com/pop-os/shell

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#124

Post by wesapien »

greggyb wrote: post #89
dpc_01234 wrote: post #18

Since there's going to be a lot of tiling WM users looking: what's the best way to get tiling WM and all the convenience of a "full blown WM like Gnome": things like Network Manager applet, bluetooth control, audio etc. all just few clicks away.

XFCE is super modular. You can turn off individual components. You can enable any program to start with the XFCE session. So, for example, disable xfdesktop and xfwm; enable other window manager of your choice. Then, when you run xfce4-session via any mechanism you get all of XFCE, but with another window manager. You can pull up xfce4-settings manager to handle all system settings as you would in any other XFCE sess…

I did this. Xfce and Bspwm along with Sxhkd works well.

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#125

Post by dfc »

csdvrx wrote: post #120
jwells89 wrote: post #61

As a longtime macOS user, while I don't mind the rest of how it handles windows/apps I've never liked the fullscreen mode that was added in 10.7, and the GNOME fullscreen mode mentioned in the blog post is identical. I don't maximize windows often, but when I do I don't usually want the window to be spirited away to its own separate universe, and the apps that actually need fullscreen implement that functionality ind…

> As a longtime macOS user, while I don't mind the rest of how it handles windows/apps I've never liked the fullscreen mode that was added in 10.7, and the GNOME fullscreen mode mentioned in the blog post is identical. I don't maximize windows often As a longtime Windows user who recently moved to Linux, I can't live without fullscreen mode: all my apps are run in fullscreen, not with F12 """fullscreen""", just norma…

Hyprland looks neat. I was expecting to see a FAQ entry comparing/contrasting to sway. What made you choose hyprland over sway?

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#126

Post by zwayhowder »

spicyusername wrote: post #122

Love to see this amount of thought being put into something that nearly everyone encounters on a day to day basis. I greatly miss using tiling window managers, like i3, but I don't miss having to fiddle with all the little temperamental settings to do things as common as set up my wifi. Having something like this as a default would be a great middle ground.

On my desktop I just run i3 because I have no need for the regular fiddling around. On my laptop(s) I run KDE with i3. That to me is the best of both worlds. Easy wifi config and automatic setup of HDMI devices, but tiles, tiles as far as I want :)

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#128

Post by soulofmischief »

moojacob wrote: post #117
soulofmischief wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have used GNOME 2 for an extended period of time and then moved to GNOME 3, I think you'd find the shorter list of what wasn't removed. The idea was a vast plugin ecosystem which would allow development of desktop features to be more distributed. The problem was, some of the most basic features (like a taskbar for displaying open windows, or panels, or applets, or sane window management tools) were left out. A…

For more context Linux Torvalds moved back to GNOME in 2013, a year after that article was posted. From https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTMxNj : > He says that GNOME 3.x has been improving and that when pairing the desktop with the right extensions, it's a rather pleasant desktop. He specifically points out Frippery and GNOME Tweak Tool as making a huge difference to his experience.

Thank you, I didn't know that and didn't mean to misconstrue his opinion. GNOME Tweak Tool is a critical part of a usable GNOME experience, but I wouldn't dare call that a good user experience because it's a non-starter for the majority of casual users.

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#129

Post by fatfingerd »

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #109
ur-whale wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is everyone doing that needs something else? You omitted to explain what you do for a living. I write code for a living, and what you describe simply doesn't work for me given the many different things I need to look at and refer to in parallel (without having to perform a hard context switch such as moving to another workspace or un-maximizing a window) to be able to cobble together code that works.

Currently I work as a security architect. I have previously worked as a software developer, solution architect and systems administrator. I do like having more than one screen available. Having three is ideal but I mostly just have two. But I just maximise a window on each screen, or have two windows on one of the screens. No advanced window management needed!

I find the trouble to be kitchen sink apps, IDEs in particular.

For one task one window stuff it is easy to use full screen/half screen workspaces jumping about on 2 screens..

For a kitchen sink app there's some invented tiling, and ever changing requirements of what sub windows to fit, and they usually add some blocking float windows that need data I would copy paste from the main window..

Re: Rethinking Window Management

#130

Post by csdvrx »

dfc wrote: post #125
csdvrx wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a longtime macOS user, while I don't mind the rest of how it handles windows/apps I've never liked the fullscreen mode that was added in 10.7, and the GNOME fullscreen mode mentioned in the blog post is identical. I don't maximize windows often As a longtime Windows user who recently moved to Linux, I can't live without fullscreen mode: all my apps are run in fullscreen, not with F12 """fullscreen""", just norma…

Hyprland looks neat. I was expecting to see a FAQ entry comparing/contrasting to sway. What made you choose hyprland over sway?

> What made you choose hyprland over sway?

The number of people talking about how great it was, while it's much more recent that sway: it was too high to just be by chance.

Eyecandy is important, and so is flexibility: check https://github.com/end-4/dots-hyprland and you'll see very different styles made from the same hyprland that I use in "each window is fullscreen" mode.

But to stay with a desktop, you've got to integrate it to your workflow, and what made me stick to hyprland is that it's possible to define a keyboard oriented workflow, like I had on Windows

Post reply on HN