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

Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

datagubbe.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 293 posts

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#141

Post by n3storm »

jampekka wrote: post #126
n3storm wrote: post #63

Maybe the arrogance is the worst feature of GNOME approach. They make this studies and constantly repeat how focused are they on usability that when an individual finds it not usable (not in that words) it's double frustating cause is like GNOME saying: "our average users are happy so you must to be handicaped"

No shame in needing a special UI if you're handicapped.

I totally agree, but if I proudly state my website is AA and you are blind and cannot navigate and read content, wouldn't it feel double embarrasing that if just another site with no AA stamp?

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#142

Post by criticalfault »

IshKebab wrote: post #122
criticalfault wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not completely true. They are hated by some users, loved by some. For example, in general, I really like what gnome does. Desktop use is not something that is useful outside starting other apps, so I like its simplicity and the fact that it gets out of the way. Default apps could use maybe a bit more features, but I generally don't find too much wrong with e.g. files. The only confusing thing for me is which h…

> their visuals are a disaster. Believe what you will, but visual consistency and attention to detail is what gnome has. They are not perfect, so there are some issues as OP points out, but they are on a different level from kde. KDE looks like it was frankensteined, while gnome it looks like it was designed. Yeah I totally agree with that. KDE has terrible aesthetics and great usability, Gnome has great aesthetics a…

I would disagree that gnome has terrible usability. It has a very good one. Nobody's saying it is perfect, but I and many other people can use it without issues.

KDE has more features, so maybe *some* things are a bit easier. But everything else is way worse. Including lack of certain apps like a decent VM manager.

I feel sorry for kde, the community there is way friendlier and whatnot, but this Frankenstein approach is bad for serious use. Somebody defined a compromise like a solution which nobody is happy with and KDE feels exactly like that. People adjust how it looks and feels for that reason.

They feel overly bureaucratic and and embodiment of this https://xkcd.com/1172/

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#143

Post by ruuda »

I switched to Nemo after I got tired of Nautilus moving all the buttons for no particular reason every Gnome release, but a few versions ago they had a pattern that was genuinely good: a dropdown next to the current directory in the navigation bar, with everything you can do in the current directory (paste, create directory, open terminal, etc.). This was really neat, traditionally you have to access those by right-clicking some whitespace in the list/grid view, but in the list view there is only a narrow band of empty space to right-click, usually you accidentally click a file. So this was a genuine innovation in UI design. Unfortunately they since removed it again.

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#144

Post by Cockbrand »

jiehong wrote: post #65

This reminds me of not being able to right click in Files in list view for creating a new document or pasting something, because it only accepts a right click in an empty area. Yet, in list view, as soon as you have a few files and the window is full, you’re given no empty area to click in. I saw some people have the same issue [0] in the past, and it’s not really been fixed either [1]. [0]: https://ubuntuforums.org/…

I find this debatable from a UI/UX perspective. I think that the designers made the right choice here, because a context menu should show actions which can be applied to the object I right clicked on. "New Document" isn't really some function of a file or folder icon. Even worse: when I right click on a folder, should the "New Document" menu item create a new doc in the current folder? Or in the one I clicked on?

It would be better to have these common tasks in a separate menu item in the icon bar where they are always available, in addition to the context menu when right clicking on empty space in a window.

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#145

Post by LtWorf »

jampekka wrote: post #126
n3storm wrote: post #63

Maybe the arrogance is the worst feature of GNOME approach. They make this studies and constantly repeat how focused are they on usability that when an individual finds it not usable (not in that words) it's double frustating cause is like GNOME saying: "our average users are happy so you must to be handicaped"

No shame in needing a special UI if you're handicapped.

They claim to be very accessible though.

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#146

Post by 0x_rs »

manmal wrote: post #59

As someone totally out of the loop, what’s the status of font rendering in Gnome? The screenshots don’t look any better than 20 years ago, a jarring difference to what I‘m used to from macOS.

You might even find it to have regressed after pango 1.44 released, but human eyesight is not a metric contemplated by its developers.

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#147

Post by KETHERCORTEX »

jampekka wrote: post #125
userbinator wrote: post #121

I don't get the obsession with "clean" UIs, nor how hiding everything and replacing it with tons of whitespace and nondescript icons can be "calming". It's sterile and unwelcoming like an empty house or unused workshop.

Clean and well thought out UI is like clean and well thought out plumbing. Just works, doesn't need fiddling and stays out of the way.

It isn't about GNOME apps. Their UI actually stands in the way and require fiddling.

In GNOME Clocks:

- You cannot set the name for a timer when creating iy. You need to set the time and start it first, then either pause and reset it or wait for completion. And only then the text field for timer's name appear.

- Timer sound is just a single bell that's easy to miss when you are busy with something like cooking. No repeats, no additional dialogs or highlights. Just a single notification and timer resets.

Nautilus (Files):

- Does not focus a file/folder for keyboard navigation after entering a folder using keyboard navigation (arrow keys and Enter). Maybe I'm missing something,but that's my experience with resorting to mouse or pressing Tab.

- "Open in Terminal" opens folders only in GNOME's default terminal. There's no way in GNOME Settings to set the default application for terminal either.

GNOME Weather:

- The width of hourly weather graph/chart is limited. Even if you have a big monitor and will maximize it, you will have to scroll horizontally to see the further than ~10 hours.

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#148

Post by [deleted] »

drtgh wrote: post #132
rtpg wrote: post #34

Always a reminder for people who are frustrated with the state of Gnome... I've found KDE to be _very good_ for people who want to see options up and center. In a way KDE is definitely more Windows-like and Gnome more Mac-like in its approaches, and you can see this very directly with the screenshotter tools packed into the various environments. Definitely worth it for people frustrated at Gnome's cleanliness-to-a-fa…

The key is that KDE offers such easy and flexible customization by default. In my case with the taskbar like Windows7 with non-grouped open programs and so on. One just have to right-click on the taskbar, set, and done, because the options are available, those configuration options exist, they cared about making it easy to use and to get. In the same way, I think Dolphin v24 should be seen as a starting point for the…

[deleted]

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#149

Post by 4bpp »

n3storm wrote: post #63

Maybe the arrogance is the worst feature of GNOME approach. They make this studies and constantly repeat how focused are they on usability that when an individual finds it not usable (not in that words) it's double frustating cause is like GNOME saying: "our average users are happy so you must to be handicaped"

In my experience the prototypical response is closer to an assertive "this was not made for you, you are part of a tiny minority of users who always have been catered to anyway" - if you were actually "handicapped", making the UI work for you would be a higher priority on political grounds.

In fact, it is sometimes entertaining to imagine that somewhere in the depths of the GNOME cult compound, they keep a single individual, who is legally blind, physically incapable of using a keyboard, simultaneously belongs to all demographic groups that are traditionally underrepresented among computer users, and has in fact never used a computer themselves but was shown a few things on an iPhone by their Gen Alpha great grandnephew. All these factors combine to turn this person (affectionately referred to as Mother Gnome by those in the know) into a utility monster of UI design, so that it becomes an absolute moral imperative to design things to appeal to them, at whatever expense it takes.

Re: Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination

#150

Post by 627467 »

savolai wrote: post #60
cycomanic wrote: post #35

> It's worth mentioning that I agree that the modern design paradigm probably is friendly to beginner users in many ways. But at some point, people stop being beginners. People who use computers several hours per day, performing a wide variety of tasks in many different programs, should also be taken in to account when designing software. As such, my critique comes from the point of what's usually called a "power use…

The basics: you are not your users. Just because it’s easy for you, doesn’t mean it’s easy for others. That is the entire basis of usability work. I cannot believe how resistant the tech community, like above, is to the very basics of human cognition. It’s your comment that’s the rant. OP has actual data from decades of research they are applying. Quoting myself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41303387

One problem I see of "usability professionals" here and elsewhere is how arguments go little beyond:

1. "you are not the users" - certainly when talking about many apps like a file explorer any user is a user - not all users.

2. "Disheartened by tech community dismissal of basic human cognition" and "decades of research" without actually citing and ideally elaborating on research that many times is targetting very narrow scopes.

Post reply on HN