https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399972
Nate Graham <n...@kde.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |n...@kde.org
--- Comment #2 from Nate Graham <n...@kde.org> ---
Full disclosure: I use an icons-only task manager myself.
Let's consider the differences:
The Traditional task manager (TTM) organizes things on the basis of windows
(well, tasks, but for the most part tasks are windows) and is optimized for
switching between tasks/windows. As long as buttons don't become grouped (which
can be turned off), switching between many windows using the mouse can be quite
fast. Launching new apps is a secondary consideration, and is subject to a
sub-optimal UI that people complain about: Bug 390817. With a TTM, launching
new apps is typically done via a launcher menu like Kickoff or Kicker; you
wouldn't pin 15 apps to your TTM, because there would be hardly any room left
for more than a few task buttons.
The Icons-only task manager (IOTM) organizes things on the basis of apps, and
only secondarily and poorly for apps that have multiple windows. IOTMs are much
easier than TTMs for launching apps because of the larger click targets. IOTMs
can hold more launchable apps without losing functionality (with TTMs, pinned
apps reduce the space available for task buttons), and they scale better when
many apps or windows are open (with TTMs, the task buttons become tiny and
useless). FINALLY, IOTMs are more visually attractive since they can be used to
hold a large number of pretty app icons. However switching between single
instances of single-window apps is slower; switching between multiple instances
of apps or multiple windows of the same app is *much* slower due to the
grouping; other switching methods such as alt-tab or alt-f10 make more sense.
In a sense, one's personal preference depends very much on whether or not one
thinks in terms of apps or windows. People who think in terms of apps will
probably prefer the IOTM, while people who prefer windows will prefer the TTM.
I have no idea what that breakdown is, though it's revealing that all of our
major competitors (macOS, Windows 7+, Unity, GNOME in Ubuntu 18.04+,
ElementaryOS) use an IOTM/Dock style widget instead of a TTM. Also, all mobile
OSs use icon-based launcher/switchers that are much more like an IOTM than a
TTM.
The best implementation for an IOTM on the desktop is in a vertical panel
that's double the width of the TTM's default height (basically, it would be
what Unity and Ubuntu 18.04's GNOME do). This allows for a large assortment of
app launchers to be shipped by default, and they can all be pretty and show off
our nice icon design. However, a vertical panel complicates clock display; See
Bug 365995 and Bug 381551. Those should be fixed.
Personally I would be fine switching to an IOTM by default, but only if we put
it on a vertical panel and populate it by default with a reasonable assortment
of KDE apps (if available): System Settings, Discover, Dolphin, Falkon, KMail,
Kate, Konsole, Gwenview, Okular (Distros would of course override this as
required, e.g. Falkon -> Firefox, add LibreOffice, add VLC, etc). Done this
way, I think it would be really nice, and provide greater discoverability and
speed of access for our awesome apps. It would also just look *pretty*, which
matters and helps attract and retain users from an emotional angle.
I'll leave this open to gather more comments, but some people don't like
discussing design matters on Bugzilla. If folks complain, we can move this to a
Phabricator task.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
