“we just copied all of your private keys and documents into our cloud and hid them”
And then deleted the originals on your computer so that your only copy is in our cloud.
Oops! Your cloud storage is full! Now pay us $25/mo or you will not be able to access your cloud storage.
How so? I want KDE to remember that certain programs should only open on certain screens
KDE has been able to do this for a long time.
System Settings --> Window Management --> Window Rules
Or, right click on the title bar of the window --> more options --> configure special window settings
From there, you can create a rule that forces a certain program to open its window at a certain location. And you can specify that location to be on the screen you want it to be on. Specifically set a rule for “Position”, enter the screen coordinates where you want it to go, and select “Apply Initially”.
(If the application isn’t behaving under that rule, try adding the “Ignore requested geometry” rule as well.)
But I would hate it with passion if my landlord would place his stuff into my flat.
Well, that depends… How valuable is his stuff?
Gnome is easily the least customizable DE in the entire Linux ecosystem.
And I’m sure their devs are hard at work coming up with ways to make it even less customizable in the future.
Moreover, people who give Linux a trial, they wish for something different.
Says who? I think most people who give Linux a trial, they wish for Windows, but without the all the bullshit.
What I’m afraid of is newbies who get Gnome as the default without knowing any better, without even knowing what a DE is or that there’s more than one. And when they find it weird and difficult to learn, they’re not going to think, “Gnome is weird and difficult to learn, I should try a different DE.” – they’re going to think, “Linux is weird and difficult to learn, I should go back to Windows.”
What would be a better starter DE then?
Literally any other DE. Throw a dart at a bunch of DE logos pasted to the wall, and you’ll hit one that’s better for newbies than Gnome.
(And no, Gnome is not intuitive. You said yourself that using Gnome requires you “just learn to do things differently”. If it was intuitive, you wouldn’t need to learn it, and it wouldn’t feel ‘different’.)
Since all your examples of how intuitive Gnome is involve the same settings menu in the top right corner … is that settings menu in the top right corner labeled at all? Or is intuition the ONLY way to know it’s the settings menu? You know, maybe I’m starting to understand the disconnect here. When I say something is intuitive, I mean it’s where you’d naturally expect it and does what you expect it to do. But when Gnome people call something “intuitive”, I’m starting to suspect they say that because using intuition is the only way to figure out the interface. You just have to guess what that vague icon does…
Just because it has a different workflow that big players implanted in people, Linux needs to match that?
For newbies? Yes. SO MUCH YES.
I don’t care if you want to use Gnome on a distro for people who want weird and different. But for any mainstream distro targeted toward newbies, Gnome should not be the default DE. Precisely because it requires a lot of additional learning to use the DE, in addition to learning to use Linux.
Well, for me, each virtual desktop is dedicated to a different ongoing project. When I want to switch from one project to another, I just switch virtual desktops. Each project can have all kinds of windows open on multiple monitors, and none of them are relevant to the other projects.
Set a window rule to have those particular windows be on all desktops. Then the others can switch while those stay the same.
it is innovative
Nah, it’s just weird. And doing a lot of things to be different for the sake of being different. Which steepens the learning curve for newbies. (And, worse, may make newbies think all Linux is weird and difficult to learn.)
Just because it’s different doesn’t mean it’s better.
newby friendly (Windows and Mac are both more complex)
‘Simplicity’ does not necessarily mean it’s user friendly. Especially when you’re telling them to go download and install more things just so their desktop can do things that EVERY other desktop in the entire world does. I really really wish this paradigm of “removing options = user friendly” would just die already.
(It’s not really user friendly, it’s developer-friendly. Because there’s less for them to build and maintain.)
It has efficient keyboard navigation by default
Every DE does this. Name a single Linux DE that doesn’t have efficient keyboard navigation.
And it has pleasant, modern UI by default.
It has a blobby, plastic-looking, overstyled UI by default. But that’s just a matter of taste.
(And if you don’t like their default UI … well, you’re screwed, because they really don’t want you to change it.)
I’ll make a deal:
You stop including Gnome as the default DE on mainstream, newbie-friendly distros, and I’ll stop talking shit about it.
Which features are unnecessary?
Well, depends how you’re using it. In my case, for example, I don’t have a printer, so I could turn off the entire print manager system/service and save a bit of unnecessary RAM. And if you’re trying to be economical about RAM usage, things like fancy window decorations, window animations, and other purely aesthetic stuff like that can of course go. But, really, what features are necessary versus unnecessary will depend on you and what you’re using your computer for.
Or did you just mean what features does KDE have?
In that case, the answer is basically, all the features. Like, KDE is the quintessential ‘everything and the kitchen sink’ desktop. You name it, they have it … or it can quickly and easily be added. Any feature you can think of from any other OS or desktop, chances are KDE already has it or at least can do it with just a little tweaking.
For an example, I think my favorite feature would be the ability to set custom window rules for each application or even each sub-window within an application. Setting rules that dictate the size and placement of that app’s windows, their transparency, which virtual desktop they open in, whether they show up in the taskbar or not, whether other windows can cover them up or not, etc. I use those rules extensively in my workflow to make sure each app always goes exactly where I want it on my multiple monitors, stays there, and behaves just how I want it to. (For example, I want my system monitor to be 80% translucent in a certain corner of the screen. I want my timer app to always stay on top, and in a particular location on a particular screen, I want my time tracking spreadsheet open on all desktops, but always in the background so it never covers any other window, and not cluttering up the taskbar. I want the terminal to always open maximized on my left monitor, and for it to be 100% visible when active, but 80% translucent when not active. With window rules, I can make all of that happen.)
Why? Just… why?
Any time you ask the Gnome devs this, you can expect the answer to be “elegance”. And then they block you.
Making KDE look like a Mac is an entire genre of easily downloaded and installed themes:
https://store.kde.org/p/1400409
https://store.kde.org/p/1305006
Crimping a push fit terminal of some sort on the end would make a handy static wrist strap hookup too I’d imagine.
Plus, you’d get to see the horrified looks on your friend’s faces when they see you plugging your wrist strap into a wall outlet!
For the sake of completeness I assume I plug in the plug and it’s just using the house’s earth?
Yes! Heh, I guess I forgot that part. I should add it in, just in case.
What do you even do with independent virtual desktops per monitor?
I’ve got 8 virtual desktops and 6 monitors, but I want the content of all 6 monitors to change when I switch virtual desktops. Having to do each monitor independently sounds like a huge pain.
(And, of course, there are a couple things I want on every virtual desktop. But it’s easy to set certain windows to be on all desktops.)
What shortcuts does Windows have that KDE doesn’t?
And KDE can be even more efficient if you go into the settings and tweak things a bit, turning off some unnecessary features that are on by default.
Hey, man. Sometimes I’m dealing with images a lot, and it helps to have image thumbnails big enough to see clearly.
(And even the mini-thumbnails inside a folder’s thumbnail are visible enough to be helpful, giving me a quick sense of what’s in that folder.)