Propose your solution
Attachments
Duplicates
Comments
|
|
This is not a good idea. Joe Users don't run programs by typing their names. Everything that normal users need is easily accessible through the menu. The entry was removed to make the menu less complicated and confusing for normal users. If you really want to run programs by typing their names there's excellent gnome-do.
Alt-f2 isn't hard to discover. You might need the dialog if you're a power user, power users know how to use google and read the help files, therefore they will quickly discover how to bring up the run application dialog. After that it's really easy to use. You can even put an applet on the panel that starts the dialog when clicked if alt-f2 is too bothersome.
Alt-f2 isn't a cryptic spell for a power user, it's just a simple keyboard shortcut. Granted, it isn't easily discoverable for normal users, but normal users don't need this feature. And even normal users, when in need of running a program by typing its name will know that they can achieve it in the terminal.
It seems that bashing GNOME for simplifing its interface has become fashionable these days. There's always going to be some disgruntled users. You can't make everyone happy. It's free, it's open, change it if you don't like it. GNOME has issues, this is not one of them.
|
|
azrael
wrote on the 5 Jul 08 at 14:00
|
|
|
|
The problem is that Gnome devs don't allow to change it easily. They could just remove the menu entry and leave an option to bring it back. But they didn't. And that's the problem. Ticking a single item in menu editor is much easier than recompiling a gnome panel or downloading and installing a separate tool.
|
|
mouz
wrote on the 5 Jul 08 at 14:04
|
|
|
|
This is a good idea. The threads show Joe Users miss 'Run Application'. It should be under the 'System' menu (not the 'Applications') menu; above 'Quit...'.
|
|
|
Ubuntu isn't Windows. I hope this remains so.
If there's ever a reason to run something from a "run" application, the reason for this should be fixed instead of trying to improve the duct tape.
If people can't be instructed to use "Terminal" instead of "Run", then I'm sorry for them. A Terminal is available by default in the menu and can do everything a "run" application can do. At the same time, a Terminal is much more useable, you can watch for a command's output for example.
Gnome dev's decision to remove some clutter is very welcome here.
|
|
insulae
wrote on the 6 Jul 08 at 04:07
|
|
|
if you want to create a menu item with run application, create a new item with the next command:
" gnome-panel-control --run-dialog "
meaby a good idea is create the menu item and put with the "show" option unchecked.
|
|
azrael
wrote on the 6 Jul 08 at 09:15
|
|
|
|
gnome-panel-control is not installed by default - it's a part of the openbox package.
|
|
|
|
Although I use Alt+F2, I agree that the Run Application should be visible, preferably under System->Above "Quit". It should be in the menu by default, either checked or unchecked, but not non-existent altogether.
|
|
nvivo
wrote on the 3 Sep 08 at 15:03
|
|
|
There are plenty of reasons to have a "run" entry easy to find.
I always open documents on KDE by typing things like "~/bills" or "~/Videos".
I know I can create a shortcut and click it, but its just a lot faster to type it, and I don't need to clutter my desktop with lots of links for simple documents.
The matter here is not to about Joe trying to run programs by typing their names. Is about removing a very useful option that some people like to use.
If you don't want to show it to newbie Joe, don't enable it by default, but leave a simple way to enable it back. It's not that hard to do that.
I'm a developer, I know...
|
|
adelie
wrote on the 1 Oct 08 at 16:19
|
|
|
+1 dominikowski
My fix to this 'problem', because personally I am not a big fan of the run dialog because it is limited to X applications, like 'xkill', I set f2 to 'gnome-terminal' and ctrl-f2 to 'gksudo gnome-terminal'. Then it is easy to get apps running by name from one click, plus gives the bonus of 'stdout' and 'stderr' :)
Something else I have always believed... commands that require the keyboard and the mouse together are never convenient. make it easy with the mouse, and if it can not be easily designed with the mouse, put it entirely on the keyboard. Not talking about modifier keys, just stuff like 'click, type some stuff, click, some stuff'. Example, don't you hate user forms where you can't type in your answer and hit enter, but 'submit' or whatever requires a mouse click? It hasn't always been that 'tab, return' would do anything at all.
|
|
|
|
Using the terminal sometimes creates more clutter, because the terminal windows must stay open for any commands that are run out of it. Using the run dialog eliminates this clutter. Some users like to take advantage of both the power of CLI and user-friendliness of GUI and the run dialog provides that.
|
|
syakaro
wrote on the 11 Jun 09 at 19:46
|
|
|
I don't get the "make the experience easier" argument for removing "run" as an item on the main menu.
Most Windows applications are ran through other means than "Run" function as well, and yet Windows still kept it. Because you never know when you need it.
With everything else free for the users to decide and/or mess up, why take this one away?
|
|
tuoggy
wrote on the 14 Oct 09 at 14:12
|
|
|
[quote]
Most Windows applications are ran through other means than "Run" function as well, and yet Windows still kept it.
[/quote]
Actually, they didn't. They combined the search and run dialogs to create the new search bar in Vista, and that remains in 7.
The problem with a Run function, is that it doesn't get used by a mass majority of the users. In fact, if things like the Linksys router instructions didn't direct users to use the run function for their setup command, it would probably never be used by basic users. The "Run" function is a waste of space. Think about it this way. If you know what you are doing, then using your left hand (assuming you are right handed), which almost never moves from it's spot on the keyboard (okay... maybe to have a drink of tea or coffee), to press ctrl+f2, is easier than moving your right hand to the mouse, clicking system, then clicking run, then moving your right hand back to the keyboard before you can begin to type type. Also, if you know what you are doing, you can just as easily add the run function to a panel. If you want to clutter your own space, then you still can!!!
Ubuntu is supposed to be easy for everyone. Everyone isn't just those power users who think that clicking 18 times before typing ~/home is the most efficient way to get to their home folder. Everyone includes all those people who don't know that the Run function even exists, and wouldn't know how to use it if they did.
|
|
ARLEXRL
wrote on the 21 Mar 10 at 06:02
|
|
|
|
gnome-panel-control --run-dialog works like a champ! Just follow the instructions to install the gnome-panel-control from the terminal and then add the command to the panel choosing custom application luncher.
|
|
|
|
how come alot of things in ubuntu are hidden unless you "talk the talk". i didnt know there was a Run application diaglog untill i found somewhere on the net that said alt F2. if you think it clutters your menus add another one. ideally it should be in "system" (dunno where it was before
|
|
|
I have a better idea. Clearly some users want it, some dont.
Add it to the menu as requested and those that think it's stupid obviously seem intelligent so they will know how to disable it in the menu editor.
There .. everyone is happy.
PS: Personally I've been using Linux for 17 years know, so I know a few things and still find it convenient to have the run application menu item. Why? because I don't always feel like opening a terminal or what to tie up a terminal or even escaping the application. Alt+F2 is a fine short but unless you have a bad memory or don't use run .. often enough to remember it.
|
|
|
|
Additionally, having a root terminal menu item is far more destructive than a run cmd item. Yet it exists.
|
Post your comment
|
Ubuntuforums.org thread #850156
