Written by Linux-user the 7 Jun 09 at 16:39.

Why does GNOME has to start developing a completely new interface? Let them first finish the current one. Let them first solve those thousands of bugs which are in GNOME for more than several years (to give some examples: icons on the desktop are still overlapping each other, in Nautilus it's still impossible to lasso files in List View, in Nautilus it's still impossible to create a new directory from the right mouse button in List View if there are more items in the directory than fit on the screen).

Those guys keep on adding new features and now they want to introduce a completely new interface. Finish the something before starting something new. Fix bugs before adding new features.

Why does GNOME has to start developing a completely new interface? Let them first finish the current one. Let them first solve those thousands of bugs which are in GNOME for more than several years (to give some examples: icons on the desktop are still overlapping each other, in Nautilus it's still impossible to lasso files in List View, in Nautilus it's still impossible to create a new directory from the right mouse button in List View if there are more items in the directory than fit on the screen). Those guys keep on adding new features and now they want to introduce a completely new interface. Finish the something before starting something new. Fix bugs before adding new features.

Written by tuxxy the 7 Jun 09 at 22:10.

In future GNOME releases users should be able to choose either the GNOME shell design or be able to revert back to the standard panel GNOME layout. This new design feature could be added as a menu or appearance option to accommodate the users who prefer the old standard GNOME layout.

Not providing this option could alienate some users and force them to adopt a new desktop environment.

In future GNOME releases users should be able to choose either the GNOME shell design or be able to revert back to the standard panel GNOME layout. This new design feature could be added as a menu or appearance option to accommodate the users who prefer the old standard GNOME layout. Not providing this option could alienate some users and force them to adopt a new desktop environment.

Written by yzarc the 8 Jun 09 at 00:12.

the screens is getting wider and wider but gnome seems to don't care about it and gnome shell looks like is in the same way. two horizontal bars also in the gnome shell and even harder to customize.

gnome should profit the opportunity of a brand new interface concept to improve the use of wide-screen. Let the top and button area free and use the side parts (optionally), it is impossible with the current gnome interface, nothing work properly.

the screens is getting wider and wider but gnome seems to don't care about it and gnome shell looks like is in the same way. two horizontal bars also in the gnome shell and even harder to customize. gnome should profit the opportunity of a brand new interface concept to improve the use of wide-screen. Let the top and button area free and use the side parts (optionally), it is impossible with the current gnome interface, nothing work properly.

Written by Endolith the 11 Jun 09 at 16:26.

Gnome Shell looks like an improvement. Searching for activities or documents is better and faster than menus if you know what you're looking for. But searching only works if you know the name of the thing you're searching for. The traditional hierarchical navigation is better suited for when you know what you want to do, but don't know what program does it.

There should still be categories, and you should be able to see them in the search results and navigate through them if you type their names. Applications should be assigned to multiple categories as appropriate, like Totem could be in both "Audio" and "Video".

Searching should work on both the application name and the program's description, as well as synonyms, so you can find Firefox by searching for "web browser", for instance.

With an empty search box, something needs to be shown to help the user get started searching for apps and realize what it's capable of.

Gnome Shell looks like an improvement. Searching for activities or documents is better and faster than menus if you know what you're looking for. But searching only works if you know the name of the thing you're searching for. The traditional hierarchical navigation is better suited for when you know <i>what</i> you want to do, but don't know what program does it. There should still be categories, and you should be able to see them in the search results and navigate through them if you type their names. Applications should be assigned to multiple categories as appropriate, like Totem could be in both "Audio" and "Video". Searching should work on both the application name <i>and</i> the program's description, as well as synonyms, so you can find Firefox by searching for "web browser", for instance. With an empty search box, something needs to be shown to help the user get started searching for apps and realize what it's capable of.

Written by aadityabhatia the 18 Jun 09 at 21:46.

Lobby the folks at Gnome to make the transition as smooth as possible.

1. Take small steps towards the new UI rather than one big leap. Every step should involve a small change.
2. The UI must be intuitive at every step.
3. Do NOT force all the users to use the new UI. Instead, make every change OPTIONAL.

Bottom line is that those who wish to stick to the classic Gnome interface should be allowed to do so until they're ready to move on.

Lobby the folks at Gnome to make the transition as smooth as possible. 1. Take small steps towards the new UI rather than one big leap. Every step should involve a small change. 2. The UI must be intuitive at every step. 3. Do NOT force all the users to use the new UI. Instead, make every change OPTIONAL. Bottom line is that those who wish to stick to the classic Gnome interface should be allowed to do so until they're ready to move on.

Written by xfuser4 the 2 Jul 09 at 09:22.

I don't think that its a bad idea to make a "hard" transition between Gnome 2 and Gnome 3.

But I think, that the Gnome people are hurrying too much. It would be better to take enough time to design Gnome 3.

- It would be important to use (paied?) user interface specialists to design Gnome Shell

- It would be important to make great API designs and provide great development tools for Gnome 3

I don't think that its a bad idea to make a "hard" transition between Gnome 2 and Gnome 3. But I think, that the Gnome people are hurrying too much. It would be better to take enough time to design Gnome 3. - It would be important to use (paied?) user interface specialists to design Gnome Shell - It would be important to make great API designs and provide great development tools for Gnome 3

Written by xfuser4 the 11 Jul 09 at 09:06.

I'm observing the development process of GNOME Shell. They really gathered lots of ideas on their website from many different people.

Somehow it looks to me, that everybody who has an idea about a new user interface is posting it there. Some of these ideas are perhaps good for the inventor of the idea - but the might be bad for the "ordinary user".

To prevent that GNOME Shell runs into a usability nightmare, it would be wise to bring usability experts to this project. I suggest, that making a link between usability experts (e.g. the guys from open-usability.org) and GNOME Shell would be wise. Even the sponsoring of good usability experts by Canonical would be a great help!

Please remember: whatever GNOME 3.0 will look like - we have to deal with it for the next five years!

I'm observing the development process of GNOME Shell. They really gathered lots of ideas on their website from many different people. Somehow it looks to me, that everybody who has an idea about a new user interface is posting it there. Some of these ideas are perhaps good for the inventor of the idea - but the might be bad for the "ordinary user". To prevent that GNOME Shell runs into a usability nightmare, it would be wise to bring usability experts to this project. I suggest, that making a link between usability experts (e.g. the guys from open-usability.org) and GNOME Shell would be wise. Even the sponsoring of good usability experts by Canonical would be a great help! Please remember: whatever GNOME 3.0 will look like - we have to deal with it for the next five years!

Written by natureflow the 14 Nov 09 at 14:04.

E.g. Port the old application menu to GNOME Shell
There are people who love to start an application without to enter a word.

It should be possible to configure GNOME Shell a way, so you can't distinguish it on a screenshot from the old GNOME Desktop.

E.g. Port the old application menu to GNOME Shell There are people who love to start an application without to enter a word. It should be possible to configure GNOME Shell a way, so you can't distinguish it on a screenshot from the old GNOME Desktop.

Written by Scotchpie the 29 Jan 10 at 10:16.

Gnome shell is a good start at developing an interface for the next generation of computer devices. Those who love the current two panel desktop must consider how practical it is on touch screen and smaller screen devices.

With the launch of the iPad this week all PC manfacturers are going to be producing their own versions and you know that MicroSoft's solution will be to simply stick their existing desktop on them, like they did with netbooks and XP.

The current two panel gnome interface is fine for the dwindling home desktop user and laptop user and Gnome Shell adds no improvement (it may even be a hinderance) but for netbooks and the new breed of touch screen pads/tablets the shell is ideal.

Therefore on the standard Ubuntu distro keep the panels as originally suggested here, but on UNR move to Gnome Shell which is faster, and in my opinion an improvement over the existing UNR interface (I've tried them both and prefer Gnome Shell).

Gnome shell is a good start at developing an interface for the next generation of computer devices. Those who love the current two panel desktop must consider how practical it is on touch screen and smaller screen devices. With the launch of the iPad this week all PC manfacturers are going to be producing their own versions and you know that MicroSoft's solution will be to simply stick their existing desktop on them, like they did with netbooks and XP. The current two panel gnome interface is fine for the dwindling home desktop user and laptop user and Gnome Shell adds no improvement (it may even be a hinderance) but for netbooks and the new breed of touch screen pads/tablets the shell is ideal. Therefore on the standard Ubuntu distro keep the panels as originally suggested here, but on UNR move to Gnome Shell which is faster, and in my opinion an improvement over the existing UNR interface (I've tried them both and prefer Gnome Shell).

Written by travisman1994 the 17 Feb 10 at 01:56.

Ubuntu needs its own desktop. They need to base it off of gnome or kde and design it WITH the community of its users. It should change the gnome version to Gubuntu and keep the other buntus as is. Gnome shell is not good for new users. It will confuse them and they will dislike the new look.

Ubuntu needs its own desktop. They need to base it off of gnome or kde and design it WITH the community of its users. It should change the gnome version to Gubuntu and keep the other buntus as is. Gnome shell is not good for new users. It will confuse them and they will dislike the new look.