There seems to be a trend recently with flat themes becoming popular in the linux world these days.
Personally I find flat themes to be rather boring, plus some of the flat themes everything seems to just blend in and there are no real markers.
I kind of blame Microsoft for this as once again design trickles down to the biggest fish.
As of 8 Microsoft retired AERO for a boring looking flat theme, not saying AERO was good as by gosh did it have issues and needed power to operate it but it made Microsoft stand out.
I personally like the more gradient based stuff like what OSX offers, not saying everything should look like OSX but it is often touted as the gold standard in OS look and feel.
But hey thats my opinion, there are no facts here just observations.
Couldn’t agree more. I do like KDE effects, it’s payload is small on current machines, so it’s just a question of taste - if you don’t like it, just turn it off. For me flat is boring and, since you mentioned W8, why the h*ck does it want to open every document fullscreen, without any visible window control??? I have two 24" monitors, not a a tiny cellphone screen. Sigh…
brunomcl wrote:
> why the h*ck does it want to open every document fullscreen, without any
> visible window control???
>
To accommodate the big ribbon in office ? 
–
GNOME 3.10.2
openSUSE 13.1 (Bottle) (x86_64) 64-bit
Kernel Linux 3.11.6-4-desktop
I don’t hate flat themes, but I do prefer a nice, 3-D looking theme.
Tim
That’s something else I don’t understand. Why the space-waster ribbon? It seem to occupy a lot more real state than the classic icon/button menus. Doesn’t it go against the “small screen” philosophy of W8/Modern? They can’t put any window decoration, but can put a text-full ribbon? It’s hard not to think “cr*p” when I have to use these things…
On 2014-02-21 04:26, brunomcl wrote:
>
> vazhavandan;2626057 Wrote:
>> To accommodate the big ribbon in office ?
>
> That’s something else I don’t understand. Why the space-waster ribbon?
> It seem to occupy a lot more real state than the classic icon/button
> menus. Doesn’t it go against the “small screen” philosophy of W8/Modern?
> They can’t put any window decoration, but can put a text-full ribbon?
> It’s hard not to think “cr*p” when I have to use these things…
Sigh.
I want as big a space possible for my work, not wasted on decorations.
Specially when having to use a laptop, instead of a big desktop machine.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” (Minas Tirith))
+1 big <sigh>. Yes it’s time for a return to facilitating work, application, and data/content. Windows, icon, and menu management have become a significant overhead wrt time, resources, and maintenance.
This thread so far reminds me of the transition by Artists from a traditional old-master style of heavy-framed picture to the lighter style of the Impressionists. As pointed out by a previous poster, artwork is a matter of taste. IIRC (no I wasn’t there) the transition was facilitated by advances in paint technology.
Change in technology is usually about improving utility. It can affect lifestyle, and lifestyle will influence the design of technology, but the key driver surely is improved utility.
-1 sigh… How is it better that I can’t open two PDFs side by side on my 24" monitor? Because someone thinks we should all work on tiny screens with our fingers? That’s BS. I’m much more productive when I have most of the documents I consult open, even on multiple desktops, while working on another (a CAD dwg, a calculations report, a FEA software in a VM, etc.). How is this worse than having to keep switching between?
Clarification: when I mention windows decorations, I’m talking minimize/maximize/close buttons, title bar with the open file name, resizing handles, etc. Doing away with this is NOT better for anything - unless you want to work (not as a consumer, but for real WORK) in the already mentioned tiny screen.
In KDE you CAN get rid of these things if you want, but the point is: you have the choice, also of other desktops, something W8 doesn’t easily give you.
So, no. being forced to have less than you once had is never better. Never.
I must have missed it, who said it would be better?
Because someone thinks we should all work on tiny screens with our fingers? That’s BS. I’m much more productive when I have most of the documents I consult open, even on multiple desktops, while working on another (a CAD dwg, a calculations report, a FEA software in a VM, etc.). How is this worse than having to keep switching between?
You seem to be overreacting to a problem that doesn’t exist right now. I can’t imagine transferring what I have and how I currently operate on my ThinkPad notebook, to a much smaller screen. It makes no sense. It sounds like you are are suffering from someone else’s FUD.
There are changes I could make that might improve things now on the ThinkPad’s wide-but-no-so-deep screen in terms of freeing up work space in KDE windows when necessary. A flatter theme and more minimalist interface might be better there, but it will not be an overnight change, even if it were available now!
What has been taken away from you, that prevents you from working the way you do now? The point I was making really is that new technology may eventually bring about change in the way we work.
Microsoft, with windows 8’s modern interface?
Perhaps, but if so it’s my own FUD. Modern (as Unity and Gnome shell, IMO) is obviously (again, IMO) geared to small touch screens, as this is (IMO once more) perceived as the future by the big OS boys. In a big screen, touch is nice but tiring. One thing is to move your fingers on a phone or 7" or even 10" display, another is to use your arm to do it. A mouse (or a trackball or something else still to be invented) is way less tiring.
You want to work with less options, or resources, or screen real state, fine. You have the option to do that, even in KDE. What is nonsense (IMO for the last time) is thinking that it’s a good thing for everybody just because it works for you (and by you I’m not referring to YOU specifically, so don’t take it personally).
Post announcement, I thought there was a consensus that a poor and costly decision had been made wrt conventional desktop PC’s, and the larger laptops/notebooks. Certainly one that impacted further growth in that sector. I don’t know what difference 8.1 made, has it? Now they have a new leader…
I also suspect that application switching i.e only one occupying the screen is based on knowledge about how a vast majority (yes, consumers) use their computers in both Enterprise and Home.
Perhaps, but if so it’s my own FUD. Modern (as Unity and Gnome shell, IMO) is obviously (again, IMO) geared to small touch screens, as this is (IMO once more) perceived as the future by the big OS boys.
I think the impact will end up being less on Gnome than if exactly the same were to happen to KDE. The latter have an opportunity to adapt while preserving fully-fledged function for desktop PC’s with a large widescreen monitor/TV. I can’t see why I would need KDE on today’s tablets or smart phones, in its present full-function form. However I can see a case for flatter themes, especially on laptops/notebooks.
IMO it would make more sense for Linux to see Gnome shell adapt for touch screen devices and KDE much less so. That would reduce some arguably wasteful overlap/competition.
The use of a flat theme is not what annoys me about windows 8.
I agree with that. And I do dislike what Gnome has done.
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 10:36:01 GMT, MadmanRB
<MadmanRB@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
>
>There seems to be a trend recently with flat themes becoming popular in
>the linux world these days.
>Personally I find flat themes to be rather boring, plus some of the flat
>themes everything seems to just blend in and there are no real markers.
>I kind of blame Microsoft for this as once again design trickles down to
>the biggest fish.
>As of 8 Microsoft retired AERO for a boring looking flat theme, not
>saying AERO was good as by gosh did it have issues and needed power to
>operate it but it made Microsoft stand out.
>I personally like the more gradient based stuff like what OSX offers,
>not saying everything should look like OSX but it is often touted as the
>gold standard in OS look and feel.
>But hey thats my opinion, there are no facts here just observations.
Heck i don’t know; but i do not like the DE to get in the way of
productivity. So flat / gradient / 3d is kind of minor for me. Animation
and the like has been a piss off for over 20 years for me; distracting and
eats resources.
?-)
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 12:34:05 GMT, “Carlos E. R.”
<robin_listas@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
>On 2014-02-21 04:26, brunomcl wrote:
>>
>> vazhavandan;2626057 Wrote:
>>> To accommodate the big ribbon in office ?
>>
>> That’s something else I don’t understand. Why the space-waster ribbon?
>> It seem to occupy a lot more real state than the classic icon/button
>> menus. Doesn’t it go against the “small screen” philosophy of W8/Modern?
>> They can’t put any window decoration, but can put a text-full ribbon?
>> It’s hard not to think “cr*p” when I have to use these things…
>
>Sigh.
>I want as big a space possible for my work, not wasted on decorations.
>Specially when having to use a laptop, instead of a big desktop machine.
+1
?-)
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 17:56:01 GMT, brunomcl
<brunomcl@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
>
>consused;2626285 Wrote:
>> +1 big <sigh>
>
>-1 sigh… How is it better that I can’t open two PDFs side by side on
>my 24" monitor? Because someone thinks we should all work on tiny
>screens with our fingers? That’s BS. I’m much more productive when I
>have most of the documents I consult open, even on multiple desktops,
>while working on another (a CAD dwg, a calculations report, a FEA
>software in a VM, etc.). How is this worse than having to keep switching
>between?
>
>Clarification: when I mention windows decorations, I’m talking
>minimize/maximize/close buttons, title bar with the open file name,
>resizing handles, etc. Doing away with this is NOT better for anything -
>unless you want to work (not as a consumer, but for real WORK) in the
>already mentioned tiny screen.
>
>In KDE you CAN get rid of these things if you want, but the point is:
>you have the choice, also of other desktops, something W8 doesn’t easily
>give you.
>
>So, no. being forced to have less than you once had is never better.
>Never.
You and “Carlos E.R.” are talking about two different things.
?-)