Slashdot Mirror
Should Apps Replace Title Bars with Header Bars? (gnome.org)
Gnome contributor Tobias Bernard is on a crusade against title bars -- "the largely empty bars at the top of some application windows [that] contain only the window title and a close button." Instead he wants to see header bars -- "a newer, more flexible pattern that allows putting window controls and other UI elements in the same bar." Tobias Bernard writes:
Header bars are client-side decorations (CSD), which means they are drawn by the app rather than the display server. This allows for better integration between application and window chrome. All GNOME apps (except for Terminal) have moved to header bars over the past few years, and so have many third-party apps. However, there are still a few holdouts.
He's announcing the CSD Initiative, "an effort to get apps (both GNOME and third-party) to drop title bars and adopt GNOME-style client-side decorations... The only way to solve this problem long-term is to patch applications upstream to not use title bars. So this is what we'll have to do."
He's announcing the CSD Initiative, "an effort to get apps (both GNOME and third-party) to drop title bars and adopt GNOME-style client-side decorations... The only way to solve this problem long-term is to patch applications upstream to not use title bars. So this is what we'll have to do."
- Talk to the maintainers and convince them that this is a good idea
- Do the design work of adapting the layout and make mockups
- Figure out what is required at a technical level
- Actually implement the new layout and get it merged
Implementation is already in progress for Firefox, though it has not yet been started for other high-priority apps like LibreOffice, GNOME Terminal, and Skype. "If you want to help with any of the above tasks," writes Tobias, "come talk to us on #gnome-design on IRC/Matrix."
And the chance that I'll have any kind of consistent interface, when thousands of app-writers are rolling their own? ZERO!
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
There is a distinction between controls for an app and controls for a window manager.
These are two different concepts and should not be muddled up.
Similarly, should an app be able to bind Alt+Tab for its own use? No, of course not.
"We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
I like my title bars and hate apps that think they're too important to cooperate with my window manager.
Yep, and it is not necessarily a bad thing that they are empty: it provides a clear area where you can grab and move the window. When I see the examples in the articles: how the f**k are you supposed to move these ? This is also what I don't like with chrome and the new firefox quantum: when your bar is full of tabs, good luck moving the window.
I know that multi-tasking is kind of overrated these days, but come on, some people still uses their desktop to do more things at once ...
have you ever tried to reposition a firefox or chrome window that is full of tabs?
what happens when the window manager uses BeOS style titlebars?
what happens to my webex/remote-desktop overlays when there is no empty space for them to live over?
somewhat related: have you ever tried to resize a window that does not have obvious resize control handles? or have you ever tried to *not* resize a window when the non-obvious control 'areas' take your click instead of the drag-to-select-text that you intended?
and don't get me started on scrollbars that appear and disappear depending on where you put your cursor instead of what the content is.
This is exactly why I quit using Gnome 20 years ago. Breaking UI conventions that work perfectly fine and destroying consistency.
Why in god's name would I want apps to cram even more useless controls in my face? A window needs two things: a title so I know WTH it is, and min/max/close buttons. That's it. Now Gnome is taking that away? Just for 20 pixels of real estate ?
Anyone calling themselves a "modern UI developer" should be tarred and feathered. Apple went to flat controls and borderless buttons. Microsoft made Office 2016 flatter than Kansas and decided light gray text controls on bright white background was somehow legible. Gnome has been lost in their own rabbit hole for decades. All of it making interfaces less intuitive and harder to use. A pox on all their houses.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
Modern UI design is often more and more "hide and seek". URLs are hidden, menus disappear, scroll bars appear and disappear. Sometimes, one has the impression, UI designers wanted to play a prank. Adding more stuff in the title bar can be a good thing. But first a rant: I have worked on clunky user interfaces before in my life like VMS workstations, DOS, GEM on Atari or old Mac OS or even gopher browsers pre Mosaic, but the trend of "hide stuff" is driving me nuts. OS X by default does not show the hard drive, nor scroll bars. On browsers, both phone or desktop, things like URLs disappear. It is now cool to hide important things in cryptic places like three dots on the upper right corner in chrome. Or then windows which like to become full screen or adjust their position on their own. I have experienced less frustration writing from scratch a printer driver on an Atari than solving the trivial task to find the print button on a modern browser. Fortunately, it is in most cases still possible to configure things but it often needs first some searching maybe even looking up manuals. I understand that there are two forces in UI design, one which wants to hide things so that it is elegant and beautiful and so that the complexity is hidden and users protected from screwing things up. This is the "passenger" point of view, which mostly applies to consuming stuff. And then there is the need of speed and convenience, which asks for putting many things on the radar so that they can be accessed and found quickly. This is the "pilot" point of view, which mostly applies when producing stuff. The CSD initiative could be a good thing. I for myself like the title bar information. It tells me for each window, where and what it is. Let the user be able to configure it. And in general, be very gentle with changes. Even small modifications can disrupt work flows.
Where the fuck are we supposed to grab a window in order to move it if the title bar is crammed full of junk?
Keep the title bar and bring back the menu bar as well. those of us that actually use a windowing operating system need them.
You want to determine whether the user is using a touch interface and adjust the UI accordingly? Fine. But some of us actually produce content on desktop computers, where design elements are made to conform to a keyboard and mouse interface.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
It's designers re-designing things for no other reason than to have work to point to on their resume. That's it. If everything is OK, and things are going great, what kind of work are designers going to do? How are they going to get their next jobs?
Note that I'm not joking or being sarcastic. Designers really do get judged like this and if they don't re-design things, then where will they be? They will kill project after project because this is their lifeblood. I don't see it getting any better anytime soon, at least until "had the good judgment not to mess with a good system" becomes a valid bullet point on a designer's resume.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
+1000
There are many reasons I despise Gnome, and this is another illustration of their arrogance. You would think they would have learned by now. This kind of thing is why I continue to use KDE, XFCE, and LXDE. Remember them mucking up desktop management? Removing any start menu option? Trying to force everything to run full-screen? Moving the stupid window controls to the LEFT side? Lack of sub-menus for program organization? Inability to see background/minimized windows? Lack of tooltips? Changing default icons to color-less line drawings? Removing more and more customizations? Gobbling up RAM like there is no tomorrow?
**I AM NOT USING A FREAKING TABLET***
Message to Gnome: If you are going to continue to ignore your user base and do freaky things to the UI, the least you can do is to make such changes OPTIONAL through easy user configuration. And not just now [to remove the options later], but ALWAYS.
The classic title bar performs several functions of varying utility. Let me count them.
1. As the title suggests, the title bar displays the title of the window. This typically includes the name of the application and the name of document currently opened, and can easily take half the space available or even more.
2. It lights up when the window is active, and dims down when inactive, helping the user maintain focus with a busy desktop.
3. It provides an intuitive, discoverable way of dragging the window. (For experienced users, Alt+dragging is more usable, although less discoverable.)
4. It is a big target for (un)maximization via double click.
5. It is a big target for opening the window control menu via right button click.
6. It houses the window manager controls.
7. Last but not the least, the title bar is provided by the window manager in a manner consistent across the desktop. If every application toolkit starts doing its own header bars, we lose this consistency.
There seems to be a new fad of making the scroll bar needle-thin too. Just about usable on a stable desk with an actual mouse; not so good on a touchpad when you're riding a bus or train.
And as you point out, terrible if you have reduced dexterity.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."