Top «Prev(2010-12-15) Latest Next(2011-04-11)» Edit

pterjan's diary


  GNOME Will I be prevented to close my laptop lid with GNOME 3?

I tried to comment on Richard's post but for some reason my comment is still awaiting moderation 1h later while 4 new ones have been posted so I'll comment here too.

Choosing if we want suspend on lid close is not about working around kernel bugs. I have had suspend working for maybe 10 years but have always disabled that.

I want to be able to decide when my laptop should suspend or not. Everyday I move my laptop, for example to go to a meeting, and want to be able to close the lid for transport for a few minutes without disconnecting from IRC/losing my ssh/...

I also sometimes close the lid at night to keep it running in my bedroom until something finishes, which I did not think about first, but a comment from Janne reminded me, so I am not the only one doing it.

When I want to suspend, I use the function key. I don't plan disconnecting the lid switch (which I am happy to have turning off the screen) to please "the UI designers for GNOME 3.0".

Today's TSUKKOMI(Total: 20) [Add a TSUKKOMI]
  Frederic Peters (2011-02-02 15:41)

Hey Pascal, no FOSDEM this year? Anyway, gsettings set org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power.lid-close-ac-action 'blank' (but I agree this could still be exposed in the UI)

  Pascal (2011-02-02 15:56)

Nice, at least the setting still exists.<br>And yes I will attend FOSDEM :)

  NickG (2011-02-02 16:06)

I assumed that any apps that inhibit standby/shutdown would also prevent this lid thing happening? Otherwise you're right - why disconnect everything if I just want to move from a to b?

  Palin (2011-02-02 16:28)

I 100% agree with you. I never wanted the notebook to suspend even if I'm on battery... I hate to have to move the pc with the lid open just because stupid windows go standby... :)

  Me (2011-02-02 16:29)

Less options = easier, right? Even if that means you will search hours for the hidden option to make Gnome do what you actually want.<br><br>Someone should explain Gnome devs why this is a misconception.

  alex (2011-02-02 16:46)

the blogger got the point.<br><br>Less options is easier, for sure, lesser option is simply stupid

  Andreas Nilsson (2011-02-02 17:15)

What option should we remove there to make room for this setting?<br>It needs to fit on small screens too.

  Jardik (2011-02-02 17:46)

One wise man (don't recall the name though) once said:<br>"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler"<br>I think he's got the point and gnome devs tend to make everything far too simple.

  Arun Raghavan (2011-02-02 17:53)

Andreas: is the goal to make a single UI that fits on small (I presume you mean something like a 10" netbook screen) as well as a 22" monitor? (that's a genuine question I have, not rhetoric)

  Matt (2011-02-02 19:08)

Andreas: won't GTK3 have scrollbars?

  Shaun McCance (2011-02-02 19:15)

Andreas, the primary goal should always be to make users' lives easier. If that happens to make it harder to design a pleasing preferences window, tough. Development is hard. The solution isn't to stop doing it.

  DBrodie (2011-02-02 19:33)

It seems that most use cases that were raised on the original blog post (and by you) weren't against "suspend on lid close", just that /sometimes/ it is inconvenient. This sounds more like a use case for the "suspend inhibit" style applet rather then anything else.

  oOarthurOo (2011-02-02 19:49)

+1<br><br>In looking at some of the changes it seems pretty clear I don't know how to use my computer. God forbid one of them is hired to redesign something that matters, like a car dashboard instrument panel. They'd probably replace the speedometer with an arrow that lengthens as you increase speed, and the fuel gauge with a coloured dot that shows green when full, yellow when not full, and red when empty. Much simpler!

  Olivier CrĂȘte (2011-02-02 21:02)

From the mockup at<br>The part you should remove is the useless battery state at the bottom. It's already visible in the top bar.

  Simon (2011-02-02 22:09)

@Andreas- you ask what should be removed to make room for the setting? Have you *seen* those mockups of the dialog? It's full of wasted space already - that big grey bit at the top with an "All Settings" button and nothing else, eating up 40-50 pixels of precious space. The redundant "battery charging" information at the bottom, as Olivier pointed out. Fix that kind of stuff, and fitting a 1024x600 netbook screen shouldn't be unreasonable.

  Ben (2011-02-03 00:04)

Years later, Linus' criticism is still valid: "I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do."<br><br>What is so spectacularly difficult or distasteful about following VLC's lead: a "simple" preferences view and an "advanced" preferences view for those who want it? I'm very tired of being told by GNOME that users don't want too many features.

  eugeni (2011-02-03 00:47)

In Gnome Land, the gnome suspends you :).

  Sven Neumann (2011-02-03 13:42)

Acked-by: Sven Neumann

  liam (2011-02-07 07:57)

@Ben<br>Nice idea. Are you volunteering to maintain that extra code?

  goebbe (2011-02-07 14:46)

Good UI-design for setting consist of: <br>- good defaults (means many users never want to change the settings)<br>- possibility to easily change basic settings (for all users that want/have to adapt the settings) <br>- an advanced button to tweak the system (for 10% power users) <br><br>Gnome developers should never forget the power users.