●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load All Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
byrtkluttz ( 244325 ) writes:
They are worrying about inadvertent middle click when you have browsers that try to force you into using the address bar for other things. The address bar should be the address bar and nothing else. And that address should always display the FQDN that you are connecting to, not just the domain. Also, they need to stop text fields from being able to capture the cursor automatically. How many times have people clicked on a link and while waiting for the site to load went and did something else only to have the browser force grab the cursor while you are typing other things, potentially critically private things. Also close the loophole where a site can see where a mouse is and what you are doing on the page. F* the advertisers, build the browser for the users and nothing else. Reply to fingerprinting requests with the same response from every browser. So many loopholes that need to be closed before worrying about something like the middle click.
twitter
facebook
bythefrog ( 8075 ) writes:
If only you were a customer, maybe they would address these issues that you have raised. Clearly, they are listening to their customers and not their end users.
bycfalcon ( 779563 ) writes:
I don't even know what GNOME wants, except that they view it as a victory whenever they make something shitty for real users. Like that's their actual goal as near as I can tell. And once they get rid of this standard, they'll bury the option to turn it back on it some weird place that can't be accessed except by a special Power-user type extension, which you have to grab separately and gives you shit about how you're gonna break stuff if you use it.
GNOME is a fucking disgrace. Every time I have to use it I try to configure it (if allowed) and then just push through it the best I can. Obviously any machine I have root on doesn't have any of that shit.
To make it stupider, other desktop environments use their GTK3 file selection thing, which is less functional than a windows dialogue box from 1993, generally unable to change to a given manually entered directory completely. Everything they touch gets so bad. I wish they would go the fuck away and never write any more code.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
To make it stupider, other desktop environments use their GTK3 file selection thing, which is less functional than a windows dialogue box from 1993, generally unable to change to a given manually entered directory completely. Everything they touch gets so bad. I wish they would go the fuck away and never write any more code.
And what's with the complete allergy now to commandline users?
I work from the terminal.when I start a gui program, I'm in some project subdirectory. Why in seven hells is the current wor
bycfalcon ( 779563 ) writes:
Who fucking cares about your trivial use case? A competent program solves yours effortlessly, starting a filepick in the working directory is a sensible default and not what is being discussed.
The problem is for anyone who starts it from an icon, or who works from multiple subdirectories (for instance, when I edit with LibreOffice I'm in three subdirectories often, or if I'm building an iso in a CD burning program. Obviously filepickers should not be written assuming that you have one working directory an
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
Who fucking cares about your trivial use case?
Well, me for one.
A competent program solves yours effortlessly, starting a filepick in the working directory
uh... you just said that's a trivial usecase?
is a sensible default and not what is being discussed.
Well, the topic is general whinging about gnome. General whinging is on topic, if you don't like that then I invite you to to somewhere else on the internet.
Obviously filepickers should not be written assuming that you have one working directory and you star
bykarmawarrior ( 311177 ) writes:
> Who fucking cares about your trivial use case?
Ah the Wayland developers slogan.
And the reason Wayland is so fucking awful.
bycfalcon ( 779563 ) writes:
Wait are you saying it DOESN'T start in the working directory either? I thought you were saying that everyone should run from commandline and never need a second thing. Not that it fails to support that either. It didn't even occur to me at all that they wouldn't support that. Outrageous.
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
Wait are you saying it DOESN'T start in the working directory either? I thought you were saying that everyone should run from commandline and never need a second thing. Not that it fails to support that either. It didn't even occur to me at all that they wouldn't support that. Outrageous.
Oh just got to this sorry. No, it doesn't start in the CWD when you start from the commandline, it doesn't even put the CWD in the sidebar (though some programmers put it there).
byaRTeeNLCH ( 6256058 ) writes:
I just read your exchange and figure it's probably Gnome's fault that discussing its shortcomings gets people so confused and upset they get into a disagreeing mode out of contagious contraryanism.
To be entirely fair, I think the good thing of having Gnome is to have a place for all condescending, Windows loving and Apple worshipping devs to congregate and not infect other places where they'd do more harm. And I stay away from Gnome to keep my sanity. And my computer. It's mine, and I decide how it behave
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
Clearly, they are listening to their customers and not their end users.
Who are their customers?
● threshold.
bytest321 ( 8891681 ) writes:
How many times have people clicked on a link and while waiting for the site to load went and did something else only to have the browser force grab the cursor while you are typing other things, potentially critically private things.
What window manager or desktop environment do you use? (I use *box and KDE and I've never had that particular problem.)
byreanjr ( 588767 ) writes:
I have this problem on Wayland. One of the major reasons I refuse to use it. Something about their X compatibility layer messes up input focus.
byDamnOregonian ( 963763 ) writes:
Wayland absolutely does not allow this kind of stealing of focus. Something else funky is going on.
The only way an application has to take focus, or put itself on top, or anything like that is via the XDG Activation Protocol [wayland.app]
Different compositors have different levels of ...protection... from applications doing this, but importantly- it's up to the compositor.
In X, your compositor/decorator have no say over this whatsofucking ever, and any application can do it- or more importantly, just swipe your keyp
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
This is a very Wayland answer.
Wayland absolutely does not allow this kind of stealing of focus. Something else funky is going on.
The only way an application has to take focus, or put itself on top, or anything like that is via the XDG Activation Protocol
[...]In X[...]
Wayland doesn't allow this X11 FAIL at all. Here's how it's done in Wayland.
byDamnOregonian ( 963763 ) writes:
LOL- You could have just said, "I can't engage your argument, so I'm going to pull a fallacy out of my ass instead."
How fucking educated are you? Highschool? Get the fuck out of here.
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
You haven't quite let me check off the wayland fanboi bingo card yet.
I've got
- "it's never Wayland's fault"
- Anger at someone not worshipping Wayland.
If you just yell at the user for wanting it to be fixed, and then tell the user they are wrong and it should be like that then I can get a whole row.
byDamnOregonian ( 963763 ) writes:
- "it's never Wayland's fault"
Never said that.
- Anger at someone not worshipping Wayland.
Outright lie.
You're no user, you're just a dumbfuck troll.
A user would have asked questions and got answers.
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
You're no user,
Correct, I am a user of X11 not Wayland since X is, frankly, better, somehow. I find that a bit mystifying but there you go!
A user would have asked questions and got answers.
Yeah! Like telling the users they don't want feature really, that they're idiots for wanting it and all authors and users should rewrite old-fashioned software not to make it better to use but simply because Wayland doesn't support things like window placement that have been standard for 40 years.
byreanjr ( 588767 ) writes:
My problem isn't exactly as the previous guys but its quite similar. There seems to be a delay in focus switching. So, when I Alt-Tab, I expect to be able to immediately start typing into the new window, but under Wayland, there's a momentary delay where input is still going to the old window. It's no longer a sequence of keystrokes that get processed in logical order, but some non-deterministic handling of keystrokes where system load impacts the sequence of events.
byserviscope_minor ( 664417 ) writes:
but under Wayland, there's a momentary delay where input is still going to the old window.
Official Wayland fanboi answer: Wayland is just a protocol so it's not Wayland's fault. X11 is old and busted and old and also just a protocol but that doesn't count because Wayland is just a protocol so literally every problem with the Wayland ecosystem is someone else's fault don't blame Wayland because X11 is old.
byDamnOregonian ( 963763 ) writes:
You really are too stupid to be having this conversation.
This is a bug, specific to a compositor. It has nothing to do with Wayland whatsoever, except that the compositor implements Wayland for its client/server communications (which aren't even fucking at play here)
Go cook me some fries, fuckwit.
byDamnOregonian ( 963763 ) writes:
That sounds like a very major compositor bug. If you don't want to file a bug- let me know what compositor you're using, and I'll see if I can replicate and file.
Alt-Tab should be entirely synchronized, since it's managed by the one thing in the system that can control focus. If it's not, that's bad, and a bug.
byreanjr ( 588767 ) writes:
It would have to be Mutter or Weston, but I'm not sure which. I also am not sure, focus follows mouse maybe involved. And I think it happens when switching from an X app to a Wayland app.
It's not a consistent thing though. It's hard to reproduce. It just sometimes happens as I'm using the system.
It's been like a year since I tried Wayland last, so I'm a bit fuzzy on details.
byAir-Op ( 465781 ) writes:
Yes, that would be a good thing to fix all of those things, but this is easy to fix, and should be..
Middle clicking and pasting a password or secret information is a serious flaw.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...