KDE's "zoom the desktop with a keystroke" is also really useful. I first saw it on a Tech Tangents stream, where he was streaming an entire desktop/screen, and simply zoomed a segment of it to show something and then reset the zoom. All without touching OBS or the Extron.
Does that scaling work/look good across other apps, outside the Gnome/GTK4 ecosystem?
Finally! I thought there was something wrong on my end. I also love how open KDE is and how almost any functionality in it can be automated.
Not clear how you can even do that now. You can "sleep" the display but it'll turn back on when you hit any key
$ cat ~/bin/monitor-off.sh
#!/bin/bash
sleep .5
xset dpms force off
Same little trick for when I lock the screen, (Settings -> Notifications -> Screen Saver -> Configure Events):cat ~/bin/LOCKSCREEN-ACTIONS.sh #!/bin/bash ## Anything that is "slow" should be run in the background otherwise lock/unlock is slowed down
#Mute audio on screen lock, only if not already muted:
(
if [[ "$(amixer get Master | awk '/Front Left:/ {print $NF}')" = "[on]" ]]; then
amixer -q set Master mute
touch "${HOME}/.audiomutedbylockscreen"
fi
) &
#Pause foobar2000 only if playing, and make a note.
( "${HOME}/bin/foobar2000-pauseonly.sh" && touch "${HOME}/.foopausedbylockscreen" ) &
#Disable all mouses (to prevent movement waking monitor.)
"${HOME}/bin/set-mice-status" disable
#Force monitor to sleep.
"${HOME}/bin/monitor-off.sh"
And finally, I have the inverse of that, which is called on screen unlock, called automatically on screen unlock (Settings -> Notifications -> Screen Saver -> Configure Events):cat ~/bin/UNLOCKSCREEN-ACTIONS.sh #!/bin/bash
#Unmute audio only if muted by lockscreen:
(
if [ -f "${HOME}/.audiomutedbylockscreen" ]; then
amixer -q set Master unmute
rm -f "${HOME}/.audiomutedbylockscreen"
fi
) &
#Enable all mouses.
"${HOME}/bin/set-mice-status" enable &
#Unpause foobar2000 only if paused by lockscreen. Remove note.
(
if [ -f "${HOME}/.foopausedbylockscreen" ]; then
"${HOME}/bin/foobar2000-playonly.sh"
rm -f "${HOME}/.foopausedbylockscreen"
fi
) &Looking at the change, it seems the dbus method[1] to set brightness explicitly to a value should continue to work. A script could be assigned to the lower brightness key that uses this DBus API.
Alternatively, the same DBus API also provides a signal for whenever brightness changes, and an autostart script could be written to monitor for the value 1 and immediately set it to 0.
1: https://invent.kde.org/plasma/powerdevil/-/blob/master/daemo...
the convenience is that most laptops have dedicated brightness keys
And you can make a custom shortcut that runs a brightness to zero script as well, that should work!
I have not done any customizations beyond the wallpaper of the day and dark mode but still, there is a tonne of stuff that can be changed.
I feel like the "welcome to kde" app should introduce users to the customizations they can do on the software, from themes to wallpapers to cursors to file open action and all the things.
my point is, i recently gave a kde neon to a sibling. they did double click and it felt weird and they said "WTH is happening. i dont want it"..
i was observing their action and i said "well you can change that behaviour. go to settings, touchpad, then double click......"
what i am getting at is, there should be a way to educate users that most if not all behavour can be changed and where to expect those things to be.
"point and shoot" became popular because of that reason only. point and shoot.
kde is like point and shoot but can be changed. users think it is point and shoot like gnome but dont know it can be changed.
it's tiling for kde and it works REALLY well.
Like the search field in the 4th screenshot in this article. Why are the magnifying glass and delete icons essentially flush with the edges of the field, while the search string is is an entire length of the icons away from the magnifying glass? It doesn't just look bad, it looks like a mistake. Even the title of the General pane is closer to the delete icon than the text the delete icon actually will delete.
That's a particularly egregious example, but there's stuff all over the place in KDE that bugs me. In the 2nd screenshot the Start button is aligned with... nothing else at all. And it makes the part of my brain that processes design hierarchy cringe.
What was it before? I haven't used KDE since the Plasma debacle but I don't remember it getting something this basic wrong...
Despite the obvious vitriol of your message, I'd precise for the posterity that when KDE was created, this was not such a surprising thing to do as e.g. old Apple OS did so, and it was a commonly used option on other OSs.
Now as for the macOS cmd-tab behavior...
I'm not familiar with it. Can you elaborate?
> ... but I don't remember it getting something this basic wrong
1. It's only "wrong" because windows has been doing the double click way. In terms of accessibility, I'd argue double click is actually kinda bad, consider how people with joint issue may have trouble double clicking quick enough to register it. (Yes, you can adjust the speed, but this setting wouldn't even be needed if it's single click in the first place.) Imagine how annoying it would be if mobile device and <button/> all require double click/double tap, or even double-enter just to open a file.
2. Most of the Linux distro configured it into double click, anyway. Probably the reason why you don't remember it being a thing.
3. Steam Deck, on the other hand, only need single tap if you use touch screen.
> I'm not familiar with it. Can you elaborate?
Plasma was introduced as the name for KDE's actual DE component (distinct from apps and frameworks) with KDE 4, a major version which was released too early in development and alienated many users due to bugs and missing features compared to KDE 3, hence the "debacle".
Then they released KDE 4 with "Plasma" which had a lot of half baked UI experiments that looked terrible and basically everyone hated. They really didn't listen to users at all, and just pushed through stuff that made no sense at all. They broke a lot of the desktop UI because they added the stupid goal of making it work on tablets too (they were the hot new stuff at the time), despite the very obvious fact that nobody was going to buy a KDE tablet. They even tried to sell one for a while!
It's a little like Gnome's mad decision to move menus to a hamburger, despite that making no sense and essentially everyone hating it.
Probably the thing that characterised the situation most was the "kidney bean". Something the internet seems to have wilfully forgotten (the only reference I can find to it is a comment on LxQT "remember the awful kidney bean?", but you can see it in this screenshot:
https://kde.org/announcements/4/4.1.0/
It's the button at the top right. I can't even remember what it was supposed to do, but it was always there, everyone hated it, you couldn't remove it, and they refused to budge. Of course it was eventually removed. Look at the terrible styling in that screenshot too. Compare it to GNOME:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME_2#/media/File:Gnome-2.18...
Essentially they took a system that people liked and changed a load of things in obviously terrible ways, and then refused to budge when people said they didn't like it.
Some went to distros with plans to continue supporting KDE 3, some went to XFCE, and some (not me) even thought Gnome 3 was nice. Recall as well that Gnome 2 was still around and supported, and then Mate kept it going. That's what I'm using as I type this.
Edit: BTW, the Trinity DE is still active, so you can still use KDE 3.
Great thing about KDE (and others) is it's configurable.
I don't particularly care which is default though, but being used to Windows it's of course nice for me to have one less step to tweak.
However given it's easier for me to change than someone with disabilities, I wouldn't mind single click staying default.
i think the single-click navigation or opening of files was done to mimic how hyperlinks on the internet work. some people are wired that way.
on the other hand, some people have a completely different brain configuration: they think that a single-click should select whereas a double-click should open a file.
there are people who do not agree with both these options. maybe, they want everything to work via audio commands.
how do we decide what the default behavior should be? the answer is: leave it to the user.
I watched her double-click web links all day long while sitting at the desktop Windows Vista computer. I couldn't do anything to educate her on when to use single and when to use double, because that distinction is just lost on some people, you know?
So I would often send her YouTube links in email, and she always reported back "I couldn't watch this; the sound was horrible! Unlistenable!"
And years, yes years, later, she reported to me that she'd figured out what was messed up about her YouTube experience, because she had been consistently double-clicking every link in her email, and opening two browser tabs to the same content, and it didn't bother her unless it was autoplay video, which would offset the sound by several milliseconds and totally mess it up.
It's how both major desktop OSes have worked for literally decades. It works very well. Why be different?
Mimicking hyperlinks doesn't make sense because you never want to move hyperlinks around or rename them. There's rarely a reason to select a hyperlink.
Why click double when you can just click once? As for selecting, just have files be selected on hover. Normally, I just right-click. Double click might have maybe made sense back in the days where clicking on things was expensive and you wanted to prevent miss-clicks but these days I don't see the point.
The weird thing is, that is doesn't even take much time to get used to one way or the other. On systems with double-click, I just need a few minutes to get used to it again and vice versa.
Since single-click is more ergonomic and more accessible (as some people have trouble double clicking), it should be the default. The whole double-click thing seems to be some sort of weird cargo cult to me but I am willing to hear counter points.
I use search/typing in a launcher to open documents and apps, or I’m using a command line.
Mostly organising things in directories or doing other admin or secondary tasks when I’m in a file explorer application.
I also tend to use list mode on the smallest zoom, and multi- and group-select items a lot, which works terribly with hover select.
Single click to select makes sense as selecting one or more files is the precursor to almost every operation.
With single click to open my main use case would get much harder and I’d randomly end up opening stuff I don’t want to at least some of the time. No thanks.
(*) What if I just want to get to another window: should I route around and think about avoiding triggerable elements? What if my hand slips and a bunch of items are selected as a result? Would a delay be needed? What about touchscreens? It seems a fundamentally bad idea, and a much worse accessibility problem than double-clicking.
That sounds horrible. How do you do multi-(de)selection then?
I tried single-click for a while, but selecting gets awkward.