On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Anton Aylward
dh said the following on 10/08/2011 12:52 PM:
On Saturday, October 08, 2011, Sascha Manns wrote:
Hello Mates,
i've read in Stephan's Thread that some of you already using Activities in the Desktop. What Activities you have defined? How do you use it?
As I meantioned previously, I use activities in much the same way I use virtual desktops. I have 3 defined activities with 4 virtual desktops each.
Keeping track of 12 Virt Desktops would be cumbersome, but grouping them according to 3 task definitions makes it quite easy.
I have 1 group dedicated to photo management and graphic design. One activity for virtualuzation and media production and one for general office work and web programming.
I am amazed by this thread. from my POV it is an argument against using Activities.
There are many assertions on the web pages references that are 'not so', that there are options to get around the assertions made.
But posts like this on by dh bring tow things to mind.
The first is the sheer overload and the results in some kind of attention span deficit. Implicit in the grouping described is that these are all active and have tasks working in them and that the user want to be able to turn to any of them at a moments notice. I would have tough many of these tasks would require more concentration and a longer attention span and prevent distractions.
Why would that be implict? The whole point of activities is you can shut one down when you are done with it and it remembers all of the applications and starts them up again when you start the activity. So when you are not using an activity, you just stop it. When you need it again you start it and all your applications are there waiting for you.
The second is a sort of 'out of sight' out of mind. Within the limits of your 'multi-tasking', which for me is dealing with email and the references in the email, I want the items I'm dealing with showing, even if not on screen.
Once again, that is an argument for activities, not against them. When youare not using activities you can just close them so they aren't taking resources, trying to grab your attention, or doing anything else. The entire rest of your argument is based on the assumption that you always have every activity with every application running at the same time. This is a problem with virtual desktops, which are always running, but it is not a problem with activities, which you can just close at will. So rather than making a good argument against activites, you are actually making an argument for why activities are superior to virtual desktops. -Todd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kde+owner@opensuse.org