The great debate.

>>105710022 (OP)
>Userless DE
Couldn't care less

whatever windows does is correct

>>105710120
this

kde should adopt CSD. hell almost every "kde app" has burger menus already

>>105710022 (OP)
the debate is retarded

>>105710022 (OP)
I dislike CSD because I don't want close buttons or title bars when I already know what's open, and I have a hotkey to close. It wastes space and is inconsistent between GUIs, even between native GNOME applications. Just no thought whatsoever. I also dislike burger menus because it's an intentionally vague graphic as though the developer says "I don't know or given enough thought as to what menu options are important so I threw them all here". XFCE was raped by GNOME.

>>105710022 (OP)
why can't you have both?

>>105710499
Because today's developers hate options and customization. They even hate that dark mode is basically a requirement.

>>105710120
Windows has client side decorations and a dozens of gui toolkits (winapi, metro, .net, direct2d, ...).

>>105710022 (OP)
Titlebar is part of the window management which is the responsibility of the window manager. The app should only worry about what is actually part of the app, not the window management. For all the app knows, it could be full screen, literally not its problem.

>>105710594
An app should also be able to specify that it DOESN'T want the window manager to add a title bar, because it draws its own.

>>105710022 (OP)
The one that is faster and less resource hungry.

>>105710830
No. The app should not concern itself with anything outside its own context. The window that the window manager has wrapped the app in is outside that context. The titlebar, frame, etc. are explicitly not part of the app at all, they are part of the window manager.

>app
you are correct but still part of the problem

>>105710911
no, i should be able to have my own titlebar. Don't touch my user interface. See Steam or OneCommander, for example, the interface is the same on all os because of client side decorations.

>>105710022 (OP)
the entire gui should be like yad with the yad being part of the desktop (with more features ofc)
uless you are a web browser there is no reason for the client to have complicated ui logic for displaying

why is the gnome logo a foot

makes me feel so weird

>>105710955
You disgust me.

>>105710911
As I said before, nowaday's developers hate choice. Especially when it's not their choice. Sounds pretty autistic to me.

>>105710578
windows has been server side since vista (dwm.exe)
XP was client side

This isn't a debate. Everyone but GNOME thinks client side decorations are retarded.

>>105710955
yes, don't touch my window decorations, fuck off with your stupid shit
stuff like that breaks seamless integration with the rest of the environment application runs in
if everything does it's own thing nothing is coherent and breaks user settings
If as a user I set that the caption/title bar has to have 13 point font and is small variant one it shouldn't override the user settings
one of the consequence of breaking something like that is it breaks maximization of windows. because it will no longer fit the screen and you will have gaps for some applications and be perfectly fine for others
it's fucking annoying

>>105711260
it also breaks things like titlebar operations coded into wm config
fvwm defines and allows user to hook into any window, frame, titlebar options
it allows the user to define the close, iconify (minimize), maximize, shade a window
it allows you to hook for example to make minimized windows into a thumbnails that show on your desktop
it allows you to override close button to for example hide a window and code a iconbutton somewhere to do (if !exists $application) { start $application } else { unhide $application }
user can do anything
but when the application window is only a window nothing works

>>105711260
Providing a proper API for that would solve all of these issues. But developers are just so stuck-up that they flat-out deny that such a feature needs to exist.

It could be this easy:
> App: I want to draw my own title bar.
> System: User choice says you can, but you must report your window geometry.
> App: Ok, here's the window geometry of everything I'm going to draw. Also I'm implementing the following windowing features: [...]

HOW HARD CAN THAT BE. Stop being autistic little assholes.

>>105711323
see this:
>>105711320

You can't define APIs for everything. X was versatily, wayland needs a fucking protocol for everything. It won't happen.

>>105711260
i don't care. my app, my interface. not happy? don't use it.

>>105711356
right, I don't use slop made for trannies

Why not serverside? Consistent and ubiquitous, client doesn't have to repeat the logic.
The only thing I can think of for client side is persistent consistence, as in, looks the way it was when authored vs always looks the way the rest of the system does.

>>105711338
I don't need an API for "everything", but it's clearly appropriate to make one for an issue that divides people like CSD.

It's really easy: if people's opinions on anything split into major groups, make options. Don't just pick the majority vote because in the worst case you risk alienating 49% of your userbase.

The very idea of free software is about freedom of choice. This bullshit reductionist ideology in software development is what kills creativity and freedom.

>>105711449
>break shit for no reason
>demand new API to fix all the shit you pointlessly broke
>nobody can agree on it
>everything is even more fragmented and retarded than before for zero benefit
gg moran

>>105710120
this is a single screenshot btw (with rectangles and text added)

>>105711449
>The very idea of free software is about freedom of choice. This bullshit reductionist ideology in software development is what kills creativity and freedom.
Ok fine, I agree but software is made for the user to use. Without taking user into consideration the software might be made for no one like the software that corporations code for the stuff without asking what the stuff actually needs.
>System: User choice says you can, but you must report your window geometry.
If the user choice says you can't will you allow the wm to control window decorations?
It's not only aesthetics you know, but also accessibility and keeping the same shortcuts and other things work for them.
Unity used to have a global menu that thanks to server side decorations allowed to use the menu to generate a menu from "dash". Basically IDE's/browsers omnibar but like 10-15 years before. They were ahead of their time with this. This was very good for productivity and accessibility, because searching options is good both for people that don't know what they look for and the power users alike. When you only have a buttons in your CSD bar the only way to interact with them is to click them and the buttons in modern applications have symbolic abstract icons which neither convey the physical symbolism associations they used to nor they use colors to distinguish them from another. The most pathological example are google apps icons. In that case they have color, but each of them have the same colors...

>>105711501
I'm not the one who broke this shit. I'm also not "demanding" a new API and when I write stuff, I sure as hell wouldn't make a feature that "people have to agree upon" - I make features that *get the work done*. My project, my choice. However, since I'm also a USER of my own software AND I'm a fan of user choice, I usually provide ways for people to be creative. Also, I listen to my users. I watch them use my software and I take criticism seriously. I'm a guy who writes software for humans, not some kind of shitty dictator-dev. I also don't force anyone to use my software. And I don't care about fragmentation, as long as there is CHOICE.

> noooooo, everything MUST be exactly as I say!!
I don't care, I make my own rules and I'm not afraid to break them, if they turn out to be bad.

>>105711576
>If the user choice says you can't will you allow the wm to control window decorations?
Yes. That's the idea of having user choice. If it turns out to be a problem if the user chooses to let apps draw their own windows, ignore shortcuts etc., just show a warning and move on. If apps implement their shit badly when you tell them that they cannot draw their own window decorations, it's on the respective developer. That's what the warning is for. Nothing is ever perfect, especially not in an environment where everyone is free to do whatever they want.

windows are containers, and their contained processes should be sandboxed. the line between app and system should not be blurred.
however, server-side decorations should be sufficiently adaptive. i would let an app request window management or system commands (like in a context menu) if it has required permissions and have minimal server-side decorations, but at the user's discretion they can always activate server-side control gui.
for example, imagine the decoration being just a border by default, or even nothing, and when a hotkey is pressed, various controls and info will overlay or expand outward from it. or, when permanently enabled, just act like typical server-side decorations that are now accounted for as part of the window's size for formatting.
i haven't really seen my expanding/overlaying approach anywhere. i'll prob prototype this with my Arcan WM project.

>>105711617
I misunderstood you at the beginning. I thought you were against SSD like GNOME devs which have the philosophy "you are either with us or stfu". The people that are used to old paradigm or have their own (superior) workflow implemented in scripts and such are frustrated, because a lot of software turns against them and leave them no choice than to switch to inferior version (from their point of view). Of course it's all subjective, it's hard to measure what is superior. There are many facets to take into consideration. Aethetics are purely subjective, productivity and accessibility as well because there are different workflows and varies among different type of people. Some people prefer to remember lots of shortcuts, other navigate menus, other click buttons, other use omnibars if they are available and some create their own personal scripts. At the same time new developers adopted the mobile patterns and targets only one kind of user. New software for the different groups these people is no longer being made. People cling to old versions and whenever a program they use migrates to such technology that takes back their freedom they are booing. It didn't came from pure hate or something like that. It's like a crying for help (human psychology). They were left behind and it's no small group of people. The developer part of that group will fork projects or create new programs from scratch and they will manage. So we have 2 out of 4 or more groups of people that somehow are served and the rest are fucked.

>>105711769
I agree. It's a complex issue, but I don't think that dictating a single "one-size-fits-all" solution is the best way to do it, especially not how GNOME handles it.

>>105710022 (OP)
its either server decoration, or no decoration

>>105711625
>windows are containers
not really.

>>105711515
looks good

>>105710120
it's hybrid on windows. the server has a default set of decorations but an app can disable them if needed.

>>105711889
in a good system (Arcan) they are. yes, i get in X they are just an allotted drawing surface with no security boundary.

>>105711515
it's good that Windows keeps all of these around. Backward compatibility makes it worth it, even if Microsoft could be much more competent than they are. (they've obviously completely given up on Windows)

>>105711356
>not happy? don't use it.
OK. I won't.

>>105711449
And who is making this API? What's the standard? A window manager will have to communicate with how many different APIs to get information?

>>105711125
> XP was client side
The default behavior on windows would be considered server side. But I don't think windows can really be considered to have a definite client and server. Windows works very differently from X or Wayland.

>>105713750
>But I don't think windows can really be considered to have a definite client and server
it does but the server is the kernel, win32k.sys
dwm.exe is also a client, like WMs on X11

>>105710074
How stupid that is, you have a title bar with lots of unused space, and then another bar below with some icons and lots of unused space. Having a top bar that contains the title, close-button, and icons is much more space-efficient.
Does the browser at least have its tabs in the title bar under KDE?

>>105710120
Bingo

Client Side is retarded. This is just what I could think of rn:
-Where do I need to click if I want to move the window?
-how can I make an application have default position,dimensions, etc?
-How can I tell if a window has focus or not

>>105713860
Who said that window decorations need to be huge?

>>105710022 (OP)
i use kde. i have both. try using a proper de.

>>105711515
the ribbon shit made me go linux-only btw

>>105713860
>you have a title bar with lots of unused space
no, I have Dolphin set to show full path in the window title and I use a condensed font, but even then the title doesn't fit in the title bar. web browser with a longer page title, it doesn't fit in the tab but most of it is readable in the title bar. csd shit ROBS me of this, which is why I have gtk3-nocsd installed for the few apps that need it

>>105714235
>Who said that window decorations need to be huge?
use case for small decorations?

>>105710830
>because it draws its own.
That's called the inner-platform effect and is a known anti-pattern.

>>105710022 (OP)
Server side till I die. Fuck you random app, you are NOT as important as my operating system and the window designs I chose. Fuck you discord, fuck you runelite, fuck you every program that does this fucking bullshit.

>>105710499
It's more work for everyone involved and creates more corner cases and requires more maintenance.

>>105710022 (OP)
Assuming I understand this correctly, the point of a window's title bar is to manage the window in the WM/DE and control where the window is, how big it is, whether it's minimized, etc. so "server-side" seems like the appropriate choice (assuming server-side means drawn and handled by the desktop environment and not the application)

>>105710022 (OP)
Not my problem.
>t.tiling window manager chad

>>105718000
I use XFCE with the NoCSD gtk, and everything except XFCE's own menus quietly bend the knee and accept SSDs.

XFCE's own menus draw an additional title bar but that's not as annoying as pure CSDs so it's fine.

>>105718000
Massive trvthnvke, supremely based post.

>>105713860
faux-mac shit will always be worse than faux-windows

Both are fine, but exluding one from the base Wayland spec is fucking mental.
SSDs are the reason why xterm still looks fitting on a modern desktop. Imagine if it still used a teal twm decoration today.

>>105710120
So basically CSD.
SSR bros? Our cope?

>>105713750
that's not a server.
X is a server because it originally designed to work like a remote desktop connected to mainframe, where all programs are executed.

>>105719728
Ok I will admit if your window stops responding to events, windows will actually decorate it with a titlebar and wash out the content.

>>105718000
this but KDE in my case. I have my title bar sorted as >Close|Minimize|Maximize|Icon|Title
meanwhile CSD cancer puts the close button on the right instead of left, and because I have a floating panel on the top right that close button is inaccessible.
>but why
because I like it this way, and it's somewhat close to how Unity DE had it a decade ago

I hate modern Gnome design so much.

Why would you put stupid fucking hamburger menus everywhere?
Those got popular on phones where they make sense.
They're completely retarded on desktops.

>>105718000
this but KDE in my case. I have my title bar sorted as
>Close|Minimize|Maximize|Icon|Title
meanwhile CSD cancer puts the close button on the right instead of left, and because I have a floating panel on the top right that close button is inaccessible.
>but why
because I like it this way, and it's somewhat close to how Unity DE had it a decade ago

>>105710022 (OP)
Whatever allows for this.

>>105719789
>winME
lmao

>>105718035
No wonder software development is being handed over the indians and LLMs. If you're going to be too lazy to do anything beyond cut and paste, why would anyone hire you instead of cut and paste machines?

>>105719789
Is it true that X11 can do this but Wayland cannot? Yes, I know that's Windows, I'm asking if Wayland can do application containers that aren't rectangles like X11 and Windows can.

>>105719799
Let me dumb it down for you.
It's like designing a car that is both manual and automatic. It's a lot of work for you as the designer but everyone else down the line as well. Manufacturing, shipping, aftermarket suppliers, mechanics, etc.. and that complexity has knock-on effects over the years. You also have a lot more issues with diagnosis, shit breaking down, and user error to deal with.

>>105719848
this is literally just default window contol that has content as a child.
it's like
window = new DefaultWindow(new MyAppContent());
vs
window = new MyCustomWindow(new MyAppContent());

GNOME broke SSDs recently. You used to be able to synchronize it with the window's dark theme, but now the SSDs just use the global setting.
At least you can force CSDs with GTK, so it's not a problem in practice.

>>105719848
Got it. You're lazy and want lots of money for not even thinking. Glad you're being replaced.

>>105719848
that's a solved problem, use a standard interface
oh wait, gnome hates that
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>105713860
says the DE.js user

>>105719848
Lel, k tard. Server rendering decorations or not is just a boolean to implement.

>>105710120
unironically this, if it isn't standardized on on windows, default to macOS, stop reinventing the wheel you stupid faggots, people actually get PAID to do UX/UI at companies that make REAL operating systems.

>>105721004
Mac os just reinvented the wheel with their liquid ui

>>105721004
ui/ux "professionals" have always been diversity hires and always will be diversity hires
especially women (derogatory)

>>105711515
can anyone explain what im looking at here?

>>105721057
Windows numerous ui toolkits. windows also has gtk, qt, ... It's UI is just a big Bazaar. Bigger than linux.

>>105710120
explain your reasoning

>>105710074
nice thumbnail, faggot

>>105721055
nah. at least in the 1990s when they were inventing the GUI for the first time, they actually took UI design seriously. thinking about how the user will interact with the on-screen environment in a serious way is much more difficult than programming. the reason most modern UIs suck, and the reason most modern UI/UX professionals are clueless and know only one trick (remove features like the lazy programmer asked), is because getting it right is so difficult. since everyone's given up, there's no competitive pressure to try.

>>105721110
it unironically peaked with windows XP, it's been a steep down hill ever since

>>105721055
nah. at least in the 1980/90s when they were inventing the mass-user GUI for the first time, they actually took UI design seriously. thinking about how the user will interact with the on-screen environment in a serious way is much more difficult than programming. the reason most modern UIs suck, and the reason most modern UI/UX professionals are clueless and know only one trick (remove features like the lazy programmer asked), is because getting it right is so difficult. since everyone's given up, there's no competitive pressure to try.

there's also no real prestige in it because if you succeed, what you do should be invisible - the UI gets out of the way and the task is easy. you notice a bad UI, but not a good one. all the big successes, the things that now feel like obvious standards and haven't yet been ruined, are things someone once had to sit down and think about.

>>105713860
how do I move this window
genuine question

>>105721052
>Mac os just reinvented the wheel with their liquid ui
and yet it is a 3 trillion dollar company meanwhile shartix is overran by trannies and communists

>>105721057
a lot of native windows programs open at once that all use different UI toolkit versions

>>105721236
use case for moving windows?

>>105721236
either click in a small hole in the titlebar
or
hold meta key and drag any part of the window

You will eat ze no-titlebar nu-GUI

>>105721236
>how do I move this window
Just like you are used to, you click and hold somewhere on the top bar, and drag your mouse.
>>105721749
>either click in a small hole in the titlebar
no, you do not need to do that, you can also click and hold on some icon (even the close button), and instead of triggering that icon it will move the window
>hold meta key and drag any part of the window
that's neat, I didn't even know that
>You will eat ze no-titlebar nu-GUI
this, but unironically

>>105719846
>I'm asking if Wayland can do application containers that aren't rectangles
given wayland impls are all proper compositors with transparencies CSDs, ya, probably. never seen any real case other than rounded corner windows, but I can't fathom you can't take it to a logic extreme.

>>105720982
>app crashes when you hit close

>>105721057
jeets being unable to make anything new

>>105710022 (OP)
why even have those decorations? why are we still using outdated UI trends of the 80s?
>>105721057
abandonware
>>105710499
you can this is just a retarded never ending debate of preferences
>>105721128
no UI was always getting short end of the stick when it came to talent i dont know what was the legacy of these UI monkeys apart from technical achievements and god awful UI trends that we are carrying to this fucking day p much everything they came up with was complete BS
just look at the "professional" software space where youd think they would realize the mistakes and make proper UI instead devs just tell users to get used to whatever trash they cooked up

>>105722485
hitting the close button sends an event to the app which then decides what to do, whatever who handle the decorations. this is why some apps are minimizing into a taskbar icon instead of closing (vlc, qbittorent, ...). learn your shit, suraj.