Well, here goes nothing...

After recently setting up about a dozen new Fedora Core 9 installs for a new 9-screen wraparound display system for one of our labs, I had my first real "usability test" experience with KDE 4.1. All I wanted to do was leave four icons on the desktop of the box responsible for controlling the rest that would kick off the scripts for bringing up/running/bringing down the display system, so I didn't have to explain to the researchers working there how to run things from the command line.

It was a nearly thirty minute ordeal to get this simple task done, and quite possibly the most frustrating experience I've had with a computer since the first week I dealt with Vista on my home PC. I was flabbergasted why something that was so easy and straightforward ten years ago was suddenly so incredibly convoluted.

The process of discovering what new steps were required involved actually leaving the lab I was in (as it lacked Internet access) and traveling to a different lab where I had both login credentials and a working internet connection, researching what magic incantation was necessary, and then trudging back to the first lab to try the latest suggestion (which was inevitably wrong). Most forum posts I was able to find via google search dealt with the "add widget" functionality accessible via the right-click menu, which of course is useless in this situation. I am not exactly sure whether some sequence of suggestions or just random spazzing out in the interface lead us to creating a shortcut in konqueror then dragging it to the desktop, but that was what we finally managed to make work. Except now the icons displayed no text on the desktop--that is, until we figured out which of the several "Name" and/or "Title" entries in the icon properties was associated with the text of an icon on the desktop.

I had heard that KDE4 was being designed from the ground up to enable new ways of presenting an interface to a user, and my primary area of interest has always been Human/Computer Interaction, so when I heard all the naysayers about 4.0 I actively defended what was being done (even though I never used it, waiting, as I was told to, for 4.1, for it to be "ready for the public"). Now I'm pretty red in the face.

So I came here looking for some justification or at least explanation as to WHY things have turned out this way... And in another thread I get pointed to Aaron Seigo's blog post about "No more desktop icons in 4.1," reading his post carefully followed by his hostile replies to those upset by the change... And I'm left just stunned.

I think enabling new ways to interact with (or new definitions of) a 'Desktop' is a great idea. But I fail to see how having a menu option for 'Create a Desktop Shortcut' in the default context menu for the desktop is incompatible with a new paradigm. They're not mutually exclusive. Yes, the behavior can be replicated via a new multi-step, non-obvious interaction... But if I give this to one of my users, they're not going to think to try those things, much less be *happy* about having to learn a longer, less intuitive way of doing something than how they did it yesterday.

One of the things I always liked about the KDE installs I've used is they were smart enough to realize that sometimes they don't know best and they need to get out of my way, evidenced by Konsole usually being the first entry on my context menu. Even though a GUI provides an "easier" and "more powerful" way to interact with the machine in front of me, no effort was made to prevent me from using the older paradigm to interact with the machine.

The KDE developers may think that "desktop icons aren't really such a big deal to people," and dismiss those of us who are a bit perturbed by this change, but I think they should realize that adding one entry to the default context menu is even *less* of a big deal, and would make a lot of people a lot happier.

Now if such an entry is already in development for KDE 4.2, feel free to tell me so and I'll shut up and stay w/ FC8 until February when it's available. Otherwise, I'd seriously request someone consider it (or point me to a good set of documentation on how to add context menu items and/or programatically create icons on a KDE 4.x desktop and I'll do it myself).

Thanks.

cbimerrow wrote:
So I came here looking for some justification or at least explanation as to WHY things have turned out this way... And in another thread I get pointed to Aaron Seigo's blog post about "No more desktop icons in 4.1," reading his post carefully followed by his hostile replies to those upset by the change... And I'm left just stunned.

His replies were "hostile" because

a) He was replying to people who were about ten times more hostile and

b) They had utterly failed to understand what his blog-post was about. And no matter of explaining made them understand what the deal was about

So when you combine very hostile people who absolutely refuse to listen when you tell them that they have misunderstood the issue, things can get pretty ugly.

The KDE developers may think that "desktop icons aren't really such a big deal to people,"

I really fail to see the problem here. I have icons on my desktop as we speak. Am I missing something here?

Now if such an entry is already in development for KDE 4.2, feel free to tell me so and I'll shut up and stay w/ FC8 until February when it's available. Otherwise, I'd seriously request someone consider it (or point me to a good set of documentation on how to add context menu items and/or programatically create icons on a KDE 4.x desktop and I'll do it myself).

Can't you just drag icons from Dolphin to the desktop?

Using 4.1.2 here. Opening the Menu and right-clicking a menu item gives me the choice of "Add to favourites" "Add to desktop" "Add to panel".
Other than that, there still is the folderview, letting it point to whichever location you want, even the old desktop folder.
Then at last you could try this workaround: Drag any application from the menu to the desktop. Then configure the newly created icon and edit the programm it points to. And maybe the icon, too, if you wish.

Janne wrote:His replies were "hostile" because

a) He was replying to people who were about ten times more hostile and

b) They had utterly failed to understand what his blog-post was about. And no matter of explaining made them understand what the deal was about

So when you combine very hostile people who absolutely refuse to listen when you tell them that they have misunderstood the issue, things can get pretty ugly.

And I agree he had every right to be hostile to the people on his *own* blog. I'd do the same thing. Kudos for him for not being a censored little PR slave. The problem is people who ask (nicely, even) what's up with the lack of desktop icons get pointed to that flame war over the issue instead of a reasoned explanation as to why things are the way they are.

I really fail to see the problem here. I have icons on my desktop as we speak. Am I missing something here?

Maybe I'm missing something here? Is there something weird about FC9's KDE install that removes a create shortcut option from the default context menu? I'd be happy to be proven wrong here.

Can't you just drag icons from Dolphin to the desktop?

Did you read my post? Let me try to explain more directly...

The existence of a new, non-obvious method to achieve similar results is not a reason to disallow the old, familiar, simple method for doing something from being used.

Yes, you can drag them from Dolphin (if you can find Dolphin, since there's nothing like the old 'Home Folder' icon in the KDE 4.1 installs I've seen), but if I give a clean KDE 4.1 install to a user who's been using KDE 3.x for years now they won't think of that, they'll just want to know why they can't just right-click and create a shortcut.[hr]

neverendingo wrote:Using 4.1.2 here. Opening the Menu and right-clicking a menu item gives me the choice of "Add to favourites" "Add to desktop" "Add to panel".

I found this as a common answer when I was digging through google results... And I think it comes out of a misunderstanding. It assumes I just want a faster way to access something that's already in the menu, but I don't. The things I was trying to create icons for were custom scripts we wrote and applications we developed in house.

Other than that, there still is the folderview, letting it point to whichever location you want, even the old desktop folder.

Yes, but the folder view (when I used it) didn't behave like a desktop at all. It arranged the icons automatically and didn't let me place them where I wanted them. Also it only displayed the first five or so characters of the name of any shortcuts I created, which make them sadly worthless (Since most of them were of the form "Start ....").

Then at last you could try this workaround: Drag any application from the menu to the desktop. Then configure the newly created icon and edit the programm it points to. And maybe the icon, too, if you wish.

Yes, that would work... But again, is completely non-obvious and non-intuitive to someone who has been used to being able to right click and choose "Create Shortcut" for the last ten years.

cbimerrow wrote:Yes, but the folder view (when I used it) didn't behave like a desktop at all. It arranged the icons automatically and didn't let me place them

This is fixed in trunk (and hence in KDE 4.2).

cbimerrow wrote:I found this as a common answer when I was digging through google results... And I think it comes out of a misunderstanding. It assumes I just want a faster way to access something that's already in the menu, but I don't. The things I was trying to create icons for were custom scripts we wrote and applications we developed in house.

I just tried this just to make sure. Granted, a very simple bash-script saved in my /home just for the sake of trying.

The bashscript was:

Code: Select all

#!/bin/sh

kdialog --warningyesno "Just testing"

I.e. it should just open a dialog saying "Just testing".

It does require the widgets to be unlocked, but otherwise I could just drag it to the desktop and it would work as expected when clicked upon (that is, showing the dialog box assuming the script had the execute flag set). Once it is on the desktop, it is quite safe to lock the widgets again.

In other words, for custom-scripts it is one extra step to get the functionality you need. It is not turned off.

As far as adding it programmatically, this is what the entry in the plasma-appletsrc file looks like (for OpenSUSE, that is in ~/.kde4/share/config/plasma-appletsrc):

Code: Select all

[Containments][1][Applets][48][Configuration]
Url=file:///home/user/test.sh   

I haven't looked into what the parts bewteen[ and ] part means but it doesn't look impossible to do by using some script of some kind. All it would take, in a rather simplicstic manner, is:

1. Figure out what the numbers between square-brackets means.
2. Feed the script the complete path to the file in question.
3. Add the above to plasma-appletsrc, replacing whatever is after file:/// with whatever is in 2.

You might want to do that with a servicemenu. A servicemenu is essentially divided into two parts: one .desktop file, and one executable.

In this case, the .desktop file may look like this:

Code: Select all

[Desktop Entry]
Type=Service
Version=0.1
Encoding=UTF-8
X-KDE-ServiceTypes=KonqPopupMenu/Plugin,all/all
Actions=Add_shortcut;
X-KDE-Priority=TopLevel

[Desktop Action Add_shortcut]
Name=Add Shortcut
Icon=kdeapp
Exec=shortcut



Which means the entry should show up when right-clicking on anything. When the "Add shortcut" entry is chosen, the script named shortcut is launched which is where the logic takes place. But see above about how I don't know how that logic would work (don't know the internals of plasma).

The .desktop file should be placed in /usr/share/kde4/services/ServiceMenus (depedning somewhat on your distro). The executable somewhere in the path (i.e. /usr/local/bin).

Hopefully this is a start.

Hi cbimerrow,
I've been trying to understand what's going on with KDE4 as well, and I've been very frustrated like you at what seem to be counterintuitive design decisions. However, I've been trying to be open minded about it, and as I understand it the idea is something like this:

Instead of starting with the conventional desktop and adding features, I believe the idea was to create a neutral framework capable of adapting to whatever UI paradigms come along. So, instead of hard-coding the traditional desktop metaphor into KDE4, and adding kludges to accomodate new ideas, they created an environment where all these traditional components are "demoted" to widget-like objects.

The downside of this is that it falls far short as a traditional desktop for the time being. The upside is that KDE is more flexible to adapt to future UI metaphors, and it'll be far more customizable than we could ever dream.

Bear in mind I say this as a mere user; I'm not a developer, and I'm not even an apologist. Just trying to understand this all in a positive light, and that's my understanding so far.

cbimerrow wrote:Maybe I'm missing something here? Is there something weird about FC9's KDE install that removes a create shortcut option from the default context menu? I'd be happy to be proven wrong here.

So, the problem here is not that KDE does not support icons on the desktop (it does), but that you can't add an icon by right-clicking on the desktop, but you have to drag it from Dolphin?

If that is the case, then this isn't a major issue. Why? Because the functionality that you want (icons on the desktop) is still there, adding them just works in a slightly different way than it did in previous version.

Now, there are several things to say about that:

a) things change.
b) It might be implemented in a future version
c) This isn't a major issue, since the functionality is still there, and the learning-curve to the new system is really low

The existence of a new, non-obvious method

I don't think that drag & dropping is a "new, non-obvious method"....

to achieve similar results is not a reason to disallow the old, familiar, simple method for doing something from being used.

It could be that it's not working because

a) it's not implemented yet

or

b) It was considered redundant

Yes, you can drag them from Dolphin (if you can find Dolphin, since there's nothing like the old 'Home Folder' icon in the KDE 4.1 installs I've seen)

Just how hard would it be to find the default filemanager? If the user can't find a filemanager, then surely he's also incapable of adding icons to the desktop, no matter how they are added.

but if I give a clean KDE 4.1 install to a user who's been using KDE 3.x for years now they won't think of that, they'll just want to know why they can't just right-click and create a shortcut.

I already gave some reasons why the feature is not there. That said, I have always felt that dragging and dropping is a more "direct" way of adding shortcuts. It's more tangible.

Yes, that would work... But again, is completely non-obvious and non-intuitive to someone who has been used to being able to right click and choose "Create Shortcut" for the last ten years.

Like I said: things change. It might be that this change is only temporary (have you checked bugs.kde.org?). If we were hell-bent of maintaining old behavior for the sake of "this is the way it has always worked!" we would still be using CLI.

If we can assume that the problems with folderview (icons moving around etc.) are fixed in 4.2, can we assume that this problem has been fixed? I just checked, and if you use folderview, you do have the "create new..."-entry in the context-menu.

Patience, young Padawan .

The fact that the Desktop isn't a directory anymore still bugs me. The Desktop is a directory in *every* other desktop, including Vista and Leopard. What made KDE1 so great from its Unix predecessors was the tight integration between the desktop and the file manager. Despite Aaron's angry protests to the contrary, Folderview is NOT the same thing!

In years past if I wanted to download a file, I would just drag a link out of the webpage and onto the desktop. But I finally switched to KDE this week, and that stopped working. I could drag to the desktop (if I remembered to unlock it first), but what I got was not a file, but an URL! Once again KDE4 kicks POLA in the nuts. Can I drag to the Folderview? I don't know, I haven't tried it. But what I do know is that a simple, straightforward, and intuitive action was removed just because someone thought icons on the desktop were unattractive. Which has the better usability? Click, drag and drop? Or click, select "save to", navigate a file dialog, then click "ok"? Call me an obsolete troglodyte, but I think the former is easier and more usable.

That's just one example out of dozens. After a week of intensive use of KDE 4.1.2 (and 4.1.3), I've come to the conclusion that the desktop is nothing more than a full screen panel.

cbimerrow wrote:The problem is people who ask (nicely, even) what's up with the lack of desktop icons get pointed to that flame war over the issue instead of a reasoned explanation as to why things are the way they are.

Sounds like you're talking about my post. My intention wasn't to point the person to the flame war in the comments, but rather the actual blog post. I think it explains how icons work in KDE4 pretty well.

This is how I see things:

The default "desktop" in KDE4 is no longer a full screen file manager pointing to a directory. It's a place where you can place widgets. You can't create or move files to the desktop - where would they end up? Remember, desktop != ~/Desktop.

Now, some people want to have icons on their desktops. As far as I know, there are three ways to do it:

1. Add a widget that acts as a link to the file. You can resize/rotate the widget (as any other widget) and remove it without deleting the file.
2. Add a widget that acts as a file browser and make it point to a directory. Folder View is such a widget.
3. Change "desktop". In KDE4 it's called Desktop Activity, and you can change its type in the Desktop Settings dialog. Screenshot here.
   If you choose Folder View you'll basically get a Folder View (the "widget") as your desktop.

Now, wouldn't you agree that it's silly to provide a "New icon" in the right-click context menu? (Note that I'm talking about the default desktop). Because you can't create anything on the desktop (someone has to correct me if I'm wrong here), but you can add things: widgets, panels, icons etc. Yes, even icons. But why should that widget get its own context menu item?

Did you ever look in the Add Widgets dialog when you tried to add the icons to your desktop? In my opinion, that's the most logical place to look if you want to use the first approach (1).
(2) should be pretty straight-forward if you want to create a new file on the desktop "the old way". In trunk the Folder View is added to your desktop by default, and you have a "Create New" item in the right click menu.

Brandybuck wrote:The fact that the Desktop isn't a directory anymore still bugs me. The Desktop is a directory in *every* other desktop, including Vista and Leopard.

Should every desktop be identical in every way?

besides, there's nothing stopping you from creating a directory called "Desktop"; and pointing a folderview to it. You can also use the folderview as a containment, which would then give you a more "traditional" desktop if that's what you prefer.... What is the problem here?

In years past if I wanted to download a file, I would just drag a link out of the webpage and onto the desktop. But I finally switched to KDE this week, and that stopped working.

I just tried dragging an image from this Firefox-window to a folderview. It worked beautifully.

But what I do know is that a simple, straightforward, and intuitive action was removed just because someone thought icons on the desktop were unattractive.

Icons on the desktop encourage "messy" computing. Folderview is a lot more elegant, powerful and cleaner solution. There's way too many times when I see someone with a desktop that is absolutely brimming with icons and other ****. Folderview at least tries to bring some sense of all that. But if you want a traditional messy desktop you can have it. Again: no problem as far as I can see.

Which has the better usability? Click, drag and drop? Or click, select "save to", navigate a file dialog, then click "ok"? Call me an obsolete troglodyte, but I think the former is easier and more usable.

Drag and drop is working fine, even over the internet. I'm really not seeing the problem here....

einar wrote:
This is fixed in trunk (and hence in KDE 4.2).

That is helpful, but it still doesn't explain why an "Add New..." would be so harmful to have.[hr]

Kryten2X4B wrote:

I just tried this just to make sure. Granted, a very simple bash-script saved in my /home just for the sake of trying.

Yes, but what I was responding to was the suggestion to drag-and-drop an icon located in the Menu. My point was such an icon did not exist because we were using custom rolled software. I do appreciate you pointing me in the right direction to tackle this programatically, however.

cbimerrow wrote:
That is helpful, but it still doesn't explain why an "Add New..." would be so harmful to have.

You do have it. In the folderview. And if you insist on not using folderview, why can't you simply drag and drop?

Why do I get the feeling that you are just trying to make this in to a problem, when in reality no problem exists?

Janne wrote:So, the problem here is not that KDE does not support icons on the desktop (it does), but that you can't add an icon by right-clicking on the desktop, but you have to drag it from Dolphin?

No, the problem is that in the process of introducing a new paradigm an existing operation from an older that has been around for over a decade which is easily understood by even novice users has been arbitrarily removed.

If that is the case, then this isn't a major issue. Why? Because the functionality that you want (icons on the desktop) is still there, adding them just works in a slightly different way than it did in previous version.

But it IS a major issue because this is how computer users EXPECT a computer with a GUI to behave. This is how computers have behaved since 1995 and the existence of NEW ways of interaction in no way makes a previous interaction method invalid.

Now, there are several things to say about that:

a) things change.
b) It might be implemented in a future version
c) This isn't a major issue, since the functionality is still there, and the learning-curve to the new system is really low

I have to respectfully disagree. The learning curve in this instance is in no way low, as it requires a *leap of logic* for you to determine the new way to achieve what you want. I'm not being conceited when I say I am something of an expert computer user. I was lucky enough to grow up with them, lucky enough to work with them in a professional capacity for over half my life now, and spent a third of my life in school learning about them, and it still took me over thirty minutes and several Google searches to figure out how to create an icon on the desktop! And I wasn't the only person working on this, either!

After regaling my Boss with this story, someone who's expertise with Linux dwarfs my own, he explained to me that he had the *same problem* trying to use KDE 4.1 at home and had finally given up in frustration with the new interface and gone back to KDE 3.x. This led to further coworkers wandering over to the cubicle and joining the conversation to complain as well about how difficult it was to accomplish the same tasks in 4.1 on the newer machines in our labs than it was using KDE 3.x on their desktops.

The fact that some other (completely unrelated) way to accomplish this exists doesn't excuse the fact that people's expectations are being turned on their heads. Even allowing your claim that the new interface has a lower learning curve than the old one to stand, it's still wrong and completely to punish people who have learned the old way of doing things at the same time you reward new users! A windowed environment has a lower learning curve than a CLI, but Konsole is still the first option in the right click context menu!

I don't think that drag & dropping is a "new, non-obvious method"....

It is when you take into account "Open File Manager, Create Shortcut *in* File Manager, Drag Shortcut to Desktop" is a pretty big logical leap from "Right Click on Desktop"

It could be that it's not working because

a) it's not implemented yet

And if that's the case, as I said, please tell me and I'll be happy to shut up about it. But all the answers I seem to get consist of "But the new way is soooo much better!" which is especially frustrating because it isn't.

b) It was considered redundant

So is the CLI for most things in a modern desktop, but it's still the first option in the context menu...

Just how hard would it be to find the default filemanager? If the user can't find a filemanager, then surely he's also incapable of adding icons to the desktop, no matter how they are added.

No, he's not. My Grandmother can right click on the desktop and create a shortcut, I've seen her do it. She wouldn't know where to look in the menu for the file manager, or understand what it has to do with creating shortcuts.

I already gave some reasons why the feature is not there. That said, I have always felt that dragging and dropping is a more "direct" way of adding shortcuts. It's more tangible.

No, you really haven't. You've just explained that other ways exist to do it, not why having the 'Create New...' Menu option where people expect it to be is so harmful.

Like I said: things change. It might be that this change is only temporary (have you checked bugs.kde.org?). If we were hell-bent of maintaining old behavior for the sake of "this is the way it has always worked!" we would still be using CLI.

And yet, as I have said, we still are using the CLI. I'll keep repeating this until someone understands: Konsole is the first option in the default context menu.[hr]

Hans wrote:

1. Add a widget that acts as a link to the file. You can resize/rotate the widget (as any other widget) and remove it without deleting the file.
   

Mayhaps it's something Fedora has screwed up, but no such widget exists in my installation.

Add a widget that acts as a file browser and make it point to a directory. Folder View is such a widget.

Which in itself is useful but does not help accomplish what I was trying to do.

Change "desktop". In KDE4 it's called Desktop Activity, and you can change its type in the Desktop Settings dialog. Screenshot here.
If you choose Folder View you'll basically get a Folder View (the "widget") as your desktop.

Doesn't exist in Fedora Core 9, at least not in a place that could be found without digging, definitely not in the right-click-context-menu. This is KDE 4.1.1. Again, if this is something Fedora has screwed up I'll be happy to take it up with them. And again, this still requires a leap of logic, since there's nothing there that tells the user "Confused as to why this system isn't letting you do the things you've done for 13 years? CLICK HERE!"

Now, wouldn't you agree that it's silly to provide a "New icon" in the right-click context menu?

No, I don't agree that it's silly because THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE EXPECT TO BE THERE. Turning people's expectations on their heads for no reason is pointless!

(Note that I'm talking about the default desktop). Because you can't create anything on the desktop (someone has to correct me if I'm wrong here), but you can add things: widgets, panels, icons etc. Yes, even icons. But why should that widget get its own context menu item?

Because people expect it to be there.

Did you ever look in the Add Widgets dialog when you tried to add the icons to your desktop? In my opinion, that's the most logical place to look if you want to use the first approach (1).

Yes, I did look there. In fact, that was one of the most frustrating parts of the entire experience: opening the add widgets dialog and getting presented a list of completely useless toy applets, mostly with the functional equivalence of xeyes, and not a single widget at all resembling something like "Shortcut".

(2) should be pretty straight-forward if you want to create a new file on the desktop "the old way". In trunk the Folder View is added to your desktop by default, and you have a "Create New" item in the right click menu.

Except that a new user has no idea what this black box labeled "Desktop" is. Or why operations work inside of this black box and not outside of it (or vice-versa). But at least, supposedly, the folderview widget is getting improved behavior in 4.2 so I'll suspend judgement on it until February.

But even then, the existence of a "Create New..." menu option in the folderview widget only served to infuriate those of us working on the system further. "Why, if they'll let me do this HERE, won't they let me do it THERE where I want to?"

If a method exists to take an existing .desktop file that's dropped onto the desktop and create a widget out of it, it should be possible to just skip the drag-and-drop step and create one directly from the context menu.[hr]

Janne wrote:You do have it. In the folderview. And if you insist on not using folderview, why can't you simply drag and drop?

If it can be implemented in the folderview, why can't it be implemented where everyone expects it to be? Again I ask, what is wrong with allowing people to use the paradigms they're used to, by default? We already do that with CLI users! Konsole is still the first option in the desktop context menu!

Why do I get the feeling that you are just trying to make this in to a problem, when in reality no problem exists?

Because that's what you want to see. You want what you believe to be true, and (admittedly, now) will convince yourself that someone who has had problems with it is simply trying to stir up trouble, not trying to point out a real problem.

Three different people with experience levels going from advanced to bona-fide experts taking thirty minutes to figure out how to accomplish a simple, thirteen year old operation and being frustrated to the point of disgust by it is a problem. A quick google search will show that I'm not the only person complaining about this, not the only person confused by this, and not the only person confused by the explanations as to why the old way of doing things can't coexist with the new. Even if the answer of how to achieve this action is the first result in a google search, it shouldn't require a google search to create a desktop shortcut!