garthecho wrote:My reason for liking the distinct design for the close button is because accidentally pressing it can have the most devastating effect. It's similar to nature showing bright colors to indicate poison.

The downside is that it severely limited the design options for anchoring the window title in the visual hierarchy. It was actually one of garthecho's designs that broke the log jam.

For a design n00b: What does "anchoring the window title in the visual hierarchy" mean?
The visual hierarchy is just the order in which information in the overall design (in this case the window and it's contents) is intended to be consumed by the viewer. The window title is the starting point in the visual hierarchy for the window, thus the anchor. Which means it needs to have visual qualities necessary for that purpose. While it's not impossible, the common color for the background of both the window and the titlebar, make it somewhat more challenging. That's partly why some of the earlier designs has the title in the highlight color. The problem, as many folks here pointed out, is the difficulty of reading that highlight blue on the near-white background.

mmistretta wrote:Active Window (distinct titlebar, blue line indicating active window)


Active Window, Mouseover "Close" button (let's you know closing = red = bad idea if you do not wish to do this)

I think you did a really good job, mmistretta. It has a clear cut (optimal edge roundings IMO), better than the proposed one. The buttons IMO are fantastic, also clean and modern. The grey is not too dark and provides a really elegant and modern look to it - and smoothely fits into the window content style, while the blue line gently seperates. I also like the red button on hover.
The titlebar looks like it's really an "extension" of the window and not like in the proposed design clearly separated. IMO this is important since the trend tends to more or less merge the title bar and the window content (no clear cut), like e.g. firefox (on windows).

What do you guys think?

colomar wrote:

prosmaninho wrote:And when I mention Gnome, I am not mentioning it as a pejorative to their design work (which is well thought) but their "my way or the highway attitude" that dismissed and alienated user feedback (even leading to multiple forks of the DE) and that fortunately KDE isn't following. It's just that his reply to me seemed to be so dismissive that it felt that way and that is what I was referring to. I wouldn't even have wrote that if his reply wasn't there. I am not mentioning this in reply to the window title work that has been presented here by others and that has been the result of consensus.

Sorry for not just letting this rest, but I feel the need to clear things up. Since your "slippery slope to Gnome design" remark was in reply to my post, I assume that mine was the one which "seemed to be so dismissive it felt that way". In that case, it indeed must have come across completely wrong. I didn't mean to dismiss your input at all! All I wanted to offer was an explanation of why it could have been done that way, to counter a point you made which I felt rather disrespectful towards the work, and, frankly, very dismissive on your part: "distinction between the close button and the other buttons on the bar which is completely pointless from a functionality perspective.".
When someone says that part of the work of someone I respect (alake in this case) is "completely pointless", I feel the need to make clear it isn't. Yes, the points I made for it were not very strong, but even weak points are enough to show something is not "completely pointless".
Actually, I think you're lucky that alake has that remarkable ability to not feel offended. I've read so many comments to his work in this forum which I'd have considered very disrespectful, but he doesn't seem to mind at all. I can tell you that if I have an idea and you go ahead and tell me "it's completely pointless", I'm going to lose my temper, as this does not show any respect at all.

Again, all I wanted to express was "a distinction between minimize/maximize and close isn't completely pointless", which I still maintain it isn't. Just because something is not completely pointless does not mean that it's the best thing in the world, it shouldn't be changed and thus any input to it is dismissed, though. The constructive part of your post (especially the mockup) are very welcome, this is what this thread is for!
So no, we do not have a "This is our design so stfu!" attitude (otherwise we wouldn't even have the public forum in the first place!), but Jens wrote up the "How to comment, criticize and give feedback!" rules for a reason. Maybe I should just have pointed to those rules instead of trying to defend someone else's work, I just felt it would be more constructive to point out possible reasons for this design choice. Okay, I admit, that didn't go as planned. Sorry.

So please, keep your ideas and constructive feedback coming, just maybe try to avoid calling things "completely pointless" in the future. "From my perspective, the differences between minimize/maximize and close are not strong enough to warrant a different design for the close button" would certainly not have triggered that response from me.

mmistretta wrote:I realize I am probably "idea poison" at this point but I wanted to share some ideas.

I am using the QtQuick controls from that particular thread. I have a slight separator which splits min/max from close. Made a few subtle changes on window corners and borders.

Active Window (distinct titlebar, blue line indicating active window)


Active Window, Mouseover "Close" button (let's you know closing = red = bad idea if you do not wish to do this)


Thoughts? Anyone?

prosmaninho wrote:Hey, no problem. I tried to follow those rules the most (and that's why I tried to design a pathetic mock-up to show what I meant).

My wording with "completely pointless" wasn't the best then and wasn't meant to elicit that rsponse or knockdown the work done in this mock-up. I should've said it felt superfluous - something that is not pointless but that it seems to be more than what is necessary to explain the function.
I'll be more thoughtful about how I word my feedback in the future so that I don't pass as someone that is knocking down someone else's work.

Blingy wrote:Why has breeze not been implemented into the newest neon5?

elav wrote:I do not know about you, but I like it more as you see the image below. I think it's better than the title bar is integrated with the toolbar.