With a good background contrast, it's easier to have windows stand out from each other. The default config with 0 gap and thin borders make it very hard to see which window is focused.
I use plain i3, with a border color for the focused window and a good contrasting indicator color. I always know what window is focused and where the next window will open.
I have always assumed i3-gaps was just an aesthetic thing. How does the gap let you know what window is focused?
Aesthetics matter in all-day ux. Gaps make content more legible and less fatiguing imho. It looks amazing against a #000 background on oled screens, for example.
I've spent at least the last 6 years removing i3 and installing i3-gaps on all my new machines (and having to comment out gaps in my dotfiles/i3config while I do it). I didn't think I'd ever see this merge. This is awesome!
if the colored gap is left/right of the gap i know the window left/right of the gap is the current one. without gap i would need to look for the other borders to understand which one is focused. i'm sure on a small (<20") screen this problem doesn't exist.
What about the gaps makes it more obvious which window is focused? I would have guessed that the gaps are the same for focused and non-focused windows.
This is not an invalid use-case. Not everybody wants to be 100% focused on productivity to the exclusion of absolutely everything else.
If you want to have something as simple as a background image, the only way you're going to be able to see it when using a tiling window manager is with gaps or transparency. Small gaps is arguably less intrusive than transparency.
People want the thing they’re staring at all day to look pleasing to the eye.
Oh the horror!
It’s kind of weird to me that folks think that aesthetics don’t matter for something that’s so central to one’s life.
The legitimate complaint about/problem with aesthetics is when it becomes the priority and/or hampers functionality. The macOS calendar when it took its extremely skeuomorphic turn was the prime example of this (it was such a poster boy for aesthetics over functionality that Apple responded by getting rid of skeuomorphism altogether).
But aesthetic improvements don’t need to be like that at sll.
The footnote is that I didn't author the idea of gaps in i3. There used to be a loose patch floating around that applied to an old version of i3.
When I came to Linux I quickly got into the unixporn community. After a bit of making Ubuntu look nice, I discovered i3. I then found the gaps patch and rebased it onto the latest version of i3 at the time. Lots of unixporn people liked that and asked me to create a repository for it, so I did -- and i3-gaps was born.
The reason I say it's true enough to say it was born on unixporn is that it's where "a gaps patch" turned into "i3-gaps", and also I reworked so much of that initial small patch that it became something new essentially.
You seem... Bitter.
I don't where is the issue with developers trying to make their product a bit prettier. If overall it draws more attention to it, be it through reddit or anything else, I see that as a win. But nobody forces you to use gaps, and nobody forces you to stop "selling shovels to developers", whatever that is for an occupation. Hope you keep winning big money, and hope i3[-gaps] developers keep doing what they love.
I wager to say that the vast majority of people using i3-gaps have never posted a screenshot of their desktop on reddit. The real use case is "some people like it". The reddit connection is merely evidence of people liking it.
> To each to their own then, whilst I continue to sell shovels to developers and turn over another ten to twenty thousand dollars a month for only that.
There is no need to be so angry over the truth. Assuming you read the comment chain, it's quite simple, the use-cases for this are almost invisible, adds no benefit other than complexity and henceforth, explains why Linux desktop support is ill defined.
So explaining the truth of not supporting complicated prehistoric contraptions is somehow upsetting to folks emotionally attached to their desktops?
EDIT:
Also with your own edits it really does show that the truth indeed hurts those that can't handle it when you are all over the place:
>> What the fuck are you talking about?
Getting very upset and angry. Causing one to sway into irrationality and reduced reading comprehension such as:
>> But saying there's no use-case is crazy .. can you not read?
There is 'little to no use-case' and it is almost invisible even if there is a use-case.
Surely you can read that and know that it isn't absolute. Yet, I'm the one that can't read? Your reading comprehension is quite low when you're angry over a windowing manager.
>> Look at your unhinged, boorish tone, uncouth bragging about how much money you make, your passionate and irrelevant denunciation of the Linux desktop, the deep personal offense you're taking to other people's UI preferences ... it's sheer projection.
I gave the reason why Linux Desktop support is ill defined. It is the truth and clearly it is upsetting you.
>> Do you have bipolar disorder or something? You really don't seem psychologically healthy.
Yet it is not me that is swearing, showing anger and giving short abrasive responses without explanation? Those who don't have a refutation often try to divert the subject to attacking the claimant and to make it all about them.
Please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments, which you've unfortunately been doing repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
Back when I used i3-gaps myself (yes, that time is behind me, sorry), I liked the visual clarity gaps provide. And from years of interacting with the community I know many people feel the same way. It just makes things feel less cluttered.
Out of sheer curiosity, what kind of setup do you use today? I did briefly try i3-gaps myself but ultimately never daily drove it. (nowadays I run Sway, but with no gaps.)
This will make some people sad, but I'm on Mac these days.
I was using i3 until the very end though, and I do dearly miss proper window management. My shortcut setup now is an absolute mess. I technically did run i3-gaps because of some features, but not gaps. This was mostly because I actually mostly used a one window per workspace approach, and if more, then a tabbed layout, so no need for gaps there.
Honestly I ran Mac for 3 years or so and i3 was one of the reasons I went back to the Linux.
That and the "war on hackers" that Apple seem to wage last few years also did not help (breaking uBlock in Safari, inability to permanently disable some system services without having to disable SIP and thus losing ApplePay+disk encryption to name a few)
I'm not sad per-se. I mean I have a strong distaste for modern macOS, but it's not like it matters to me personally what anyone else runs. I'd just prefer to not run it myself.
I will say though that I run Linux more than ever these days. I'd say the reason has more to do with Windows and macOS feeling like worse prospects than Linux actually improving as a desktop OS...
That said, I'd like to take this moment to tangent. I really, really despise the rise of SOC2 theater. It has largely killed Linux workstations at startups, and I am pretty close to quitting out of the industry due to the amount of stress this has cost me.
I like having a small gap. It pleases me to use a Desktop environment that looks like it at least belongs in this decade.
Edit: I realise some people are okay with the brutalist design due to it being the most efficient use of screen space possible, but my brain needs a "pleasing" environment, otherwise it affects my... Mood? I'm not quite sure what it is, but to not muddle the point, having a nice environment makes me more productive
I’m not sure how we determine what looks like it belongs to this decade, but surely these legacy desktop environments don’t push the envelope or tell us much, really.
I mean if we use Windows as a standard, the way to tell which decade we’re in is by counting the number of totally different UI styles we have, right?
I'm not a designer, so I can't really tell you why the little bit of extra negative space helps. Maybe just the fact that a little bit of the background can bleed through makes it seem more modern, and its easier to distinguish focused windows. Default i3 just gives me like... 90iea vibes, but not in a nostalgic way but a regressive way. Maybe it's just a matter of different tastes.
why do books and websites have margins between the text and the edge of the page? because a judicious amount of blank space between elements just looks nice and makes it easier to read. typographers and graphic designers think very hard about this stuff, it isn't useless.
the same thing goes for desktop windows. a bit of space between them makes the interface less cramped. if you're staring at it for 12 hours a day it's nice not to have things so cramped and pushed up against one another.
I'm kind of amazed at the sheer vehemence of the anti-gaps people. they always have to say "it's useless, I don't know why anyone would want it --" [proceeds to ignore all explanation for why it isn't useless and why people do want it] "-- therefore it shouldn't exist and the people who want it are decadent". I've never seen bizarre attitude to any other (optional!) UI feature.
it reminds me of those 20th century modernists who denounced serifs on letters, or ornament on buildings. or idk puritans and icon-smashers or something. miserable tube-brained people.
At work I have a 43" "cheap" monitor that is more of a TV than a monitor. Meaning, at the very edges the backlight isn't behind the pixels at a desk viewing distance. i3+gaps allowed me to put a gap around the left, right, and bottom few pixels, so my text right at the edge wasn't unreadable.
I wonder why you phrased your thoughts this way. The benefits are the additional options which were implemented in the fork. If there were no benefits then
1. no one would use this, which clearly isn't the case and
2. this merge wouldn't have occurred
Other than aesthetics, In a standard window manager titlebars and task bars often pad the top and bottom of the screen, I run without either so having borders still feels more natural in some respects.
Your comments here are not the kindest and they seem pretty ignorant and arrogant.
There is no complicated contraption here. A couple tens of thousands of lines of code that makes arranging windows in any way you want completely effortless is a useful piece of software. Your window manager that just works (Windows, Mac) probably uses more lines of code just for its animations.
Different people use their computer differently with different pieces of software and have different needs.
Ignoring the combination matrix of Linux desktop distros combined with the multiple non-standard components in the desktop stack excluding the kernel (which is the only standard component) is an order of magnitude of complexity, qualifying the implementation, level of support, and testing and as a 'complicated contraption', including this project.
> Different people use their computer differently with different pieces of software and have different needs.
With the giant difference being how 'software support' is defined which for almost all Linux Desktop distros out there, is no standard distro meaning it being an ill defined, free for all.
If you read my first comment, I'm talking about both the project in this post and the entire Linux Desktop with the insecure X11 windowing system(s) are the extremely complicated contraption; part of the Linux Desktop ecosystem.
I don't care about the shovels that you sell to developers, and you shouldn't care that some people want to have a little fun with their desktop. You don't do that, and don't think it's a "real" use-case. Fine, we get it. You made that extremely clear several times.
There is nothing to refute. We don't agree with you, we don't care about your opinion, and we're tired of hearing it.
> I don't care about the shovels that you sell to developers, and you shouldn't care that some people want to have a little fun with their desktop. You don't do that, and don't think it's a "real" use-case. Fine, we get it. You made that extremely clear several times.
Clearly stating the reason why Desktop Linux support is eternally ill defined due to the moving parts of the desktop stack is the whole point of this, and no serious person would accept or cater support to a tiny minority of complaining Linux users to fix their highly tweaked non-standard desktop because they messed around with their dotfiles.
> There is nothing to refute. We don't agree with you, we don't care about your opinion, and we're tired of hearing it.
Who exactly is we? You don't speak for the one pretending to 'refute' my claims about the Linux Desktop ecosystem. They can explain why for themselves.
My claims about the Linux Desktop in my comments remain irrefutable, an evergreen fact and still no rebuttal to it exists because it is the truth.
Indeed, some folks found the feature unnecessary at first, but somebody found an OK way to implement it, and eventually it became popular enough that they decided to merge it back into mainline. Little drama and everyone is happy in the end. Actually I think this is more like the OSS ideal.
