SUMMARY The default value (150 ms) of Screen Corner's Activation delay is too high. Although a high value minimizes the risk of accidental triggering, it also makes intended triggering feels slow and unresponsive. It doesn't help that it was actually determined by time -- in normal user's perception it must be determined how far that push into the corner, only to be confused by the inconsistent outcome. I suggest we change it to: 50 ms. The related option can be found at: >> System Settings >> Workspace (section) >> Desktop Behavior >> Left column >> Screen Edges >> Other Settings (section) >> Tested under Manjaro 17.1.12 KDE.
It's also one of the first settings I have to change to a lower value.
>Although a high value minimizes the risk of accidental triggering It's a balance and a very subjective one.
(In reply to David Edmundson from comment #2) > >Although a high value minimizes the risk of accidental triggering > > It's a balance and a very subjective one. "A very subjective one" Please allow me to ask some questions here: 1) Subjective to whom? 2) Have you done any research about this matter? 3) Do you use this function yourself? There is at least one more person here who share the same opinion. I believe it more or less reflects issues like this should be treated more carefully. I'm afraid that dismissing a report arbitrarily within hours, without meaningful discussion, is not a healthy way for a open source software to grow.
> Have you done any research about this matter? You want it changed so I suggest you provide some evidence backing your request. You seem to be using the terms "normal users" and "most users" far too frequently without any base for these claims.
(In reply to Kai Uwe Broulik from comment #4) > > Have you done any research about this matter? > > You want it changed so I suggest you provide some evidence backing your > request. You seem to be using the terms "normal users" and "most users" far > too frequently without any base for these claims. "It's also one of the first settings I have to change to a lower value." You said it.
For me, personally, sure, but I have often times observed Plasma users accidentally bumping into a screen corner and finding themselves stuck in Present Windows, since top left corner defaults to that.
This comes up from time to time. Just changing without proper research would be a disservice to many users. The main problem is that it differs from input device class (touchpad vs. mouse) and also between devices (gamer mouse vs. office mouse). And also personal preference for how fast and how precise one moves the mouse. I have seen users almost panicking when triggered accidentally. I am afraid of changing this setting to suite people with a high precision mouse. If we could detect the class (no, we cannot) we could adapt. Without it needs to be a setting working fir everyone.
(In reply to Martin Flöser from comment #7) > This comes up from time to time. Just changing without proper research would > be a disservice to many users. The main problem is that it differs from > input device class (touchpad vs. mouse) and also between devices (gamer > mouse vs. office mouse). And also personal preference for how fast and how > precise one moves the mouse. I have seen users almost panicking when > triggered accidentally. I am afraid of changing this setting to suite people > with a high precision mouse. If we could detect the class (no, we cannot) we > could adapt. Without it needs to be a setting working fir everyone. Thank you for the explanation and I respect your decision based on that. But please allow me to share a bit information. 1) I'm not a gamer. I'm a pure office user. I'm using pretty common optical mice and thinkpad trackpoints. So is everyone I helped with their computer problems. When I use my mice, it is always for web task and text editing. With those being my background, I still have hard time triggering screen corner reliably with the default 150 ms delay. 2) I feel this has more to do with how fast someone works, and how fast they expect their computer to react, like: Experienced users vs Casual users. Not so much about the actual hardware capabilities. 3) For the sake of discussion, here I can assume it is affected by how precise the pointing devices are -- but the hardware quality in general has been improved. Those "crappy" mice that come with the computer manufacturers, they have been all fairly precise optical mice for more than a decade now. These $5 mice, as cheap and common as they are, don't work well with the default 150 ms delay either. 4) Maybe we can do some test with some cheap mice of the last decade and see our 150 ms default value is still suitable for new hardware?
(In reply to Kai Uwe Broulik from comment #4) > > Have you done any research about this matter? > > You want it changed so I suggest you provide some evidence backing your > request. You seem to be using the terms "normal users" and "most users" far > too frequently without any base for these claims. I think I should answer your doubt with "some evidence to back my request". ### MY EXPERIENCE I have been maintaining computers around me for more than 20 years now. It started when I was in primary school. I have been the administrator and IT support in every institute I studied/worked in. My friends and my relatives call me to fix their computer all the time. ### THE NORMAL USERS My own position mainly revolves around education system: primary schools, middle schools, colleges, universities. But the people I helped come from all walks of life: office workers, students, government officials, police officers, artists, full-time-parents, doctors, psychiatrists, store cashiers, factory runners, programmers, business owners, financial ventures...you name it. Hundreds of them. More than 70% of these people, I don't even know them before I offered them assistance. With that in mind, I think I am justified to call them "NORMAL USERS". And they all have two things in common: 1) They are Microsoft Windows users. 2) They use their computer for work. If you have to be "precise about the numbers". I know 3 exceptions: I use Linux myself. I converted one of my programmer friends into using Linux. One of my relatives had a Macbook for "life-style statement" but he never actually used it. So my perception of "normal, working people" are 99.9% Microsoft Windows Users. Even if you wrote my data off, the market share doesn't lie -- more than 90% desktop users are using Microsoft Windows, give or take. Those who comes from Microsoft Windows, expect a similar experience. It's really that simple. ### WHY I REPORTED MY KDE PLASMA ISSUES After reporting many bugs and judging from the reactions I had, I think some of you might assume me reporting bugs to push my selfish goals to make KDE Plasma the way I want, and thus treated my reports with extra scrutiny. But that can't be further to the truth: 1) I prefer using default settings provided by the developers. 2) I trust (or want to trust) the developers to know better than me. 3) I even adapted to GNOME 3, as quirky as it is. 4) Changing KDE settings is easier after I wrote down the notes. 5) I've switched to KDE Plasma as my main workspace and I can make it comfortable for me. But I reported these bugs for those "normal working people" I mentioned above, especially those who wanted to try KDE Plasma but stopped by all its quirks. I was one of them and I know their pain. You can't hear the voices from those you unknowingly turned away. Someone has to sacrifice their time and energy to become the bridge between you and them. I am trying to be that bridge and let those voice come through. I have zero benefit out of these unappreciated efforts. But I still believe reporting these issues is the right thing to do. I'm not here to challenge your intellectual decisions. It's totally fine that you have your own vision different than serving the needs of the people I mentioned. But I hope my sincere intentions are treated fairly. Right now, I really don't feel like I am welcomed to report bugs as a user here.
Tyson, bug reports are of course welcome. Please don't take anything personal. As I said this comes up rather often and my response is always that we should not just change the default but understand why the new default is better. So far all we know is that there are users who prefer a shorter interval. We do not know why. I think we have a real problem here which goes far beyond the default and that we would break other users if we change the default (the issue doesn't come up so often that it's a huge problem). If someone does the research (user testing) to figure out what is the perfect value or finding the reason why some users prefer another default that would be very welcome. I already outlined some ideas for the different perception, but I doubt these are the only ones. For me it's important to not just change the default. I always consider this as a lazy solution as we don't fix the actual problem.