The window picker arranges previews to be as space-efficient as possible, so the thumbnails are bigger (while keeping their relative size compared to each other) and identifying windows is easier. We consider this more important than a more predictable ordering like LRU, in particular as the window picker is primarily aimed at mouse/touch input and LRU makes most sense in keyboard-driven components (like the app switcher).

But it's useless to try and find something here. LRU atleast gives you a starting point.

Also, I don't understand your logic. You're saying that thumbnails are bigger and saying it's more important that predictable ordering, but what has thumbnail size to do with ordering?

(In reply to Jason Hunter from comment #2)
> But it's useless to try and find something here. LRU atleast gives you a
> starting point.

Quotation needed. The current ordering dates back four years ago, yet we've only had a single bug report claiming it was "useless". Sorry, but you need to provide a better reason than "just because I say so".


> Also, I don't understand your logic. You're saying that thumbnails are
> bigger and saying it's more important that predictable ordering, but what
> has thumbnail size to do with ordering?

Take the case of three smaller, non-maximized windows (N) and two maximized ones (M). With the current strategy, window previews would be lay out somewhat like this:

  N   N   N
    M   M

When using LRU order, you'd easily end up with:

 N   M

 N   M

   N

As the available screen size is the same, the only way to fit that layout is by making thumbnails smaller.

Feel free to read up on bug 582650 (and also note that number of duplicates - this clearly was fixing an issue that was bugging users, while currently the only data point in favor of LRU is "someone on the internet says so".

I should also add that the LayoutStrategy is pluggable, so it is possible to replace it with an extension.

Created attachment 335561 [details]
Lots of Windows

Right, I get your point, but I think the foundation should be rooted in logic and since there is no human logic applied to placement of windows, how can humans find anything in this arrangement? 

Atleast with LRU, you've got some form of logic where a reasoning individual can find what he's looking for. 

With so small text and no overlaying icon in the activities overview, I feel that it's a mess to find anything at all (see attached photo). 

Surely, this cannot be the best solution.

This is just getting mental;)

The word I was looking for is: UNPREDICTABLE.

It's different every time I go into the overview screen. Imagine if ALT-TAB was like this;)

Can we please fix this?

There is no logic applied to the layout. 

The layout is determined by a computer programs logic; this is wrong. It should be determined by the logic of a human brain, as this layout is meant for a human. 

If you want to find a window in the overview mode, your brain resorts to logic to find it and naturally you would look at the bottom for a window you just used; there is no human brain that would look at the middle of the screen, for example.

GNOME is going to shut down bugzilla.gnome.org in favor of  gitlab.gnome.org.
As part of that, we are mass-closing older open tickets in bugzilla.gnome.org
which have not seen updates for a longer time (resources are unfortunately
quite limited so not every ticket can get handled).

If you can still reproduce the situation described in this ticket in a recent
and supported software version, then please follow
  https://wiki.gnome.org/GettingInTouch/BugReportingGuidelines
and create a new ticket at
  https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/issues/

Thank you for your understanding and your help.