Ubuntu debates usability changes

Ever since last July, when Mark Shuttleworth called on Ubuntu to surpass Mac OS X in desktop design within two years, Ubuntu mailing lists and blogs have become one of the main places to go for detailed discussions about GNU/Linux usability. However, the discussions can become convoluted and acrimonious, as developers argue the logic of design principles. A case in point is the discussion of Ubuntu's new notification guidelines on the ubuntu-devel list over the past two weeks, which quickly turned into a discussion of whether notifications should be used at all.

The discussion centers around the new guidelines for notification messages, which typically appear by the notification tray in GNOME. These guidelines were announced in Mark Shuttleworth's blog entry for February 21. Both the blog and the guidelines include screen shots to illustrate what they are describing.

The problem is that the now-standard notification bubbles (so-called for their shape) are easily missed because they disappear after a few seconds, and they often point to icons in the system tray, which users may find hard to click. For these reasons, the guidelines call for a reduction in their use, although acknowledging the possibility that they might still be useful in unspecified circumstances.

Whenever possible, notification bubbles will, in the next Ubuntu release, be replaced with a notification in an existing window; for instance, when a web browser has blocked up a popup, the notification could display in a dialog above the web page, using the browser's built-in notification system. More radically, when a notification needs user input, but doesn't need an immediate response — for instance, when a printer is detected, but the necessary driver is missing — it will be displayed in an alert box that opens beside the system tray without taking the focus away from the user's current window.

In cases such as a low battery reading, when a quick response is needed, the window or alert box will display the basic message, followed by, when the user clicks it, a dialog, possibly with a different color background. The guidelines refer to this arrangement as "morphing," and suggest that it will help prevent the accidental selection of a button when the cursor moves to the dialog. Why accidental selection is perceived as a problem, though, is unspecified.

The advantages of the proposed alert boxes is that, unlike notification bubbles, they remain on the desktop, and provide dialogs that are easier to click than a system tray icon.

Discussion of these new guidelines quickly followed Shuttleworth's blog entry, wandering across several threads in ubuntu-devel in February and March. Some of the discussion called for citations to support a usability assertion, as when Jordan Mantha told Mat Tomaszewski of the Canonical design team, the group responsible for the guidelines, that "'trust us, we have our reasons' is not going to very convincing to many people."

As discussion continued, it soon became apparent that at least some Ubuntu designers outside Canonical distrust those employed by the company. For instance, Scott Kitterman remarked:

Similarly, Martin Owens complained that "It's as if the people at Canonical had taken a politics course and decided to deliberately alienate those people who are not inside of Canonical."

To such comments, Mat Tomaszewski replied several times, with patience and enthusiasm for the tasks at hand, while Matthew Paul Thomas, another Canonical employee, explained in a similar tone that usability efforts were just getting started, and were expensive enough that "much of the time we will have to rely on common sense".

At one point, the language became so heated that Mark Shuttleworth intervened to call one developer's comments "not constructive" — a rare occurrence on Ubuntu lists compared to those of some projects, due to the code of conduct by which developers agree to abide.

However, for the most part, discussion remained civil. Matthew Paul Thomas defended the new guidelines, pointing out that:

Thomas also summarized potential problems with notice bubbles: either they disappear after a few seconds and can disappear before users notice them, or else they persist and distract users. In addition, alerts and windows are easier to use than small, often indistinguishable icons.

By contrast, Lars Wirzenius presented a case against all notifications, saying flatly that:

All Wirzenius wanted was essential notifications, suggesting that "All applications should, in my opinion, strive to interrupt the user as little as possible, especially by default."

Wirzenius' position was soon challenged by other developers in ways that show some of the considerations necessary in usability design. Chow Loong Jin questioned Wirzenius' assertion that default settings should be designed for those who use their computer as a "tool" rather than a "toy," arguing that the tool users would know how to change the defaults while the toy users would not.

Similarly, Ted Gould contended that, since toy users are probably a majority, the defaults should be settings that they want. In the same post, he also suggests that:

However, Tomaszewski indicated that some ability to change levels of notifications would be available via a "Do not disturb" mode that would block at least some standard notifications.

What made this discussion especially interesting was how it brought out both the general and specific issues that arise in usability. For instance, Mathew Paul Thomas responded to the suggestion that using an application at full-screen size should disable notifications by pointing out that:

Thomas also warned that:

In much the same way, Tomaszewski stated:

Yet another post, this time by Bruce Cowan, summarized the problems with any sort of dialog. The sudden appearance of windows and alerts, Cowan suggested, is confusing, and could make users worry that a piece of malware has started an application. In addition, too many dialogs could frustrate users, to the point that some disable them altogether, so that over-use of the system could defeat the entire purpose of providing timely warnings. As for the changes in the new guidelines, Cowan suggested that they may annoy experienced users who see little wrong with notification bubbles.

Whether these discussions will have any effect on the Ubuntu Design or Desktop Experience Team seems uncertain, since the guidelines are already being used in alpha versions of the upcoming Jaunty release. All the same, they are the sort of discussions that Ubuntu developers are likely to be having for the next eighteen months as they try to realize Shuttleworth's goal of increased usability, especially in the absence of hard data to show what designs are most usable. They are likely, too, to have them again, as they attempt to have their changes accepted upstream by projects like GNOME. However, for others, they show the punctilious but necessary considerations that usability generally involve — considerations that many free and open source software projects are only just starting to face.