Weekly Edition
Return to the Distributions pageRecent Features
| |||||||||||||
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation)
Datamation reports
from Mark Shuttleworth's keynote at the Ubuntu Developer Summit.
"'There is going to be a crowd that is just too cool to use something
that looks really slick and there is nothing we can do for them,'
Shuttleworth said. 'Fortunately in Ubuntu there are tons of options and
lots of choice and ways to skin the cat.' Shuttleworth stressed that he
wants to make sure that the primary Ubuntu desktop offering is both easy to
use, beautiful and exciting for power users. He added that it would be nice
to get Linus Torvalds in to help with usability testing.
'If we do, I'm sure the footage will be widely available,' Shuttleworth
said. 'We may mute the audio track, but that's a key goal for us in this
cycle.'"
(Log in to post comments)
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 12:36 UTC (Tue) by tshow (subscriber, #6411) [Link]
"Don't hate me because I'm beautiful..."
Actually, it's Unity's personality I have a problem with. I'm going to resist laundry-list mode and just point out as an example of what's wrong that the system preferences are hidden in the shutdown/sleep/reboot menu.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 14:10 UTC (Tue) by imgx64 (guest, #78590) [Link]
> the system preferences are hidden in the shutdown/sleep/reboot menu.
I believe it's called the "system" menu, and surprisingly, you can find system settings there!
Anyway, it's not hidden, it also exists in the Unity dash (where you can find it by searching).
Now, I won't pretend that I don't have issues with Unity, but finding the system settings isn't one of them.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 14:20 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] Just as a data point, it took me a long time to figure out where the system settings were on my 11.04 system here. In fact, I had to go through the process more than once before I finally added them to the sidebar. I don't think it's entirely obvious.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 14:26 UTC (Tue) by imgx64 (guest, #78590) [Link]
I'm surprised you had a problem with it. The main way I launch applications is by tabbing Super to start the dash, then typing few letters of the application name (for example, "sett" for "settings"). How did you search for it?
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 14:28 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] I went clicking through icons. I'm happy to type for my applications, but I'm normally accustomed to using terminals for that purpose...:)
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 15:09 UTC (Tue) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link]
So you are one of the users prefering search interfaces. Please be aware that there's an entirely different class of users who prefer browsing to searching. That's one of the most basic things we learned in usability class and one that opened my eyes to why some people would find an interface extremely intuitive to use while others just couldn't find anything.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 17:03 UTC (Tue) by JanC_ (guest, #34940) [Link]
The "Dash" in Unity in Ubuntu 11.10 makes it somewhat more obvious than it was in 11.04 how to browse applications.
In older days, "browsing" was the only way offered by default and one had to install extra software like 'gnome-do' to use the "searching" approach, now it seems those in power of Unity & GNOME Shell prefer "searching" instead of "browsing". My guess is that we need to search for some middle ground, without losing the advantages of both...
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 8, 2011 23:40 UTC (Tue) by steffen780 (guest, #68142) [Link]
I think we should browse for the middle-ground... sorry, just couldn't resist ;)
But I think you're right, ideally both should be easily available. I browse the stuff I use often, and I search the stuff I only use rarely (or that I can't find browsing). Both have their place, and of course different people will place the emphasis differently. Some of my non-nerd friends actually use the google search bar to get to facebook, inspite of repeated warnings.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 17:05 UTC (Tue) by imgx64 (guest, #78590) [Link]
True, and browsing was indeed horrible in 11.04. But in 11.10, it's easier by using the "Filter results" pane (see: http://cdn.omgubuntu.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/app... ).
I agree that it's still not as discoverable as good ol' application menus (I hope this improves in the future), and the superfluous spacing can be annoying (Ubuntu designers seem to like extra spacing for some reason), but then, how often would someone browse the installed applications? Once you know what applications are installed, I don't see any reason to browse for an icon as opposed to typing its name (unless you forget the name, which is why browsing is a couple of clicks away).
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 2, 2011 11:56 UTC (Wed) by jzbiciak (✭ supporter ✭, #5246) [Link] I moved to Windows 7 on my work laptop. They made an even bigger hash of the start button[*], and one of my coworkers suggested a similar thing: Just use the search box to find everything. Is that the direction everyone's going, or is it just Unity and Windows 7? I was (half-)joking with a coworker the other day that maybe in 5-10 years, everyone will have moved away from traditional "computers", so they'll no longer try to be consumer electronics. Then I could get a 'real computer' again--one that didn't try to throw all this fancy "ease of use" in my way. Downside is that, lacking the economies of scale, they'd probably get crazy expensive again too. [*] So much so that they decided to ditch it in Windows 8 because most people have stopped using it.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 2, 2011 17:37 UTC (Wed) by bjsnider (subscriber, #80975) [Link] Just use the search box to find everything. Is that the direction everyone's going, or is it just Unity and Windows 7?That is also how Gnome-Shell works, so I'd say yes, that's not just the future, it's the present.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 3, 2011 14:50 UTC (Thu) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
I use Classic Shell on Windows 7, which gives you the old Start Menu: http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/ - you can also shift-click to get the new menu including searching (and also browsing through All Programs).
The real trend is to support both browsing and searching - iPhones for example make it easy to browse or search for applications. Throwing out browsing would be a mistake.
Unity is the only interface I've seen that makes it so hard to browse through all applications - perhaps I missed something, but it wasn't obvious how to do that. I only tried it for a few hours because it was so flaky (the dash's search would not accept keystrokes some of the time) in Ubuntu 11.04.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 14:42 UTC (Tue) by csigler (subscriber, #1224) [Link]
The sad thing is that it should be reasonably easy to collect "real world use" data (through a focus group of experienced Ubuntu users, for example) from users like you, and then on that basis to put a link to system settings in a place where people are more likely to look for them. I'm not a current Ubuntu user, but stuff like this feels like Not-Invented-Here syndrome to me.
Clemmitt
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 15:32 UTC (Tue) by ajross (subscriber, #4563) [Link]
I actually had a similar problem with Gnome 3's hiding of the status bar. Where did my Pidgin and Skype icons go? Literally, it took me an hour of playing (and grousing: this was going to be a killer bug for me, and I almost junked the whole experiment with the new desktop) before I discovered the hot corner purely by accident.
But that aside, I actually like the design as it exists. Discoverability and usability are often in conflict.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 2, 2011 8:49 UTC (Wed) by renox (subscriber, #23785) [Link]
> Discoverability and usability are often in conflict.
Uh? Unless you're talking about 'power user' stuff such like vi, emacs, if the 'cool new new UI' of Gnome isn't discoverable then it doesn't have good usability, period.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 16:28 UTC (Tue) by adamgundy (subscriber, #5418) [Link]
that's been improved somewhat in 11.10. the icon for the menu is now a cog wheel instead of (if I remember correctly) a 'power' icon, and the settings entry is towards the top of the list, instead of at the bottom, below various shutdown choices.
there are also other 'settings' type options in the menu now, lists of removable devices, printers, etc, and also an 'updates' option.
small changes, but that particular wart is much better now.
System settings in Unity Posted Nov 1, 2011 16:56 UTC (Tue) by JanC_ (guest, #34940) [Link]
To be exact, the new icon looks like a "power" icon and a "cog wheel"/"system icon" fused together. Which is indeed more useful and more correct than the "power icon" in 11.04 was.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 13:39 UTC (Tue) by aorth (subscriber, #55260) [Link]
> "We may mute the audio track"
LOL. Because we all know Linus speaks his mind... he's not vulgar, but he definitely doesn't hold any punches. Just check out his git talk at Google: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 ... "The authors of Subversion" were stupid"
I'd love to see and hear Linus try to use Unity. :)
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 20:29 UTC (Tue) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] I don't know whether Fitzpatrick and Collins-Sussman are "the authors of Subversion", but they don't seem that stupid to me.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 23:30 UTC (Tue) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
Essentially Linus' criticism of the Subversion project begins and ends with their goal of building a better CVS. He believes this was a fundamentally wrong-headed idea, so that no matter how good the plan was to achieve it, and no matter how well that plan was executed, the result would be something he regarded as unusable trash.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 0:57 UTC (Wed) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] Linus's insight in this case is that a square wheel remains a square wheel no matter how much effort you expend on making the corners more pointy.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 20:54 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Yes, he says as much in the video. And although he explains his terminology at about 8 minutes in, I wonder how much of the audience were alienated by the tone.
Now that I use Mercurial, CVS does seem like a relic that I avoid whenever possible (and I've mostly avoided using Subversion altogether), but fixing CVS's deployment issues - one of the major motivations behind Subversion - was a fairly worthy goal back when they set about doing so.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 13:43 UTC (Tue) by amtota (guest, #4012) [Link]
I am not interested in "exciting", I don't want eye candy or new "paradigms".
I just want something that works reliably and does not hide options/shutdown/etc On this count, both gnome3 and unity fail.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 14:54 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Yes, because the most important thing I care about on a desktop is font settings and my shutdown menu. :P
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 15:19 UTC (Tue) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
If the user has bad eyesight and shuts down his computer every time he's done using it then yes.
We're not all 20 year old power hackers fueled by angst and caffeine.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 15:56 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Yes, because people with poor eyesight need to change their fonts every 15 minutes. :/ If you want to see 'angst' look at your own posts for a change.
Locating and changing the defaults fonts for Gnome is still a lot easier then it is for, say, OS X or Windows. Power users don't seem to have any issues with either of those two systems.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 21:39 UTC (Tue) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
Why the sarcasm? I'm just saying that some people might find these sort of features useful.
Yes, I was astonished when Gnome removed all focus-follows-mouse controls, made it buggy, and then claimed it it was still supported. Also, it bums me out to hear Gnome devs claim that widespread breakage is needed every five years to ensure the platform moves forward. This type of thinking seems to guarantee that Linux on the desktop will never take off. But so be it! I'm in no position to do anything about it. No angst intended.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 2, 2011 2:52 UTC (Wed) by debacle (subscriber, #7114) [Link]
> Gnome removed all focus-follows-mouse controls, made it buggy,
Is it really buggy? I'm using GNOME all the time with metacity set to focus_mode=sloppy and raise_on_click=off and it works for me. If it didn't I would certainly change to another WM.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 2, 2011 5:13 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
https://lwn.net/Articles/461550/
It's better but doesn't seem completely fixed in 3.2... I still occasionally see the focus on one window but keyboard input goes to another problem. Switching desktops seems to exacerbate it.
Wait, Metacity? Are you talking about Gnome 2? Gnome2's got 99 problems but FFM isn't one of them.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 2, 2011 10:35 UTC (Wed) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]
You really explain everything in a negative way. From your summaries, you can only conclude GNOME developers are weird.
Suggest to re-read the GNOME 3.2 release notes and the things I said before. I cannot be bothered to say the things I've said before yet again.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 3, 2011 12:48 UTC (Thu) by Frej (subscriber, #4165) [Link]
I think the story with focus follows mouse is:
* Reimplement the windowmanager/desktop with a new interaction model. (gnome3)
So in turn they are just reasonable human beings, and not evildoers who only wants to harm and trick you! I doubt they 'made it buggy' on purpose. And they didn't remove it, they haven't found the time to implement it properly.
We describe the same issue. But your beliefs seem to be that others have the worst possible intentions.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 16:12 UTC (Tue) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]
That's why "Large fonts" is a toggle on the accessibility menu in Gnome 3.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 23:06 UTC (Tue) by mgedmin (subscriber, #34497) [Link]
You do not like physical power buttons for some reason? Mine works just fine.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 2, 2011 14:31 UTC (Wed) by pbonzini (subscriber, #60935) [Link] My lid doesn't in GNOME 3.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 2, 2011 18:05 UTC (Wed) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
I don't know if there's irony in your reply, but I certainly care about shutdown. If I turn my PC twice a day (and I do) then I want to shut it down also twice a day. I use the shutdown option FAR more often than LibreOffice, for example.
"exciting for power users" - right there is where you lost me Posted Nov 1, 2011 16:41 UTC (Tue) by drago01 (subscriber, #50715) [Link]
Well for a lot of people "work" does not equal "spend time in a settings dialog"
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 13:44 UTC (Tue) by l0b0 (subscriber, #80670) [Link]
Yikes. I'm a 30+ developer who just wants to get stuff done. I guess that makes me all sorts of "cool," but I expected Canonical to have a little more grasp on reality based on the golden years, 2007-9. 10.04 is very nice, and hopefully they'll start listening before support runs out in 2013 - Other distros (Mint & Debian, I'm looking at you) haven't even caught up with even Ubuntu 8.04.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 18:16 UTC (Tue) by sciurus (subscriber, #58832) [Link]
"Other distros (Mint & Debian, I'm looking at you) haven't even caught up with even Ubuntu 8.04."
In what ways?
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 14:56 UTC (Thu) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
Since Mint is based on Ubuntu mostly(*), with usability improvements, it's hardly failing to keep up with Ubuntu 8.04 - in fact I'm switching from Ubuntu 8.04 to Mint 11 to get a more recent distro that doesn't inflict Unity or GNOME 3 on me. Mint will ultimately support GNOME 3.x but it's much more conservative so will support 2.x for much longer.
I can see the need for new Linux users to have a shiny new discoverable interface, but desupporting the old ones will just push people towards other DEs such as XFCE or LXDE, or other distros such as Mint.
(*) Mint also has a rolling release based on Debian Testing.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 15:57 UTC (Thu) by l0b0 (subscriber, #80670) [Link] (*) Mint also has a rolling release based on Debian Testing.I guess I must have tried that one then. It was horrible.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 16:59 UTC (Thu) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
The Debian version of Mint (LMDE) is quite new, released just over a year ago, and the Mint team say that it will be a bit rougher than the Ubuntu version, although LMDE is now doing update packs that provide a more stable point every month or so.
I'd encourage everyone to try Mint - they have a great community, and generally seem far more responsive to user input than Canonical/Ubuntu, where even quite well characterised bug reports can languish for many releases. They also have a revenue model (advertising on their forums and site) that doesn't seem to conflict with open source and seems enough to fund them to some degree.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 15:11 UTC (Tue) by anatolik (subscriber, #73797) [Link]
Unix/Linux community has a lot of brilliant system software developers, but unfortunately it has a lack of designers/UI usability engineers. Most of UI stuff on linux is (were) horribly looking.
Canonical/Mark fills this gap, they doing really great and beautiful UI. UI that is comparable to other desktop systems (yes Win/MacOSX I am looking at you). And I really appreciate for what he is doing for Linux community.
As of Unity. I used to be one of the Unity haters who did not liked it. One reason is a bad memory with unstable 11.04 release, another one is storm of negative critics (a lot of it is non-constructive, unfortunately). But a few weeks ago I installed 11.10 as a second system to my home computer (next to Mint) and you know, now I can tell that I *love* Unity. It looks very beautiful and polished, it does not have all those small bugs and issues very typical to other Linux UI's. And now I use 11.04/Unity most of the time, I think it'll become my primary OS in the very near future.
My verdict: Unity is a great desktop manager, and it has a brilliant future. I am going to use it.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 17:14 UTC (Tue) by JanC_ (guest, #34940) [Link]
I hope you won't use Ubuntu 11.04's Unity, because that has a lot of bugs and stability issues (including not-unimportant memory leaks). Unity in Ubuntu 11.10 seems to be *a lot* better in that respect.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 17:21 UTC (Tue) by anatolik (subscriber, #73797) [Link]
This is right. I tried Unity on 11.04 and it was really bad (if not horrible). A lot of crashes, memory leaks etc... That is why I decided to stay with Mint.
11.10 is *way better*. Unity is usable now. I wouldn't say that everything is perfect e.g. dual-monitor does not work well, but this is not a critical issue for me at home. I think this bug will be fixed in 12.04.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 23:13 UTC (Tue) by mgedmin (subscriber, #34497) [Link]
People keep saying things about dual-head not working well with Unity, but I've never seen an elaboration.
I've experienced some systray positioning errors in 11.04 (http://pad.lv/778256), and some notification bubble positioning errors in 11.10 (http://pad.lv/716458), due to my use of two different monitor sizes, but those are relatively minor. Is there anything else?
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 11:08 UTC (Wed) by pkolloch (subscriber, #21709) [Link]
I always liked some of the ideas of Unity -- e.g. prefering full screen, uncluttering the screen, "positions" for applications and associated short cuts to switch to an application.
But somehow it got in my way too often.
Now I am using Unity as of in 11.10 on my notebook and I really like it -- even though I occasionally encounter bugs like not being able to switch to skype.
I even start to enjoy the slim scroll bars because I am using the middle mouse button + track point for scrolling now.
The only problem I have is that some applications which are not adjusted to Unity don't work well. Especially in combination with menu hiding.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 4, 2011 8:15 UTC (Fri) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
Ubuntu has many nice features and has done great things for Linux adoption, but in my experience something new breaks with every release and on every machine (kernel or Xorg crashes/freezes, not just cosmetic issues). The project/company spends far too much time writing new features / products, and not enough on fixes and stabilisation, possibly because of the enforced 6 month release schedule.
Writing Unity might be defensible to attract new users, though I don't like it myself, but writing bazaar in particular seems a waste of resources. Someone else gave a list of other examples of Ubuntu-only projects.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 15:42 UTC (Tue) by faassen (guest, #1676) [Link]
I think I count as a pretty old-school Linux user, been using it since 1995 and it's been my main desktop for many years, used for software development and entertainment and actually everything else too.
In the last few months I tried Gnome 3 and I tried Unity. Unlike many people, I actually really like Gnome 3. But I only got annoyed with Unity. So I Shuttleworth is right about old school Linux users not being too cool for a slick desktop. But Unity just bugs me in the wrong way while Gnome 3 just clicked for me.
Let me try to remember what bugged me about Unity. Its sidebar, which was full of icons by default and made me *scroll* through it (it turned out to had to remove tons of the icons to make it usable; I'm not sure where it picked all of them up).
What especially annoyed me was the "menus are all on the top now like MacOS BUT you can't see what's there until you hover over the top bar" - the latter point in particular seems to be in a totally different usability universe from where I am. How am I supposed to aim for a menu if I can't see where it is and I don't even know whether it exists? I also remember struggling with the way Unity did full screen, and its buggy interaction with some software (Second Life comes to mind).
Perhaps I didn't give Unity enough of a chance and I haven't tried its most recent incarnation yet, which for all I know has improved it all drastically. But since I'm happy with Gnome 3 I think I won't be trying any time soon... I rather wish Canonical gave up on being UI usability gurus though and join the rest of Gnome again - that'd be true unity. But I saw the nasty flame wars that burned those bridges, and it will take a while to build them up again.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 17:06 UTC (Tue) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link] The "one menu bar to rule them all" thing is why I won't even be bothering to try Unity. It made sense at 512x384. It doesn't at 1920x1080.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 17:20 UTC (Tue) by JanC_ (guest, #34940) [Link]
I agree with the top panel menu being very annoying on a 1920x1080 desktop; it makes me travel "miles" with the mouse (and is very confusing in any case). Fortunately there are several ways to disable it... ;)
I wish there was an option to only enable it for maximized windows though (or even make that the defaulton my netbook I run almost all applications maximized anyway).
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 17:27 UTC (Tue) by anatolik (subscriber, #73797) [Link]
> it makes me travel "miles" with the mouse (and is very confusing in any case)
BTW Unity has quite powerful shortcuts. After a few weeks of using Unity I found that I use it a lot. http://askubuntu.com/questions/28086/what-are-unitys-keyb...
F10 does what you want.
> I wish there was an option to only enable it for maximized windows
No, it does not - not on a large monitor. Posted Nov 1, 2011 18:05 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] F10 does what you want. Not really. "Menu on top" makes some sense for mouse: it's easy to move mouse to the top (you only need to position mouse horizontally which is easy for menu). It does not make sense for keyboard operation: my eyes can slip over monitor edge easily and it's not a problem to position them over in-window menu. Design which puts autohideable menu on top is stupid because it's hard for both mouse users (you can not see menu items till you actually move mouse to the top) and for keyboard users (because it's on the top and you actually need to rotate head to see said top). Brilliant: design which is painful for everyone! It only makes sense for tiny screens (like in typical netbook) since you keep windows maximized there anyway (lack of space) and it's easy to move eyes (lack of space, again). Why it was kept in "big" Unity is mystery to me.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 19:39 UTC (Tue) by nas (subscriber, #17) [Link] Yeah, that menu bar alone makes me give up on Unity. It's perhaps not such a major issue but, to me, shows utter lack of UI design skills. I upgraded my parents PC to 11.10. One of their first questions was "how to I close a application when I'm done with it?". I immediately installed XFCE and changed their default session.Ubuntu: stop turning your loyal users into guinea pigs for your half baked design experiments.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 20:05 UTC (Tue) by anatolik (subscriber, #73797) [Link]
> One of their first questions was "how to I close a application when I'm done with it?". I immediately installed XFCE and changed their default session.
Why didn't you tell them about [x] button in the window top-left corner?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jXNUuoN1Z9w/TpcoI_Cjp8I/AAAAAAA...
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 20:47 UTC (Tue) by faassen (guest, #1676) [Link]
I have no idea what the original commenter intended, but [x] closes the window, not the application, right?
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 21:09 UTC (Tue) by sfeam (subscriber, #2841) [Link] Right. And there seems to be a growing number of applications that respond to it by docking into the system tray or iconizing or something else that is definitely not "closing" in the sense of "exiting". But maybe this isn't the case under Unity?
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 23:20 UTC (Tue) by mgedmin (subscriber, #34497) [Link]
It's up to the application.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 23:42 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
So that would be 'disunity', then?
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 1:42 UTC (Wed) by anatolik (subscriber, #73797) [Link]
It closes the window and in single-window applications closes the application as well. Try to press it and you'll see.
As of application that redefine action for close button - it is not related to Unity. This problem affects other DM as well. I wonder how switching to XFCE fixed your problem....
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 2:45 UTC (Wed) by nas (subscriber, #17) [Link] > Why didn't you tell them about [x] button in the window top-left corner?There was no [x] button, at least not until you moved the mouse all the way to top of the window and waited a bit (maximized window?). Even then close icon was hard to see because it seemed to be partly covered by the words of the menu. That later part is likely a bug. However, having to know to move your mouse to the top of the screen and wait for the icon to appear is unacceptable, IMHO. It is not user friendly behavior. There is a askubuntu question about it, answered by Mark himself.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 20:41 UTC (Tue) by djzort (guest, #57189) [Link]
What a disappointing comment about linux users. Its not about being "cool" its about using what you like and having freedom to chose. Thats the whole point of open source and the main reason people are attracted to linux. If you want to be shepherded in to a new interface you can use mac or windows.
When did open source projects start becoming popular by doing a few things right, incorporating, then suddenly start dictating how people should using their computers? I can think of another a peoples revolution that went the same way.
If your software is so great, dont waste your time answering your critics with words - answer them with continuous achievements. If you think you are stuck in a swamp, dont waste your time swatting at the mosquitoes... march boldly out of it. And in this regard, its obvious why Ubuntu is haemorrhaging users to Linux mint and to back to Debian. Even Fedora and Suse might be picking off a few twisted minds.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 23:22 UTC (Tue) by mgedmin (subscriber, #34497) [Link]
> If you think you are stuck in a swamp, dont waste your time swatting at the mosquitoes... march boldly out of it.
You know, this probably explains why Canonical is boldly developing new UI instead of focusing on bug fixing.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 1, 2011 23:29 UTC (Tue) by blackbelt_jones (guest, #62623) [Link]
>>If your software is so great, dont waste your time answering your critics with words - answer them with continuous achievements.
Are you really saying that there's something wrong with the man giving his opinion? Are you saying he hasn't achieved anything?
A couple of years ago, I was posting angry messages about KDE4, so I should be able to relate to the animosity about Unity, but I'm not. KDE4 was a threat to continued support of KDE3. An established paradigm was being dismantled. But, other than as the Ubuntu defaults, Unity supplants nothing. You're not going to be able to get Gnome 2 anymore, but that's not because of Unity, it's because of Gnome 3. Regardless of whether Gnome 3 turns out to be genius or idiocy, the anger at Gnome 3 is easy to understand.
>>And in this regard, its obvious why Ubuntu is hemorrhaging users to Linux mint and to back to Debian.
Well, sure. The first thing that happens after a big paradigm shift is that users migrate. Shuttleworth must have been expecting that, but Ubuntu is trying to position itself for a slow ascent during the changes to come. I don't own a tablet, but if I ever do, I'm going to think of Ubuntu right away.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 0:31 UTC (Wed) by clugstj (subscriber, #4020) [Link]
Well, what annoys me about Shuttleworth is that he is so arrogant. If you disagree w/ the way his software works (or doesn't), then he dismisses you in various ways.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 6:08 UTC (Thu) by dfsmith (guest, #20302) [Link]
Are you saying that Shuttleworth is the next Steve Jobs?
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 1:20 UTC (Wed) by Tara_Li (subscriber, #26706) [Link]
The thing that strikes me in the comment about Linus helping them with usability testing is that they might "mute the sound track" - not bleep words, but just remove what Linus says so they can claim pretty much anything for his opinion on it. There's a big difference between cutting a few words that might piss off the FCC, and completely removing everything he has to say - though I guarantee another news source would immediately be asking Linus for his side.
Still, the arrogance of "Oh, we'll put out video so you can see Linus, since everyone will love that, but if he doesn't like it, we'll just make sure nobody can hear him say so..."
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 1:37 UTC (Wed) by SEMW (guest, #52697) [Link]
> he thing that strikes me in the comment about Linus helping them
> with usability testing is that they might "mute the sound track" - not > bleep words, but just remove what Linus says so they can claim pretty > much anything for his opinion on it.
And what's even more insidious is that he cunningly expressed his dastardly conspiracy in a manner that fooled all the attendees into thinking it was just a joke about Linus's blunt manner.
I hear some even laughed. Poor sheeple.
"...in to help with usability testing" and alienation Posted Nov 2, 2011 9:47 UTC (Wed) by iam.TJ (subscriber, #56644) [Link]
The crux of the problem: it is not usability testing that is needed, it is user input into the original design decisions! Oh and making sure the user experience doesn't regress or break - Canonical could learn something from Linus' mantra "we don't break userspace" there!
As an Ubuntu developer/bug fixer since 2006 I've been pushed away from actively working on it by the actions and comments of 'the leadership'.
Originally Ubuntu improved the experience for new and power users alike and in that way drew in talented developers who contributed - much like me.
Now it feels more and more like the 'Ubuntu Community' is just a mask for internal Canonical plans and Shuttleworth's ambitions to corner the mass-market and particularly small form-factor devices like netbooks smartphones and the like.
The Canonical focus is the mass-market and getting OEM deals in return for cash from computer manufacturers and retailers.
Now, I've been alienated by the long-term plans since as many have pointed out, in the main these seem to be driven by the small-form-factor.
As a developer working with multi-monitors (not just dual monitors) I've always experienced some pain with each upgrade as Xorg has evolved, especially with monitors that do not provide EDID. I worked hard to get broken XDMX working.
I was painlessly using multi-monitors with MS Windows in 2000 - eleven years later I regularly experience painful breakages with the Ubuntu upgrades such as:
* multiple mouse cursors
These are the more regular bugs one might expect, but it still points up the lack of real regression testing or true concern for the user experience. I found out during one such bug that *none* of the developers responsible for the Xorg or Gnome packages used multi-monitor set-ups nor tested on them!
Like many others I don't want to have to spend valuable time finding and fixing bugs in released packages after each upgrade; I just want to use the OS as a platform to get my important work done.
For that reason I stopped upgrading and have so far stuck with 10.04 Lucid, with updated kernels and a few packages tracked in active PPAs.
I introduced a young Windows-using friend to Ubuntu recently and he wanted to try it on his small low-powered notebook, and his 1080 HD desktop. We installed 11.10. Unity works well on the notebook in terms of not cluttering the screen with vertical-space-consuming panels, but it's a pain to use on the HD screen. However, he still chose to switch the notebook to lightdm and the desktop to Gnome 3 with the 'Classic' (Gnome 2) look!
Last night he actually *demanded* I downgrade his installations to 10.04 Lucid since he likes the look of my 'simple' 10.04 Lucid desktops with predictable menus and operation by mouse alone, not least because he can *explore the system and applications* and get an overview of what's available for later use by the icons and application names.
Also, this whole "type a search to find applications" is a pain - once the user's hand is on the mouse it should be able to stay there until they need to type something into an application. I think someone forgot what W.I.M.P. is about.
Unity's single menu bar and panel indicators mirrored on each monitor is disruptive and feels like an imposition by a well-meaning parent.
Having applications lose control of their own menu-bar is also an extreme annoyance on high resolution displays - and even more so on multi-monitor systems!
Unity's behaviour reminds me of the old single-tasking days of Windows 2, before the Intel 80386 CPU introduced true pre-emptive multi-tasking to Windows 2.1 in 1988.
"...in to help with usability testing" and alienation Posted Nov 2, 2011 11:11 UTC (Wed) by angdraug (subscriber, #7487) [Link] As a dual-monitor user, I agree with most of your comment, although you got one thing wrong: Unity's behaviour reminds me of the old single-tasking days of Windows 2, before the Intel 80386 CPU introduced true pre-emptive multi-tasking to Windows 2.1 in 1988. Multitasking in Windows 2.1 (and 3.0 through 3.11) was cooperative. Windows didn't get true pre-emptive multi-tasking until NT in 1993 and Windows 95 in, well, 1995.
"...in to help with usability testing" and alienation Posted Nov 2, 2011 13:52 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Windows/386 did preemptively multitask DOS applications with each other: it was only those poor Windows apps that had to put up with cooperative multitasking. (This decision made sense: the single event queue made it likely that if one blocked, all would block even if they were preemptively multitasked, so why bother?)
"...in to help with usability testing" and alienation Posted Nov 2, 2011 11:28 UTC (Wed) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]
> this whole "type a search to find applications" is a pain - once the user's hand is on the mouse it should be able to stay there until they need to type something into an application. I think someone forgot what W.I.M.P. is about.
I agree entirely that the mouse-based discovery is broken in unity. However, IMHO, the search-based box is a Godsend.
Don't use the mouse to get to it, use the Penguin (or Windows, if you are saddled with one of Those Keyboards ;) key to open and pop right into the search box. Type away and use the arrow keys to navigate within the list of results. Enter to launch. (GNOME 3 does this too, and it arguably descends from Gnome-Do, which descends from quicksilver, which probably descends from other things). I love it so much that words cannot express my feelings adequately. :) Your hands never leave the keyboard.
HTH.
"...in to help with usability testing" and alienation Posted Nov 2, 2011 17:24 UTC (Wed) by iam.TJ (subscriber, #56644) [Link] Keyboard all-the-way is fine - if the application I am about to use is keyboard controlled and it doesn't interrupt my work-flow. It's not so great when the applications are point-and-click drag-n-drop (e.g. GIMP), map explorers (e.g. Google Earth), CAD/design programs (e.g. SketchUp (in WINE)), most NLE video applications, media player (e.g. Rhythmbox) and any number of other smaller tools (e.g. DVD creator, PDF reader, Wireshark, file explorers, etc.) and of course don't forget games. The terminal is there for typing command-lines - the GUI is for W.I.M.P. What tickles me in an ironic way is that Canonical are going to have to reverse course and make the non-keyboard input devices primary again if they're going to push Ubuntu into OEMs building touch and gesture controlled devices as per the recent UDS announcement (see Shuttleworth: Ubuntu on phones, tablets, TV's and smart screens everywhere).
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 12:42 UTC (Wed) by ras (subscriber, #33059) [Link]
If I have a complaint about the current from of UI designers, it is their arrogance. There was a time when window manager designed didn't try to tell us how to arrange our desktops. They gave us the tools to design our own. Admittedly they weren't very user friendly. Putting together a fvwm configuration wasn't for the faint hearted. But it was in line with the UNIX philosophy. One mob provided the raw tools. Another used them to provide something that looked like a Mac, or Windows, or if you thought they were all nuts you designed your own.
A decades worth of progress I was hoping for huge smorgasbord board of fancy panels, active widgets I can arrange around my desktop. Perhaps the ability to put a menu on every window or just the top (or bottom) of the screen, or maybe just appear when I press a button - or a widget like on Android. If you like, widgets that provided every launcher and eye candy seen on Windows, Mac OS, iOS, plus 1000 things they hadn't thought of. And yes, a lovely UI to make it easy to configure so I didn't have to struggle with those horrid old style configuration files.
Dreams aside, that way I could customise my window manager to get out of the way on a small screen, yet let the same underlying code allow me to take advantage of all the real estate available on my desktop. Maybe I could tell it that on my small screen device everything had to be full screen, but on laptop I lots of windows with minimise buttons, and bouncing icons at the bottom that told me when the needed attention.
But that isn't what happened. It seems our current crop of window manager designers think they know far better than me how I want my desktop arranged. And so with every generation gnome has _removed_ options, and unity takes this to its ultimate conclusion by removing almost all of them. To a person who came from an era where the Unix philosophy was to provide a tool box others could use to build things, it seems so bloody ... arrogant.
Yet I can imagine a world where that might have made sense. In that world we would have standardised on one screen size and resolution, with common buttons on each keyboard. But in this world, the real world, the reverse has happened. In this world screen sizes range from small phones to multiple 2560x1600 screens, with keyboards ranging from 0 buttons to multi media monsters that occupy 1/2 the desk. There is only one word to describe the notion that a UI designer, no matter how clever, can put together a single window manager that works on all these form factors. Insane.
I am sure this is a passing phase. We are the open source movement, we are a meritocracy. We can see the obvious. Surely sanity will return soon.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 2, 2011 14:17 UTC (Wed) by bnbvnvcb (guest, #81174) [Link] Hear hear. We can stick to stable solid releases (such as RHEL 6 or Scientific Linux 6) until the craziness is over. RHEL/SL 6 have a perfectly usable Gnome 2 stack, quite debugged. And if Gnome 2 is not your thing, the KDE 3.5 fork known as Trinity is well maintained, with packages available for RHEL as well as Fedora and various Ubuntu releases.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 2:19 UTC (Thu) by acunningham (subscriber, #9368) [Link]
The wisest words regarding UI design I've heard for a long time!
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 5:49 UTC (Thu) by amtota (guest, #4012) [Link]
Very well said. Totally agree about the arrogance: everytime I tried to make constructive comments about why I did not like the new WMs, I got told that *I* was the problem, that *I* did not know what I was talking about, "[citation needed]", that I was a troll and other such nonsense.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 13:27 UTC (Thu) by Rehdon (guest, #45440) [Link]
The funny thing is that Microsoft messed things up by trying to shove a traditional desktop interface down mobile users' throats: Shuttleworth is going the other way round, and the end result is equally annoying.
Almost as funny hearing from UDS that the Canonical devs never planned to make Unity non-configurable: oh no, of course that has nothing to do with the growing uproar about just that issue!
But I wouldn't be as optimist as you are: FLOSS is a meritocracy, true, but Canonical surely is not, and judging from Shuttleworth's words it will take a long time before his ego will let sanity return.
Rehdon
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 7, 2011 12:47 UTC (Mon) by ssam (subscriber, #46587) [Link]
+1
there are some great ideas in unity and gnome-shell:
it would just be nice to be able to pick and choose which ones you wanted.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 5:29 UTC (Thu) by ssmith32 (subscriber, #72404) [Link]
Unity does look slick
To me, it is not very usuable* And, no, Mark, I am not cool, not at all.. trust me.. IF you want me to use it, it needs to be usuable. Even for very geeky, very uncool folks like me..
*c.f. my various frustrations voiced in other comments, no need to moan on and on
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 14:14 UTC (Thu) by pj (subscriber, #4506) [Link] Unity moved me straight to xubuntu, and eventually to wmii. dwm also looks appealing, but it may take me too much work to get a fully cromulent desktop.
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 3, 2011 22:15 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Yeah. dwm appears to be a classic example of 'rip out all the features, look, minimalist!'. How anyone can use it over the insanely scriptable wmii is quite opaque to me.
Alas wmii has only one rather inactive developer :((
Shuttleworth: Linux Power Users Aren't too Cool for Unity (Datamation) Posted Nov 17, 2011 19:24 UTC (Thu) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
From the dwm web page:
> Because dwm is customized through editing its source code, its
Er, yeah. I guess it's refreshing to see such honesty, at least.
My take on it: just use Xfce. And get real work done rather than yak-shaving.
|
|||||||||||||
