Unity Wishlist

Unity is coming along nicely, but it still has a lot of ways in which it needs improvement. what are some of the things that you think need to be done to make it the best interface the universe will ever know.

For me the biggest problem I have with unity by far comes in the form of task switching and workspace switching, both of these feel clumsy to me. for instance thanks to grouping I have to click three times to get to the important firefox window I want, once to select the group (which will open something useless like the downloads window) again to initiate the 3d window picker, and then from there I need to look and visually identify which one I want and click on it again. I would MUCH rather just have half a dozen firefox (or whatever) icons and be able to just click on the one I want.

Another thing I would like to see is official support for the desktop cube, it seems to mostly work already, so this should be an easy win, all you need is better integration of activating it (workspace switcher, actually middle clicking on the launcher would be my preference). the consistent problem with all implementations of the cube have been how to activate it and the best solution I have found is 'go to the edge of the screen and middle click'. with the cube in this setup all you have to to is move your mouse to a screen edge, hold the middle mouse button down and move around to see which workspace you want, let go when you find it.

More compiz plugin support (the extras package, or some subset of it, would be nice). It would also be nice if you could grace us with different wall papers on different workspaces, I have waited SO MANY years for this, the gnome people always blew it off.

pie in the sky wish; widgets. real ones. KDE's plasma widgets are a great example of what I would like to see.

I agree on all points, and would like to add the following:

I am interested in having a built-in menu driven way of browsing installed applications. (Perhaps as an optional feature on the upper toolbar?)

Which leads into my next thought: I'd like it to be more easy to configure. The current setup is quite difficult to adjust, which is a big deal with so many users who are unhappy with the default behavior.

I vote for something more simple. No one can live with about 10 items on launcher. My smartphone has more icons than that in one desktop. Drawers would be a good addition. Linux users are familiar with them.

Penguinnerd said: I agree on all points, and would like to add I'd like it to be more easy to configure.

could you be a bit more specific, I see this all over, but i have a feeling it's easier to ignore people when they say 'everything' vs a three paragraph laundry list.

One thing that is really annoying me is the "apps available for download" category in the dash. I don't want to see 5+ random icons in my application list. If I wanted to see what was available for download, I'd just use the Software Centre.

It's clutter for no reason. My GNOME 2.32 Applications menu wasn't littered with a bunch of "available apps" was it?

The Unity desktop is a loser not only in functionality, but also in design and especially color. I find all that default orange-brownish color of icons, navigation bar and other places quite off-putting. Appropriate perhaps for the dwellers of the Kalahari Desert and surrounding regions, but I live in a vibrant world of blues and greens. The default colors on the desktop speak of scarcity, harsh living conditions and many difficulties--which is the opposite of what Ubuntu should imply. Brighten up the desktop, or at least make it easy for the end user to tweak away those dull earth tones.

perolad said: The Unity desktop is a loser not only in functionality, but also in design and especially color. I find all that default orange-brownish color of icons, navigation bar and other places quite off-putting. Appropriate perhaps for the dwellers of the Kalahari Desert and surrounding regions, but I live in a vibrant world of blues and greens. The default colors on the desktop speak of scarcity, harsh living conditions and many difficulties--which is the opposite of what Ubuntu should imply. Brighten up the desktop, or at least make it easy for the end user to tweak away those dull earth tones.

hehe

Still getting my feet wet with 11.10. I'll say Unity seems more solid, and I dig the changes from 11.04. Going forward most of my wishes aren't with Unity itself, but the pieces surrounding it. I want 12.04 to be mostly focused on stabilizing the current setup, which I'm guessing it will be. The second biggest change I want is GNOME3 is get customization back into the fold.

Just looking at the shift from 11.04 to 11.10 (GNOME 2 to 3), I've lost the ability to load the launcher from the top corner (instead of hammering the left side futilely). I also seem to have far fewer options within Appearance (why can't I fully tweak my theme like with 2.32, or adjust my wallpaper, etc.).

Beyond GNOME's tweaks, while I dig Unity (am likely in the minority), I wanna seem them focus 12.04 less on adding more features (the ones in 11.10 I think shore up a lot of my issues with 11.04) and more on allowing people to use Unity how they want (min/max buttons, the way the global menu is displayed, adding a traditional menu or other items to the top bar, things like that).

Beyond that, I wanna see them work with other developers in getting as much software as possible working perfectly with the global menu and launcher. Most notably is WINE, which I know is likely a nightmare, but I run SQLyog fairly regularly and can't launch it from my launcher and it's wonky at best with the global menu bar (double title bars or a white stripe on the bottom of the screen).

And lastly, keep going with the Messaging menu. I know people rip on Unity for slowing down productivity, and I can see that argument, but being able to check IMs, see an e-mail, change settings and do lots of other little tasks from my Messaging menu instead of moving away from my work is nice. Let's add in the GNOME3 ability to respond to an IM (or an e-mail even) from that menu without leaving my current workspace. That'd be schweet.

cuppsy said: Still getting my feet wet with 11.10. I'll say Unity seems more solid, and I dig the changes from 11.04. Going forward most of my wishes aren't with Unity itself, but the pieces surrounding it. I want 12.04 to be mostly focused on stabilizing the current setup, which I'm guessing it will be. The second biggest change I want is GNOME3 is get customization back into the fold.

Just looking at the shift from 11.04 to 11.10 (GNOME 2 to 3), I've lost the ability to load the launcher from the top corner (instead of hammering the left side futilely). I also seem to have far fewer options within Appearance (why can't I fully tweak my theme like with 2.32, or adjust my wallpaper, etc.).

Beyond GNOME's tweaks, while I dig Unity (am likely in the minority), I wanna seem them focus 12.04 less on adding more features (the ones in 11.10 I think shore up a lot of my issues with 11.04) and more on allowing people to use Unity how they want (min/max buttons, the way the global menu is displayed, adding a traditional menu or other items to the top bar, things like that).

Beyond that, I wanna see them work with other developers in getting as much software as possible working perfectly with the global menu and launcher. Most notably is WINE, which I know is likely a nightmare, but I run SQLyog fairly regularly and can't launch it from my launcher and it's wonky at best with the global menu bar (double title bars or a white stripe on the bottom of the screen).

And lastly, keep going with the Messaging menu. I know people rip on Unity for slowing down productivity, and I can see that argument, but being able to check IMs, see an e-mail, change settings and do lots of other little tasks from my Messaging menu instead of moving away from my work is nice. Let's add in the GNOME3 ability to respond to an IM (or an e-mail even) from that menu without leaving my current workspace. That'd be schweet.

yea i would like to see gnome-shell style interactive notifications, not just passive ones

also would be nice to have tooltips/previews in the dash.

i like this competition between unity and gshell

Bobboau said: could you be a bit more specific, I see this all over, but i have a feeling it's easier to ignore people when they say 'everything' vs a three paragraph laundry list.

Okay, why isn't compizconfig installed by default? Unless there's another way that I don't know about, this is what is used to configure such simple behaviors as when the left-hand side bar becomes visible. (Left edge or corner reveal)

It's like having to install a whole new application just to change your wallpaper.

Penguinnerd said: Okay, why isn't compizconfig installed by default? Unless there's another way that I don't know about, this is what is used to configure such simple behaviors as when the left-hand side bar becomes visible. (Left edge or corner reveal)

It's like having to install a whole new application just to change your wallpaper.

is not the same...

it may look cute, but compizconfig (ccsm) is an advance tool that has broken lots of peoples computer desktops. I wouldnt let any of my family members touch that

they will be creating a simple tool in time for the LTS hopefully

Okay, whatever gets the job done.

My point it, it's ridiculous that the user needs to install their own configuration menus. It should be a big priority in LTS for sure.

Penguinnerd said: Okay, whatever gets the job done.

My point it, it's ridiculous that the user needs to install their own configuration menus. It should be a big priority in LTS for sure.

I can only see this as an issue if you have limited bandwidth. I'm not sure about you, but most of us add application and utilities after the initial install to make things work the way we want them to. I personally add another 200-300 packages plus backed up personal files.

Upgraded to 11.10 from 11.04 two days before.

I am generally new to ubuntu.

I don't really like the colors used. They are too dark. I hate the default background. I 'd like to see that change. It's what the first time user sees that creates the first impression, and the current default background doesn't quite say 'you will be better off using this operating system .

Also, I am a really big fan of the ring switcher. I'd like to see it become the default window switcher. I like it because you can see the whole window before activating it, you can adjust the speed and other details of the rotation, plus it looks way better than the default switcher.

For applications like firefox that can have more than one tabs open, i'd like to navigate to it using alt+tab to go forward, alt+1 to go backwards (in case i move 1 window after the one i actually want). Then press alt+grave to enter the application, and see the tabs of the selected application in a new ring, and navigate to the one I want using alt+tab and alt+1 as in the first ring.

That way, you can have your thumb on the alt button and get to the window you want with just a few button presses.

The only problem I have with Unity 11.10 is that gnome-raw-thumbnailer doesn't work. It worked in unity 11.04, but stopped in 11.10 beta2. Other than that I really like the unity interface.

9antreas9 said: Upgraded to 11.10 from 11.04 two days before.

I am generally new to ubuntu.

I don't really like the colors used. They are too dark. I hate the default background. I 'd like to see that change. It's what the first time user sees that creates the first impression, and the current default background doesn't quite say 'you will be better off using this operating system .

Also, I am a really big fan of the ring switcher. I'd like to see it become the default window switcher. I like it because you can see the whole window before activating it, you can adjust the speed and other details of the rotation, plus it looks way better than the default switcher.

For applications like firefox that can have more than one tabs open, i'd like to navigate to it using alt+tab to go forward, alt+1 to go backwards (in case i move 1 window after the one i actually want). Then press alt+grave to enter the application, and see the tabs of the selected application in a new ring, and navigate to the one I want using alt+tab and alt+1 as in the first ring.

That way, you can have your thumb on the alt button and get to the window you want with just a few button presses.

As far as the backgrounds go, there is a contest every release for inclusion, the results of the contest can be seen as a background slideshow, by choosing the top right icon when you right-click on the desktop and select Change Desktop Background. I've found over the years, that most users, no matter what OS they use change the background, no matter how nice it may be.

The default background changes slightly for each release, I know this small change was supposed to lead to an animated background at one time. I don't know if this is still in progress.

As far as the ring switcher goes, every user, uses their computer differently, so setting it as a default is going to displease as many people as it makes happy.

perolad said: The Unity desktop is a loser not only in functionality, but also in design and especially color. I find all that default orange-brownish color of icons, navigation bar and other places quite off-putting. Appropriate perhaps for the dwellers of the Kalahari Desert and surrounding regions, but I live in a vibrant world of blues and greens. The default colors on the desktop speak of scarcity, harsh living conditions and many difficulties--which is the opposite of what Ubuntu should imply. Brighten up the desktop, or at least make it easy for the end user to tweak away those dull earth tones.

Just your subjective opinion about colour. I like the purple orange combo, absolutely hate the blue and green.

cariboo907 said: As far as the backgrounds go, there is a contest every release for inclusion, the results of the contest can be seen as a background slideshow, by choosing the top right icon when you right-click on the desktop and select Change Desktop Background. I've found over the years, that most users, no matter what OS they use change the background, no matter how nice it may be.

The default background changes slightly for each release, I know this small change was supposed to lead to an animated background at one time. I don't know if this is still in progress.

As far as the ring switcher goes, every user, uses their computer differently, so setting it as a default is going to displease as many people as it makes happy.

Ack! cariboo, you know people hate change around here, bring back your old avatar, before some people start opening threads about it!

Or you're trying to upset people on purpose?

[/hehe]

madjr said: Ack! cariboo, you know people hate change around here, bring back your old avatar, before some people start opening threads about it!

Or you're trying to upset people on purpose?

[/hehe]

We started a theme week yesterday, can you guess the theme?

cariboo907 said: We started a theme week yesterday, can you guess the theme?

i hope is not *weird Asian people* ? or is it ? :p

"Out of the box" Meerkat, Lynx, ... had a lot more usable flexibility in setting up the desktop,colors, images, behavior, etc. than I've found on "Unity".

To me, "Unity" is "dumbing down" in an attempt to attract more users. Much more rigid in setup "out of the box".

Any way to tell if "Unity" has resulted in more Ubuntu users?

Jerry

p.s. I use Unity looking for ubuntu development release bugs, the "fuzzy out of focus veiled images" on Ubuntu-3D make me feel I've lost my reading glasses so I use -2D. Nice sharp images for me, thanks.

Oh by the way, I can read text. All those hieroglyphic icons using up most of the screen space don't mean anything to me. On tablets and phones the icons are used to make the choices big enough so only one is hit with fingers but I use a keyboard and mouse on Ubuntu.

Is there a way to stop the launcher pop out when an app is running?

Most of my time on the computer is in Firefox. I frequently move the cursor toward the back arrow and activate the launcher. I know there is a bug report but not sure there can be a fix. Maybe a time delay would help but that would be annoying if you needed the launcher.

I would be happier if I had to press the super button.

jerrylamos said: "Out of the box" Meerkat, Lynx, ... had a lot more usable flexibility in setting up the desktop,colors, images, behavior, etc. than I've found on "Unity".

To me, "Unity" is "dumbing down" in an attempt to attract more users. Much more rigid in setup "out of the box".

Any way to tell if "Unity" has resulted in more Ubuntu users?

Jerry

p.s. I use Unity looking for ubuntu development release bugs, the "fuzzy out of focus veiled images" on Ubuntu-3D make me feel I've lost my reading glasses so I use -2D. Nice sharp images for me, thanks.

Oh by the way, I can read text. All those hieroglyphic icons using up most of the screen space don't mean anything to me. On tablets and phones the icons are used to make the choices big enough so only one is hit with fingers but I use a keyboard and mouse on Ubuntu.

I've set my icon size to 32 px, and autohide the launcher, they are still quite readable at that size on both my netbook with its 10" screen, and on my 22" wide screen monitor. All the icons have tool tips, so I don't get what the need for a text label is. The only reason I could see where you might needed Icon labels is if you have several icons on the desktop.

As far as customizing the interface goes, right now we are still at the diy stage, keep in mind that Gnome 2 was released in 2001, and it wasn't nearly as usable at the start as it was after 9 years of development. As time goes on. I'm sure that there will be more tools available to customize your installation.

jerrylamos said: "Any way to tell if "Unity" has resulted in more Ubuntu users?

Well... It's lost at least one. I've been with Ubuntu since Dapper Drake, and I've *tried *to like Unity - I really have. But I've had enough.

I've just installed Mint Linux as a stopgap while I look around a few other distros. I'm not a tech-wiz by any means, but my computers have felt unspeakably dumbed-down since Unity came along.

Maybe I'll look at the other distros, think, "OMG! Ubuntu really *was *the best!" and come back... but I kinda doubt it. My Unity wishlist would have just one item - that it would go away.

I think Unity is looking totally awesome in Oneiric.

Only changes I care to see would be new monochrome icons for like Firefox and Gedit and bug fixing.

I am really loving the design choices that the developers have made for Oneiric. Everything is really awesome.

whitefort said: Well... It's lost at least one.

I've been with Ubuntu since Dapper Drake, and I've *tried *to like Unity - I really have. But I've had enough.

I've just installed Mint Linux as a stopgap while I look around a few other distros. I'm not a tech-wiz by any means, but my computers have felt unspeakably dumbed-down since Unity came along.

Maybe I'll look at the other distros, think, "OMG! Ubuntu really *was *the best!" and come back... but I kinda doubt it. My Unity wishlist would have just one item - that it would go away.

Why are you posting here, the name of the thread is Unity wishlist, which means what changes/fixes do we want to see.

If you don't like Unity, you don't have to use it, use what works for you. If you feel the need to tell the world you aren't using Ubuntu anymore, please use twitter or facebook.

This sub-forum is for the testing and discussion of Precise Pangolin, if you actually take part in testing, you will see that many of the users here don't use Unity either, but they have found what works for them.

jerrylamos said: To me, "Unity" is "dumbing down" in an attempt to attract more users.

In the classic GNOME 2 session you had:

• A top panel with a main menu, launchers, some systray stuff.
• A bottom panel with a show desktop icon, a task bar, a workspace switcher, and a trash icon.

In Unity, you have:

• A top panel with window buttons, window title, some systray stuff.
• A dash to replace and extend the main menu.
• A side panel with launchers, a workspace switcher, and a trash icon.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any "dumbing down".

Wishlist Unity:

1) Possibility to move the launcher to any place of the screen or to cancel it and substitute it by another dock

2) Additional Unity / Gnome 3 configuration tool, outside Compiz configuration tool, but keeping the simplicity in "System Settings" for newcomers

3) Possibility to move the top panel to any edge of the screen, or at least to the bottom of the screen, also autohide option

4) Restart Unity without loosing the costumization (unity --replace right now I understand restores the defaults)

5) Finish integration of applications into Unity, right now the worse is LibreOffice, the integration is quite broken

wgarcia said: 4) Restart Unity without loosing the costumization (unity --replace right now I understand restores the defaults)

No, unity --replace works just fine. You mean unity --reset.

jerrylamos said: "Out of the box" Meerkat, Lynx, ... had a lot more usable flexibility in setting up the desktop,colors, images, behavior, etc. than I've found on "Unity".

To me, "Unity" is "dumbing down" in an attempt to attract more users. Much more rigid in setup "out of the box".

Not to start a flame war, etc - You people know I use and like Ubuntu. But I agree with you. Ain't that the trend right now? Since iPhone, mostly all interfaces were reduced. Do you remember what an iPAQ running WIndows was, a couple years ago? The screen was very small, yet you had start menu, etc. Now look at the Windows for mobiles now.

Have you looked at the leaks and pre-releases of Windows 8? God, now instead of the usual start-menu, whatever, we have large blocks on screen. It's a freaking big iPhone so far.

I hate that. I really like to have everything I use at hand, many programs, files, folders, network shares, IDE, etc. Thank god interfaces are still customizable in many devices, including PCs and those that run Ubuntu. But this forum has been a good place for me to remember myself that advanced computer users are just a minority. Most people need a working browser, with big buttons that link to their e-mail and social networks. That's it. If the thing has a word-like editor and an excel-like program, that's ok for a few, but it can be hidden anyway - most won't use. If there was no Unity, but the desktop was divided in 9 gigantic squares, one for each app / web-app, it would be appealing for today's computer user.

Maybe one day soon we will have different versions of operating systems: One for normal people, with fart sounds app, joke-of-the-day, email and social networks on screen, and another version for people that use computers a little more.

Thanks, Macuntu, one less problem with Unity ;)

effenberg0x0 said: Not to start a flame war, etc - You people know I use and like Ubuntu. But I agree with you. Ain't that the trend right now? Since iPhone, mostly all interfaces were reduced. Do you remember what an iPAQ running WIndows was, a couple years ago? The screen was very small, yet you had start menu, etc. Now look at the Windows for mobiles now.

Have you looked at the leaks and pre-releases of Windows 8? God, now instead of the usual start-menu, whatever, we have large blocks on screen. It's a freaking big iPhone so far.

I hate that. I really like to have everything I use at hand, many programs, files, folders, network shares, IDE, etc. Thank god interfaces are still customizable in many devices, including PCs and those that run Ubuntu. But this forum has been a good place for me to remember myself that advanced computer users are just a minority. Most people need a working browser, with big buttons that link to their e-mail and social networks. That's it. If the thing has a word-like editor and an excel-like program, that's ok for a few, but it can be hidden anyway - most won't use. If there was no Unity, but the desktop was divided in 9 gigantic squares, one for each app / web-app, it would be appealing for today's computer user.

Maybe one day soon we will have different versions of operating systems: One for normal people, with fart sounds app, joke-of-the-day, email and social networks on screen, and another version for people that use computers a little more. That would be a really great improvement. Some of us really do use the box for more than porn.

I really hope that the devs listen to it's users - Unity is Ubuntu's standard DE (it's ok for me) but they (devs) should/must address our concerns - people want to customize their desktop and place icons/... wherever they want! So I have overworked my wishlist for PP:

1.) fix Unity to an usable DE (stable and customizable) 2.) more quality/stability - less features

I really want a working 12.04 LTS system which should not be a burden to administer and deploy.

Just saw some interesting ideas about the layout and organisation for the dash over at webupd8.org. Especially like the grouping ideas and the reorganisation of the different elements of the dash. Imo would be a step in a better direction over the current layout.

Link: http://www.webupd8.org/2011/10/unity-mockup-simplified-dash.html

A little while back the Unity developers did a Q&A on redddit. One of the questioners asked about making the launcher movable. Jason Smith stated that it would be pretty easy to make it movable, but he was asked not to.

I'm surprised someone didn't jump on this, and come up with a patch to solve the problem. I can't code my way out of a wet paper bag, so it can't be me. :)

cariboo907 said: A little while back the Unity developers did a Q&A on redddit. One of the questioners asked about making the launcher movable. Jason Smith stated that it would be pretty easy to make it movable, but he was asked not to.

Wow.

On what grounds?

rg4w said: Wow.

On what grounds?

He didn't say, but I would imagine it was the guy that signs his paycheck, as he is definitely against making the launcher movable.

cariboo907 said: He didn't say, but I would imagine it was the guy that signs his paycheck, as he is definitely against making the launcher movable.

Ok - it will be interesting of the reaction of the paycheck guy if someone comes up with a nice patch and the whole community stands behind the patch guy :-)

cariboo907 said: He didn't say, but I would imagine it was the guy that signs his paycheck, as he is definitely against making the launcher movable.

Is this rationale explained anywhere online? Ayatana, LaunchPad, etc.?

If there's a sound reason behind it (like "we don't have time in this cycle) I can be okay with it, but if it's just an opinion without regard to usability heuristics or testing I would be quite concerned about the platform's potential over the long term.

I'm hoping it's just the former....

bash said: Just saw some interesting ideas about the layout and organisation for the dash over at webupd8.org.

Link: http://www.webupd8.org/2011/10/unity-mockup-simplified-dash.html

I really like the looks of this as well. If Unity were exactly like that, and had fewer bugs, I could actually stand to use it! :p

That's how it should be in 12.04.

And as I said before, add configuration settings, and smash bugs.

ranch hand said: That would be a really great improvement. Some of us really do use the box for more than porn.

Personally, I think that's really, really unfair.

kaldor said: One thing that is really annoying me is the "apps available for download" category in the dash. I don't want to see 5+ random icons in my application list. If I wanted to see what was available for download, I'd just use the Software Centre.

It's clutter for no reason. My GNOME 2.32 Applications menu wasn't littered with a bunch of "available apps" was it? Completely agree. And it must be noted that the loading of the "apps available" makes the rendering of the dash slower than acceptable. Faster rendering would be great.

And the ability to remember status would be also appreciated; I mean: if I'm using my music apps, not forcing me to navigate to or search for them any time I launch the dashboard would be very kind from Unity...

I would also like to be able to set if the dash launches "normal size" or "maximized" (sorry for the Windows-like wording, please enlighten me ;-)

(I wonder if I could explain myself...)

Regards

Pablo

Pferra said: Completely agree. And it must be noted that the loading of the "apps available" makes the rendering of the dash slower than acceptable. Faster rendering would be great.

And the ability to remember status would be also appreciated; I mean: if I'm using my music apps, not forcing me to navigate to or search for them any time I launch the dashboard would be very kind from Unity...

I would also like to be able to set if the dash launches "normal size" or "maximized" (sorry for the Windows-like wording, please enlighten me ;-)

(I wonder if I could explain myself...)

Regards

Pablo

I was just playing with the dash due to a post by effenberg0x0 about the minimize button, if you clcik the resize button when the dash is open, it will go to full screen, and back to normal size when clicking the button. See the screenshots

pferra said:

I would also like to be able to set if the dash launches "normal size" or "maximized" (sorry for the Windows-like wording, please enlighten me :wink:

cariboo907 said: I was just playing with the dash due to a post by effenberg0x0 about the minimize button, if you clcik the resize button when the dash is open, it will go to full screen, and back to normal size when clicking the button. See the screenshots

Which is equal to this: gsettings set com.canonical.Unity form-factor Netbook gsettings set com.canonical.Unity form-factor Desktop

I mean, it could easily already be in the settings, somewhere.

Regards, Effenberg

Not having read the thread, I'd like it if the global menu didn't auto hide. That never made sense to me.

MonolithImmortal said: Not having read the thread, I'd like it if the global menu didn't auto hide. That never made sense to me.

If the global menu is the launcher, that can currently be set in ccsm / Ubuntu Unity Plugin / Hide Launcher (set to never)

MonolithImmortal said: Not having read the thread, I'd like it if the global menu didn't auto hide. That never made sense to me.

You're in good company - this is now filed as a bug, submitted by none other than MPT:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/732653

Thank you Effenberg and Caliboo. But I noticed that that fullscreen button does not set "fullscreen" as default mode (I mean, when you close the dash and reopen it, it opens as window again).

Even though, I discovered that the feature is actually available through the "minimize/maximize/close" button set on the top right corner of the dash: if you close maximized, it reopens maximized.

So, at this point, I only miss the ability of "memorise" last navigation location or applied filter (if you close having "system" category, reopen in "system" category).

Best regards to all...

Pablo

rg4w said: Is [the rationale behind the inability to move the Launcher] explained anywhere online? Ayatana, LaunchPad, etc.?

Actually, yes. I was following Ayatana for a while, and saw mention of some of the usability studies and such.

The reason the Launcher is on one of the sides of the screen is simple: vertical screen real estate.

More and more screens are 16:9 or 16:10 as opposed to 4:3. Which means, even if the physical size (which is measured diagonally) gets bigger, vertical screen real-estate either remains the same or (usually) shrinks.

A decade ago, I had a 1600x1200 17" CRT. I now have a 22" flat panel at 1680x1050. I have 150 *fewer* pixels than I had a *decade* ago. In very practical terms, this translates into "fewer lines of text and code I can see at one time without scrolling," and since I'm a dev, that gets really annoying. (My laptop is worse: 17" screen, 1600X900. Previously, I had a 15" screen, 1600x1200.).

Taking away another 48px, on top of the 24px for the panel... well, that's REALLY no good. On the other hand, I seem to have horizontal pixels to spare, so the left or right hand side of the screen would would be good.

Now: why is it on the left side of the screen? That answer is rather obvious and was borne out by testing: every window's scrollbar is on the right. People complain about trying to hit a browser's back button and accidentally summoning the Launcher? Just wait until they summon the launcher every time they try to scroll up or down.

Compound this with English and pals being top to bottom, left to right languages - placing more importance on the top and left sides of any given reading surface - and the decision was pretty easy to arrive at. I arrived at many of the same decisions myself - the first thing I did in any given Gnome 2-based setup: remove the bottom panel, install Docky, and attach it to the left side of the screen. (This actually paid dividends, because Unity's Launcher is written by the same guy who wrote Docky, and updating to 11.10 imported all of my shortcuts from Docky into Unity's Launcher. Truly, a nice touch. :-)

MonolithImmortal said: Not having read the thread, I'd like it if the global menu didn't auto hide. That never made sense to me.

100% agree. I'll even expand on that: I would really, really like it if, by default, NOTHING automatically hid itself until I told it to. First thing I do - and part of the reason I imagine I'm actually happy with Unity - is to tell the launcher to just stay put on the side of the screen, always visible. I am in no mood to go and *chase down* vital bits of the UI.

I'd like the Launcher icons to not be encased in those "tiles". They waste space and look... strange. I think the aesthetic would be better with just the icons in the Launcher strip; I think the square tiles around each one takes something away, makes it look plastick-y.

I'd like Chrome, Firefox, OO, Eclipse, and everyone else to use the new scrollbars and Global Menus.

I'd like a way to configure Unity WIHOUT having to use CCSM. Don't get me wrong, the CCSM utility is awesome, but scary to a noob; and having to wade into those waters just to tell the launcher to stop running away from a window is rather a bit much. The new Ubuntu-Tweak utility does a marvelous job of this.

In fact, I think its high time Ubuntu-Tweak became an official app.

I'd like Gnome-tweak-tool to come automatically installed.

I'd like to be able to click on the Launcher icon to minimize a non-minimized program. Docky, Cairo-Dock, Plank, MacOSX Dock... even the NeXT dock does this. I don't know why Unity's Launcher does _not_.

The simplified Dash mentioned above? Genius. I see the first page of the existing Dash as something to be gotten past to get to the good stuff.

I want to do the following: Hit ALT+F2, type in "gedit," hit "enter", and *have gedit actually launch*. I do not want to have to hit enter AGAIN, to confirm that yes, the icon you just found is the program I want to launch. That extra enter sucks.

Banshee is default? Great, should have happened a while ago. But you know, why isn't "Next track," "previous track," and "stop" in Banshee's quicklist? For that matter, why doesn't my icon change into the album cover, with time remaining for the current song, the way it can in Docky and Cairo-Dock?

When I get too many Launcher tiles, they "stack" at the bottom. Every time I push the stack up, to interact with the ones on the bottom, they all re-stack as soon as my mouse leaves the Launcher. STOP THIS, PLEASE. If I move the line of icons up (so that the ones up top are stacked, but the bottom ones are not), what makes ANYONE think I want the OS to come in behind me and un-do what I just did? Leave things where I put them, please.

...just some things off the top of my head I'd like. I'm sure I could nit-pick more things, but this is what I've noticed.

WorLord said: I'd like the Launcher icons to not be encased in those "tiles". They waste space and look... strange. I think the aesthetic would be better with just the icons in the Launcher strip; I think the square tiles around each one takes something away, makes it look plastick-y.

I'd like a way to configure Unity WIHOUT having to use CCSM.

I'd like Gnome-tweak-tool to come automatically installed.

I'd like to be able to click on the Launcher icon to minimize a non-minimized program.

All of the above - especially the tiles around launcher icons, for the same reasons mentioned.

WorLord said: Actually, yes. I was following Ayatana for a while, and saw mention of some of the usability studies and such.

The reason the Launcher is on one of the sides of the screen is simple: vertical screen real estate. I agree that it makes good sense to have the Launcher on the side rather than the bottom, and feel Apple made a mistake on that one with their Dock, for all the reasons you mentioned.

On both my Ubuntu and OS X systems, I've had my launcher/Dock on the side of my display for many years, and am very glad to see Ubuntu do it right in this regard.

Now: why is it on the left side of the screen? That answer is rather obvious and was borne out by testing: every window's scrollbar is on the right. People complain about trying to hit a browser's back button and accidentally summoning the Launcher? Just wait until they summon the launcher every time they try to scroll up or down.I've read the two usability study summaries from Canonical, but apparently missed the part in which they did A/B prototyping to confirm this hunch about the left side. In fact, I don't recall A/B prototyping at all, not even with paper prototypes. URL?

In Unity there are no scrollbars, at least not persistent ones. Whether by trackpad or mouse wheel, the new scrollbars recognize that most scrolling is done through secondary means rather than direct manipulation of the scrollbar with the mouse.

Moreover, for the last two decades app developers have begun realizing the benefits of Fitts' Law by having toolboxes on the left, now lost to them since the left edge of the monitor is occupied by the Launcher.

I'm okay with having the Launcher on the left *by default*, but not providing a way to move it to the right seems more limited than is necessary.

I visit a weather page with map and radar. It has a window with current weather. At the top are arrows to minimize and/or shift the window to the other side of the screen. That would be a nice addition to the launcher for those that keep it open.

I am content with the launcher on the left. I tried ccsm and autohide and didn't like having to press the super key and hold it while I click on something. Went back to dodge windows.

rg4w said: In fact, I don't recall A/B prototyping at all, not even with paper prototypes. URL?

GAH. It has been a *really long time* since I was following that discussion in the Ayatana list; pre-11.04, in fact.

All I can find right now is this comment from Mark about wanting the launcher near the Ubuntu button (clearly outdated, given that the button is now ON the launcher). That bug in particular contains a lot of conversation from Mark and other devs about why Launcher is on the left, but *no one* is mentioning the scroll bar thing.

I swear I read it, but I guess I'll have to retract it due to my failure to find the conversation(s).

rg4w said: I'm okay with having the Launcher on the left *by default*, but not providing a way to move it to the right seems more limited than is necessary.

I agree. I don't ever want to see it on the bottom, because switching from horizontal to vertical on a dock is actually quite a bit more work (in code) than it would seem; but L <-> R is really rather trivial.

Currently the bug is in "Work up a patch, give it to us, and we'll consider it" mode. I think its a bad overall idea, considering how Unity works and where it wants to go, but there are enough people for whom this IS the breaking point to make me think "Just put it in the CCSM with the rest of the Unity options and be done with it."

WorLord said: GAH. It has been a *really long time* since I was following that discussion in the Ayatana list; pre-11.04, in fact.

All I can find right now is this comment from Mark about wanting the launcher near the Ubuntu button (clearly outdated, given that the button is now ON the launcher). That bug in particular contains a lot of conversation from Mark and other devs about why Launcher is on the left, but *no one* is mentioning the scroll bar thing.

I swear I read it, but I guess I'll have to retract it due to my failure to find the conversation(s). Not a problem. I read the Ayatana list somewhat regularly going back to July '10, and with all the traffic and occasional argument threads it's easy for details to get lost there.

I agree. I don't ever want to see it on the bottom, because switching from horizontal to vertical on a dock is actually quite a bit more work (in code) than it would seem; but L <-> R is really rather trivial.

Currently the bug is in "Work up a patch, give it to us, and we'll consider it" mode. I think its a bad overall idea, considering how Unity works and where it wants to go, but there are enough people for whom this IS the breaking point to make me think "Just put it in the CCSM with the rest of the Unity options and be done with it." I wish I was more proficient in C++ so I could just add it and be done with it.

effenberg0x0 said: Not to start a flame war, etc - You people know I use and like Ubuntu. But I agree with you. Ain't that the trend right now? Since iPhone, mostly all interfaces were reduced. Do you remember what an iPAQ running WIndows was, a couple years ago? The screen was very small, yet you had start menu, etc. Now look at the Windows for mobiles now.

Have you looked at the leaks and pre-releases of Windows 8? God, now instead of the usual start-menu, whatever, we have large blocks on screen. It's a freaking big iPhone so far.

I hate that. I really like to have everything I use at hand, many programs, files, folders, network shares, IDE, etc. Thank god interfaces are still customizable in many devices, including PCs and those that run Ubuntu. But this forum has been a good place for me to remember myself that advanced computer users are just a minority. Most people need a working browser, with big buttons that link to their e-mail and social networks. That's it. If the thing has a word-like editor and an excel-like program, that's ok for a few, but it can be hidden anyway - most won't use. If there was no Unity, but the desktop was divided in 9 gigantic squares, one for each app / web-app, it would be appealing for today's computer user.

Maybe one day soon we will have different versions of operating systems: One for normal people, with fart sounds app, joke-of-the-day, email and social networks on screen, and another version for people that use computers a little more.

I agree ABSOLUTELY! Perfectly stated- not all of us want an interface geared towards the social network-angry birds junkies. Windows 8 scares me as well... There's no way that interface can be more productive than your standard desktop metaphor. Thankfully it appears you can still run it in desktop mode. Again, well put!

ekaspar said: I agree ABSOLUTELY! Perfectly stated- not all of us want an interface geared towards the social network-angry birds junkies.

Windows 8 scares me as well... There's no way that interface can be more productive than your standard desktop metaphor. Thankfully it appears you can still run it in desktop mode. Again, well put!

It's just like learning to use any interface, just give it time, but you do have to learn a new way of doing things.

ranch hand said: That would be a really great improvement. Some of us really do use the box for more than porn.I dont understand, what else do computers do?

Seriously my main Unity wishlist item would be to have a quick category filter like the applications menu in gnome2, i mean i love unity and i like the launcher and the search features but when im lazing back using only the mouse, if i want to find an app i dont have quicklisted in the launcher, i have to open the dash click the apps icon at the bottom, then select the filters from the top, choose a filter from the right, then the apps are listed on the left? this feels so stupidly put together,

i think the dash should have on it right at the top just above or under the search bar a gnome2 style applications/places/prefernces, it would be there for us stubborn gits who dont like change and if you didnt want it you could just ignore it

CaptainMark said: I dont understand, what else do computers do?

Seriously my main Unity wishlist item would be to have a quick category filter like the applications menu in gnome2, i mean i love unity and i like the launcher and the search features but when im lazing back using only the mouse, if i want to find an app i dont have quicklisted in the launcher, i have to open the dash click the apps icon at the bottom, then select the filters from the top, choose a filter from the right, then the apps are listed on the left? this feels so stupidly put together,

i think the dash should have on it right at the top just above or under the search bar a gnome2 style applications/places/prefernces, it would be there for us stubborn gits who dont like change and if you didnt want it you could just ignore it

Seconded! That'd be a massive improvement to Unity!

Apparently I am a troll, so my post has been removed, :p however, I would still like to see the following in Precise Pangolin's Unity:

• an ability to simply add links to the desktop,
• a gadgets/widgets, or whatever you wish to call them, capability on the Unity desktop
• possibly a fixed location for Nautilus and the Rubbish bin so that when you scroll through the Dash (unless there's a chance to get rid of the Dash altogether, add it as an installable/uninstallable feature, which would in fact seem like a better idea to me) and when you put more than merely a few application start buttons on it the two don't go anywhere.

My main gripe is about losing the app lens from the launcher, the less I have to look at the Dash Home the better (that really needs to have some personalization!)

I know <Super+a> still works just fine, but when I'm kicked back in my Lazy Boy just surfing & listening to tunes; It's a pain to lean forward pick up the keyboard and type. Lazy... you betcha, I'm Old and Entitled!

If someone has a way to get a lens into the launcher. I'm all ears. I've looked into the code of the launchers and saw nothing there about placement I presume it's hard coded into the dash itself.

All & All I'm very happy with the progress. Just needs some more ability to customize and personalize.

p.s. I don't need no stinking menus. :biggrin:

Also, I'd like Dash to have the option to pop out only on demand or actually stay open at all times, not to open every time you go too far left on the screen, it's a nuisance as it covers things and since all of the desktop is empty there is plenty of room for the window to be shrunk by the few pixels the Dash is wide.

WorLord said: I'd like to be able to click on the Launcher icon to minimize a non-minimized program. Docky, Cairo-Dock, Plank, MacOSX Dock... even the NeXT dock does this. I don't know why Unity's Launcher does _not_.

I could not agree more! For Natty, I built Unity with the patch provided to do just that - Minimize running app on clicking launcher. It can be found in this extensive bug report: Bug #733349: Minimize Application's Windows upon clicking its Launcher Icon

It's one of the main reasons I've not moved to Oneiric yet. That one patch may have given Ubuntu a reprive to exist in my world for a little while longer.

The biggest usability nightmare found in Unity, IMHO, is the subject of yet another hotly debated bug: Bug #682788: Global menu is not ergonomical on large screens

Essentially, it would really help workflow if only maximized windows had global menu active, whereas un-maximized windows would contain their own menus.

Actually, these bugs aren't so much hotly debated, but almost unanimously requested. Implementing some simple optional settings such as the patch in the minimize bug allow and the settings proposed in the 2nd bug.

These two issues alone bring about more eye movement (searching for the little minimize window control rather than simply clicking the app's launcher), more mouse movement (too many various instances to enumerate), and require many more mouse clicks to accomplish the simplest of tasks. While I'm quite proficient with keyboard-only usage of various OS & software, I also want to be able to use the Unity interface in an efficient, logical manner with an un-distracted workflow. Currently, Unity requires me to think, plan, move, and search the screen every time I want to manage windows - all wasted, unnecessary efforts impeding my use and distracting me constantly.

Unity is frustrating.

rg4w said: Not a problem. I read the Ayatana list somewhat regularly going back to July '10, and with all the traffic and occasional argument threads it's easy for details to get lost there.

I wish I was more proficient in C++ so I could just add it and be done with it. You can take the panel, or any number off them that you can create with a right click drop down menu, and put in anywhere you want, vertical or horizontal (middle of the screen is fine even) if you are using Xubuntu. Those panels are made to hold launchers and you can stack the buggers.

tekstr1der said: Essentially, it would really help workflow if only maximized windows had global menu active, whereas un-maximized windows would contain their own menus.

Seconded!

ARooster said: Seconded!

Thirded

ARooster said: Apparently I am a troll, so my post has been removed, :p

however, I would still like to see the following in Precise Pangolin's Unity:

Congratulations.

• an ability to simply add links to the desktop,
• a gadgets/widgets, or whatever you wish to call them, capability on the Unity desktop
• possibly a fixed location for Nautilus and the Rubbish bin so that when you scroll through the Dash (unless there's a chance to get rid of the Dash altogether, add it as an installable/uninstallable feature, which would in fact seem like a better idea to me) and when you put more than merely a few application start buttons on it the two don't go anywhere.

I am glad to see, by the way, that I am not the only literate person here that can actually use a menu and prefers it.

Yes I use launchers. As many as I want, been told for years that I use too many and should use the menu. Now I should have ones come up instead of a menu. No thanks.

So ranch hand, are you saying that you have launchers all over your desktop that don't have any icons, only text labels? Or do you several launchers that use the same icon, causing confusion if they don't have text labels?

I only can use one icon really for a program launcher, the code icon used for Bash scripts. So the name has to be discriptive enough for me to know what it is. I'd love to hear a better way of doing this! Then again, in Windows I am quite used to looking at both the icon and the text under it. I imagine two are better than one, especially if the icons look similar.

There are many users that have shortcuts/launchers to text documents and spreadsheets on their desktops, when creating a launcher for an .odt or .ods file the correct Libre-Office icon is automagically selected, the problem comes in when you have more than one text document or spreadsheet, unless you specifically select a different icon the spreadsheets will get the spreadsheet icon and the text documents get the text document icon, thus the need for text labels under the icon.

Personally I prefer an empty desktop, as I usually have quite a few windows open that cover the desktop, so icons for documents, spreadsheets, music and video files are essentially useless unless I close/move a window to see the icons. For me it may take a couple of extra clicks, but clicking the bfb at the top of the launcher opens the dash, then I click the document icon at the bottom of the dash window to show my most recent opened documents. If I don't see the document/file I want, you will see on the dash that there are more documents available depending on how many you have recently opened.

Of course there are keyboard shortcuts available to cut down the need for the two or three extra clicks needed, but I'm trying to determine if it is feasible to use a mouse only for the keyboard challenged users out there.

This is getting way off topic again, and I apologize to those that actually want to stay on topic. :)

cariboo907 said: So ranch hand, are you saying that you have launchers all over your desktop that don't have any icons, only text labels? Or do you several launchers that use the same icon, causing confusion if they don't have text labels?

No, not me, I have the two panels that Xfce thinks you want.

Panel 1 by default is set up like a dock for you on the bottom. I cut the size down a good bit and moved it to the right and left it as auto hide. I am not sure I am going to keep it or not but it does work very nicely.

Panel 0 is the top panel and it is pretty similar to the Gnome2 panels except for the ability to stack your launchers.

My launchers would surly be confusing for you to use. They are set up for me and there is no confusion. Under Gnome2 I had more icons for launchers than I do now. They were grouped in threes. The center one was related to the 2 on either side of it in relation to different jobs. Now that center one is all that shows until you open the launcher for the list. This saves some motion and certainly unclutters the panel. Speed of use feels about equal but couldn't swear to it.

On one of my Xubuntu 12.04 install I am going with what they offer which is one panel (same version of xfce4.8 just Ubuntus Xubuntu teams tweaking). Have 7 icons with 13 launchers. Trying that out. So far I like it pretty well. Everything handy at the top right except the application menu at top left. This is my change, default is the bottom in Xubuntu. I prefer the top.

Have to play with it a bit more to see if I like that arrangement or this one better.

I do know that if you want to customize a launcher this panel arrangement is pretty impressive. I use the same applications most of the time. Launchers are nice if they are where you want them to be. The rest of the time I prefer to go to a menu, intelligently organized, to find a tool that will do the job I want to do. This menu does that very well too.

Haven't played with Xfce since 3.4 or 5. Been a lot of improvements in that time. I figured that it would be probably about now that I would feel comfortable enough with this DE to switch full time. Actually took 2 weeks. Haven't booted to Gnome Session in 3(?) weeks I think. I know my Sid installs have gone to GS, I do not think this testing install has but really do not know. I suppose I ought to boot into Gnome and find out sometime.

Don't really care. Found a DE that works better for me than what I have been using.

Hylas de Niall said: All of the above - especially the tiles around launcher icons, for the same reasons mentioned.Further to this gnome-tweak should be integrated into the gnome control-centre

Also has anyone used gnome-pie its not the most natural feeling tool to use because it seems to require two hands on the keyboard and one on the mouse, haha never enoungh hands, but it does give you the option to put loads of stuff quite close to hand without cluttering the desktop

I would like for the ubuntu 12.04 that :

• the first page of dash display favorite and most used applications !
• an application to customize desktop more than wallpapers and theme like fonts,transparence, icone on desktop, ....

B0B

• an improved Workspace Switcher. The old one in GNOME was working just fine. It was customisable, it showed which workspace you're currently on unlike the current Dock icon that only shows you where you are by clicking on it without the ability to just see where you are from the icon (and yes, I know you can use the keyboard shortcuts to move them, but I'd really just prefer to see where I've got things open and where I am at the moment).

ranch hand said: Have to play with it a bit more to see if I like that arrangement or this one better.

Screenshot? I'm having difficulty visualizing your setup.

I wish I could have a "right click menu" in Unity.

arpanaut said: My main gripe is about losing the app lens from the launcher,

the less I have to look at the Dash Home the better (that really needs to have some personalization!)

I know <Super+a> still works just fine, but when I'm kicked back in my Lazy Boy just surfing & listening to tunes; It's a pain to lean forward pick up the keyboard and type. Lazy... you betcha, I'm Old and Entitled!

If someone has a way to get a lens into the launcher. I'm all ears.

I have a (kind of) workaround: install xtodotool from USC, and create a launcher with the following command: ``` xdotool key super search --name Dash key 116 23

(Incidently, I'm trying to get a command to open the Installed section straight away (I think it would be useful to those who complain of having to make three mouse clicks to see all programs) but the problem I'm running into is that if it I run it a second time, it closes the Installed section.  If you have any tips, I'd be happy to hear them.)

WorLord said: Screenshot? I'm having difficulty visualizing your setup.

The first is from my Debian testing Xfce setup. Xfce by default gives you the panel that is on the right in that shot on the bottom.

The second is from Xubuntu 12.04-testing. Their implementation gives you just the top panel. On my other Pretty ***** install I have added a right side panel and on the one pictured have left it as installed.

The launchers are movable with a gui within the panel or from panel to panel with a right click menu.

One thing Xubuntu has removed or disabled, I have not looked to be sure, is a popup from xfce that gives you random tips on using the desktop. Thai is really nice, if like me, you are not very familiar with Xfce.

You can see gparted on the Xubuntu install. Highlighted is where that particular install is.

tekstr1der said: The biggest usability nightmare found in Unity, IMHO, is the subject of yet another hotly debated bug:

Bug #682788: Global menu is not ergonomical on large screens

Essentially, it would really help workflow if only maximized windows had global menu active, whereas un-maximized windows would contain their own menus. That one's a tough call, and for all the comments posted there I wasn't able to find any links to definitive usability studies which would substantiate the request.

I recognize that Fitts' Law works both ways, but historically the relatively few studies done have showed the backstop effect from the monitor edge far outweighs the cost of longer mouse travel (this article from Tog provides background on Fitts' Law).

But even with the backstop effect, as monitors have gotten large the question is: what is the measurable difference between the benefits of the backstop effect and the length of mouse travel on today's larger monitors? Is that still a positive number?

I've been searching the CHI archives and elsewhere for an answer to this question for some time, and thus far have come up empty.

If any of you have a link to a study done on this issue I'd be very grateful.

rg4w said: That one's a tough call, and for all the comments posted there I wasn't able to find any links to definitive usability studies which would substantiate the request.

I recognize that Fitts' Law works both ways, but historically the relatively few studies done have showed the backstop effect from the monitor edge far outweighs the cost of longer mouse travel (this article from Tog provides background on Fitts' Law).

But even with the backstop effect, as monitors have gotten large the question is: what is the measurable difference between the benefits of the backstop effect and the length of mouse travel on today's larger monitors? Is that still a positive number?

I've been searching the CHI archives and elsewhere for an answer to this question for some time, and thus far have come up empty.

If any of you have a link to a study done on this issue I'd be very grateful.

We had a thread about that last cycle here. I defended the end of the global menu for apps not maximized, by adding menu to the right of the title bar. Some participants agreed. Others tried to stab me. I remember I liked this option (http://www.webupd8.org/2011/02/unity-mockup-menu-integrated-in-window.html) but within some posts we were talking about saving the whales.

The bad ergonomic aspect for me is evident, because I'm in a 23" monitor. If I have calc opened in the lower right of my screen, why would I go all the way up and down again just to switch from scientific to standard mode? It takes unnecessary mouse movement. I already have CTS, I need to move the mouse as less as possible. Maybe if I was working in a 7" netbook, it wouldn't be a problem.

Large monitors are becoming cheaper and cheaper. Companies are obviously buying them, as employees can now have more information on screen, work more, be more productive. No one will maximize a normal app like gedit, calc, etc. In a 23" monitor, you won't even maximize gimp, eclipse, etc.

Regards, Effenberg

CaptainMark said: I dont understand, what else do computers do?

Seriously my main Unity wishlist item would be to have a quick category filter like the applications menu in gnome2, i mean i love unity and i like the launcher and the search features but when im lazing back using only the mouse, if i want to find an app i dont have quicklisted in the launcher, i have to open the dash click the apps icon at the bottom, then select the filters from the top, choose a filter from the right, then the apps are listed on the left? this feels so stupidly put together

Primarily what I care about is getting the the app I want quickly, and the dash does that.

It's as fast or faster for me to find something in the Dash as it was in the old menu system, and more reliable since I don't have to worry about the list of apps disappearing if my mouse is a little off the mark when going to a sub menu or situations where something else wanting attention/focus would cause the old menu to disappear. Scrolling performance is better for me in the Dash than with the old menu as well.

Just my opinion.

If you *really* want the old type menu, maybe you should be looking at something like classic-menu indicator, may be questionable getting it to work on Oneric/Precise, but it's out there, maybe more developers will get on board to port/maintain it.

Later, Seeker

rg4w said: That one's a tough call, and for all the comments posted there I wasn't able to find any links to definitive usability studies which would substantiate the request.

I recognize that Fitts' Law works both ways, but historically the relatively few studies done have showed the backstop effect from the monitor edge far outweighs the cost of longer mouse travel (this article from Tog provides background on Fitts' Law).

But even with the backstop effect, as monitors have gotten large the question is: what is the measurable difference between the benefits of the backstop effect and the length of mouse travel on today's larger monitors? Is that still a positive number?

I've been searching the CHI archives and elsewhere for an answer to this question for some time, and thus far have come up empty.

If any of you have a link to a study done on this issue I'd be very grateful.

Using a 27" 2560x1440 monitor, I never have any idea which window's particular menu I'll discover up on the global menu bar. It's not so much the mouse/eye movement that bothers me as trying to figure out what app the menu belongs to, focusing the intended app, and returning to the menu to actually use it. Absolutely silly.

Also the fundamental point expressed in that bug is to provide the OPTION, not to change defaults. Options are becoming all too rare these days on DE's other than KDE.

Maybe I have not read the forums enough so please correct me if this has been accomplished.

My wish is to make the launcher movable. While the left side of the screen has been its home for quite some time, giving the ability to move the launcher where one wants would be a nice feature. Also, a customization menu for the launcher invoked by right clicking on a blank area to resize icons or the launcher itself would be helpful.

as2000 said: Maybe I have not read the forums enough so please correct me if this has been accomplished.

My wish is to make the launcher movable. While the left side of the screen has been its home for quite some time, giving the ability to move the launcher where one wants would be a nice feature. Also, a customization menu for the launcher invoked by right clicking on a blank area to resize icons or the launcher itself would be helpful.

Apparently it is quite easy to change the launcher code to make it movable, although no-one has stepped up to the plate as yet. The reason it isn't movable at this time, is that Mark Shuttleworth wants it to stay where it is.

Because Unity is a compiz plugin, you have to use compizconfig-settings-manger to make changes to the launcher, including changing icon sizes, background transparency and other settings.

There are also what are called quicklist, that allow you to add functionallity to the launcher. See here for some examples

tekstr1der said: Using a 27" 2560x1440 monitor, I never have any idea which window's particular menu I'll discover up on the global menu bar. It's not so much the mouse/eye movement that bothers me as trying to figure out what app the menu belongs to, focusing the intended app, and returning to the menu to actually use it. Absolutely silly.

Also the fundamental point expressed in that bug is to provide the OPTION, not to change defaults. Options are becoming all too rare these days on DE's other than KDE.

this is for you:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/682788

madjr said: this is for you:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/682788

Yeah, I linked to it earlier in the thread:

tekstr1der said: I could not agree more! For Natty, I built Unity with the patch provided to do just that - Minimize running app on clicking launcher. It can be found in this extensive bug report:

Bug #733349: Minimize Application's Windows upon clicking its Launcher Icon

It's one of the main reasons I've not moved to Oneiric yet. That one patch may have given Ubuntu a reprive to exist in my world for a little while longer.

The biggest usability nightmare found in Unity, IMHO, is the subject of yet another hotly debated bug: Bug #682788: Global menu is not ergonomical on large screens

Essentially, it would really help workflow if only maximized windows had global menu active, whereas un-maximized windows would contain their own menus.

...

seeker5528 said: Primarily what I care about is getting the the app I want quickly, and the dash does that.

It's as fast or faster for me to find something in the Dash as it was in the old menu system, and more reliable since I don't have to worry about the list of apps disappearing if my mouse is a little off the mark when going to a sub menu or situations where something else wanting attention/focus would cause the old menu to disappear. Scrolling performance is better for me in the Dash than with the old menu as well.

Just my opinion.

If you *really* want the old type menu, maybe you should be looking at something like classic-menu indicator, may be questionable getting it to work on Oneric/Precise, but it's out there, maybe more developers will get on board to port/maintain it.

Later, Seeker

or

@CaptainMark Add cairo-dock and hide unity ( compiz --replace or ccsm ) and pick not to have the Unity plugin

or use Gnome-Shell ... with cairo-dock - you can quickly have your menus .....

[IMG]http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/8487/snapshot1hy.jpg[/IMG]

Bobboau said: Unity is coming along nicely, but it still has a lot of ways in which it needs improvement. what are some of the things that you think need to be done to make it the best interface the universe will ever know.

For me the biggest problem I have with unity by far comes in the form of task switching and workspace switching, both of these feel clumsy to me. for instance thanks to grouping I have to click three times to get to the important firefox window I want, once to select the group (which will open something useless like the downloads window) again to initiate the 3d window picker, and then from there I need to look and visually identify which one I want and click on it again. I would MUCH rather just have half a dozen firefox (or whatever) icons and be able to just click on the one I want.

Another thing I would like to see is official support for the desktop cube, it seems to mostly work already, so this should be an easy win, all you need is better integration of activating it (workspace switcher, actually middle clicking on the launcher would be my preference). the consistent problem with all implementations of the cube have been how to activate it and the best solution I have found is 'go to the edge of the screen and middle click'. with the cube in this setup all you have to to is move your mouse to a screen edge, hold the middle mouse button down and move around to see which workspace you want, let go when you find it.

More compiz plugin support (the extras package, or some subset of it, would be nice). It would also be nice if you could grace us with different wall papers on different workspaces, I have waited SO MANY years for this, the gnome people always blew it off.

pie in the sky wish; widgets. real ones. KDE's plasma widgets are a great example of what I would like to see. I have the same wishes; which means that what I'm really wishing for is the functionality and usability of Gnome 2. I don't understand how taking so many steps backwards in terms of usability can be considered "progress". I also do not understand the need to "improve" (change, modify) something that *already works* rather than improve some other aspect of Linux. I don't own a tablet and I don't want a tablet-style interface on my laptop. Navigating to an application via typing into a search bar simply makes no sense considering the modern desktop... What the heck is going on?!

I have no idea if it works in Gnome3 and Gtk3 but Wallpapoz has been giving me a different wallpaper on different workspaces since 8.04 and I am sure it was around before that.

How it would work on workspaces that do not have a set number is another big question.

23dornot23d said: or

@CaptainMark Add cairo-dock and hide unity ( compiz --replace or ccsm ) and pick not to have the Unity plugin There are many menus and docks i could be using but this is our Unity Wishlist after all, I like unity but these are features i feel could improve it if given as an option, most of all i dislike the lack of options we are now given, its pretty much "use this program how we want you to, or use something else" when it should be "use this program however you feel you want to customize it" its more fitting with the nature of free software after all

Ok - in this thread I found some nice tricks to fix somehow Unity but after 2 weeks I have to admit it is enough. I'm a right-handed person therefore I prefer docks + open/close/max buttons on the right part of the screen/window too - I have not found out how I can achieve this (CCSM is not the right tool for such a kind of task or I have overlooked some setting) and on two 26" led monitors it's a burden to work with Unity. However as I have to check the next LTS release to be prepared for it I will test PP but my main workhorse is running again Lucid Lynx.

Gyokuro said: Ok - in this thread I found some nice tricks to fix somehow Unity but after 2 weeks I have to admit it is enough. I'm a right-handed person therefore I prefer docks + open/close/max buttons on the right part of the screen/window too - I have not found out how I can achieve this (CCSM is not the right tool for such a kind of task or I have overlooked some setting) and on two 26" led monitors it's a burden to work with Unity. However as I have to check the next LTS release to be prepared for it I will test PP but my main workhorse is running again Lucid Lynx.

I can help you partially. Getting the max,min,close to right of the applications windows is as simple as:

gconftool-2 --set -t string /apps/metacity/general/button_layout "menu:close,maximize,minimize"

gconftool-2 --set -t string /apps/metacity/general/button_layout "close,maximize,minimize"

Regards, Effenberg

EDIT: I'm working with large monitor too, sometimes LFD. I'm using Alt+(key) to use the global menu and avoid the mouse movement. Generally I do an Alt+F and navigate using arrow keys. It's not ideal, but helps.

effenberg0x0 said: I can help you partially. Getting the max,min,close to right of the applications windows is as simple as:

gconftool-2 --set -t string /apps/metacity/general/button_layout "menu:close,maximize,minimize"

Use this to revert:

gconftool-2 --set -t string /apps/metacity/general/button_layout "close,maximize,minimize"

But I don't know of a way to move the Global Panel from where it is or get the menus back to apps in runtime. For these ones you need change to code (AFAIK).

Regards, Effenberg

Ok, thank you very much - so I can put this in a script in case Unity do not get revised and I have to make staff happy in forthcoming 12.04.

Yes, you can create a bash script with the customizations that are needed in your work environment and put it in the "Startup Applications" for each user. Since Startup Apps can now be hidden, there's little chance users will mess with it. As far as I can see it is unlikely that this specific setting will be in the standard "Settings" in PP.

Now, if anyone manages to add a button to the left corner of the window, which can open the Application Menu (even if the Global Menu is not disabled and will repeat same options), that would be huge. Something like "menu,app_menu:min,max,close". I've only seen drawing/proposals for it, but no real code/workaround.

edjski said: Navigating to an application via typing into a search bar simply makes no sense considering the modern desktop... What the heck is going on?!

It also doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have "type and search" as the default navigation method on a tablet interface. What you want for one-finger navigation is the ability to //browse//. Perhaps someone could come up with an interface that, say, lists all the options and suboptions in some form of navigable "menu" system ...

I think the type-and-search thing might be borrowed from some of the new changes to Win7 et al. Where they suck. There've been times on Win7 where I've tried to look for a file with certain attributes, and after cursing the new interface for no longer giving me a simple dedicated checkbox for those options, I've worked out by googling online that what I have to do to find the file is essentially to type in a long CLI string with certain keywords and switches that let me specify the search attributes. So a search that used to take five characters to set the search string and four option/checkbox ticks, and required no real knowledge of the OS, now requires a types thirty-seven character CLI command and knowledge of the syntax and spelling (with no visual suggestions for the user, and no "advanced search" option to help them build their queries). That's not progress.

It's like the GUI revolution is being wound back in favour of commandline interfaces, and the end-user has no say about it. Of course, they can always vote with their feet and bale out of Windows to go to Ubuntu as a saner alternative that's not prone to these fashion glitches and change-for-change's-sake horriblenesses, which MS has to implement in order to be able to justify saying that each new charageble upgrade to the OS is "new" ... but if Ubuntu is then consciously copying the same features and gimmicks as WIN/OSX, then it's no longer providing that alternative. We might as well just take our chances with Windows.

Trouble is, I understand why developers would want to do this. I understand why a Mac-user, tasked with developing a user-interface for a free OS might think that the most fun thing they can do is make it look just like a Mac. That gives them an easy way to evaluate how well they're doing, and it's easier than sitting back and actually thinking about what the OS and user really need, and accepting that the answer may sometimes not look like the other things currently on the market. So I can understand why this happens, and why developers doing it get a buzz from successfully apeing other "pro" interfaces. But it's still the wrong thing to do.

ErkDemon said: It also doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have "type and search" as the default navigation method on a tablet interface. What you want for one-finger navigation is the ability to //browse//. Perhaps someone could come up with an interface that, say, lists all the options and suboptions in some form of navigable "menu" system ...

I think the type-and-search thing might be borrowed from some of the new changes to Win7 et al. Where they suck. There've been times on Win7 where I've tried to look for a file with certain attributes, and after cursing the new interface for no longer giving me a simple dedicated checkbox for those options, I've worked out by googling online that what I have to do to find the file is essentially to type in a long CLI string with certain keywords and switches that let me specify the search attributes. So a search that used to take five characters to set the search string and four option/checkbox ticks, and required no real knowledge of the OS, now requires a types thirty-seven character CLI command and knowledge of the syntax and spelling (with no visual suggestions for the user, and no "advanced search" option to help them build their queries). That's not progress.

It's like the GUI revolution is being wound back in favour of commandline interfaces, and the end-user has no say about it. Of course, they can always vote with their feet and bale out of Windows to go to Ubuntu as a saner alternative that's not prone to these fashion glitches and change-for-change's-sake horriblenesses, which MS has to implement in order to be able to justify saying that each new charageble upgrade to the OS is "new" ... but if Ubuntu is then consciously copying the same features and gimmicks as WIN/OSX, then it's no longer providing that alternative. We might as well just take our chances with Windows.

Trouble is, I understand why developers would want to do this. I understand why a Mac-user, tasked with developing a user-interface for a free OS might think that the most fun thing they can do is make it look just like a Mac. That gives them an easy way to evaluate how well they're doing, and it's easier than sitting back and actually thinking about what the OS and user really need, and accepting that the answer may sometimes not look like the other things currently on the market. So I can understand why this happens, and why developers doing it get a buzz from successfully apeing other "pro" interfaces. But it's still the wrong thing to do. While I see no need for MS or Mac I have to agree with the rest of what you are saying.

You really ought, by the way, to look at Xfce. They do take their time in developing but it works great.

There are a number of other DEs out there too. Open box is very nice and very usable.

It takes a bit of study to set up, but once set up it is great. You can do a lot with it to really suit the way you work. Very flexible.

It is so flexible that there is such a thing as an adaptation of their menu for MS (bblean).

Originally Posted by jerrylamos

To me, "Unity" is "dumbing down" in an attempt to attract more users. In the classic GNOME 2 session you had:

• A top panel with a main menu, launchers, some systray stuff.
• A bottom panel with a show desktop icon, a task bar, a workspace switcher, and a trash icon.

In Unity, you have:

• A top panel with window buttons, window title, some systray stuff.
• A dash to replace and extend the main menu.
• A side panel with launchers, a workspace switcher, and a trash icon.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any "dumbing down".

rao v&#7863;t | Vi&#7879;c Làm|Mua bán | Qu&#7843;ng Cáo |Vi&#7879;c làm C&#7847;n th&#417; | rao V&#7863;t C&#7847;n th&#417;

vothanhcam said: I'm sorry, but I don't see any "dumbing down".

I think that some people see the use of large icons as dumb-downery (and the fact that there's no obvious right-click or menu setting to NOT have large icons). Some people would use the term "Mickey Mouse" or "Fisher-Price" for an interface that seems locked to a size that looks like it was designed for people wearing mittens.

Also, the decision to set up the desktop to work in a particular way, and not include any of the usual features that would let users override the default settings and set things up //their// way, perhaps smacks of condescension, in that it suggests that the designers thought that they knew better than the end-users what would best suit those users, to the extent that the designers seem to have made it deliberately difficult for the users to change things back to a more "normal" desktop.

It's like someone putting child-locks on your kitchen cupboards. If you're not a child, it can be seen as offensively patronising. And while it's one thing to be patronised by someone who's genuinely a design genius, in this case, the people responsible for Unity clearly don't fall into that category. Painfully so.

A third reason why Unity might be seen as "dumbing-down" is that its interface redesign is supposedly optimised for 16:9 movie screens, and for small-screen devices. There's been a big shift in emphasis in the industry with the success of the iPad to considering small devices that let you watch movies and be a more passive consumer of content, and the Unity redesign seems to be consciously targetting that market. So if you use your PC for actually creating content or doing serious work, and you've invested in a large screen, it might slightly niggle you to find that your workspace has now apparently been redesigned with big buttons and small-screen optimisations for people who want to buy a shiny piece of consumer bling to use as a leisure device. And the fact that there's no standard inbuilt customisation controls to turn the desktop back to a more conventional layout suggests that the design brief for Unity was maybe to target the consumer electronics market at the expense of desktop users. Maybe Canonical reckoned that there was more money to be had by turning the OS into something that could be licensed to tablet and TV manufacturers.

Anyhow, a lot of desktop users basically thought that Canonical was giving them the finger, and was letting them know that they weren't considered to be particularly important any more. Canonical gave the impression that the new plan was to ignore boring old PC users and people with old hardware, and chase after the Apple-user demographic and the people who buy the very latest consumer electronics, because that's where there was a higher concentration of disposable income, and more opportunities for a company like Canonical to get a slice of the pie. If you can tell a tablet manufacturer that your userbase is demographically the same as people who buy iPads -- that it attracts the Apple crowd -- then that tablet manufacturer is more likely to pay you money for permission to put your OS on their machines.

So that's the suspicion that people have about what's happening -- that Ubuntu is being converted as far as possible into an Apple-clone consumer electronics OS, 'cos that's where the obvious money seems to be.

On the bright side, if that IS the plan, they seem to be making a right mess of it, so if the Ubuntu userbase isn't completely fragmented in a year's time, maybe they'll have to start making more conciliatory gestures to more traditional PC users. Right now, their userbase seems to be fleeing in all directions to alternative distros and alternative desktops. A couple of years ago, most people who used Ubuntu seemed to be fairly happy with the default desktop, now most of the people who defend the Ubuntu project most strongly seem to be saying that it's great ... if you use a third-party desktop, or one of the alternative distros, or you download special tools to let you undo the changes made by the last couple of releases. Unity appears to have fractured the Ubuntu userbase, as different groups skeet off in different directions to find different workarounds to the new interface's perceived failures.

The irony is, that in trying to make Ubuntu more attractive to people who don't like to tinker -- and doing it badly -- Unity seems to have turned Ubuntu from a successful, stable, reliable, "inclusive" OS that you could recommend to anyone and that "just worked", out of the box, into an OS that you only consider mentioning to people who are prepared to spend some time tinkering and checking out all the "scary" aspects of Linux like distros and alternative desktops, that most "consumer" users run a mile from.

:confused:

ErkDemon said: It also doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have "type and search" as the default navigation method on a tablet interface.

Just because search is there doesn't mean you are required to use it and it seems pretty common for tablets to have an on-screen keyboard, it you decided you did want to use it.

What you want for one-finger navigation is the ability to //browse//. Perhaps someone could come up with an interface that, say, lists all the options and suboptions in some form of navigable "menu" system ...

You mean like a 'Dash' kind of thing, which among it's other choices has a big icon that says 'more apps' under it that perhaps would bring up a menu with something like 'Most Frequently Used Apps - see X more', 'Installed Apps - see X more', 'Apps Available For Download - see X more' each showing a small number of apps with the option to see more?

As for having a choice of icon size, having a choice between large and small would be nice.

Later, Seeker

ErkDemon said: Anyhow, a lot of desktop users basically thought that Canonical was giving them the finger

Well, in the modern touch device/screen/tablet age, wouldn't that be muli-finger? :twisted:

Later, Seeker

ranch hand said: While I see no need for MS or Mac I have to agree with the rest of what you are saying.

You really ought, by the way, to look at Xfce. They do take their time in developing but it works great.

There are a number of other DEs out there too. Open box is very nice and very usable.

It takes a bit of study to set up, but once set up it is great. You can do a lot with it to really suit the way you work. Very flexible.

It is so flexible that there is such a thing as an adaptation of their menu for MS (bblean).

Hey old buddy, you're a multi-booter from way back :D

Care to try my crap-tastic thingy? Just install a fresh Oneiric (don't update) and do what it says here:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=11435509&postcount=78

Then go through the Oneiric updates and afterwards upgrade to Precise.

I have actually even tried it it with a fresh Precise but the changes are more dramatic the other way, and I'm all into the drama ;)

kansasnoob said: Hey old buddy, you're a multi-booter from way back :D

Care to try my crap-tastic thingy? Just install a fresh Oneiric (don't update) and do what it says here:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=11435509&postcount=78

Then go through the Oneiric updates and afterwards upgrade to Precise.

I have actually even tried it it with a fresh Precise but the changes are more dramatic the other way, and I'm all into the drama ;) I have 4 Xubuntu 12.04-testing installs. One could easily be replaced by this. Is this best done from a netboot install so that there is no conflict with Unity and Gnome Shell?

By that I mean just install the gnome-desktop package instead of the ubuntu-desktop package.

seeker5528 said: Well, in the modern touch device/screen/tablet age, wouldn't that be muli-finger? :twisted:

Later, Seeker Yup, that is pretty much sums it up nicely.

Actually I think if I had Unity on a touch device it would serve pretty well but I think that I will be keeping Android on my phone.