Shuttleworth on bug #1 - perhaps we can consider that one fixed.

[SeZo]

Wow.. You have convinced yourselves to accept the INEVITABLE
I have a different out look on this one. Horses for courses.
You do different things with phone/tablets compared to desktops/laptops
The latter is for creating and not necessary for consuming content.

There is no need to FORCE the desktop users to a tablet/phone interface.

So what would be better, 2 separate DE/UI paradigms or one that spans both devices and desktops (as long as it works) ? .. now ask yourself which DE (currently) would seem the best fit.

KDE shows that it can be done with its plasma netbook interface:
http://www.kde.org/workspaces/plasmanetbook/
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Blogs/Productivity-Sauce/KDE-Plasma-Netbook-Revisited
With a few clicks you can switch between them.

It is also suitable for the tablets:
http://plasma-active.org/

[Mark Greaves (PCNetSpec)]

I think maybe you misunderstood what I was saying (or I didn't phrase it well) .. I'm not saying you HAVE to have the same DE on devices as workstations .. I'm just saying that Unity may have had a "purpose" beyond change for the sake of change, and "why not" if it can be made to work

If Ubuntu are willing (and able) to address the issues Unity brought up on the workstation .. why not give it a chance.

Both Gnome3 currently, and KDE4 went through the same transitionary stage, where given time to improve, they did/are.

It seems I was quite willing to give Gnome3 time to "mature", but wasn't extending that to Unity .. which *may* have been a mistake on my part 

And I disagree .. KDE isn''t an ideal situation on devices (though I have to admit here too, some of this may be personal bias).. it's sounds a lot like Win8 if you have to change UI, even if it is just a few clicks. The "ideal" situation would be a DE/UI that fits both .. now I don't know for sure this is possible, but Unity appears as close as anything else at the moment (indeed maybe closer), without loosing anything from either, in fact possible enhancing the "device" UI, without harming the workstation UI much beyond some slight limitations that appear to be being slowly addressed.

There is no need to FORCE the desktop users to a tablet/phone interface.

Where are Ubuntu doing this .. there is nothing stopping you from installing another DE ? .. not to mention that I don't (and never have) consider Unity a tablet/phone UI in the same vein as iOS/Android .. in fact I consider it a tablet "friendly" workstation UI.

All I'm saying is "with hindsight", I can (maybe) see what Ubuntu's plan may have been .. and *IF* what I've read about the improvements to the UI (from the workstation perspective) are correct, and that they continue to work in that direction (as Gnome are having to do) .. I'm willing to give it another go.

There's a lot to be said for hindsight .. and though I wasn't a Unity fan (and it still remains to be seen if I ever will be), at least now i (kind of) "get it".

Wow.. You have convinced yourselves to accept the INEVITABLE

I'm not "convinced" of anything yet, least of all that this "plan" of their's can or will work .. but hindsight *may* be giving me a new perspective .. and I could be totally wrong .. more an admission that I may have been "fighting" the Unity "idea" for the wrong reasons.

I've not suddenly become a Unity fan, nor am I bowing to the "inevitable" .. I'm saying I can no longer just DISMISS Unity, and just maybe they are on to something .. I know I put a LOT of "maybes" in there .. but that's precisely because I don't "know" yet

I also have to admit this apparent U-turn may be me just "wanting" Ubuntu on Android to create more Linux awareness, and therefore people installing it on their workstations .. then they'll be free (and hopefully aware enough) to choose a completely different LINUX DE if they so choose

Maybe it wasn't Ubuntu changing for the sake of change after all.. maybe it was me sticking with what I knew, for the sake of sticking .. I'll bet there were people that said "why change from a pure CLI interface, to a more restrictive GUI .. that's a bad idea", I'd rather history not judge me as one of them, someone who didn't give change a fair chance

I used to shoot Unity down for being "daft" and "pointless" and "bad for Linux" (through desktop fragmentation) .. hindsight seems to be suggesting there was a plan all along, so maybe it's not so daft and pointless .. I didn't like it when Shuttleworth said things like the launcher will stay "as is", but they've relented and made it customisable, and hopefully this more "listening" approach will continue .. and just maybe it will end up being GOOD thing for Linux as a whole.

OK, essay over.

The End. .. I'm now taking questions

[Mad Penguin]

IMHO, Canonical looked at OSX and said "oooh, shiney, we should have some of that!" - which would be the wrong premise for changing an established UI style that's been in use for 10-15 years. It seems to be a case of, "how close to Apple can we get without any legal fallout"? without actually considering whether the OSX interface was actually worth copying.

Newsflash :: As the owner of a 27" iMac running OSX, "OSX sucks [dead rats though a straw]!" .. comparatively.
[unless all you do it use Office and Chrome .. you won't of course be using Safari unless you like restarting it all the time after crashes ..]

Gnome3 on the other hand seems to have been more of an "ideally, how would our desktop work?". Unfortunately this has led to a reliance on new hardware, lots of memory, and a long buggy development cycle - which is still in progress. I'm using Gnome3, but would revert to Gnome2 in a heartbeat if I thought the Gnome guys would continue to support it.

What would be really nice is if the chaps looking at UI design actually thought about the average [business] user for a change, rather than what they want or what would look cool. Things to consider;

a. Will our nice new UI run as a thin client using "no machine" ?
b. Will our nice new UI run on an older or cheap machine with no hardware acceleration ?
c. What about thin client hardware and efficiency over ethernet?
d. Will the user need to take out a mortgage to add sufficient memory to their system to make the UI fly?
e. Are we going to play nice with people with more than one monitor?
f. Will all those flying windows and special effects actually be of benefit to anyone, or are we just showing off and introducing lots of new area where bugs can grow?

- these (IMHO) are all issues with both Gnome3 and Unity.
- Oh, and my personal gripe, when the f*** am I going to be able to get a working "rdesktop" connection again?

Common questions I'm now asked? (to which I don't have good answers);

a. How the f*** to I support Gnome3 systems using nomachine?
b. How the f*** do I get rid of that bar down the side of my screen and get my menus back?
c. Where the f*** is my screen switcher now?
d. Where the f*** is the applet which shows me which applications are running?
e. How the f*** do I add stuff to the bar at the top of the screen?
f. Where the f*** has my bottom panel gone?
g. How the f*** do I create new panels?

... I don't know *anyone* who likes this new crap! Everyone has at least one complaint!
... It's a bit like the latest budget, did they not do any research before dumping this crap on us!!!

$0.02 from guinea pig # 312453.

[Mark Greaves (PCNetSpec)]

Granted, Unity/Gnome3 probably isn't fully equal to Gnome 2 in a production environment yet .. or even necessarily the home, but the dropping of Gnome 2x wasn't only Ubuntu's choice .. Gnome decided Gnome 2 is dead.

I'd agree that things seem to be released without much thought about what's been broken, and with little thought for users .. but I put this down as much to the 6 monthly release cycle and the fact that at some point, they have to take the plunge or third party devs will never get onboard, and it's easier to throw your resources into improving the latest DE if/when it's the only one you're concentrating on.

I seriously doubt if Gnome2 was perfect when it came out, but was improved greatly (and gradually) by third party plugins, tweaks, etc.

All I'm saying is that Unity seems to have some kind of "plan" behind it .. yes it was released too early, yes it's still not ready .. but unlike Shuttleworths early comments seemed to suggest, there is *some* thought now going into tweaks to the UI, and hopefully this will continue.

Was standing still at Gnome2 really the answer ? .. sure it would have made life "easier" in the short term, but it may also have ended up with the Linux desktop being viewed as old and irrelevant.

Development isn't standing still .. I'm still convinced Gnome3 (and now hopefully Unity too) will become everything Gnome2 was and more .. but yeh, a little painful whilst in the "maturing" stage.

What I wrote in my last two postings was not supposed to be a comment on whether the move away from gnome 2 was wise .. or whether Gnome3/Unity are ready as a replacement .. just that if nobody gives them a chance, they never will be .. and I kinda get were Canonical/Ubuntu were/are headed, and that doesn't HAVE TO mean that Ubuntu can't work in a production environment AS WELL as on devices.

Sure there's some way to go yet, but given time and development, I have to wonder whether in 10 years we'll all be bitching about the change to Gnome4 or ReUnity, saying "why change the old versions were great".

You cant please all the people, all of .. blah, blah .....

Seems to me, most peoples objections really boil down to .. too much, too soon .. not the idea of change itself .. kinda the same argument levelled at M$ Vista, which developeded into Win7, their most popular (and arguably best) OS to date 

[Mad Penguin]

Gnome decided Gnome 2 is dead.

Absolutely, however, I don't see Gnome 2 not being developed any more as being a reason to switch (immediately) to Unity .. [?]

but I put this down as much to the 6 monthly release cycle

Absolutely, a six monthly release cycle being one of the worst decisions they've made. In almost every release, not only have they put out stuff that hasn't been tested, they've put out stuff that they've KNOWN was broken, sometimes badly broken. If they were selling Ubuntu, IMHO they would've or should've been sued out of existence by now (!)

I seriously doubt if Gnome2 was perfect when it came out

Absolutely! It took them a long long time .. and as soon as they got it stable and working well, what happens?
- which brings be back to "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!".

Rehat learnt this many years ago, have two versions, one that works, and one tekkie's can play with. Ubuntu still think they can do this off of one version, they're either going to have to wake up quickly or something is going to turn around and bite them on the arse. You can't make out you're supplying a production quality product (even for free!) , take no responsibility for quality control, and KEEP getting away with it. A day will come ..

>Was standing still at Gnome2 really the answer?

No, you can always improve, however you can always do it without doing it at the expense of loyal users .. not something that appears to have occurred to the chaps at Canonical. Whereas I'm quite happy to play with new stuff, people I support would rather forego features in favour of stability.

With regards to Unity, there are obviously talented programmers working on it, but as the famous quote goes;
"You can put lipstick on a pig, but at the end of the day, it's still a pig ..."

Anyway, what does our mighty leader have to say on the matter;   
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/05/linus_slams_gnome_three/

[BkS]

From what I can tell, the only cost that manufacturers will occur when loading Ubuntu for Android on their next gen devices will be support from Canonical. That's how Canonical is making revenue, so I imagine that the manufacturers will either redirect their call centers to Canonical's or _try_ offer support directly to the consumer.

In respect to Unity, I DID tell you (Mark) it wasn't that bad. I agree, Unity as a touch/non-touch UI is almost perfect. I like Unity I used it for a year and when you get used to it, it feels so natural. Granted it wasn't fast in 11.04, but since 12.04 it has picked up a little bit of speed and customization IS getting there, just very slowly.

From the looks of things, Ubuntu for Android should be shipping sometime within the next 2 years, so you never know.

I think personally (Mark) you did jump the gun with Unity, but I don't think it was because of THAT change, I personally think that it was because it wasn't the "norm".

People really slag Unity off for being, or at least trying to be "OS X". Honestly! Take your figure out your ar**! How the hell does it look like OS X? It's not silver or blue or have any of those STUPID scroll bars / loading bars. Yes it HAS global menus, and it HAS 3 round buttons at the top on the LEFT (which I prefer btw!) but in respect this was "planned" out to be easier for the end-user and not having to move the mouse far in order to reach something.

I'm a big believer in keyboard shortcuts, I can't get enough of them () and Unity really does capitalize on keyboard shortcuts. Heck, if you hold down your superkey in Unity it brings up the keyboard shortcuts.

Gnome 3 IMO is very pretty, but lacks window management. It seems as if the GNOME team wants user's to use the virtual desktops and honestly I don't really "get it". There are somethings I think Unity would benefit from in GNOME3 like the notifications, and the administrators authentication pop-up, and dare I say it, but the applet menu?

Both Unity & GNOME 3 have come a long way since their arrivals, but if I were to pick a desktop environment over another I'd have to pick Unity for the simple fact, it makes sense.

It tries to aid you in your work. If you want something, bam hit the superkey type a few words, press enter and voila. Or if your looking for a menu and can't remember what it's called or are just to lazy to the feckin' mouse, bam hit the alt key type a few words, hit enter, done.

Unity is sort of there, I guess I just dislike how I can't have a proper theme for it yet. That's probably the only thing that holds me back, as well as not having the coolness of those notifications found in Gnome 3.

[Mark Greaves (PCNetSpec)]

Linus, genius that he is, doesn't necessarily have a better insight into what makes a good DE than anyone else .. didn't he use KDE for a while

I'm not that convinced Gnome3 and Unity are necessarily steps backwards beyond the fact they still at the beginning of their development .. so they are a "pigs ear" still remains to be seen.

I agree however that Like Redhat it may have been nice if Ubuntu had another version that held on to Gnome2 for as long as possible .. but I'm still concerned that may have slowed development on Unity .. and isn't that what 10.04 LTS was about ?

That damn 6 month release "ready or not" cycle, is a royal pain, and should be dropped .. for goodness sake Canonical, release when it's ready, and listen to feedback for when that should be.

They *could*, I suppose go down the MATE route like Mint, but again this would just split development.

As for Gnome .. I'd tend to agree they dropped Gnome 2 prematurely, and it may have been helpful to fly them concurrently .. but rightly or wrongly they chose to follow KDE's lead and jump in at the deep end .. everyone else was kinda forced to follow.

With Ubuntu for Android I can see where Ubuntu is headed, and if they can pull it off, and the DE still manages to work on the workstation, more power to them .. it's a "vision" that *may* turn out to be a vision too far .. but like I did with the early problems with 10.04, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt and see where it goes .. too early to tell yet, but I like the vision and hope they can pull it off.

[Mark Greaves (PCNetSpec)]

@ BkS

Don't get me wrong here .. I'm not saying Unity is great, I'm just saying I now understand the thinking behind it, so am willing to give it a chance .. I still think it needs some work before it will "impress" .. I'm more impressed at the idea/vision, not so much the product yet, and it remains to be seen if they can pull it off .. but I'm hoping so

The only thing that's really changed is, I now "get" the thinking behind Unity, and I'm no longer saying I won't use it because I see it as fragmenting the Linux desktop .. other than that, they've still got a lot to do to "impress" me with Unity .. but I'm now willing them to do so