Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Many Ubuntu Users Still Hate The Unity Desktop

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I tried Unity as a novelty but honesty didn't spend enough time to get used to the paradigm shift in the interface. Now I just login to classic desktop and will wait for Unity 2D to roll in before I give it another try. I don't see what the big deal for so many long time users to be hating on Ubuntu. Canonical is pushing software innovation/evolution to attract users from areas previously ignored. Previous linux users were disenfranchised windows and left on their own. Its takes a whole new direction to attracting new users long before they get to that frustration point in the windows experience. That direction may not be to long time users liking, but unlike closed source OS's they at least have options to packup and move.

    The only thing I can see Canonical is guilty of is perhaps they pushed Unity from netbook to mainstream a release or two to early. They could have phased it in as a "hey try out our future develop interface, please give us feedback" as a secondary login option on a default desktop install. Then in a release or two, let it overtake and make it the default login.
    Last edited by tweak42; 08-02-2011, 04:39 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Otus View Post
      I've used it actively since natty betas and it isn't all bad. Bugs aren't really a problem anymore, just design choices.

      I hate that I can't customize it. Top panel takes way too much space for a netbook and won't hide. The launcher OTOH always hides, but I'd like to keep it visible on my desktop. Worst of all, nothing adapts to font size, so it's an accessibility nightmare.

      DockbarX + cardapio on maverick was a much better interface. I could install it on natty, but I've been using Unity in the hope that they'll fix it. I'll reconsider once oneiric is usable.

      Edit: In short it has better defaults than the old gnome interface, but it limits tweaking.
      The launcher can be configured to stay visible at all times. Various options are available in the Unity plugin of the Compiz configuration manager.

      Comment


      • #18
        they should've helped the Gnome team with Gnome3.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by m4n1sh View Post
          Aping the mac's UI brain damages its plain damn wrong uninnovative and stupid
          Typical Apple hater. I am not a supporter, but this is bullcrap. OSX's is more usable in usability wise. Like GNOME2 was a revolution?
          Um I call Bullshit on your calling bullcrap, OS X is THE worst when it comes to real usability.

          Let's just make a list of 10 things:

          1. Global menu:
          Global menus have always been an absolutely terrible design, it sacrifices usability for a few vertical pixels. Simple Usability test, have two windows open side by side, or otherwise such that both windows are fully visible. Now from having the focus on one window quickly open up a menu from the other window.

          On a mac: give focus to the other window and then move the mouse to the top panel
          On something reasonable: move mouse over to other window and click on menu.

          2. Scrollbars:
          OS X Lion has made scrollbars not only difficult to see but nigh impossible to actually use. Though one may argue that one should just use scrolling gestures but that brings us to...

          3. Scroll Gestures:
          in Lion instead of staying with the standards that everybody already knows they've reversed them in order to unify the gesture with their Ipad.. but problem the interface concept between a touch screen and a touchpad are completely different, particularly when a standard has already been established and accepted.

          4. Window buttons are on the wrong side unless you happen to be one of those left handed people:
          OS X is known for having their window buttons on the left side and on top of that instead of being icons they're colors, but that'll be point #5. There is a reason that those buttons are normally on the right, it is because most people are right handed and so it is both easier reach and more natural for people who are right handed. Now one might then point out: Why is the start button then normally on the left side then? It is simply because we are a culture that reads L-to-R, and thus naturally menus will cascade out to the right because of that, I imagine that R-to-L cultures have it on the other side, and you often see screenshots from asia with the menu bar on the right side of the screen.

          5. Window button colors are a non-obvious explanation of use to the average person
          While it's not hard to intuit the meaning or understand it after playing around with it, without a pictogram for explanation particularly in conjunction with #4 I can't just set the average user about using it and expect them to know what each one does.

          6. The dock bar
          Some people like dock bars and others of us detest them, from the usability failure that is making the icons accordion, to the fact that if any large amount of software is pinned to the dock which is effectively a start menu replacement, then the icons become small enough as to be unusable.

          7. Applications do not close when you have closed all windows
          To my knowledge under every other system when you tell a program to close from the window buttons it closes, on a mac it stays open until you use the global menu or the shortcut sequence to close it.

          8. Nonstandard shortcuts
          Although each of the three main systems have their own sets of shortcuts, there have come to be standards that are expected, such as the Ctrl-{c,v,x,a} set, Standard controls are of course a usability concern and Apple has decided to continue going against those standards by continuing to only have their old Apple shortcuts based off their apple key.

          9. Can't reposition things in the manner that you want, It's Apple's way or it's... Apple's way. You have no choice in this regard, and thus people cannot change the environment to suit their needs best. Instead you have to conform to the software rather than the software conforming to you.

          10. The filesystem tree is kludgy and fails to conform to the *nix standards we all know and love, while this specifically may not effect most users this is huge to me personally, and having things not where I expect them to be breaks usability for me. I mean why the hell are they not using /home for instance?
          Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 08-02-2011, 05:00 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Unity is a very silly attempt to clone Mac OSX. If you wanted Mac on Linux you'd do a lot better to start with GNUStep and modify from there. The entire idea of taking gtk/gnome and modifying it into a clone of Mac is silly. You won't gain any application compatibility, it's not a paradigm the users are used to, and anything you create will undoubtedly get slammed for not having the same features/usability as Mac OSX. I used Linux for 10+ years, I still use it at work. I've moved to OSX for all my personal computers because I've frankly grown lazy, and I prefer the platform to the other options. It crashes a hell of a lot less than linux does, and I don't have to care about tweaking every little system setting. The biggest disappointment with linux is that it will never have media pipelining like quartz composer in OSX, yet it already has about 80% of the code needed to do it in GNUStep. I can see why Canonical picked up Gnome and are trying to make it into OSX, but the entire idea is badly flawed. They would have been better off IMHO paying developers to bring webkit to GNUStep and actually finishing the GNUStep desktop.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by tweak42 View Post
              I don't see what the big deal for so many long time users to be hating on Ubuntu. Canonical is pushing software innovation/evolution to attract users from areas previously ignored.
              People won't switch from Windows to Ubuntu because of Unity. People will switch from Ubuntu to Fedora, Debian, etc, because of Unity.

              Personally I'm wondering which distro to switch to when 11.10 eliminates Gnome 2.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by dufoli View Post
                totaly agree with you.
                Most of people don't like [xxx] but do nothing to improove it.
                i assume you don't like AIDS either but i don't think you are doing any research on creating a vaccine for it

                people will always complain but in the case of open source even if your arguments against dev choices are correct noone will bother

                if you cannot code you are useless in FOSS and even if you can there is a big chance that no dev will bother specially in UI stuff

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by movieman View Post
                  Personally I'm wondering which distro to switch to when 11.10 eliminates Gnome 2.
                  Maybe Fedora? Or OpenSuSE? Or ArchLinux?

                  Oh wait, all of this distributions use or will use GNOME3. Even Debian switches to GNOME3 in 2013. The only distribution which will support GNOME2 until 2015 (and even longer) is RHEL or one of its clones (CentOS, SL, etc.).

                  If you don't want to use stone-age software, you have to adopt to the new situation.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by glasen View Post
                    The only distribution which will support GNOME2 until 2015 (and even longer) is RHEL or one of its clones (CentOS, SL, etc.).
                    Yes, CentOS is one of the options. By then perhaps the UI developers will have been dragged kicking and screaming back to some semblance of sanity.

                    If you don't want to use stone-age software, you have to adopt to the new situation.
                    Ah, the old 'I'm l33t3r than you becuase I use version 79.15' argument. It never impresses, I'm afraid.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      You know you can set up KDE to operate in a similar fashion to Gnome 2? It won't be 100% of course but you can do it.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I upgrade to each new Ubuntu release but not 11.04. I will not consider putting it on my main work PC. Too much bugs and inconveniences. I will stick with 10.10 and give 11.10 a go on the live CD again.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          The only thing that really keeps me from using Unity is absolute lack of configurability. I will never use an UI where task bar is nailed on the left side just because somebody thinks it is cool.
                          There was time when one of the promoted aspects of linux desktop was total configurability. So now it is even worse than windows, haha, use windows for freedom .

                          AFAIK these changes are because they want UI to be touchscreen friendly. Well, thats nice, but nobody EVER will use ubuntu on tablet. So they can keep their touch-friendly (wtF) desktop to themselves.

                          Also it is very unstable, natty is one of the worst releases yet, compiz/unity was and is not in any condition to be considered as a primary shell, plus i have problems with pulsaudio and etc..

                          I also will never use Gnome 3, it looks like it was designed by someone insane. Minimalism combined with waste of screen space. What an improvement.
                          One thing I would really like to know, who thought people want these new revolutionary ways to interact with computer and blablabla, its almost uselles, Im not going to use it and they will not fix it.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by frostwyrm333 View Post
                            The only thing that really keeps me from using Unity is absolute lack of configurability. I will never use an UI where task bar is nailed on the left side just because somebody thinks it is cool.
                            There was time when one of the promoted aspects of linux desktop was total configurability. So now it is even worse than windows, haha, use windows for freedom .
                            Configurability still exists for KDE, and will likely continue to exist..

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              You don't have to use a Mac

                              Originally posted by ethana2 View Post
                              I don't have that kind of money. Amiga had the global menu bar first, and Apple took KHTML, CUPS, and X11 from *us*. What goes around comes around.

                              If I had an infinite supply of money, I'd probably be using OS X Lion right now. But you know what? I don't! I'm a college student-- and Ubuntu is a darn good alternative, for me, right now. I have two gripes with Unity : It doesn't work on my hardware, and application categories are essential for me. I want the category icons sitting in the launcher on the side, which then expand to show their contents when clicked..

                              Anyways, phoronix has become intensely pessimistic, more like some guy's soapbox than a news site. From what I see on /. and the like, that's not doing much for credibility. Try to find something you can be not-a-downer about.
                              You don't have to use a Mac. To get the absolute best desktop GUI, far more advanced than a Mac, run a KDE4 desktop Linux distribution. In order of DistroWatch page rankings, OpenSuSe, PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, Slackware, Sabayon, Chakra, Mageia and MEPIS are Linux distributions which ship with KDE4 as the default. Arch Linux is neutral, and it too has a very decent KDE4 desktop.

                              Discover the power of a truly powerful and not-dumbed-down desktop, free of cost and also free of license encumberances.

                              Enjoy.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Lol @ mentioning my post as "A list".... hahahaha

                                I don't have anything new to add besides that post and Michael's recent posts. The jury has convened. They concluded that Ubuntu sucks. We are all in agreement. Time to move on to Fedora or OpenSUSE.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X