7 ms·

Users are split on whether window controls should be on the left or right. Hint: make it easily configurable. Otherwise, you get to irritate 40-60% of your us

by dsr_ 9y ago

Users are split on whether window controls should be on the left or right. Hint: make it easily configurable. Otherwise, you get to irritate 40-60% of your users.

CJefferson 9y ago
I think this more suggests just pick one. I don't think one is particularly superior to the other, and every configuration option is another thing to test, making sure everything else window related renders properly. Also every configuration option is another thing to confuse users with. I would much prefer a single well thought out consistent interface than a "build your own" grab bag.
- addicted 9y ago
  I don't have a multiple monitor setup for my Ubuntu instance, but when I am running windows on multiple monitors, the side of the taskbar (when I don't have it configured to the bottom) makes a huge difference. Depending on which monitor I have it on (let's assume I have the taskbar on the rightmost monitor), havign it on the left gives me a few pixels to hit an icon on it (and worse if it's set to hide automatically) whereas having it on the right gives me an infinite number of pixels. IOW, the configuration is important even if there is a preferred side.
- peller 9y ago
  Right or wrong, this does seem more inline with "the Gnome way." It's also why I stopped using Gnome (and in fact, Ubuntu all together). But I suspect I was never their target user, and that's OK. If they can make it easier for more typical computer users, good for them, and they should stick to what works.
  - digi_owl 9y ago
    Sadly it feels like the "target user" of Gnome (and thus Freedesktop related projects) are dyed in the wool Mac users, but the Gnome people will not admit this even as they drive away more and more existing Linux users.
    - kps 9y ago
      They are clearly not targeting Mac users, as Gnome/GTK programs continue to insist on the Windows shortcut model of overloading Control. KDE/Qt programs are at least configurable, with effort, to the Mac (and historical Unix) model of a Meta key for GUI shortcuts and Control for control characters.
scotu 9y ago
where are you defaulting? do you need to add an api to let the app developers know the window direction so they can create apps consistent with the env? Options are a cost, are the user going to be irritated or just have a few laugh at their muscle memory for a few days (that was my reaction when I switched window control position from gnome to unity)?
callahad 9y ago
> Otherwise, you get to irritate 40-60% of your users. The survey says nothing about how strongly folks hold that preference. I may prefer Schwepps Ginger Ale, but I'm not going to be irritated when offered Canada Dry instead. That "40-60%" number is a ceiling, not a floor.
- bluejekyll 9y ago
  I would be very irritated if I couldn't put my bar on the left. I put it in the left on every UI I use. The reasoning seems sound though. Where there is no strong user preference, consider making it configurable. The only way you find out how irritated people would be without the option would be to piss them off.
  - cx1000 9y ago
    Consider eclipse. It allows the user to configure every. Single. Thing. And in doing so makes configuration difficult because there are so many options. Sane defaults and a consistent environment are better, imho.
    - johnbellone 9y ago
      That's because Eclipse is basically an operating system like Emacs.
      - pawadu 9y ago
        As a long time Emacs user I find your comment very offending. Emacs is nothing like Eclipse. If anything, I would compare Eclipse to Vim: bare bone its useless, with plug-ins its just too big and unstable. :)
    - bluejekyll 9y ago
      Yeah. A great point. I do find eclipse to be too configurable, and part of why I use IntelliJ (for Java). Apple software is generally on the other end of that spectrum, which annoys many people; although you'll notice that even there you can put the bar on the left, right or bottom.
mavhc 9y ago
Put them in the middle, problem solved
- douche 9y ago
  Design by compromise: ensuring that no one is happy.
deadbunny 9y ago
Is this not configurable via the GTK skin?
paride5745 9y ago
The Gnome-Tweak-Tool is going to get this switch. http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/06/gnome-tweak-tool-move-window-buttons http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/06/gnome-tweak-tool-move-win...
apetresc 9y ago
Also note the design of that pie chart - 'left' is on the right, and 'right' is on the left.
- pawadu 9y ago
  Also, left should be red, right should be blue. :)
  - kps 9y ago
    Ubuntu defaults to US locale, where left is blue and right is red.
    - apetresc 9y ago
      Wait, seriously? I thought pawadu was joking. There's actually an accepted standard for color ordering on pie charts?
johnbellone 9y ago
The key takeaway is _easily_ configurable. I don't want to have to drop into a shell and modify some XML file to do it.

by dsr_ 9y ago

Users are split on whether window controls should be on the left or right. Hint: make it easily configurable. Otherwise, you get to irritate 40-60% of your users.

CJefferson 9y ago

I think this more suggests just pick one. I don't think one is particularly superior to the other, and every configuration option is another thing to test, making sure everything else window related renders properly. Also every configuration option is another thing to confuse users with. I would much prefer a single well thought out consistent interface than a "build your own" grab bag.

addicted 9y ago
I don't have a multiple monitor setup for my Ubuntu instance, but when I am running windows on multiple monitors, the side of the taskbar (when I don't have it configured to the bottom) makes a huge difference. Depending on which monitor I have it on (let's assume I have the taskbar on the rightmost monitor), havign it on the left gives me a few pixels to hit an icon on it (and worse if it's set to hide automatically) whereas having it on the right gives me an infinite number of pixels. IOW, the configuration is important even if there is a preferred side.
peller 9y ago
Right or wrong, this does seem more inline with "the Gnome way." It's also why I stopped using Gnome (and in fact, Ubuntu all together). But I suspect I was never their target user, and that's OK. If they can make it easier for more typical computer users, good for them, and they should stick to what works.
- digi_owl 9y ago
  Sadly it feels like the "target user" of Gnome (and thus Freedesktop related projects) are dyed in the wool Mac users, but the Gnome people will not admit this even as they drive away more and more existing Linux users.
  - kps 9y ago
    They are clearly not targeting Mac users, as Gnome/GTK programs continue to insist on the Windows shortcut model of overloading Control. KDE/Qt programs are at least configurable, with effort, to the Mac (and historical Unix) model of a Meta key for GUI shortcuts and Control for control characters.

scotu 9y ago

where are you defaulting? do you need to add an api to let the app developers know the window direction so they can create apps consistent with the env? Options are a cost, are the user going to be irritated or just have a few laugh at their muscle memory for a few days (that was my reaction when I switched window control position from gnome to unity)?

callahad 9y ago

> Otherwise, you get to irritate 40-60% of your users. The survey says nothing about how strongly folks hold that preference. I may prefer Schwepps Ginger Ale, but I'm not going to be irritated when offered Canada Dry instead. That "40-60%" number is a ceiling, not a floor.

bluejekyll 9y ago
I would be very irritated if I couldn't put my bar on the left. I put it in the left on every UI I use. The reasoning seems sound though. Where there is no strong user preference, consider making it configurable. The only way you find out how irritated people would be without the option would be to piss them off.
- cx1000 9y ago
  Consider eclipse. It allows the user to configure every. Single. Thing. And in doing so makes configuration difficult because there are so many options. Sane defaults and a consistent environment are better, imho.
  - johnbellone 9y ago
    That's because Eclipse is basically an operating system like Emacs.
    - pawadu 9y ago
      As a long time Emacs user I find your comment very offending. Emacs is nothing like Eclipse. If anything, I would compare Eclipse to Vim: bare bone its useless, with plug-ins its just too big and unstable. :)
  - bluejekyll 9y ago
    Yeah. A great point. I do find eclipse to be too configurable, and part of why I use IntelliJ (for Java). Apple software is generally on the other end of that spectrum, which annoys many people; although you'll notice that even there you can put the bar on the left, right or bottom.

mavhc 9y ago

Put them in the middle, problem solved

douche 9y ago
Design by compromise: ensuring that no one is happy.

deadbunny 9y ago

Is this not configurable via the GTK skin?

paride5745 9y ago

The Gnome-Tweak-Tool is going to get this switch. http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/06/gnome-tweak-tool-move-window-buttons http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/06/gnome-tweak-tool-move-win...

apetresc 9y ago

Also note the design of that pie chart - 'left' is on the right, and 'right' is on the left.

pawadu 9y ago
Also, left should be red, right should be blue. :)
- kps 9y ago
  Ubuntu defaults to US locale, where left is blue and right is red.
  - apetresc 9y ago
    Wait, seriously? I thought pawadu was joking. There's actually an accepted standard for color ordering on pie charts?

johnbellone 9y ago

The key takeaway is _easily_ configurable. I don't want to have to drop into a shell and modify some XML file to do it.