4 ms·

I have a different theory: the Ubuntu "core" and "design" teams have their vision of what Ubuntu will be, and just don't listen for feedback from the community.

by Spittie 13y ago

I have a different theory: the Ubuntu "core" and "design" teams have their vision of what Ubuntu will be, and just don't listen for feedback from the community. It's fine to just push changes, otherwise we would be stuck in the 80s and the 90s (everyone hates changes), but it's not fine to not listen to any kind of feedback from the community, even after years. The unity sidebar is the biggest example. They refused to let users change the size of the icons for years. Even now, you're still limited by a small range they've decided on. They removed used, small features because it would make the codebase "harder to mantain". The global menu is an usability nightmare on Ubuntu (the HUD instead is a pretty cool concept). I don't really like global menus, but Canonical managed to make it even worse - It's hidden by default, and get showed only on mouse hover. I've been using Linux with various DE for years, and the last time I tried Ubuntu it took me 5 minutes to remember where is the menu (I can only wonder what would my parents do). Obviously, they didn't change this at all. I could go on and complain about Ubuntu all day (and not only about Unity - I'd like to talk about their tendency to patch everything downstream) but the message is "Canonical shot themself in the foot". I can only hope this is a "new beginning" and they'll start to listen their userbase.

pekk 13y ago
You talk like "the community" all has one opinion. In reality, whoever is unhappy screams and claims to speak for "the community" as a way of trying to get their way. And almost always someone is unhappy. Most of the time, an equally large subset of the community is not screaming because they are happy with that decision. You could chase one side of the community and then the other forever, without reaching a stable outcome.
- Spittie 13y ago
  Sure, I understand. But why not make everyone happy, and give a choice? At least, for the small "little" tweaks that make everyone scream? There are plenty of examples: globalmenu on/off, globalmenu hidden/showed by default, buttons on the left/right side of the window, size of the icons in the launcher, side of the screen on which the launcher appear, show the launcher on every screen or only the main one...
  - eklavya 13y ago
    Did you even bother to read the announcement? They HAVE provided this exact choice.
    - Spittie 13y ago
      Yes I have. No, they haven't. All you can do right now is to move the global menu from the "global" bar to the window bar. You can't still have it back to "default", like other operative systems, and you can't still have it being visible by default. And, by the way, this was just one small point of my post. Everything else still applies.
      - res0nat0r 13y ago
        This is the same lamenting and strife that one could also apply to Apple. OSX is their way or the highway. If Ubuntu listens to the loudest community whiners the UI would be a terrible mess. If you don't like the default desktop: sudo apt-get install -y fluxbox, or whatever of the dozens of other WM's are out there that you like better. Problem solved.
      - eklavya 13y ago
        Ok, so default like which operating system, mac? windows? They are doing things differently, what's wrong with that? I like it and I use it, those who don't have plenty more DEs to choose from. By the way they do provide a way to change the size of the icons, since 12.04 at least.
      - Spittie 13y ago
        (Can't reply to yours comments res0nat0r and eklavya, hopefully this will do anyway). By default like the operative system with 90%+ of the marketshare - Windows. I'm not saying that they're doing it good, but 90%+ of the people using a computer expect it to act that way. I'm also not saying that it should be the default, just have a tiny little option somewhere (instead of forcing me to remove the appmenu* packages, which I know how to do it, but my parents sure don't). I'm also not sure why are you attacking me and telling me to install another DE - I have (In fact, I don't even use Ubuntu anymore, as I don't like apt-get and some other stuff). I'm just saying that they should add some options to make everyone happy. I have the same feeling towards Gnome shell, but at least this one has easy-to-install plugins.
- Elhana 13y ago
  Give people choice: People who like it old way are still happy and people who like new stuff will just switch. Make a dialog at the start of the session when you release new features, asking if you'd like to enable new features or keep your old settings for existing users. Install new features on by default. Everyone happy, no complaints. Then collect stats after some time and see what is actually getting used and if 95% is in favor of some option - remove the old feature. This could also be a nice incentive to provide stats to developers - your opinion gets counted.
  - michaelt 13y ago
    While this would be the ideal, having too many options is kind of a hassle for third party developers. I mean, you test on the latest version of Ubuntu, then the LTS version, then with Gnome3, MATE and Xfce, then with Kubuntu and Xubuntu, better test all of those in 32 bit as well as 64 bit, and with free and nonfree drivers for Intel ATI and nVidia graphics cards, and you're sick of testing before you've even got off the major Ubuntu variants. Or you don't test like that, and I find I can't get Google Earth to work, or I get VPN software that can't disconnect properly if I use the Gnome3 network manager, or any of a dozen other annoyances.
brudgers 13y ago
I have a third theory: The theory behind Unity was a theory and not based on empirical data collected from actual users. I am not comparing the design process to focus groups etc. but to the UX design methodology described in The Story of the Ribbon. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl9kD693ie4 http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl9kD693ie4
massysett 13y ago
Listening to your userbase is a good idea if you want to keep that userbase happy. Ubuntu's goal has always been to vastly expand its userbase to, shall we say, non-traditional Linux users. Now Ubuntu wants to expand into entirely new devices. These new users are, by definition, not in Ubuntu's userbase, so if Ubuntu wants to get them, listening to existing users is likely a detriment. If you've been using Linux with various DE for years, and Ubuntu frustrates you, then Ubuntu is not the product for you. Ubuntu is going for people who don't even know what a "DE" is. The instant Ubuntu becomes beholden to listening to its userbase is the instant it stops doing anything interesting and it loses whatever slim chance it ever had of being anything beyond a top ranker on DistroWatch. "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." Not sure he ever said it, but the point stands.
trycatch 13y ago
> The unity sidebar is the biggest example. They refused to let users change the size of the icons for years. Even now, you're still limited by a small range they've decided on. That's an example of so-called bullshit. The setting was added to the standard config util in Ubuntu 12.04, the first LTS with Unity. It was a setting in compiz config since 11.04, the very first release. > I could go on and complain about Ubuntu all day (and not only about Unity - I'd like to talk about their tendency to patch everything downstream) but the message is "Canonical shot themself in the foot". Of course, you can, but next when you'll want to complain, try to use it for more than 5 minutes. Don't speak for the whole userbase -- I'm a part of Ubuntu userbase, and I love Unity. I consider vanishing menus a great idea, because in practice it adds exactly zero problems with menu interaction, but saves space (less important) and reduces clutter on desktop (more important).
return0 13y ago
They don't have a vision, they just copy random crap. Thankfully there are alternative options.

by Spittie 13y ago

pekk 13y ago

You talk like "the community" all has one opinion. In reality, whoever is unhappy screams and claims to speak for "the community" as a way of trying to get their way. And almost always someone is unhappy. Most of the time, an equally large subset of the community is not screaming because they are happy with that decision. You could chase one side of the community and then the other forever, without reaching a stable outcome.

Spittie 13y ago
Sure, I understand. But why not make everyone happy, and give a choice? At least, for the small "little" tweaks that make everyone scream? There are plenty of examples: globalmenu on/off, globalmenu hidden/showed by default, buttons on the left/right side of the window, size of the icons in the launcher, side of the screen on which the launcher appear, show the launcher on every screen or only the main one...
- eklavya 13y ago
  Did you even bother to read the announcement? They HAVE provided this exact choice.
  - Spittie 13y ago
    Yes I have. No, they haven't. All you can do right now is to move the global menu from the "global" bar to the window bar. You can't still have it back to "default", like other operative systems, and you can't still have it being visible by default. And, by the way, this was just one small point of my post. Everything else still applies.
    - res0nat0r 13y ago
      This is the same lamenting and strife that one could also apply to Apple. OSX is their way or the highway. If Ubuntu listens to the loudest community whiners the UI would be a terrible mess. If you don't like the default desktop: sudo apt-get install -y fluxbox, or whatever of the dozens of other WM's are out there that you like better. Problem solved.
    - eklavya 13y ago
      Ok, so default like which operating system, mac? windows? They are doing things differently, what's wrong with that? I like it and I use it, those who don't have plenty more DEs to choose from. By the way they do provide a way to change the size of the icons, since 12.04 at least.
    - Spittie 13y ago
      (Can't reply to yours comments res0nat0r and eklavya, hopefully this will do anyway). By default like the operative system with 90%+ of the marketshare - Windows. I'm not saying that they're doing it good, but 90%+ of the people using a computer expect it to act that way. I'm also not saying that it should be the default, just have a tiny little option somewhere (instead of forcing me to remove the appmenu* packages, which I know how to do it, but my parents sure don't). I'm also not sure why are you attacking me and telling me to install another DE - I have (In fact, I don't even use Ubuntu anymore, as I don't like apt-get and some other stuff). I'm just saying that they should add some options to make everyone happy. I have the same feeling towards Gnome shell, but at least this one has easy-to-install plugins.
Elhana 13y ago
Give people choice: People who like it old way are still happy and people who like new stuff will just switch. Make a dialog at the start of the session when you release new features, asking if you'd like to enable new features or keep your old settings for existing users. Install new features on by default. Everyone happy, no complaints. Then collect stats after some time and see what is actually getting used and if 95% is in favor of some option - remove the old feature. This could also be a nice incentive to provide stats to developers - your opinion gets counted.
- michaelt 13y ago
  While this would be the ideal, having too many options is kind of a hassle for third party developers. I mean, you test on the latest version of Ubuntu, then the LTS version, then with Gnome3, MATE and Xfce, then with Kubuntu and Xubuntu, better test all of those in 32 bit as well as 64 bit, and with free and nonfree drivers for Intel ATI and nVidia graphics cards, and you're sick of testing before you've even got off the major Ubuntu variants. Or you don't test like that, and I find I can't get Google Earth to work, or I get VPN software that can't disconnect properly if I use the Gnome3 network manager, or any of a dozen other annoyances.

brudgers 13y ago

I have a third theory: The theory behind Unity was a theory and not based on empirical data collected from actual users. I am not comparing the design process to focus groups etc. but to the UX design methodology described in The Story of the Ribbon. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl9kD693ie4 http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl9kD693ie4

massysett 13y ago

Listening to your userbase is a good idea if you want to keep that userbase happy. Ubuntu's goal has always been to vastly expand its userbase to, shall we say, non-traditional Linux users. Now Ubuntu wants to expand into entirely new devices. These new users are, by definition, not in Ubuntu's userbase, so if Ubuntu wants to get them, listening to existing users is likely a detriment. If you've been using Linux with various DE for years, and Ubuntu frustrates you, then Ubuntu is not the product for you. Ubuntu is going for people who don't even know what a "DE" is. The instant Ubuntu becomes beholden to listening to its userbase is the instant it stops doing anything interesting and it loses whatever slim chance it ever had of being anything beyond a top ranker on DistroWatch. "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." Not sure he ever said it, but the point stands.

trycatch 13y ago

> The unity sidebar is the biggest example. They refused to let users change the size of the icons for years. Even now, you're still limited by a small range they've decided on. That's an example of so-called bullshit. The setting was added to the standard config util in Ubuntu 12.04, the first LTS with Unity. It was a setting in compiz config since 11.04, the very first release. > I could go on and complain about Ubuntu all day (and not only about Unity - I'd like to talk about their tendency to patch everything downstream) but the message is "Canonical shot themself in the foot". Of course, you can, but next when you'll want to complain, try to use it for more than 5 minutes. Don't speak for the whole userbase -- I'm a part of Ubuntu userbase, and I love Unity. I consider vanishing menus a great idea, because in practice it adds exactly zero problems with menu interaction, but saves space (less important) and reduces clutter on desktop (more important).

return0 13y ago

They don't have a vision, they just copy random crap. Thankfully there are alternative options.