In general, no. If the ideas they express are better, but the metrics we can
bring to bear (including the view of the people to whom the design
leadership has been given) then those patches can be included without
options, the default behaviour will be improved for all. If they just create
So, probably, the solution is rather to find some clever algorithm that
places them dynamically based on the current desktop conditions, but we
won't be motivated to search for this algorithm if we resort to creating
more options as soon as someone complaints.
Heh, OK you've almost won me
2009/10/21 Mark Shuttleworth m...@ubuntu.com:
Luke Benstead wrote:
The only thing against that is what Mark said about the async
notifications growing upwards, but I still don't see why that's a
problem (it would look pretty cool if the existing text moved up, then
the new line faded
2009/10/21 Johan Euphrosine pro...@aminche.com:
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 18:09 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
That would be worth a flash mockup, or code mockup, to see in
practice.
Hi,
Here is a tentative clutter mockup:
2009/10/21 Matt Wheeler m...@funkyhat.org:
2009/10/21 Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com:
You legend! Yeah, exactly that kind of thing, I think it would look pretty
cool.
Thanks a lot!
So, good idea?
Are you actually suggesting that messages that stay visible for longer
should bob up
On 12 March 2010 14:26, Siegfried Gevatter rai...@ubuntu.com wrote:
2010/3/12 David Balch da...@balch.co.uk:
Please could the design team explain the rationale for moving the
window control buttons from the right to the left, and the benefits
expected to result.
But for the default use, no, we won't animate the you've got a message
icon indefinitely when you've got a message.
Mark
I agree that a constant animation would be a bad idea. But is there
any chance of getting a colour change when there are messages waiting?
The current icon (showing the
On 26 March 2010 13:53, Jim Rorie jfro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 09:30 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
David Siegel david.sie...@canonical.com wrote:
I think maximize, minimize, and close are taken for granted -- they're
unquestioned assumptions carried over from a dusty
On a slightly related note, check out Solution #5 from this brainstorm
idea: http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/24130/
I think that sort of set up would open up a load of possibilities for
tighter integration of notifications of file transfers/downloads/syncs
etc.
Luke.
Just to quickly add my experience to this. I've not yet accidentally
hit the close button, however I have on several occasions hit minimize
when aiming for the Applications menu. I also tweeted about it in
frustration: http://twitter.com/kazade/status/12155652979
I'm now totally confused, because
I brainstormed a little on your mockup. The attached image shows
workspaces as tabs, and inside it are the actual applications.
This could easily carry dock functionality as well, where you pin some
applications to a particular workspace.
--
Remco
Interestingly I was just about to post a response to this thread with
a similar idea...
The main problem I find with workspaces is their interaction with the
window list. It would be nice if all applications were visible on the
window list all the time *but* grouped into workspaces with an
I've just been thinking about the new indicators, and how there were
some complaints about it adding a click to get to stuff in the menus.
Then I thought, it would be pretty cool if all the menus on the panel
(including Applications, Places, System, Me menu, Indicators and the
calendar ) opened on
On 22 April 2010 18:14, Mark Shuttleworth m...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Conscious User wrote:
1) Communicating the goals and current status to end users. The amount
of people who think the messaging menu is only a launcher, for
example, is overwhelming.
If people don't figure out how to use
On 23 April 2010 11:10, Vishnoo drkv...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 10:14 +0100, David Siegel wrote:
Guys, this is an excellent discussion. Will someone please volunteer
to organize some of what's been said on a wiki page, or Google
Doc/Wave, or something? Otherwise these ideas will
On 27 April 2010 17:24, Jeremy Nickurak jer...@nickurak.ca wrote:
What about windows with long titles? Web browsers ofter put the title of the
page you're viewing in the window title, so it's HUGE. Not much extra room,
if any, in that case.
Maybe a cut-off title with ... and the full thing in
I've been giving this a lot of thought recently, well actually, I've
been irritated into giving it thought after not being able to find my
Rhythmbox window. I've been trying to work out why we have minimize
to tray functionality at all and all I can come up with is that it is
because the
On 5 May 2010 15:42, Victor vm.kalbsk...@gmail.com wrote:
No, it is not time.
Care to elaborate?
Luke.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help
On 5 May 2010 20:06, Gavin Langdon puttabu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Jarlath Reidy jarlathre...@gmail.com
wrote:
A better functioning taskbar would eliminate the need for yet another
desktop metaphor. There are too many on the desktop at the moment (double
click
Morning all,
I've just been thinking about Windicators and how they could be
useful. I vaguely remember someone posting an idea (before the
Windicator announcement) of being able to send files and data between
applications. I think Windicators could allow us to do this in a very
consistent way...
Make sense?
Mark
Yep, perfectly. I should've really given it more thought before
lumping the idea in with Windicators - it definitely would belong in
the File menu. It's just the kind of thing that would require a
consistent API so that applications would adopt it and Windicators
would have
On 17 May 2010 11:40, David Siegel david.sie...@canonical.com wrote:
More specifically, I'm interested in why people use minimize-to-tray
instead of regular minimize. My suspicion is that it's easier to
recall minimized windows by clicking on indicators than by clicking on
the window list.
On 17 May 2010 11:58, Mark Shuttleworth m...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 17/05/10 11:40, David Siegel wrote:
More specifically, I'm interested in why people use minimize-to-tray
instead of regular minimize. My suspicion is that it's easier to
recall minimized windows by clicking on indicators than by
Luke, thank you for the excellent description of your use case.
David
No worries. The window-switcher and minimize-to-tray (I firmly believe
the latter exists because of the former) is my #1 bug bear ;)
Luke.
___
Mailing list:
On 28 May 2010 15:33, Alex Launi alex.la...@gmail.com wrote:
The indicator should probably convey the cumulative progress so you can
just flick a glance in the corner and get an idea of the progress without
having to click or even move the mouse.
--
-- Alex Launi
It would be really cool
My question is: isn't it time to put some brakes on the
enthusiasm and start prioritizing polishing instead of new
features? The current approach is not scalable, and this is
starting to show...
Really just a +1 to everything said. Although I particularly agree with
David Siegel's comment
I'm not going to pretend I understand all the issues relating to CSD, but
from here they don't sound like they best way to go. I use Chromium as my
default browser and I switched to native decorations the moment I right
clicked on the taskbar and got a totally unfamiliar menu without Always on
top
On 14 June 2010 08:31, Matthew Paul Thomas m...@canonical.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Scott Ritchie wrote on 23/04/10 06:48:
I like where you're going, but what do we do about interoperability?
There's a hint in your post that we'll simply leave apps
On 15 June 2010 10:32, Conscious User consciousu...@aol.com wrote:
A massive portion of Ubuntu users use Wine or Java apps to some
degree. If we are trying to improve usability, how would relegating
non-application-indicator-conforming apps to floating windows improve
a user's
On 15 June 2010 10:39, Conscious User consciousu...@aol.com wrote:
How about a middle-ground compromise? Not using a full blown
window,
but putting the Wine tray icons inside an indicator menu.
Horrible mockup attached for illustration.
I thought
On 16 June 2010 14:54, Omer Akram om2...@gmail.com wrote:
the 'about me' and 'users and groups' will be replaced by User accounts
diagloue in maverick.
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 14:39 +0100, Luke Benstead wrote:
Hi all,
This has been bugging me for a little while. Most of the dialogs
On 15 June 2010 08:10, Martin Owens docto...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 14:08 +0100, Luke Benstead wrote:
Is there a reason why DockbarX is not suitable for this? I've attached
a screenshot incase people dunno what I'm talking about :)
That is what you would get if you removed
On 17 June 2010 15:58, Matthew Paul Thomas m...@canonical.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roth Robert wrote on 03/05/10 13:22:
...
Starting a new topic to discuss the suggestions, comments, ideas
regarding the windicators
Hmm... here is a quote from Mark in an earlier thread that I started:
For designing indicators, ask yourself:
- what is the *status* I am conveying, and
- what options are there to manipulate that status?
If you don't have both, especially the status, don't use an indicator.
Use a
On 18 June 2010 16:25, Conscious User consciousu...@aol.com wrote:
We'll have to think about that :-)
Suggestions? Show the ones that most recently changed status?
I think that would introduce an unpredictability factor
that a lot of users wouldn't like.
Like it happens with the
Hi all,
Here's this week's bug bear of mine:
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/6311/as7ob3.png
Can we make that any less user friendly? We present the user a dialog, which
no matter which option they choose leaves them with behaviour they don't
want. Choose Delete and you lose your applet
On 29 June 2010 12:21, Conscious User consciousu...@aol.com wrote:
Yes, the broadcast field is certainly a learnable feature in the
MeMenu.
It will make publishing your current thought to the world very
comfortable, i'm sure.
But please somebody help me understand why i have a field
Hi all,
A while back we were discussing using blue to represent information in the
indicator applets. Mark said it was worth looking in to:
https://lists.launchpad.net/ayatana/msg01205.html
I'm bringing this up again, because with the discussion about a green
flash to indicator success of Me
How about starting just Firefox from the terminal so you can track what it
does?
Anzan
Firefox was just an example, I experience poor responsiveness pretty much
everywhere. The bugs that Dylan linked are quite probably related, this
comment is quite worrying (the poster did a lot of work on
On 30 July 2010 16:31, Frederik Nnaji frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote:
hello there ;)
is anybody working on the FUSA currently?
Allow me to raise the topic for brief elaboration..
Restart Required seems incorrect to me:
after executing a partial upgrade, Ubuntu shows two red elements in the
This is just something I've thought about...
In 10.10 we'll have two group indicators; the messaging and sound menus.
Both of these menus allow applications to run inside them, by this I mean
when the window is closed they continue to run in the background available
from the indicator. So these
Hi all,
Yesterday I was making a USB startup disk to install UNE on my girlfriend's
new netbook (she loves it btw!) and when the process finished I went to
Eject/Safely Remove the USB stick. I instinctively moved my mouse to the
indicator applet (I dunno why) and then realized there is no place
This is not just isolated to the installer. It would be nice if every button
press system wide showed some kind of indication that the click was
received. What might be nice is if the button text disappeared and a little
circular progress indicator showed for a second or two before being replaced
On 15 September 2010 17:25, Greg K Nicholson g...@gkn.me.uk wrote:
On 15 September 2010 16:54, Conscious User consciousu...@aol.com wrote:
I know it's the space for the confirmation bubbles, but I think it
would be much better if those appeared in another place entirely,
like a bottom
We could do better with the fading, but I find myself unable to imagine
a situation where someone simultaneously (a) needs to see what's under a
notification bubble and (b) needs the cursor elsewhere. Can you give
an example?
I think Michael Jonker already provided one at this very thread;
On 20 September 2010 16:55, Mark Curtis merkin...@hotmail.com wrote:
Trying to find an area of the screen that won't obscure all applications
is fruitless. There is no single location that won't end up obscuring SOME
application's interface.
Popular applications such as GIMP (right and
Hi,
I'm sort of thread hijacking a little here (apologies for that), but this is
actually close to something I've been meaning to bring up here for a while.
On my phone, when I set it up for the first time I was asked if I want to
set up certain accounts (e.g. flickr, Facebook, Twitter etc.) and
On 27 October 2010 21:35, Caio Alonso caioal...@gmail.com wrote:
Recently, I've noticed several usability issues in Ubuntu that really are
big annoyances that I think are being overlooked. After watching Mark's
keynote the other day I thought I'd pen them down to see if perhaps we can
fix
On 27 October 2010 22:27, Conscious User consciousu...@aol.com wrote:
Before any kind of conclusions, a survey with long-time
OSX users should be made. After all, not only they use
a Global Menu all the time, but a lot of them also
have huge monitors.
Heh, yeah because that would be
Hi all,
So I stumbled across this answer earlier:
http://askubuntu.com/questions/10481/does-will-unity-support-disabling-the-global-menu
We are getting the global menu by default on the desktop edition. I'm
actually overwhelmingly disappointed by this, there were actual logical
reasons why the
Read Jorge Castro / Neil Patel's reply, they are the guys working on this.
The blueprint isn't official (aside from being approved for discussion at
UDS) and doesn't mention the global menu.
Quote:
“*Yes, the Desktop version of Unity will use the global menu by default*.
There might be some
On 1 November 2010 13:11, David Prieto frandavid...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I don't mean to sound rude, but did you even read the answers to the link
you posted?
One of them shows this blueprint which wouldn't use the global menu for
the desktop version.
On 1 November 2010 13:59, frederik.nn...@gmail.com frederik.nn...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 14:40, Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com wrote:
To reiterate, I understand the reasoning for the global menu on netbooks,
and I totally agree. Why is a global menu better on a modern high
On 1 November 2010 19:47, Shane Fagan shanepatrickfa...@ubuntu.com wrote:
I agree with the idea of less wasted space. So putting in the global
menu into the desktop for maximized apps is a good idea.
Well, ideally the way to get rid of that wasted space would be to not have
the bar there at
On 1 November 2010 20:40, cmaglothin cmaglot...@gmail.com wrote:
Why exactly would there need to be a distinction at all? It would be
pleasing to the eye if it just blended perfectly with the gradient of the
maximized window border.
Mainly to show that:
a.) The indicator applet is floating
On 02/11/10 16:05, Seif Lotfy wrote:
I am trying to figure how would be the best way to do it. If the feedback
is ok on the ayatana side i think i could have the backend done within 2 -
3 weeks
Cheers
Seif
Here's what I'd love from a People place:
1. The ability to import contacts from
4. I've aligned Trash along the bottom next to Get more applications
which seems less cluttered
After further thinking, I think that the trash icon doesn't belong on
the applications view at all, because on unity's latest builds the trash
is always available in the dock.
Agreed. I did
On 19 December 2010 17:22, Mirek M. maz...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
As my requests for having an option to put the Ubuntu button + launcher on
the right have been received as insignificant feature requests, I'd like to
explain how Ubuntu button + launcher actually make more sense and
On 21 December 2010 11:21, Mark Shuttleworth m...@canonical.com wrote:
We definitely need a natural way to move between full screen (no
panel) and panelled mode, across multiple apps. And perhaps we need a
good way for things like indicators to show up at appropriate times,
when the panel is
On 4 January 2011 11:19, Cyrille Ngassam Nkwenga cyri...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All Friends,
Warning : I'm not a designer, but just a daily user of Ubuntu.
So let have a look on the Desktop paradigm.
We used to understand the Desktop as the one on real life. The desktop
contains our
another thing that disturbed me was that i now had no generic place to put
stuff which i didn't want to have in my face all the time..
^^ this
I only ever use the desktop for stuff I need temporarily or that is yet to
be organized. I wish there was a corner of the screen where I could drag
On 14 February 2011 11:07, Matthew Paul Thomas m...@canonical.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
ks64 wrote on 01/02/11 18:27:
Despite all the hype about Unity, there is one thing that is making me
miss GNOME Shell: built-in screencasting. Press Ctrl+Shift+Alt+R and
On 18 February 2011 11:10, David Stevenson da...@avoncliff.com wrote:
On 18/02/11 04:38, Greg K Nicholson wrote:
Why not integrate (and hide) the menu bar in the title bar instead for
ummaximized windows?
This makes sense logically.
I also like this idea. My top panel has always been full,
On 18 February 2011 12:25, Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 February 2011 11:10, David Stevenson da...@avoncliff.com wrote:
On 18/02/11 04:38, Greg K Nicholson wrote:
Why not integrate (and hide) the menu bar in the title bar instead for
ummaximized windows?
This makes sense
On 18 February 2011 13:23, Andrew Laignel a.laig...@sportsweb.biz wrote:
*Cough*
https://wiki.mozilla.org/File:Firefox-4-Mockup-i06-%28Win7%29-%28Aero%29-%2
8TabsTop%29.png *cough*
:)
Err... yeah, like that :)
Luke.
___
Mailing list:
On 10 March 2011 09:25, Mark Shuttleworth
mark.shuttlewo...@canonical.com wrote:
Let's see what people who try it have to say. Don't worry if there is
negative feedback, that's what exploring and testing are all about.
Thanks for making the testable mockup.
I really like the flipping* dock
On 11 March 2011 15:43, Lee Hyde anub...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/03/11 14:41, Mark Curtis wrote:
Someone else suggested putting it in the Me Menu
This would solve both problems of not being close to Shut Down nor
cluttering up the Launcher
I can't imagine any justification for placing a
On 15 March 2011 20:13, Vishnoo v...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 15:51 -0300, Conscious User wrote:
Thorsten Wilms wrote:
The alternative would be to show both title and menu, but giving
the menu priority. For habituation and quick aiming, it's important
that the menu always
On 23 March 2011 14:13, Bilal Akhtar bilalakh...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Hello all,
I filed bug [1] in unity today, and it was marked 'opinion' by sabdfl as
it needed more discussion before it could be implemented.
The current way of switching between windows of the same app is
time-consuming.
I dint realize it copied info to clipboard either.
Why is that copy to clipboard so easily accessible, btw? Do a lot of
people use that info frequently?
I was actually expecting that clicking on the song info, would open the
player and focus on that song.
--
Cheers,
Vish
+1. That would
On 2 April 2011 09:17, Muhammad Nabil ottoman.k...@yahoo.com wrote:
SInce the applications window minimize to the launcher (which on the
left) in Natty Narwhal, how about change the current style of Minimize
button to this :
http://i.imgur.com/AxKxD.png
What do you think?
--
Genius. +1
On 5 April 2011 13:47, nick rundy nru...@hotmail.com wrote:
There are a lot of other applications that benefit from the additional space
afforded by merging the titlebar and menubar into the panel besides the
web-browser. Nautilus, media players, music players, word processors, e-mail
clients,
Hi guys,
I've been using Unity on my main desktop for a few days now, and I'm
getting incredibly frustrated with the behaviour of switching between
multiple windows of the same app. Say for example I have three windows
open, and I minimize two of them I can't find a way to get to one of
the
Hi everyone,
If you guys haven't watched this (well, listened mainly) you really should.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaLDMz_e2jQfeature=player_embedded
I have to say though, I agree with him on pretty much every single
point, especially his point about removing the top bar completely.
That was Beta 1's behaviour, try it :)
Maximize a window, open up say, the empathy contact list, now look at the panel.
Luke.
On 15 April 2011 15:27, nick rundy nru...@hotmail.com wrote:
Have there been changes since Beta 1? What you describe sounds awful!
The design that was implemented in
On 15 April 2011 16:08, nick rundy nru...@hotmail.com wrote:
This is where the whole thing falls apart quite epically. Now visually
the panel is the titlebar of the maximized window, but the contents of
it are the focused window, which is likely not the same window. It's a
complete WTF? moment
On 15 April 2011 16:25, Ian Santopietro isan...@gmail.com wrote:
You are missing my point, with Empathy focused, try closing the
maximized window. There is the problem, the maximized window should
have it's controls in it's titlebar like it normally does, like every
other window does, but it
On 15 April 2011 17:25, Jacopo Moronato jmoro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 17:40, Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com wrote:
They are obviously brighter than me then, because I've been using
Unity on my desktop for a week now and I'm still trying to close
windows that don't have
I'm so tired of hearing this cop out. Yes, we can go and use something
else, we aren't forced to use Unity. But we are supposed to be winning
users here, not driving them away.
Luke.
On 15 April 2011 21:47, Carl Simpson cwd.simp...@gmail.com wrote:
Having the menu always in the panel makes it quicker to acquire and
click, which is good, but it appears connected to the wrong window. In
my view, having the menu appear to be connected to the right window is
more important than speed.
Agreed.
Luke.
I think most people can see there is a real issue here. I just hope
that Canonical *at least* just disables the titlebar merging before
Natty and just retain the global menu. That way it removes the obvious
problems until they can be properly resolved and redesigned for
Ocelot. It also gets rid of
to integrate title into the panel.
On 16 April 2011 14:52, Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com wrote:
I think most people can see there is a real issue here. I just hope
that Canonical *at least* just disables the titlebar merging before
Natty and just retain the global menu. That way it removes
Hi Jim,
I believe it's called the Session menu (at least, it was until some
bright spark decided to shove a system-wide control panel underneath
it - I assume it still is).
Luke.
On 18 April 2011 17:20, Jim Campbell jwcampb...@gmail.com wrote:
The documentation team is wondering what to call
On 18 April 2011 19:08, Ryan Prior ryanpr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jim,
I believe it's called the Session menu (at least, it was until some
bright spark decided to shove a system-wide control panel underneath
it - I assume
On 19 April 2011 18:24, Mitja Pagon mitja.pa...@inueni.com wrote:
- Matthew Paul Thomas m...@canonical.com wrote:
It does. In the videos I watched of Charline Poirier's user test two
weeks ago, of the eight out of ten people who could find the hidden
menus at all, seven of them discovered
On 21 April 2011 06:36, S. Christian Collins s.chriscoll...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/20/2011 11:41 PM, Conscious User wrote:
Without explaining what is your idea for maximized windows, the
usefulness of the mockup is very limited.
Most people would agree that making the menubar moving left and
86 matches
Mail list logo
