Please stop changing the bug title and please don't use this bug as a meta-bug to complain about how things are different. If you have an issue with the way Unity is designed or an issue with stability or an issue with something not working the way it should then file a separate bug detailing your issue under ayatana-design, unity or compiz.
Every time you comment on this bug with a separate issue or change the bug title, the developers get more bug spam to deal with every morning, and this makes them less productive and less likely to fix the bugs that you want fixed. On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 9:20 AM, andy16666 <[email protected]> wrote: > "You know you can go back to Gnome 2." > > Yes, I know. My wife has already opted to do so. She tried Unity for > about 2 days, thought it was some kind of sick joke and requested that I > "fix" her computer. > > I'm a ten year Linux veteran and I figured we were finally getting > somewhere with this Linux on the desktop thing. Often when a piece of > software is this badly designed, you just throw it away and start over. > Treat it as a learning experience. In this case I think there are some > good ideas floating around. :) They're just in the wrong place, behave > the wrong way, and provide the wrong functionality. :-P And if I can > stay and help "fix" unity, I'm just stubborn enough that I will. > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are a member of Unity > Bugs, which is subscribed to unity. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/648180 > > Title: > Unity is not an adequate replacement for Gnome2 (and sucks a little > bit less then it used to) > > Status in Unity: > Opinion > Status in “unity” package in Ubuntu: > Opinion > > Bug description: > Binary package hint: unity > > Can I just say one thing? Unity sucks. Unity is to netbook-launcher > what Vista was to XP. > > Unity will be the main reason why I won't upgrade from Lucid to > Maverick on my netbook. > > Can anybody tell me what exactly was wrong with the very usable > netbook-launcher to decide to make such a drastic change, one which is > not useful at all and still very buggy (even when released, I'm > afraid). > > ProblemType: Bug > DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.10 > Package: unity 0.2.44-0ubuntu1 > ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.35-22.33-generic 2.6.35.4 > Uname: Linux 2.6.35-22-generic i686 > NonfreeKernelModules: wl > Architecture: i386 > Date: Sun Sep 26 16:46:04 2010 > InstallationMedia: Ubuntu-Netbook 10.10 "Maverick Meerkat" - Alpha i386 > (20100803.1) > ProcEnviron: > LANG=en_US.utf8 > SHELL=/bin/bash > SourcePackage: unity > -- Sam Spilsbury -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/648180 Title: Unity is not an adequate replacement for Gnome2 (and sucks a little bit less then it used to) -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
