Ubuntu usability is significantly decreased with Unity

Alexander rhettnaxel at gmail.com
Wed Dec 28 20:57:58 UTC 2011

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Jo-Erlend Schinstad <
joerlend.schinstad at gmail.com> wrote:

>  Den 28. des. 2011 20:40, skrev Nenad Lecek:
>  Dear all,
>  as I don't know where to put my comments about Ubuntu 11.10 usability,
> I'm posting here. My apologies if this is not the right place, and I'd be
> grateful if you point me where to post my comment.
> This list is ok to use for discussions about the desktop, but you should
> back up your claims with facts. It is not a fact that Unity doesn't serve
> users well. It serves me well, for instance. Claiming that Ubuntu is no
> longer user friendly because you don't like one of the applications it
> provides, is pure nonsense.
>  Some reasons are explained below. This is not a full list, just the key
> points.
>  1) Appearing/disappearing left side toolbar doesn't bring anything
> compared to Gnome Classic Ubuntu desktop and menu. Why? Simply put if you
> know that you have couple of menus where you programs are, this is much
> better/faster than unnecessary dynamic/uncertainty which Unity provides.
> BTW, Classic gnome desktop we had in previous Ubuntu versions was really
> well structured. Unity doesn't provide that. Personally, I do not see the
> point of promoting Unity as the only desktop on Ubuntu, because classic
> gnome desktop was well structured and good enough. Eventually, only search
> capability like in Unity could have been added, although this functionality
> in Unity is far from good, currently is just minor convenience.
> Promoting Unity as the only desktop in Ubuntu would be a lie. Who is doing
> that? The idea that "classic gnome desktop", which is called Gnome Panel,
> by the way, is no longer available in Ubuntu, is a misconception. It's
> still there.
>  2) The application menu is shown in main menu toolbar. This is annoying
> at best, and from usability point of view very it is a really poor choice.
> Why is considered good to force the user to search where the menu for
> her/his application is.
> You're claiming that you now have to search for the menu because it's
> always at the same place? That doesn't make sense to me. In any case, you
> can disable the global menu if you prefer it that way.
>  3) Performance consideration: seems so that Unity eats performance and
> batteries on laptops. Again, no value in service it provides in return.
> Of all the components in Ubuntu, you just assume that Unity somehow
> reduces performance? Correlation does not imply causation. I see no reason
> why Unity would impact performance in any way.
>  4) Search applications capability in Unity is really poorly designed and
> of limited usage. In some cases, you almost have to know exact name so that
> application you are searching for could be found. In others searching
> application itself has confusing, complex user interface. This could have
> been done much better.
> If you can do better, then do so, or at least explain how. You don't even
> provide an example so that others can understand your problem.
>  Finally, my proposal is to return to classic gnome desktop as default
> Ubuntu desktop.
>  In addition, if new fancy user interface is for whatever reason needed,
> one can keep improving alternative user interface designs until one of them
> reach maturity needed for such broad user base. And make it optional, not
> mandatory.
> Unity has never been mandatory in Ubuntu. It's extremely unlikely that it
> will ever be. Gnome Panel is still around if you want to improve it.
>  For example, in case main menu taskbar of classic gnome desktop contains
> the short, google like edit line for entering search expression for finding
> application, the Unity will be completely unnecessary. Simple as that.
>   Google searches public information. Unity scopes searches your personal
> information and online information. Completely different things. I would
> not want to give Google direct access to my personal computer in order to
> search for things. Unity is not primarily a look. It is primarily an
> infrastructure that enables applications to connect to the system. Parts of
> Unity is implemented for both Windows, LXDE and Xfce, for instance. The
> components will look different in KDE and Xfce, since they're different
> desktops.
> You seem to have many questions, but you formulate them as accusations and
> unsubstantiated claims instead. It is not an effective way of attaining
> information. In fact, you're reducing the likelihood that people will be
> willing to help you.
> Jo-Erlend Schinstad
> --
> ubuntu-desktop mailing list
> ubuntu-desktop at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
Solution: explore a different desktop or distro.
Sincerely, Alexander.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/attachments/20111228/565e34c2/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ubuntu-desktop mailing list