Window Controls on the Right Side

[John Moser]

On 04/29/2015 08:54 PM, John Moser wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/29/2015 08:32 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> 
>>
>> The entire reason for them being on the left is to make the top-right

Actually, no, you know what?  I'm going to set decorum aside and pull a
Linus here, on everyone involved.  Not you, Clynt; *everyone*.

First and foremost, the biggest red flag you'll ever find in the UI
design sphere is "Apple blahblahblah".  This statement comes out of
people who have no clue what they're talking about, so make an appeal to
authority--typically the authority of the least-successful product
produced by the least-successful desktop computer OS manufacturer.

Folks seem to forget that Apple's OSX is the only broadly-marketed,
consumer-targeted alternative to Microsoft Windows, and is completely
trounced by them; while also conveniently forgetting that Android
devices control *four* *times* the handheld device market of iOS
(caveat:  that's by browser detection; by sales, people have purchased 7
times as many Android devices as iOS devices, and manufacturers have
shipped 8 times as many Android devices as iOS devices).  Claiming that
Apple does something a certain way should be an argument made *against*
doing something--it would still be a bad argument, but it would at least
make sense.

Apple makes a shitload of money being iTunes, Inc.

So let's set aside the pointless Apple fanboy arguments and do some history.


Back in 10.04, Ubuntu tried moving the controls to the left.  This met
with huge resistance, largely in the form of complaining, whining, and
people putting the controls back where they belong.  Now, I can't recall
who said what, but I can at least recall what I said, so we'll go with that.

What did I say?

Oh yeah.

I said most people are right-handed, and that the easiest way to tilt
your wrist or move your arm was out and away.  The top-right of your
screen is the easiest area of the screen to access--go ahead, try it.
Those of us with civil rights in Elbonia will find I'm completely
correct; lefties will find confusion, followed by the realization that
they're using the wrong hand.



A year later, in 11.04, Ubuntu released the Global Menu.  Three days
before 15.04, Ubuntu reversed a decision to disable the Global Menu by
default, after preening themselves with talk about the new Locally
Integrated Menus--i.e. pre-11.04, non-Apple menus.

Again, more bitching.  People hated on the Global Menu.  A lot.  It's
sort of a big deal:  loads of contention among users, news articles
asking if Shuttleworth is insane or just stupid, everything from
strategic trepidation to outright hostility.

The Ubuntu developers actually had an explanation for this one.  They
said it puts the menus in a consistent location, so the user won't get
lost trying to find File Edit blah blah blah Tools.

Translation:  Users are retards who have been beaten with Cricket bats
until they've sustained sufficient brain damage to soil themselves
uncontrollably, so we've put the menus somewhere we can train an Amoeba
to find consistently.

My take on the situation?  Two simple things:

First, if the window is maximized, the menu is obviously in the same
place on the screen.  If not, you have multiple windows, and it takes
*two* *mouse* *clicks* to click a menu.  With LIMs (you know, *normal*
menus), you just click File on the window; with Global Menus, you have
to click the window, then go back and click File at the top.

These days, even standard Windows 7 is so screwed up that I'm not sure
what window I've got selected; right now, on Ubuntu, the only difference
between this window and the Thunderbird main window is this window has
black title bar text and controls, while every other window on the
screen has medium-dark gray text and controls.  Back in the day, the
title bar would be an entirely different color.  You can be pretty sure
the user will have to stop and verify he's looking at the right menus
before he can click with confidence.

Second, people don't work the way Canonical has suggested.

A screen is meaningless.  Say it with me:  The screen is meaningless.
People don't know where they are on the screen.  They know they're
working on a specific window; LIMs are part of that window, and share a
consistent spatial relationship with that window.  Everything in the
window shares a specific spatial relationship with that window--mostly
with the top and left of that window.  The window may resize or move
around, but most things--including the menus and controls--share a
specific spatial relationship with the top and left of that window.

Putting the menu in the same fixed position in the workspace--the
screen--means you're moving it around.  You have a component of the
window which no longer has a fixed spatial relationship with the window,
and must be located when used.  The controls in the top-right have the
slightest disadvantage of being affected by the width of the window;
this is made up for by the fact that the user is typically well-aware of
the window's physical dimensions, that being critical to everything he's
doing with it.  Disconnecting the controls or menus from the window puts
them off somewhere in lala land; they may as well be dumped randomly
around the screen, as long as they stay put once placed and are readily
identified.


Canonical has been backpedaling on Global Menus for several releases,
giving configuration options, then heavily considering just turning that
crap off.  They have not come out and claimed anything about good UI
design; they've just shuffled around uncomfortably.



Now we're talking about controls being in the top left.

I'll make this simple.

The top of the screen is easy to hit:  throw the pointer that way
haphazardly.  The top of a window is *not* easy to hit.  Grouping the
controls around the single most important universal element of a modern
UI--the freaking FILE MENU--is a good way to get errant clicks coming
out your ass.

For those just rolling with the idioms, I'd like to point out that this
literally means you're figuratively shitting errant clicks all over the
place.

If I'm going to use vulgar imagery, I'm at least going to inject a
little cerebral commentary.

An errant click just above File currently does nothing, and then you
immediately click again after a tiny nudge, and probably don't realize
how very often you do this (the people who whine about how computer mice
suck terribly and keyboard shortcuts are critical for productivity are
the people who notice).  Suddenly you have to be extra-careful about
where you click.

On the bright side, every time you get a new mouse, you'll learn
precision-clicking faster.  Practice has to generate errors; deliberate
practice involves constant and immediate feedback, so you're gonna have
to click CLOSE when trying to click FILE repeatedly, until you learn to
land that pointer right on the FILE menu.  Better drill those
mouse-pointing skills on every individual device you own.



We're going to have these arguments repeatedly, and we're going to keep
having them until people stop going "YEAH THIS WILL BE COOL, WE'RE GOING
TO DO NEW STUFF AND BE DIFFERENT!" and "WAH WAH I DON'T LIKE THE NEW
UI!"  Maybe one day, we'll have competent UI designers set up end-user
focus groups and take actual metrics of what does and doesn't work,
instead of having some self-absorbed pseudo-dictator make shit up and
claim it's good UI practice.

End rant.