lproven at gmail.com
Fri Dec 2 16:08:38 UTC 2011
On 2 December 2011 15:30, Ioannis Vranos <ioannis.vranos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ioannis, you are giving some confusing and incorrect information in
>> your posts about the new GUIs and I would respectfully suggest that
>> you need to do some more background reading and research.
>> Unity is *not* touch-centric.
>> Unity is inspired by the Mac OS X desktop, with its Dock, its single
>> central Applications folder and its single global menu bar across the
>> top of the screen.
>> Note that Apple *does not sell* any touchscreen devices running Mac OS
>> X. Mac OS X is a /desktop/ and /laptop/ interface and has been since
>> its appearance 11y ago.
>> The touchscreen devices, the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch run a totally
>> different interface on top of a totally different OS: iOS, which is
>> based on the same Unix kernel as Mac OS X but is not the same OS.
>> Please stop spreading this disinformation.
> http://unity.ubuntu.com/projects/unity :
> "Unity provides a complete, simple, ==> touch-ready environment that
> integrates your applications and your workflow".
> "Founded in 2010, the Unity project started by Mark Shuttleworth and
> Canonical has gone on to deliver a consistent user experience for
> desktop and netbook users alike. Putting great design at the heart of
> the project, Unity and its technologies such as Application
> indicators, System indicators, and Notify OSD, have strived to solve
> common problems in the Free Software desktop while optimizing the
> experience for ==> touch, consistency and collaboration".
>> Yes, Unity is designed to be a stepping-stone /towards/ an interface
>> that will be suitable for touchscreens /as well as/ mouse/keyboard
>> users but it is not there yet.
>> Reference on this from the SABDFL: http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/820
> There it is mentioned:
> "By 14.04 LTS Ubuntu will power ==> tablets, ==> phones, TVs and ==>
> smart screens from the car to the office kitchen, and it will connect
> those devices cleanly and seamlessly to the desktop, the server and
> the cloud.
> Unity, the desktop interface in today’s Ubuntu 11.10, was designed
> with this specific vision in mind".
> And later:
> "We have also invested in the design and engineering of Unity,
> motivated by the belief that desktop interfaces would merge with
> mobile, ==> touch interfaces into a seamless personal computing
> platform in the future".
>> Read about Shuttleworth's design plans for Unity here:
> In the above article of 2010, it is mentioned:
> "We also want to embrace touch as a first class input. We want people
> to be able to launch and switch between applications using
> ==> touch, so the ==> launcher must be finger friendly".
>> As for why Mint uses GNOME Shell and not "Fallback mode", this too is
>> well-documented. Mint's creator says:
>> @Craig: Gnome 2 + GTK+ is not being developped anymore, so you won’t
>> see it get any new features, but it’s amongst the most stable desktop
>> environments out there. As such, it’s not going anywhere. GTK3 and
>> Gnome 3 are more promising technologies of course, but they’re far
>> from reaching the same level of maturity Gnome 2 has. “Gnome 3 without
>> Gnome-Shell” is called “Gnome Fallback Mode” and it’s nothing to do
>> with Gnome 2.
>> Gnome 2 is a stable GTK+ desktop which no longer evolves in terms of features.
>> Gnome Fallback Mode is basically an adaptation of gnome-panel, which
>> looks like Gnome 2 but is based on GTK3 and is incompatible with
>> Bonobo and panel applets.
>> So the first thing to consider is this: Panel applets need a rewrite
>> to work in Gnome Fallback Mode. MintMenu for instance works in Gnome
>> 2, but it doesn’t work in Gnome Fallback or in Gnome Shell. We can
>> make it work in Gnome Fallback and we can make it work in Gnome Shell,
>> but we then need a rewrite.
>> The second thing to consider is that Gnome Fallback isn’t here to
>> stay. The Gnome devs don’t want it there and people who like Gnome 2
>> don’t like it anyway. Eventually you’ll see Gnome Shell gain
>> compatibility with less powerful graphics card and Shell will be the
>> only way to run Gnome 3. It’s not a bad thing, since Gnome Fallback
>> Mode, from a usability point of view, really isn’t an interesting
>> desktop. So going forward, we’ve got Gnome3/GTK3 being actively
>> developed and improved, we’ve got Gnome2/GTK still there for us to use
>> but not gaining new features, and we’ve got something called Gnome
>> Fallback Mode which is just that, a 2D fallback mode, and which is
>> going to disappear.
>> Souce: Clem Lefevbre himself, here: http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1845
> OK, it is their point of view, my point is since GNOME 3.2 Fallback
> mode exists, they should use that, if they wanted a GNOME 2.x-style
> applications menu.
>> You are coming out with completely unsupported speculation about how
>> and why Mint are doing what they are doing, as well as about Unity,
>> when I am afraid you are *wrong*, the facts are different and they are
>> right there for you to read and learn if you just make the small
> Thank you for your information, I think I supported what I said, in this email.
This is all stuff that is planned for the future. It does not
particularly refer to the current product, which is 100% suitable for
and very good as a desktop OS on a desktop computer, which is where I
am using it right now to type this message.
It is of course entirely fine if *you* don't like it. In that case,
don't use it.
But telling others "it is a touch interface and is no good for a
desktop" is *not helpful*. It is disinformation; spreading things that
are not true. Please stop it.
Liam Proven • Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • MSN: lproven at hotmail.com • ICQ: 73187508
More information about the ubuntu-users