Ubuntu 12.04 Can Unity Ever Be Made Tolerable?

[craig10x]

I understand what you're saying, Vincent...and that is fine...if one has given it a fair chance and still doesn't like it, there are many other choices...i think i just find it very frustrating because of some of the really horrible things people say about it that one has to keep reading over and over again...you know like "it's a piece of ____"
they are ruining ubuntu...worse de i ever used, etc etc...just getting very tired of the unity haters...

Also the bit about it being a "tablet interface" it most certainly is not...it is a DOCK...and if you don't like Dock-Style desktops then you won't like unity obviously...
I do...and in fact, between abandoning windows but before discovering linux, i had a brief "stint" with the Mac and liked it very much (just didn't like the high priced hardware and the feeling of being locked into the "brand")...so perhaps that is why i adopted to unity so easily...

Though i have to tell you...because of all the negative comments i read about it, initially I DID NOT like it...but after coming back to it after awhile and approaching with an open mind, i came to like it very much...

[KBD47]

My biggest problem with Unity isn't the dock, but the dash. If you don't remember the name of the app you need, or simply want to browse the apps, it's more of a PITA than a traditional desktop like MATE, or Cinnamon. Also not too crazy about not having preview buttons of open windows, just a little arrow, and if you have apps open far across the launcher you have to scroll back and forth to find them. None of this is too huge to overcome if you mostly surf the web and do email, facebook, etc., but it can be a pain in an environment where you need to be productive.
I spent two months with Unity after 11.04 came out, and my wife spent one month using it. It functioned, it worked, we got used to it, but it was never quite as comfortable for us as the traditional desktop paradigm.
In 12.04 Unity is more tolerable, mainly because I can shrink the launcher down to nothing and can lock it in place so it isn't hiding. And 2D is fairly quick on my machine, though I hear 2D is going to eventually be dropped.
Not everyone who dislikes elements of Unity or Unity itself are: Unity Haters. After all, those who like Unity and dislike Gnome 2 are not called Gnome 2 haters

[MALsPa]

My biggest problem with Unity isn't the dock, but the dash. If you don't remember the name of the app you need, or simply want to browse the apps, it's more of a PITA than a traditional desktop like MATE, or Cinnamon. Also not too crazy about not having preview buttons of open windows, just a little arrow, and if you have apps open far across the launcher you have to scroll back and forth to find them. None of this is too huge to overcome if you mostly surf the web and do email, facebook, etc., but it can be a pain in an environment where you need to be productive.

I don't mind using Dash -- it isn't that hard to remember the name of an app when I need it. Usually, all I have to type is the first three letters of the name of the app before it shows up. But, so that I don't always have to use Dash, I added a Utilities "quicklist" to my launcher. It contains several frequently-used apps. I'm still tweaking it, adding and removing apps from the list, but this is what it looks like at the moment:

utilities-quicklist.png (240.67 KiB) Viewed 1642 times

This really cuts down on the number of icons in the launcher, although any running applications will place an icon in the launcher.

Another thing I did was I used nautilus-actions to add entries for applications to my desktop right-click menu. Again, I'm still playing around with it, but this is what it looks like right now:

nautilus-actions2.png (650.55 KiB) Viewed 1642 times

That one also works in GNOME Shell, by the way.

Either or both of these tools can dramatically reduce the number of times you have to go to Dash to open an app.

As for seeing which apps are running by looking at the little arrows next to the Launcher icons, I find that useful enough, but I used ubuntu-tweak to set up a hot corner at the upper-left to show all workspaces, and a another hot corner at the lower-left to show windows from the current workspace. Those two hot corners get me around to my running apps very quickly, and I think having those compliments the "little arrows" thing very nicely, although I can see where the next guy would prefer simply having open apps showing up on a panel.

Anyway, these tools make the workflow/production thing a non-issue for me here. YMMV.

[KBD47]

Using Kubuntu tonight and am reminded how wonderful and comfortable it is to move between apps and windows with so little effort or forethought

[MALsPa]

As always, use what works best for you.

[Shibblet]

I have to weigh in here on a couple of points.

Any new interface is going to be met with hostility. It's a timeless controversy. The idea is that New = Better. But "Better" is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes "better" means "known."

People have an inherent distrust of change, or anything that is made to replace something else. I could tell you a crazy story of how my grandfather refused to buy a new toaster in 2006, because the one they got for their wedding in 1947 was "just fine." It's just human nature to have a hard time accepting change.

That being said, you will always have haters to any new interface. We hate Unity, We hate Cinnamon, We hate Gnome 3, We hates the Baggins', What they are really hating is the time it will take to learn a new interface.

I have been taking graphic design classes, and one of the classes is Adobe Flash. Now, I know that I can move my object from one place to the next, but why can't I size it? I know it can be done, but I can't figure out how to do it. So now I am off to the "Help" files to figure out how to size my object. And after sifting through the index and table of contents looking for a title that remotely resembles my probblem, I start reading and reading and reading, only to find out that's not what it is... so you give up on the "help" files, and go to the internet and search Google, only to find people who are doing things "similar" to what you're trying to accomplish, and you read and read and read, and then after who-knows-how-long, you find your answer, and it works. Then, you try to colorize it, and the whole process starts over again.

This is very similar to the problems found in new interfaces. Things like "Where are my mouse sensitivity controls?" and "Why can't I just double-click on the network button?" or "Why did they put that control in this category, instead of this one?" I've seen changes like this between two different versions of KDE4.

So, any interface, with enough time, patience, and willingness to change, could be a good one.

[CtrlAltDel]

I have to weigh in here on a couple of points.

Any new interface is going to be met with hostility. It's a timeless controversy. The idea is that New = Better. But "Better" is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes "better" means "known."

People have an inherent distrust of change, or anything that is made to replace something else. I could tell you a crazy story of how my grandfather refused to buy a new toaster in 2006, because the one they got for their wedding in 1947 was "just fine." It's just human nature to have a hard time accepting change.

That being said, you will always have haters to any new interface. We hate Unity, We hate Cinnamon, We hate Gnome 3, We hates the Baggins', What they are really hating is the time it will take to learn a new interface.

I have been taking graphic design classes, and one of the classes is Adobe Flash. Now, I know that I can move my object from one place to the next, but why can't I size it? I know it can be done, but I can't figure out how to do it. So now I am off to the "Help" files to figure out how to size my object. And after sifting through the index and table of contents looking for a title that remotely resembles my probblem, I start reading and reading and reading, only to find out that's not what it is... so you give up on the "help" files, and go to the internet and search Google, only to find people who are doing things "similar" to what you're trying to accomplish, and you read and read and read, and then after who-knows-how-long, you find your answer, and it works. Then, you try to colorize it, and the whole process starts over again.

This is very similar to the problems found in new interfaces. Things like "Where are my mouse sensitivity controls?" and "Why can't I just double-click on the network button?" or "Why did they put that control in this category, instead of this one?" I've seen changes like this between two different versions of KDE4.

So, any interface, with enough time, patience, and willingness to change, could be a good one.

Shibblet, what many who were born yesterday fail to realize, in their youth, is that age often brings wisdom that can't be bought or taught. As they grow older, they become more intelligent and can see the folly of their youth through the eyes of a wise individual. The ONLY way to gain this knowledge is through the aging process.

If you grandfather's toaster worked well and was in good working order, why change it just for the sake of having something new? He was right about his toaster and I hope he kept it. It's probably a pretty wicked toaster and it's probably very well made and has craftsmanship that quite likely can't be matched by the cheap materials and shoddy workmanship that goes into making toasters nowadays. I'm almost certain the 1947 toaster is a gem and is probably worth much more than ones made in our present time.

Does modern bread need modern electricity to heat it with? Is our electricity today better than it was in 1947? Do modern toasters somehow make toasted bread taste better? As you become more mature, you will realize that getting things solely for the sake of getting them is foolish.

[MALsPa]

CtrlAltDel, you willing to give up your cell phone for a land-line phone with a rotary dial?

phone.jpg (37.08 KiB) Viewed 1603 times

[Shibblet]

phone.jpg

[/quote]

Why are those old phones always Orange?

[craig10x]

Or back to a black and white tv set instead of color...or how about no television at all...just radio....which was much the case in 1947
Hmmm...laptop computers, desktops? How about IBM's that take up an entire office floor as there were back in the 50s?

Progress and Change is a GOOD THING...

[CtrlAltDel]

CtrlAltDel, you willing to give up your cell phone for a land-line phone with a rotary dial?

The attachment phone.jpg is no longer available

That's an ugly phone. They were always black or beige, for the most part, in the United States. I've never seen an orange one.

But, let's be serious, cell phones were an advancement in a highly recognizable and useful form over rotary phones that were land based and connected with lines. That type of progress in design is similar to a shovel vs. a tractor.

I see no progress in design or even basic components in regards to toasters. I mean, really, why get a new toaster if the old one still works? Do you get a modern toaster to impress the neighbors or friends that come to visit? I certainly wouldn't because my self-worth and how I feel about myself isn't connected to property or things I own.

Back to the topic of the old shell vs. the new shell/Gnome vs. Unity, etc... What exactly does Unity do better than Gnome other than mimic turning your desktop or laptop into a smartphone? I already have a smartphone, why would I wish to turn my computer into one?

Is having a computer that acts and behaves like a smartphone somehow the wave of the future? I don't see the value in it.

[CtrlAltDel]

Or back to a black and white tv set instead of color...or how about no television at all...just radio....which was much the case in 1947
Hmmm...laptop computers, desktops? How about IBM's that take up an entire office floor as there were back in the 50s?

Progress and Change is a GOOD THING...

Progress and change can be a good thing or it can just be change for the sake of change that is not driven by any need and leads to a lack of interest. The Ford Pinto was a change but it wasn't a particularly good one and didn't last very long because it was not designed well and had flaws and people didn't like it.

You guys keep illustrating these momentous innovations in technology and somehow try to relate them to this recent change in the direction of Linux. What is the great and staggering innovation of Unity? I just don't see it.

[MALsPa]

:-) That's an ugly phone. They were always black or beige, for the most part, in the United States. I've never seen an orange one.

I haven't, either. Just happened to find that image on the internet. I had black ones, beige ones, white ones, and I think I remember having one that was a sort of maroon/red color. Dating myself, here. By the way, isn't it funny that we still use phrases like "dial a number"?

But, yeah, change can be good, but sometimes it isn't an improvement on the old way.

Sometimes it just depends on your perspective. For example, I prefer to use my old flip-phone while my son prefers his smartphone. I know that I could do things with a smartphone that I can't do with my flip-phone, but I don't care. Should I go around endlessly criticizing smartphones just because they aren't what I want to use? That's what seems to be happening with Unity and GNOME Shell -- people who don't like them too often act like those desktops can't be any good for anyone else (which is obviously not the case), or that anyone who wants a "productive" desktop environment has to use a "traditional" environment (many of us feel differently).

[Shibblet]

That's an ugly phone. They were always black or beige, for the most part, in the United States. I've never seen an orange one.

I remember the beige ones now, they were the wall mounted model. And I didn't want to chime in on the toaster debate. The whole reason was for my grandfather to buy a new toaster for about $20.00 instead of tinkering with the olden style broken toaster in order to make it work. That may bring up a whole new debate on the linux front... But I digress.

The question is "Can Unity Ever Be Made Tolerable?" And the answer is a definite yes. It already is tolerable. There's a learning curve to it, and if you like the way it functions, you will not only tolerate it, you'll love it.

The point I was trying to make with the toaster, is that my grandfather could go get any new type of toaster he wanted. This is allegorical to Windows XP, Vista, 7, Gnome, LXDE, MATE, KDE, Unity, Enlightenment, FluxBox, etc. But he's quite happy with just making his old one work. The main reason is that he just didn't want to get something new. And people can be like that. They can be hard to accept change.

[craig10x]

Oh and just to note: the original dial phones from Bell were only available in black...much later on they introduced colors....their original slogan was:
"You can have any color you want as long as it's black"

I'm sure when the first touch tone phones were introduced...there were those who said: "what's wrong with a DIAL on the phone?"
Which kind of reminds me of those who feel that only the old way is good...why would anyone want something like unity?
And after getting use to unity, now the old way seems strange to me

By the way (i think i mentioned this before) i never cared for the original 2 panel with fan out style menu that ubuntu use to have...i worked with it during my early days with ubuntu but later switched to mint when i discovered their 1 panel on bottom with a slab style menu....

I always thought (and still feel) the slab menu is much nicer then then the fan out menu...and 1 panel is much better then 2...

But i also have easily adopted to unity because i also like dock style menus (like on the mac)...

[Shibblet]

Let's not forget this stage of evolution.



Where the old meets the new to make people more comfortable...

I think one of the best things about Linux (in General), is that there are so many different interfaces available. With Windows, you get the only interface available for that version of Windows. With MacOSX, it's the same deal, one interface. With Linux, you can actually have a system with Cinnamon, Gnome 3 Shell, Unity, KDE, XFCE, FluxBox, LXDE, Enlightenment, etc, etc, etc. All on the same system! So, if you ever get tired of your app-dock being on the left hand side of the screen, and want to switch to a menu in the lower left corner, you can do that. You can always go back and switch again, and again, and again.

*Edit
I guess you can run KDE on Windows... but I haven't looked much into that. It's probably just for the plasmoids.

[aes2011]

Its a preference thing, some folks can use Unity and be happy and some folks can't. That's fine because there are all kinds of options available and we can all be happy. Enjoy

Very well said. If I don't like something, I just ignore it if I can. Nothing will ever be tolerable to the intolerant. There's choice out there.

[Shibblet]

Very well said. If I don't like something, I just ignore it if I can. Nothing will ever be tolerable to the intolerant. There's choice out there.

HA! That's awesome!

It's funny how much of a debate this whole "interface" issue has started when you can get any interface you'd like at the end of a short download. People are really up-in-arms over Unity, but all you have to do is download Gnome-Shell, and Unity is no longer an issue.

[Goz]

bimsebasse, the traditional desktop interface is mouse-centric, two dimensional, and built for productivity. You can move across the screen and quickly access everything on the computer with few mouse clicks, and the open apps show up in preview buttons across the desktop. For a desktop user with a mouse, and even a laptop user with a touchpad--it just doesn't get any easier than this. Any noob can sit down to that interface and intuitively find their way around.
The new desktop interfaces require the user to find their way through layers, to search for apps and files and programs with text input, to learn and memorize keyboard shortcuts. .

And this is why I hate it so and refuse to use it.

[Condorman]

I don't have a problem with Unity per se, and I've quite enjoyed my time with Gnome Shell. They do offer something different to the user, and a lot of the things people cite as problems are often seen as strengths by other people. I'm lucky insofar as I'm not so set in my ways that I don't appreciate something new or even better. I can usually quite happily get along with any DE placed in front of me no problems.

So I can't hammer Ubuntu and Unity for their new interface as I quite like it. Plus, while ever Ubuntu exists, there's Linux Mint too, so really no one should have any cause for complaint. If you don't like Unity or Shell because they changed too much or you can't get on with them, well you really ought to look at Mint's Cinnamon. It's awesome. And no-one mentions KDE. Look how amazing that is. You are very well catered for.

Honestly, the storm of the new DE's should be over now. There are a lot of incredibly solid options for everyone and every possible eventuality.