Ubuntu 14.04 Brings Back Menus In Application Windows 255
sfcrazy writes "Canonical is bringing back menu integration with application windows. In 14.04 there will be an option for users to enable menus in application windows. That's a huge u-turn from Mark's stand on Global Menus which upset a lot of Ubuntu users."
Quit mucking with the UI (Score:1, Insightful)
I can live with them or without them, but they need to pick one way to do it and stick with that.
Too much change harms (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nice to have the choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux users like what they want. That might not conform to whatever your personal preferences are or what's trendy. That doesn't make Linux users "luddites". It makes them something other than mindless drones.
Beyond that, going out of your way to try and copy that other marginal player in the industry us just retarded. You will pretty much ensure that less saavy users are alienated by something that seeks to be annoyingly different for it's own sake.
You think Linux users are luddites? We're not even close to that compared to the bulk of the potential users out there.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is there any compelling reason for them to "stick" with something? Having the choice is a positive good. Unity's lack of options is what drove me away from it.
Muscle memory. There is nothing more significant to a good user interface than being friendly to developing muscle memory. Everything else is secondary. Once you develop muscle memory, you don't care much what it looks like because you don't look at it. If you can't develop muscle memory, you won't ever enjoy using the device.
That's why the many devices that are pure touch screen driven suck. They demand your constant attention like a mewling infant. The push to add hot spots and gestures and voice to all these touch screen devices is driven by this truth.
Re:Nice to have the choice (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, because anyone who questions your viewpoint and politics is obviously an ignorant luddite. ..and liberals wonder why others perceive them as arrogant, totalitarian, histrionic, narcissists. Tolerance and diversity only applies to their own viewpoints and protected castes, I guess.
Global menus work ok for small desktops (1024x768 tops), but with huge desktops that have multiple windows side by side, having to select the window and move the mouse to the top of the screen to use the menu for it is a pain.
Intelligent users like configurations that work for their workflows. When they are obviously changed out just for change's sake, they become irritated. This applies to any platform. Change for change's sake has become a fad in the last 5-6 years, and it's driving people nuts.
It still has Unity (Score:5, Insightful)
So the rest of the menu complaints are irrelevant.
Re:Nice to have the choice (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't think users have a problem with innovation or new things... they have a problem with being bound with an interface NOT DESIGNED FOR DESKTOP COMPUTERS.
Unity = Metro = Crap (on desktop)
OLD? Stupid crap still on 10.7 (Score:2, Insightful)
Why Apple has made the perfect UI, how could you not love the best design for DJs and Photoshoppers? There are about 10 things wrong with OSX and they are all random design crap Jobs picked -
Global menus,
Single mouse click,
Left window controls (yay for all the left handed and left eye dominant people, boo for the other 95% of the world)
Launchpad (how is the start menu missing causing a revolt and launchpad even exist? Launchpad is the initial SIN!)
Finder layout straight out of system commander circa 1988.
Crap loads of docked icons you never use be default.
A separate contact and calendar app....
General iOS crap
Hardwired application dependency locations (the whole point of application folders is to stop that!)
Scroll bars that disappear even if your mouse is near them and appear at the bottoms of pages OVERTOP content.
I could go on and complain about the apps, but lets say OSX is great for people who use a computer like they use iOS and leave it at that....
Re:There are some good reasons for global menu bar (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nice to have the choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe I should have just said people that are resistant to change.
The is nothing wrong with resisting pointless change. I used Unity and didn't like it. Not because it was different, but because it wasn't an improvement.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, Apple is the latecomer to this - iOS 7 came out in 2013. Metro and Unity showed up in 2012.
Apple changed because a growing number of people were complaining that the iOS UI started looked "dated" and "static" because it hasn't changed as wildly as Android or as "fresh" as Metro on Windows Phone. Ditto OS X - people were complaining it looks very similar to the way it looked over a decade earlier.
Of course, I hate the new "flatness" that seems to be the trendy thing 0 I like my faux 3D with shading and depth and texture. I admit, iOS perhaps went a bit too overboard with stitched leather and green felt, but I liked the icons and all that.
But I guess that's the breaks. Be like Apple and try to keep things practically the same and after a little while you get accused of ossifying the UI and it looks old, dated, not trendy and ugly. Be like Microsoft and offer fresh and shiny every couple of years and you look cool. Except well, it seems to have come at the cost of functionality.
And then there's Linux where everyone wants to do everything and you end up with hideousness that is Unity.
Don't change the UI and you get accused of ossifying. Change the UI and everyone hates it.
Re: Nice to have the choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Because the optimal UI for desktop computers was a solved problem five years ago.
Because UX people need to put "mobile" on their CVs and resumes in order to get hired anywhere.
Because I'm sick of being the guinea pig for some UX weenie who only cares about his next paid gig.
Re:Nice to have the choice (Score:4, Insightful)
Moron.
Thats why I like that windows 8.1 got rid of all that glass crap everywhere and i dont really touch any metro stuff since none of the applications i use have metro versions
so you love they got rid of that glass crap (on the desktop I assume you mean) and then you only use the desktop.
You must be a designer - every new interface is so cool, and clean, and elegant, with its fresh lines and clean interface.... as long as you don't have to the use the horrific stuff.
Re:OLD? Stupid crap still on 10.7 (Score:5, Insightful)
I agreed with all of that except your comment on the scroll bars.
Scroll bars are NOT needless clutter. They are a visual cue on the amount of content on the screen vs the amount of content that you can't see. Right now with a quick glance I can see I'm only half way through reading the comments. I can't do that if the bar is hidden, and I'd need to do something like move the page.
I hate this on touchscreens as well but it's more forgiveable since any finger touching the screen will make the bars reappear. I can't do that while I'm typing on a keyboard.
Change for change's sake is annoying (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm still using a physical keyboard because it's better than a touch keyboard. The Windows 8 interface was an unnecessary and inconvenient change and yes I know you can do X, Y and Z to make it less annoying but then what was the point of the change? It hasn't improved anyone's experience and just puts extra, undocumented steps in that confuse everyone, even the techies. That goes double for Server 2012 where Metro is a completely unnecessary nuisance.
Re:OLD? Stupid crap still on 10.7 (Score:5, Insightful)
Mac OS has been like this since System 1. And it makes sense; whatever you're doing, its menu is going to be in the same place. Fitts' law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen [asktog.com].
I've read the question 5 [asktog.com] and its answers about global menu superiority.
I would like to emphasize this:
- I've been using Macintosh, Unix workstations, MS PC (DOS,Win3.1 up to Win8), Linux PC with various WM/Desktop, etc.
- Global menu was fine for me on Macintosh Classic 9-inch display, for any task.
- Global menu is painful and irritating on 24-inch display, for most of the creative tasks.
I suspect that this is not only a matter of how long the cursor travel though the screen, but also about how much you have to adjust your gaze on the area requiring your attention.
Fitts' law fails to address that point, even if you can do things quicker it might not be as productive if it's uncomfortable and tiring.
Regarding GUI, Apple has failed on several points with nowdays huge displays, for instance it tooks them years to allow window size adjustment on any border (instead of a tiny triangle on bottom right). The feature comes with Lion in 2011... That's a shame.
Re:Nice to have the choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometimes I think some linux users are a bunch of luddites with strong right wing conservative leanings
and liberals wonder why others perceive them as arrogant, totalitarian, histrionic, narcissists
How the fuck can people take a discussion about a UI element to fucking politics? It's not even a good political discussion, it the same stereotyped shit we read about everyday, where there are only two fucking views on each subject and they are both ludicrously inflexible. I thought for certain no one would fall for the obvious, weak flamebait of the first post, but lo and behold, the discussion has degenerated into things like
Of course, that's why you elect politicians who'd love to stamp out free speech, right? To make it my problem, and make up for the fact your arguments are without merit?
Come on, tell me the truth: you guys disliked the new design and are poisoning the content, too, so as to encourage our transition to a better place, right? Because no one can be that unproductively disruptive unless on purpose.