Natty + Fluxbox
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| gstrock May 04, 2011 10:31 AM EDT |
I'm back to using Fluxbox thanks to Unity.
It reminds me of when Linux used to be fun,
before I went to these "desktops". I don't mess a lot with building a huge Fluxbox menu, I'm using Kupfer as a launcher/finder. - Gstrock |
| Dsmithjr May 04, 2011 10:41 AM EDT |
Is this a serious post? It seems more like you're just trying to be humorous. You start out the post complaining that Unity is too simple, but you end the post complaining that Unity is too complex. For starters, there is a search button on that "silly Totem Pole". It's the very top button. The one with the Ubuntu logo on it. Click right there and a nice search box will pop up with your cursor already located in the box. Looking for Synaptic? Click that button and simple start typing synaptic. By the time you have "syn" in the box, you'll see not only a nice little icon but also the words "Synaptic Package Manager" right there under the icon. It's both simple and efficient. Shouldn't that be the goal? To me, the only real complaint I have with Unity is that it's just too simplified for power users and it's still a bit too buggy. I don't think complaining that it's not simple enough is really going to go anywhere. My wife flies around Unity like an old pro, and she's only been using it for 3 days. I enjoy its simplicity as well, it's only when you want to change it that you run into issues. That being said, it seems like a lot of people are complaining about Unity for the simple fact that it's different. |
| jdixon May 04, 2011 11:00 AM EDT |
> That being said, it seems like a lot of people are complaining about Unity for the simple fact that it's different. Isn't that the most common complaint about new software? People don't like change. |
| tuxchick May 04, 2011 11:33 AM EDT |
Quoting: You start out the post complaining that Unity is too simple, but you end the post complaining that Unity is too complex. He makes a good point that trying for simplicity often creates more complications, and reduces efficiency. Desktop devs are nearly always confusing a simple visual appearance with real simplicity-- they are definitely not the same, it's just hiding things and making the system harder to use. There was a joke floating around some years ago after the release of Gnome 2, that the ultimate goal was a blank desktop with a single button labeled DO STUFF. Having to type the name of the application you're looking for is not efficient, and certainly not helpful if you don't know the name, or don't know the name that the system you're using thinks it should be. Suppose it were labeled "install software" or something else? Good luck figuring that out without tedious trial and error, or figuring it out at all since this is supposed to help really stupid noobs, and are these mythical noobs going to know what a Package Manager is? That sounds like something very personal to men. What's really funny about that approach is it mimics the evil dreaded command line-- you have to already know what you're looking for. I call this the "porthole view", because they keep narrowing the view the interface has of the system smaller and smaller. The fastest way to find something when you're not sure what you're looking for, or when you want want to explore and see what is available, is by browsing a list. A system menu should have an alphabetical view as well as a category view. But oops, lists don't look nice, so we can't have those. People don't like not-useful changes. This piece is funny and true. |
| csatlose May 04, 2011 11:35 AM EDT |
Linux has been on my machines since 2000, and I'm a geek by hobby not by profession. I have tried, used, and pretty much loved all desktop environments (e.g. KDE, Gnome, XFCE, LXDE, Enlightenment) as well as window managers (WindowMaker, Fluxbox, Openbox, etc.). With that said let's look at the matter at hand. Ubuntu is creating a desktop environment that will behave more or less like an appliance because the target audience of the 21st century computer landscape is an appliance using group of people. For example, I see lots of people with MacBooks, iMacs, and iPads, and almost all of them are happy because they have a pretty "desktop" environment and they don't **want to** tinker with it. If Ubuntu's long term goal is to become a widely used computer/tablet/portable device OS, then they will continue on this path of making things as simple as clicking on big icons to start programs, or typing keywords in the search box to find their programs and files. In my opinion, Unity will be widely adopted and loved in the next two years by the general computer user running Linux, and the interface will most likely attract new users. Now, the last bit missing is automatic presence of codecs and bits of code (is libdvdcss2 a library file?) in the OS, and I won't be surprised if Canonical will soon license those items to make it easy for the users to open up an Ubuntu machine and start using it out of the box for whatever purpose they want. The uproar about Unity is from people who are well versed in the use of any Linux operating system, and I think their energy is misguided. Those upset by Unity have the choice to install any other desktop on their Natty Narwhal desktop, including Gnome 2.x. The uproar would be understandable if Canonical stopped the release of all other *buntu .isos and totally locked down the choice of the user to Unity. They did not do that, and if they did, most people unhappy with the situation could go to any of the available wonderful distros in the Linux ecosystem. Currently I am happily using Chakra on a desktop, Ubuntu 11.04 on an external usb hard drive, and Ubuntu 10.04 on an ARM based laptop. Long live Linux and its ecosystem. |
| pmpatrick May 04, 2011 1:15 PM EDT |
Quoting:are these mythical noobs going to know what a Package Manager is? That sounds like something very personal to men.Thanks. I really needed a good laugh today. |
| vainrveenr May 04, 2011 3:37 PM EDT |
Quoting:Those upset by Unity have the choice to install any other desktop on their Natty Narwhal desktop, including Gnome 2.x.And naturally, those upset by any other Ubuntu choices made by Canonical themselves have the free choice to install any other Linux distro on their machines. Quoting:The uproar would be understandable if Canonical stopped the release of all other *buntu .isos and totally locked down the choice of the user to Unity.Indeed, there appears to be an increasing number of Ubuntu-based Linux distros, none of which are (or can be) "totally locked down" by Canonical. Quoting:In my opinion, Unity will be widely adopted and loved in the next two years by the general computer user running Linux, and the interface will most likely attract new users.OTOH, it is just as likely that any other Ubuntu-based distro without Unity will be just as "widely adopted and loved in the next two years by the general computer user running Linux". Linux Mint seems to be the most popular contender for this at the present time (see http://distrowatch.com/), but this could very well change within the presented two-year timeframe. Quoting:They did not [lockdown the desktop choice], and if they did, most people unhappy with the situation could go to any of the available wonderful distros in the Linux ecosystem.Indeed, prior commentators made this very same point within the LXer thread 'We have choices now?' found at http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/31685/ E.g., Quoting:Three ways to deal with [Canonical's disappointing decision(s) for Ubuntu]In spite of the current overwhelming barrage of pro-Ubuntu and pro-Unity posts even here at LXer, the likelihood is high for those who similarly feel that Ubuntu 11.04 is "Nasty Nonwhale – the desktop for the discerning illiterate!", that they will choose ways 2 and 3. |
| ElderGeek May 04, 2011 5:44 PM EDT |
We have 1) Longtime Gnome Users 2) Longtime non-Gnome Linux users 3) Nonlinux App style OS lovers 4) Nonlinux WIMPy (Windows Icon Mouse Panel) style OS Lovers. Both Gnome 3 and Unity are shooting for #3. The question is, how many of them can you get on Linux and is it worth alienating a good deal of #1 and #2 to do so while NOT appealing to #4? Mark Shuttleworth has pretty much stated what we are getting in 11.04 with Unity is what we will be getting in the future. If you don't like it, you are already to much of a power user and should find another linux distro. In context I think Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Lubuntu would all qualify as other distros.So there is plenty of choice. However, I believe there are many will be butt-hurt by Marks general attitude and management style as it works itself out over the next 2 years or so. These folks may very well head for Arch, Debian and Fedora. Which will suck a good deal of the oxygen out of the "Ubuntu Community Support" ecosystem. |
| gus3 May 04, 2011 5:54 PM EDT |
Quoting:If you don't like it, you are already to much of a power user and should find another linux distro.And then there will be no power users remaining to find/fix issues with Ubuntu. The very definition of "brain drain". |
| jdixon May 04, 2011 6:18 PM EDT |
> And then there will be no power users remaining to find/fix issues with Ubuntu. The very definition of "brain drain". No free power users. Canonical can always choose to use a paid support staff. |
| gus3 May 04, 2011 6:21 PM EDT |
Thus turning them into something like Microsoft, where people use the company's primary OS only enough to be able to support it, but not so much that they actually, you know, understand it. |
| skelband May 04, 2011 7:30 PM EDT |
I wonder how long it will take for someone to come along with a DE that looks and feels lot like the touch panels on Star Trek TNG? It would appear to me that what Unity and Gnome Shell is trying to do is take the next step towards a different paradigm of computer use. The problem is that the applications that are likely to be used on that desktop use the current WIMPy paradigm. They kinda get around this on the phones and pads because all the apps "get" the UI idea of that platform. So you get a sense that the applications of an android phone fit into the UI idea. What I found when I tried the Ubuntu Netbook Remix all those years ago is that the large icon panel type UI was sort of OK, but it all broke down when you actually ran an application, like OpenOffice which took you right back to how things have always been in the desktop eco-system. What you end up with is a mish-mash of UI and apps that don't really integrate into a whole idea that makes coherent sense. Like I said, smart phones and pads seem to have that sorted because everyone takes the leap of faith. That's just not happening on the desktop. This is quite separate to the issue of whether it suits your work style, which Unity and Gnome Shell seem not to in my case. |
| montezuma May 05, 2011 9:30 AM EDT |
Just a small heads up. I upgraded to 11.04 and was not impressed by Unity so I switched to the classic gnome which is little different to the old desktop. Since then however I have switched to Unity-2D which for some odd reason is nicer to use than the usual default unity. It also runs a lot cooler because no desktop effects are enabled. If they could put in a few more applets I would be happier but kudos to the unity-2d devs for a no nonsense desktop. |
| hkwint May 05, 2011 10:00 AM EDT |
Yeah, good idea skelband. After Gnome I think they should ditch complex office suites too - and come with somethin "less functional / less clunky" (please strike through which of the two ones is not apllicable) and more aimed at tablets. Think the KOffice-fork is already moving in that direction. |
| BernardSwiss May 05, 2011 7:15 PM EDT |
Quoting: Quoting:In my opinion, Unity will be widely adopted and loved in the next two years by the general computer user running Linux, and the interface will most likely attract new users. I think the point here was that the general public won't even care -- the Unity/Gnome3/app-style interface will be seen as sophisticated, easy-to-use and somehow more "polished" than what most of the Linux old guard would prefer. And maybe even Cool, too. As some else pointed out, this will be an appliance OS. Like Android or iOS. (It now occurs to me that a large part of Window's success is because the MS monopoly-leveraged dominance in effect made the Windows PC a sort of appliance as well) The new users, the mainstream press, and the Windows-centric world will of course all point to Canonical's Ubuntu Unity as the tipping point at which the Linux world finally "got it" and at long, long last created a decent, practical operating system suitable for employment by ordinary people and pragmatic geeks. One "as good as" or better than Microsoft Windows, almost as easy as Apple's OSs, but in some ways better (if not as cool), and credible as a commercial or consumer-grade product, because it has a marketing-oriented company -- and money -- behind it. Are we "old guard" Linux users upset? Complaining? Yes. But I don't get the impression that it's because Unity uses a UI that we don't care for. Ubuntu is a distro that established Linux-users have come to care about, and become a representative (one might say ;-) canonical) distro, and in a very real way has even come to represent Linux to the rest of the world, And everyone acknowledges that for many devices (phones, tablets, netbooks and touch-screens), this style of interface is useful and even necessary. But the real trouble is how the transition is being done. I'm not even talking about democracy, here. In fact, if Unity was being implemented in such a way that users could easily switch between the new and old UI paradigms according to hardware, task and workflow, I'm certain that everybody would be cheering most enthusiastically (aside from a few caveats about bloat). After all, even the oldest of old school Linuxers would probably spend 50%, 75% or 90% of their time in Unity when using a netbook or tablet, if they could just flip between the two according to circumstance. But the removal of the accustomed and relied-upon option, from software one has come to rely upon, rankles -- this is the kind of behaviour on expects from outfits such as Apple, Microsoft or Sony. The old market segment that Canonical based it's growth and development on may move on and find something better suited, after being treated this way. (note that the aforementioned Mint appears to be moving to a Debian core). The displaced former loyalists will find alternatives, and will still be resentful. But the market that Canonical appears to be targeting won't know and won't care -- and thus Ubuntu may well and probably will indeed become "widely adopted and loved" by a much larger market. |
| vainrveenr May 05, 2011 11:04 PM EDT |
Quoting:I think the point here was that the general public won't even care -- the Unity/Gnome3/app-style interface will be seen as sophisticated, easy-to-use and somehow more "polished" than what most of the Linux old guard would prefer. And maybe even Cool, too.This from a so-called member of "the general public"??; a self-claimed impartial, distro-neutral, and "old guard" Linux user??; someone intentionally and effectively dedicated to using and promoting Ubuntu/Unity?? Quoting:The new users, the mainstream press, and the Windows-centric world will of course all point to Canonical's Ubuntu Unity as the tipping point at which the Linux world finally "got it" and at long, long last created a decent, practical operating system suitable for employment by ordinary people and pragmatic geeks. One "as good as" or better than Microsoft Windows, almost as easy as Apple's OSs, but in some ways better (if not as cool), and credible as a commercial or consumer-grade product, because it has a marketing-oriented company -- and money -- behind it.No, actually there is little "of course" to the claim that Canonical's Ubuntu Unity is or was the very "tipping point at which the Linux world finally "got it"" The mainstream press, and the Windows-centric world can just as easily point to the "marketing-oriented" companies Red Hat and Novell for their commercial offerings RHEL and SLED/SLES respectively. The "decent, practical operating system[s] suitable for employment by ordinary people" would "of course" be the offshoots of Red Hat's and Novell's commercial offerings; namely the highly popular (and rightly so!) Fedora and OpenSUSE. For "pragmatic geeks" there is ("of course!") the Red Hat offshoot CentOS. As CentOS is described at its DistroWatch description http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=centos : Quoting:CentOS as a group is a community of open source contributors and users. Typical CentOS users are organisations and individuals that do not need strong commercial support in order to achieve successful operation. CentOS is 100% compatible rebuild of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux, in full compliance with Red Hat's redistribution requirements. CentOS is for people who need an enterprise class operating system stability without the cost of certification and support. Quoting:And everyone acknowledges that for many devices (phones, tablets, netbooks and touch-screens), this style of interface is useful and even necessary.Incorrect. AAMOF the Unity "style of interface" is not even necessary" for Android, an OS used on more and more small devices......as others reading these LXer comments can readily attest. Quoting:thus Ubuntu may well and probably will indeed become "widely adopted and loved" by a much larger marketAnd yet the same claim is just as equally valid that another non-Ubuntu and non-Unity distro will indeed "become ""widely adopted and loved" by a much larger market"". Such a widely-adopted interface could be a future shining&successful example of GNOME or KDE, or even the outside chance of XFCE, LXDE, or another as-yet-unconsidered non-Unity interface. The starter of this thread wrote Quoting:It[Fluxbox] reminds me of when Linux used to be fun, before I went to these "desktops"It seems much less likely that Fluxbox will become as widely-adopted an interface as will "these desktops" the starter refers to. -- The point here IS that bona fide members of the so-called "general public" may not care what alternate non-Unity interface is used -- whether directly heavily-promoted as "Cool" or otherwise -- as long as the interface comfortably and maybe even intuitively allows them to carry out what they perceive the need to carry out, sans an overdemanding learning curve (the emphasis decidedly intended!) |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!