Ubuntu Tablets: Less Jarring Than Windows 8?

Keep the code, separate the UIs by thelamecamel · 2013-02-20 01:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

Now I finally see what Shuttleworth's been meaning when he says the same applications run on all form factors - as a developer, you separate the logic from the UI, and write three UIs: one for phone, one for tablet, and one for desktop. Until now I thought "nice in concept, but what's the point?". But if your device itself suddenly switches from a phone or tablet to a desktop, then your app can keep running and switch UIs on the fly.

What I really find neat is how tablet apps can become phone apps when docked on the side, for multitasking. This finally looks like a tablet that's not purely for consuming content.

Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by sapphire+wyvern · 2013-02-20 01:45 · Score: 1

What I really find neat is how tablet apps can become phone apps when docked on the side, for multitasking.
Hmm, that _is_ a cunning piece of design. A bit like Metro's app docking but actually useful and less sucky.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by ByOhTek · 2013-02-20 01:54 · Score: 4, Informative

Separating UI from logic is a design paradigm that is well over 10 years old. It's generally a good idea, not just for different form factors like this, but for cross platform apps where you may not have a good UI library across all target platforms.

--
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 02:01 · Score: 1

If not, then as a programmer, you failed programming 101. my software can handle the time suddenly jumping 20 million years ahead or behind.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by blackest_k · 2013-02-20 02:14 · Score: 2

certainly it is a beginning, if the graphical tool kits can be expanded so they can present the interface in a manner which reflects the mode of the tablet. Even the user interface could be changed easily enough as it is many of us have at least a couple of options for desktop environments that are only a login away.
I like the idea of an ubuntu tablet since it almost certainly means it can be more. It almost certainly will be capable of running android maybe similar to running virtualbox in seamless mode. I can already run ubuntu on my android tablet as a dualboot but it isn't that good unless i bring a keyboard and mouse into the mix.
On the plus side hopefully there are going to be some decent tablets with open hardware around which new interfaces can be developed.

--
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by crazyjj · 2013-02-20 03:07 · Score: 4, Interesting

Separating UI from logic is a design paradigm that is well over 10 years old.
Yeah, but in practice has anyone ever been able to get it to work across radically different platforms? I mean, you're talking about moving on the fly from the ARM architecture with low memory, weak video drivers, etc. of a tablet to a full-on desktop system--just by changing the UI? Sounds like a great idea, but implementing it would be a fucking nightmare. It's hard enough as it is just trying to support all the possible desktop configurations.

--
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by FireFury03 · 2013-02-20 03:10 · Score: 4, Interesting

Now I finally see what Shuttleworth's been meaning when he says the same applications run on all form factors - as a developer, you separate the logic from the UI, and write three UIs: one for phone, one for tablet, and one for desktop. Until now I thought "nice in concept, but what's the point?". But if your device itself suddenly switches from a phone or tablet to a desktop, then your app can keep running and switch UIs on the fly.
What I really find neat is how tablet apps can become phone apps when docked on the side, for multitasking. This finally looks like a tablet that's not purely for consuming content.
The thing is, I'm not convinced you actually want to have a separate UI... The Microsoft strategy of shoving a phone/tablet UI on a desktop or a desktop UI on a phone/tablet is clearly moronic, but I think there is some middle-ground where you can design a UI that works well for all the hardware.
For one thing, there doesn't seem to be a clear distinction between phone/tablet/laptop/desktop - if we look at the hardware, all of these devices have varying screen sizes and they can all have varying combinations of input technologies - my phone has a keyboard, some laptops have touch screens, you can connect a keyboard and mouse to a tablet. What we have is more like a continuum:
- phones tend to have small touch screens with no keyboard (but some phones are practically big enough to be verging on "small tablet" size, some phones have keyboards and trackballs, pretty much any android phone can have a bluetooth/usb mouse and keyboard attached to it). Many phones can also be plugged into external monitors.
- tablets tend to be a bit bigger than phones (but there isn't a lot of difference between a small tablet and a large phone). They have touch screens, but again, you can connect keyboards and mice to them, plug them into external screens, etc.
- laptops are often, again, a bit bigger than tablets. But again, there's a cross over here - a small laptop may have the same screen size as a large tablet. They have keyboards and trackpads and you can connect external keyboards, mice, screens to them. But many laptops also have touch screens - what's the difference between a touch screen laptop and a tablet with a keyboard and mouse?
- desktops are usually treated the same as laptops. Again, often bigger screens (but not always), they have keyboards and mice but nothing stopping you having a touch screen.
So where do you draw the line - at what point do you say "we're now on a tablet" and switch to the tablet interface? What's the justification for switching the *entire* UI to a tablet interface? Is it down to the input devices available? If I unplug the keyboard and mouse then am I suddenly incapable of using multple windows at once? Similarly, if I connect a keyboard and mouse to a tablet, do I suddenly expect to lose all the touch screen controls?
As for screen sizes - certainly as the screen gets smaller I'm more likely to want applications full-screen; and conversely for large screens I'm more likely to want applications in windows. But this isn't necessarilly the case for all applications. For example, even on a tablet, I may want an instant messaging conversation to be displayed at the same time as surfing the web, so enforcing full-screen-everything seems like the wrong approach.

--
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Junta · 2013-02-20 03:29 · Score: 1

You mean like what happens all the time in a suspending laptop already? Or when you get SIGSTOPPED?

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Junta · 2013-02-20 03:39 · Score: 1

Problem is that it is pure concept and mock up for now. Without an actual implementation, it's hard to judge how 'seamless' it truly ends up being and then also how hard is it for a developer to use correctly. There are incredible mockups from companies on a daily basis that never get realized. It's one idea to have a good idea on how something should work, it's another to actually make that happen. Another issue is that in the mobile arena in particular, app persistence is actually rare compared to desktop. Users are being trained to not care that an app they were running has completely lost state while not being tended to. I think this is sad, but unfortunately for companies like Ubuntu the strategy seems to work. Finally, Canonical has an awfully steep uphill batle to fight. If all it took were a compelling technical platform, WebOS would have gotten much further. Ecosystem and all the facets of the phone platform users take for granted (e.g. massive battery optimizations) will kill them if done wrong. Basically, I fully expect this to go the Ubuntu TV way, nowhere.

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Re: Keep the code, separate the UIs by lwriemen · 2013-02-20 03:42 · Score: 1

Try well over 30 years old. MVC came out in the 70s.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 04:07 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yeah, but in practice has anyone ever been able to get it to work across radically different platforms?
An entire segment has done it, in practice: all the network programmers.
Question: What kind of machine does the client have? What OS does it run?
Answer: I don't know. I can't ever know. Therefore, as a rigid matter of policy, I don't care.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Anne+Thwacks · 2013-02-20 06:38 · Score: 1

I, for one, welcome our new XFCE overlords, no wait, in Soviet Ubuntu ...
Damn, I think that coffee was caffiene free.

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by bondsbw · 2013-02-20 07:05 · Score: 1

When Microsoft announced Windows 8, I thought that was the entire point of the snap view. Every "Metro" app would be able to run as a tablet app or a Windows Phone 8 app, and snap view would run the phone mode on the tablet.
Then I was disappointed.
Microsoft keeps hinting that a near future version of Windows Phone will have apps that can be cross-compiled as tablet apps, but I'll believe it when I see it. For now, Ubuntu has taken the lead in this regard.

--
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Jerslan · 2013-02-20 07:17 · Score: 1

I'm not convinced you actually want to have a separate UI... ... I think there is some middle-ground where you can design a UI that works well for all the hardware.
Sure, for some types of apps you would want to go this route. Though Android discovered the hard way that people with tablets often don't just want that tablet to be cluttered with enlarged phone apps (ie: scaled up). MVC allows you to have separate UI's so that you can take advantage of larger screen spaces and the extra UI features they enable, while only having one set of program logic. This is how iOS Universal Apps work. You have one set of UI's for iPad and another for iPhone/iPod-Touch. The iPad has several UI Features that iPhone & iPod Touch don't (because their limited screen space makes these UI Features impractical).
Re: Keep the code, separate the UIs by ByOhTek · 2013-02-20 07:23 · Score: 1

well over 30 years old is a subset of well over 10 years old...
I only started working on this stuff 15 years ago. The post I was responding to was acting as if it was something new, which it is not.

--
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by notknown86 · 2013-02-20 07:56 · Score: 1

The problem is that somebody has to write the other 2 UI's. Keeping in mind that:

- Many of the existing apps on Ubuntu aren't written by inherently Ubuntu developers, but by cross platform, Linux developers. i.e. small existing dedicated dev community
- Ubuntu has alienated a fair portion of the Linux community of late. i.e. shrinking existing dev community
- The desktop experience stinks, in the estimation of many. i.e. questionable prospects for dev community growth

Where are these tri-headed apps going to come from?
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by maxwell+demon · 2013-02-20 09:33 · Score: 1

Why would you scale them up? There's no reason why all apps have to be fullscreen all the time.
One possible way to handle this could be to give an app a "natural size" (possibly user configurable, but with a sane default), and if the screen is larger than the application's natural size, it starts windowed, otherwise it starts fullscreen. A phone app would likely have a relatively small natural size, while a web browser will have a relatively large one. And a movie player might have a natural size large enough that it starts fullscreen even on large desktop displays.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by AmiMoJo · 2013-02-20 09:39 · Score: 1

Have you looked at phones and tablets lately? Quad core processors, gigabytes of RAM, fast flash memory storage and high resolution screens backed by powerful GPUs are the norm.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 10:34 · Score: 1

to bad they had to shit all over the desktop UI and dumb it right down for it to work with that principle.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by monkeyhybrid · 2013-02-20 13:08 · Score: 1

A well made Android app is able to adapt it's UI for different size / density screens too, or have completely different UI layouts for different devices. The more popular apps do this very well and it's not hard to design for. Unfortunately a lot of Android developers still design primarily for phones and leave tablet owners with the same layout. It's getting better though.
I'm mainly an Android user and developer but love the way Ubuntu for tablets manages this side by side app stuff. Same with Surface - it's the one feature that I actually like from what I have seen of Surface tablets. I don't think it will be too long before a future Android release enables a similar feature, and when it does, it should be fairly trivial for Android app developers to make use of it because the ground work has already been laid. I'd say it's in a better position to do so than iOS apps in fact, because Android developers already have to cater for an almost limitless variety of screen sizes where as the few variations in iOS devices means many iOS apps have UIs designed for just two or three variants and are not as flexible (black bars on iPhone 5 for example).
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by monkeyhybrid · 2013-02-20 13:19 · Score: 1

It's not that hard to do. Current Android / iOS apps adapt on the fly to different screen orientations and can adjust their layout for different size / density devices. It just takes a slightly different approach from the outset, a bit like responsive web design - you change the way you think about the UI constraints and end up with a UI that adapts to practically any size, orientation or pixel density.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by Curate · 2013-02-20 13:23 · Score: 1

Hmm, that _is_ a cunning piece of design. A bit like Metro's app docking but actually useful and less sucky.
Yes it's a cunning design. But don't fall for all of Shuttleworth's marketing hype, even if he does phrase it very eloquently. He is not only a cunning designer, but a cunning linguist too.
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by GrantRobertson · 2013-02-20 17:49 · Score: 1

In a way...
From what I know, which may not be enough, the network programmers succeed at this because they use virtual machines that have a standardized "machine." What I am also pretty sure of (though not positive) is that - other than Windows Terminal Servers and Citrix-type servers - most of those applications running on servers are, well, server applications. They have no user interface. The user interface part of the application runs on another machine or in a browser somewhere else. In many ways, it is that user interface that is "in charge" even though the server may do most of the work.
In most of the Model-View-Controller designs I have seen it seems that folks keep the View and Controller parts linked pretty tightly together. Only the model is separate. Sometimes, the model is then stored and ran from the server while the view and controller are remote. Even if they run in a browser and the code is fed to that browser from the server, the controller and view software are both still running in the browser together.
Now, perhaps this has already been done, but I like to think "out loud" as it were: What if you put the controller on the "server" too? What if the model and the controller were running in separate virtual machines that had been minimized to only include what that model and that controller needed to run? What if those minimized virtual-servers were designed to be live-migratable from one physical machine to another just like many virtualization managers can do? What if that controller were also in charge of where the user interface appeared? It could send a copy of the user interface to whichever physical machine could connect to it. Perhaps more than one at once. The controller would decide how to construct the UI based on a standardized specification it had been given indicating what "controls" were really needed on any particular device and some style guidelines, also specified in some standardized style language (similar to but more app-centric than CSS). Now, that controller would be in communication with another controller that works to keep track of which devices you are interacting with. You put down your tablet and pick up your phone. The app-controller would notice that you weren't interacting and ask the device-controller to let it know if you start interacting with a different device. The phone, which has been registered with the device-controller but has no inkling of the app already installed on it, indicates to the device controller that you are interacting with it. The device controller tells that app-controller and that app-controller sends an appropriate UI to the phone via an established interface. Initially, the UI is just a dialog that asks if you want to continue interacting via the phone. This could be nothing but a notification on the notification bar. Once you decide to continue interacting, the app-controller could send just enough of the UI to the phone as you need to interact appropriately. Only the UI. The model and controller stay where they are unless ... ... unless you take your show really on the road, where you normally wouldn't have access to that model and controller. Say on a car trip. So, the device detects that you have moved to some location where you may likely move away from the current location of access to the model and controller. Say, you walk out your front door, or start to move around in a manner that indicates you are putting on your coat. The device tells the device-controller which tells the model and app-controller. They tell their respective servers that they may need to move and their servers begin replicating them to a physical server that will be able to continue running those "virtual machines," even if only in an abbreviated manner. For instance, only a subset of the model may be replicated. Then, if you do actually start to move where you would loose access, the virtual machines containing the model and app-controller are live-migrated to the new location, perhaps a server in your car,
Re:Keep the code, separate the UIs by cynyr · 2013-02-24 04:49 · Score: 1

nothing i have written has had any care what amount of time has gone by, so yes, it should all "just work".

--
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.

Why care about the transition? by Threni · 2013-02-20 01:21 · Score: 1

Does he think many people are going to go from the Linux desktop to the tablet? Or that they'll use his tablet and then get it on their desktop? He shouldn't waste his time. He should be aiming for the mass market - people who've never heard of, or used, any form of Linux on the desktop. Even linux users think Unity is a piece of crap; I certainly did, and dumped it in favour of Mint, and I've recently bought a Nexus 10. There's no way I'm paying for that sort of experience on a tablet. I'd focus on making it usable and not worry about bridging any gaps.

Re:Why care about the transition? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 01:26 · Score: 1

Unity is not that bad, let's not exaggarate. Newer versions are getting speedier and more customizable so I expect most of the Ubuntu-using Linuxers will accept it.
That said, I also installed Linux Mint on my primary machine but I have Ubuntu/Unity on others. Unity works fairly well on my ARM Chromebook even without hw accelerated X.
Re:Why care about the transition? by dc29A · 2013-02-20 01:45 · Score: 5, Insightful

Unity is not that bad, let's not exaggarate. Newer versions are getting speedier and more customizable so I expect most of the Ubuntu-using Linuxers will accept it.
That said, I also installed Linux Mint on my primary machine but I have Ubuntu/Unity on others. Unity works fairly well on my ARM Chromebook even without hw accelerated X.
Speedier? Male cow excrement! On my hexacore desktop with SSD, Unity Dash takes a good half second to open. Similar features that are instant on Windows 8, OS X, Gnome 3 or KDE. If by any chance I have a maximized window open, it can take a good 2 seconds. I like the idea of Unity, I like the concept of Unity, but it's a slow piece of shit.
Disclaimer: I use Ubuntu both at home and work.
Re:Why care about the transition? by thelamecamel · 2013-02-20 01:57 · Score: 1

On my hexacore desktop with SSD, Unity Dash takes a good half second to open.
Yeah, alas it seems to rely pretty heavily on 3D acceleration. If you don't have 3D acceleration then it tries some sort of software rendering that is S-L-O-W (10 seconds sometimes to open the dash!) even on fast computers. And if the dash has been swapped out of RAM then again it's slow to activate. On my computers with supported 3D acceleration it's usually a very pleasant experience. On my new netbook... I grudgingly use 12.04 and the 2D version.
Re:Why care about the transition? by Lumpy · 2013-02-20 02:05 · Score: 2

Unity as a UI IS bad when used in a traditional computer. Same as how Windows 8 utterly sucks to those of us that do work on our computers. I have 3 24" monitors with at least 6 windows open at once and I need them all active at once. the Desktop UI had not get in my way. Under windows 8 it does. Under Unity it does.
Separating out the Desktop UI to be different between professionals and home users is a HUGE mistake when it comes to productivity. There are a LOT of really stupid changes in Unity. the scrollbars being 2 pixels wide but "POP UP" is frustrating to everyone that uses them. the UI taking over all the freaking time is annoying. And annoying = less productivity and money lost.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:Why care about the transition? by Lumpy · 2013-02-20 02:07 · Score: 5, Funny

I am sure his Hexacore with SSD is using a $19.00 Intel non 3d video card and only 512 meg of ram...
People that build big machines always forget to install ram or video cards.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:Why care about the transition? by jones_supa · 2013-02-20 02:10 · Score: 3, Insightful

Every time a new Ubuntu release is coming, I hear that Unity or Compiz have "performance improvements" and excitedly go test it, but there never is significant improvements. Just yesterday I gave the Raring Ringtail daily build (2013-02-19) a spin, but the same sluggishness was there, including the always-slow opening Dash, which you mentioned. I would otherwise like to use Unity, but I can't waste all my system resources to basic desktop handling.
Re:Why care about the transition? by jones_supa · 2013-02-20 02:13 · Score: 1

The slowness of Unity is there with systems that have 3D acceleration working just fine.
Re:Why care about the transition? by thelamecamel · 2013-02-20 02:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

If they can't get good linux drivers for their graphics card, then it's very possible they're stuck with no 3D acceleration. Depends whether the rig was intentionally built for linux or not.
Re:Why care about the transition? by chill · 2013-02-20 02:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

You weren't paying attention. He isn't pushing Linux, he's pushing Ubuntu. The entirety of the system here is what he is selling.
The point of the transition is that the tablet physically becomes the desktop when you simply add a keyboard and mouse, probably via Bluetooth. You don't drop your tablet when getting home or to the office, you just dock it. There is just one device. Well, two as you'll also have a phone.
What this seems to hope to achieve is a seamless computing experience with no "put this down, boot the PC, do work, shut PC down, grab tablet and go".
Sort of a "one device to rule them all". After watching the video, I was far more intrigued than I expected to be. I fully expect my reaction to be "what a stupid fucking idea", but instead found myself saying "damn, that actually looks nice. I want one."

--
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Re:Why care about the transition? by synapse7 · 2013-02-20 02:28 · Score: 1

I very much like cinnamon also, but I am of the old thinking that a taskbar with my running tasks is a good thing, but new paradigms would suggest otherwise.
Re:Why care about the transition? by ais523 · 2013-02-20 02:32 · Score: 2

The slowness in the Dash opening is, as far as I can tell, due to overuse of Zeitgeist (which is overengineered for what it does). So making the window manager faster isn't going to help there, and in general, it seems difficult to fix without a rethink of how that part of the desktop is implemented.
(FWIW, I use Unity as my primary desktop/window manager; I really like what it's trying to be, and it's quite a bit of the way there already, but there are a huge number of rough edges and it's still pretty slow and buggy.)

--
(1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
Re:Why care about the transition? by dc29A · 2013-02-20 02:34 · Score: 2

If they can't get good linux drivers for their graphics card, then it's very possible they're stuck with no 3D acceleration. Depends whether the rig was intentionally built for linux or not.
Work:
Intel HD3000. Slow dash.
Home:
Intel HD4000. Slow dash.
NVidia 8400 GS or GTX 550 Ti with nouveau or proprietary drivers: slow dash, slow/choppy desktop preview.
ATI 5450 or 4200 (chipset VGA) with galeon or proprietary drivers: slow dash.
Again, no issues with other desktop environments. 12 Gb+ RAM too.
Re:Why care about the transition? by BitZtream · 2013-02-20 03:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

I am not a Linux fan, however if Ubuntu was to make a phone that had the apps I want (Just because you have an app that 'does the same thing' doesn't mean I want to use it) to use, and was just a phone normally that when I got to work I could just plugin the monitor and power, bluetooth keyboard and mouse and it instantly switches the display to desktop mode and I continue working just as if I'd brought my laptop ...
I'd considering use Linux for that. I'd prefer that they make OSX an ARM platform as well, so people made fat x86/ARM binaries and I could just use iOS on the phone display and OSX when in desktop mode, with apps just switching UIs between them just like the UI changes when the screen rotates.
I want a laptop phone. I want my laptop inside my phone. I DO NOT want my phone to behave like a desktop. I DO NOT WANT my desktop to behave like a phone/tablet. I want one device that switches between the two so that as long as I have my phone, I always have my laptop.
I would give up a fully decked Retina MacBook Pro in exchange for said device in a heartbeat, even if it ran on a slow ass ARM processor (compared to my i7 laptop) for the privilege of having only one device.
You may not realize it yet, but a single converged device that does both IS the mass market. Thats where its going to go eventually. Its just a question of when we get to the point of having enough CPU power for low enough energy and size usage requirements that we get the performance we demand in our phones.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:Why care about the transition? by poetmatt · 2013-02-20 03:23 · Score: 1

Maybe 5 years ago, but this has been fairly steadily improving lately. So I'd fail to find that an excuse for anything, as dc29A fails to explain as he uses cards that are so old I'm surprised they can even handle dash. It isn't a serious rig.
Re:Why care about the transition? by julian67 · 2013-02-20 03:28 · Score: 1

I find the same. Using Maemo on a Nokia N810 and playing with Meego on my Eee PC showed the good sense of a UI that is intelligently designed to work well with wide screens, especially with GPU accelerated compositing. Unity has a few rough edges but conceptually it works, and the execution is catching up with the concept with each release. But it is dog slow, to the point of being much too annoying to use, with lags, latencies and lock ups. I've only tried it with modest hardware such as Intel Atom with integrated GMA 3150 and a desktop with integrated Nvidia 8200 (with nvidia binary driver). On my Eee PC it pretty much kills the GPU accelerated video playback. The same modest hardware can run Gnome Shell composited desktop rather better (but still a bit annoying). Meanwhile, using Xfce's software composited UI on Debian lets applications launch like a sprinter out of the blocks..."on the 'B' of Bang!" as Linford Christie used to describe his starts. The hardware is modest, but surely dual cores and GPU acceleration offer more than enough to open a notepad type app or a menu or a terminal emulator without any perceptible lag?
I find intriguing the idea of a single portable device fulfilling the roles of phone, tablet, desktop and TV tuner/home media hub, with applications automatically presenting a suitable UI for each role. But I suspect that running Unity will require so many CPUs and GPUs that the portability aspect will entail the owner retaining staff to carry the sacred device, and to waft it with yak-tail whisks to keep it cool in use (in the style of the courts of ancient despots of the Orient). At least there will be something to look at while waiting for gedit to open.
Re:Why care about the transition? by poetmatt · 2013-02-20 03:39 · Score: 1

When you combine this concept with the asus padfone concept, you get a "one device to rule them all", almost entirely. I wouldn't give it more than 3-5 years for a full convergence of devices in this fashion.
Re:Why care about the transition? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 03:54 · Score: 1

The problem is, I don't want a tablet and a phone [two devices], because it's really three devices: my laptop. I want one device with a BT headset. If I could get HSPA/LTE wireless with voice/sms on my MacBook Pro, I'd have utopia. I have my Samsung GT8.9 set up like that. It's kludgy: the screensaver mutes phone calls, but it works. The tablet sits in my backpack and I can make/take voice-calls; then I can search the web, answer email, entertain children. No BT keyboard (I haven't tried), but it's close enough for horseshoes. UBUNTU won't get my attention for a tablet that fails to operate as a cellphone.
Re:Why care about the transition? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 04:10 · Score: 1

Don't generalize, what you think is not fact
Don't project, you are not "everyone".
Re:Why care about the transition? by Threni · 2013-02-20 04:10 · Score: 1, Troll

> Unity is not that bad, let's not exaggarate
Not that bad? I used Ubuntu for 2 or 3 years as my main desktop OS. It was my first Linux I used that way, previously using Windows (for many years). As soon as Unity turned up, I hated it. For one release it was an option, so I went back to stock. On the next release it wasn't an option, so I left for Mint.
So, no exaggeration at all. Like many, many other people it was the single reason we left in droves for another OS.
Re:Why care about the transition? by chill · 2013-02-20 04:28 · Score: 3, Insightful

E-mails, Facebook and all that other social media stuff is done thru a web browser. Windows has nothing to do with it, as the familiarity is in the browser and not the OS.
Witness Google's success with Chromebooks. For many people, the browser is the only interface they see.
My wife's laptop is Win7 and my desktop is Kubuntu. She is equally at home with both. The process on both is 100% identical. "Click the Firefox icon. Do whatever else -- Gmail, Hulu Plus, Amazon/Amazon Prime, Ebay, general browsing." Bookmarks are synced, both print to the same printer. The OS is rapidly becoming irrelevant.

--
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Re:Why care about the transition? by Anne+Thwacks · 2013-02-20 06:45 · Score: 1

I found it to be as slow as running Windows with malware, and only marginally less annoying. Hell, I have now loaded KDE and XFCE as well as gnome-shell, and choose according to my mood.
Shuttleworth should poor some money into XFCE95 - that is where the majority of users want to go!

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Re:Why care about the transition? by maxwell+demon · 2013-02-20 09:54 · Score: 1

The key is wirelessly so you could still use your phone as a phone while using the peripherals.
That will get interesting with phone support ...
"OK, now please reboot your computer ... hello? ... Hello? ... HELLO?"

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:Why care about the transition? by CAIMLAS · 2013-02-20 16:27 · Score: 1

I hate unity, but the question arises (after trying the latest on an ancient Eee901 netbook): WTF are you doing wrong? This lowly tablet doesn't even take that long to pull out the dash.

--
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Re:Why care about the transition? by socceroos · 2013-02-20 16:34 · Score: 1

The key is that you're using Ubuntu 12.10. Developers have acknowledged the speed degredation in this release, and it is planned to be vastly improved in 13.04. During the implementation of many of the new features in Unity 6.6 there were significant regressions while cleaning up code and readying for Unity Touch. This will be solved as a matter of priority - the whole phone to PC experience relies on it.
Re:Why care about the transition? by socceroos · 2013-02-20 16:38 · Score: 1

Asus Padphone + Ubuntu. Done. Plus, if you watch the video, you'd see they use the dialer on the tablet.
Re:Why care about the transition? by socceroos · 2013-02-20 16:39 · Score: 1

KDE will stay relevant. Semantic Desktop FTW.
Re:Why care about the transition? by Zontar+The+Mindless · 2013-02-20 18:07 · Score: 1

Back in the day, I used to do lots of system/shell scripting using JScript, and it never slowed anything down. You're telling me that Windows 2000 on contemporary hardware could handle this better than a modern Linux on modern kit?
Think about what you're saying, son.

--
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.

finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 01:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

provided that it isn't locked down, so we can disable all the snooping and logging canonical is doing these days...

and provided that it can be used without a mandatory online account. you should be able to use one anonymously, and pay for apps with an anonymous prepaid card (like a gaming card, etc).

and if open source (so we can see what they're doing. there's a lot of nosey apps out there) apps take off.

Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by thelamecamel · 2013-02-20 01:50 · Score: 4, Informative

Thankfully the snooping is going to remain optional (although still opt-out rather than opt-in). I've still got it turned off on my desktop, but reading documents like this (specifically the Data and metrics passed to the Smart Scopes service section) are a little reassuring, in that you can see that the developers are thinking about how to take only the data they need and are trying to protect it. I particularly like their (far-off) plans for sending location information: they won't send your exact co-ordinates like Google or Apple does - they'll round them off to maybe a 10km square because that level of location accuracy is probably not needed for the search. There's also a friendlier summary of the spec available.
That said, while this kind of fuck up is still happening, I'm going to keep online search off, despite being tempted by functionality like its iView (Aussie Hulu) support.
I too hope that you don't need an Ubuntu One account to use the tablet...
Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by dreamchaser · 2013-02-20 02:23 · Score: 1

You forgot about Ubuntu surveillance code that tracks searches unless you mean to use the guest account of your own tablet permanently.
Which part of "so we can disable all the snooping and logging canonical is doing these days" in the post you replied to didn't make sense?
Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by squiggleslash · 2013-02-20 02:25 · Score: 1

and provided that it can be used without a mandatory online account. you should be able to use one anonymously, and pay for apps with an anonymous prepaid card (like a gaming card, etc).

Experience suggests that mobile devices tend to be subjected to wipes and replacements more often than other device types, and with the general shift towards cloudiness and cloudification, that seems unlikely to change. On top of this, we're seeing the death of physical media, with mobile devices rarely having anything that could usefully be used to transfer preformatted data packages offline (yes, many - though not all - have SD cards of one sort or another, but you're not going to find $1 apps distributed on SD cards at a store.)
The fact is having a Google account with Android makes Android usable, I'd be frustraited and pissed off by now if simply changing phones was enough to ensure every app I bought either no longer worked, or needed to be manually copied using some torturous back-up process.
The world is changing, and unfortunately you can expect your computing to get more account-based, not less.

--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by Dr_Barnowl · 2013-02-20 02:32 · Score: 1

That's one plugin, for which there is a clear legal notice displayed, which also explains how to switch it off.
I just uninstalled the thing. If I want Amazon seeing my searches, I'll go browse their website.
Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by Antique+Geekmeister · 2013-02-20 02:59 · Score: 1

This is no longer feasible. Since they did it once, by default, and without graceful means to turn it off or putting clear labels on it, there is *nothing* that will stop them from doing it again or doing similar acts. And it's clear from his own statements about the problem that Mark Shuttleworth, as the leader of Ubuntu, does not understand what the problem is, so it's clear that security is an afterthought for him, not a critical part of what Ubuntu does.
It's like catching your wife in bed with a chicken. We don't *care* if the chicken is certified organic and free-range, it means your wife is into barnyard poultry, and it's only a matter of time until she brings home a goose that can break your arm.
Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by ThirdPrize · 2013-02-20 04:01 · Score: 1

Unfortunately it will be judged mainly on its performance. So it better be running on some nice kit if it wants to make an impression.

--
I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by Anne+Thwacks · 2013-02-20 06:52 · Score: 1

it's only a matter of time until she brings home a goose that can break your arm
You are obviously speaking from experience here!
I always suspected Unity caused sexual deviance - now we know it is true!

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Re:finally, a tablet that will be welcome here by Antique+Geekmeister · 2013-02-20 07:41 · Score: 1

Yes, but I'm referring to the use of geese as guard animals at US military bases. They're less expensive than dogs, and quite effective, and they *can* break your arms with their wings.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,961483,00.html

Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by zrbyte · 2013-02-20 01:33 · Score: 1, Insightful

Ok people. Please but any Unity hate posts in this thread. Thank you.

Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by div_2n · 2013-02-20 02:36 · Score: 2

I hated Unity at first. It was a buggy and foreign experience that made my desktop much less usable than I was used to on previous Linux experiences. Then many of the the most glaring bugs got worked out and I found out why alt+tab was so broken for multiple instances of the same app -- for same-app window switching, use alt+` instead.
There's still bugs, but they're slowly ironing it out. And about that foreign experience -- I have some older versions on another machine I rarely use. Recently, I fired that thing up to get some data off it. I felt just as foreign going back to the old as I did when I first encountered Unity. The lesson for me was that change can feel awkward, but as long as an interface isn't TOO clumsy, you can get used to it.
Maybe there are some power users out there that find missing shortcuts, but I'm just not that heavy on shortcuts. For the most part, Unity is fine for me. I just don't care enough to make it that big of an issue once I figured out how to replicate my old workflow.
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by Knuckles · 2013-02-20 02:55 · Score: 2

I'm really surprised, this story has by far the smallest ratio of irrational Ubuntu hate posts of any Ubuntu story in the past year. This must mean that Shuttleworth is onto something - and in fact I do find it difficult to find major flaws with the stuff he said in TFA. I found the whole idea appealing from the start, and if this plan works out, I'll be the first in line to get an Ubuntu TV, phone, tablet, laptop, and/or whatever I have to buy to finally get seamless free software-based unification for my devices from phone to TV.

--
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by Dr_Barnowl · 2013-02-20 03:45 · Score: 2

The alt-` thing is better than the standard Windows alt-tab behaviour... the alt-tab behaviour is alas, different to Windows, which is why it "feels wrong" to those of us who have laboured there a long time.
But yes, the main reason people hate on it, as far as I can make out, is that it's different.
They moaned soooo much about it when the close / minimize buttons were moved to the top left. But you think about it - it's the most efficient placement. What's the first thing you want to do when you close an app? Most of the time, open another one.
Windows : Close button top right, start button bottom left
OSX : Close button top left, start button bottom edge
Unity : Close button top left, start button (Dash) top left
Unity has the lowest mouse travel.
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by div_2n · 2013-02-20 03:49 · Score: 1

Yes, the top-right window control feels clumsy and inefficient when I do have to use Windows for work purposes.
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by Knuckles · 2013-02-20 05:10 · Score: 1

I don't think there is a lack of shortcuts, in fact I find that Unity has the best and most accessible shortcut system for window management of any UI I've used. Press and hold the Super key for the overview.

--
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by Deliveranc3 · 2013-02-20 08:12 · Score: 1

Idea for UI designers, two more common functionality elements Mute and Always on Top. Should be up there with minimize, max, and close.
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by maxwell+demon · 2013-02-20 10:13 · Score: 1

What does it mean to mute a window?

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by maxwell+demon · 2013-02-20 10:15 · Score: 1

This must mean that Shuttleworth is onto something
Or that many people moved away from Ubuntu and don't really care any more.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by Knuckles · 2013-02-20 10:30 · Score: 1

Since Monday, when they found it wrong that Ubuntu will address the concerns that the same people had (correctly) demanded for the past year or so? I don't think so.

--
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:Unity hate in 1, 2, 3... by Dr_Barnowl · 2013-02-21 02:56 · Score: 1

Mute the sound that application is making - that's actually a really good idea. Applications do have individual volume controls on both Windows and Linux (PulseAudio) now, so not having to enter the detailed sound mixer as you do now would seem useful.
Flash video understands you would like to mute often and provides a button.
Always-on-top is in the context menu for Unity, along with Always on Visible Workspace.

we need a tablet emulator by e**(i+pi)-1 · 2013-02-20 01:34 · Score: 1

Certainly good to add more variety. For me a tablet is like a monitor. It just has to work and not do more what it is asked for, like user tracking or information collecting or content change or adaptation. What would be nice is to have an emulator application on a desktop which looks and behaves from the outside like a tablet. In a time, when news outlets or search engines more and more also adapt their pages to the medium (never mind the look and feel, the disturbing part is also change of content), it would be good to have a tool, which allows to catch possible leaks and see what is done when a "tablet" is recognized. Changing the user agent in the browser can not do that yet.

Re:we need a tablet emulator by gl4ss · 2013-02-20 02:18 · Score: 1

extending desktop to mobile devices has been done quite a few times now already.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by Merk42 · 2013-02-20 01:43 · Score: 2

Good thing the UIs aren't 100% the same then.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2013-02-20 01:43 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by ShieldW0lf · 2013-02-20 01:48 · Score: 5, Informative

When I sit down at my PC, I want an interface that is designed for use on a PC, using a mouse and keyboard, and a large display.

When I pick up my phone or tablet, I want an interface that is designed for use on a phone or tablet, using finger swipes, taps, and gestures, and a small display.

THESE ARE TWO COMPLETELY FUCKING DIFFERENT THINGS.

Stop trying to make them the same.

Read page two, doofus:

"Developers will be able to ship a single application binary which itself can respond to the different form factors," Shuttleworth said. "You will be able to write a single application binary that can run on a phone, or a tablet, a PC, or a TV, and it will declare to the system which of those form factors it can support and we will present the appropriate interface for that application on each of those form factors."

--
-1 Uncomfortable Truth

I only see Ubuntu Duplo by Errol+backfiring · 2013-02-20 01:52 · Score: 2

Reading the Ubuntu site, I only see phone and tablet apps, no desktop programs. While a video player often looks "special" on a desktop (and I hate that, video players already eat enough resources when playing videos), a word processor must not. Or a CAD program. Or a spreadsheet. My e-mail client on my phone looks totally different than on my desktop and I want to keep it that way. I much rather configure my phone, tablet and desktop separately than having one config to overrule them all and in infeasibility bind them.

This is the opposite of Ubuntu for Android, where you get a desktop if you plug desktop hardware (through a docking device) into your phone. If that desktop is a real destop (XFCE, LXDE or whatever, not Unity), that would by far more practical.

--
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!

Tiling by mutube · 2013-02-20 01:58 · Score: 2

I'd love a good modern tiling WM for desktop/mobile/phone - with configurable numbers of panes/arrangements on different devices (i.e. a single one on a phone, plug in an external monitor and get a split horizontal with sub-panes on the right.)

Unfortunately Unity (and Ubuntu) ain't it.

--
Python coder | PyQt Applications | Writer

Re:Tiling by mutube · 2013-02-20 07:11 · Score: 1

Says someone who doesn't have a Galaxy Note.
I meant (but didn't write clearly) that on a small screen you'd be using a single 'tile'.

--
Python coder | PyQt Applications | Writer
Re:Tiling by CAIMLAS · 2013-02-20 16:41 · Score: 1

I've been thinking about this. In my mind's eye, Awesome might be well configured for something like that, simply because it's written in Lua and pretty adaptable for things like eg. widgets. But I don't know the language or the wm well enough to know the answer to whether it would be adaptable for a touchscreen device without much of a headache: I'm guessing not.
Personally, things like this new Ubuntu framework only have limited applicability unless I can get my choice of window manager/DE once we switch over to full "desktop" mode.

--
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by Anonymous Coward · 2013-02-20 02:27 · Score: 1

its easy to design for both these days

Even the events based system that needs to equate the difference between mouse, and touch are being unified.
Look at the the latest w3c specifications. Under the hood the system abstracts the two so you only program for one API for this.
http://www.w3.org/2012/pointerevents/

And as far as the layout, you can use responsive design patterns to easily achieve this by detecting the screen size and dpi and adjusting he layout accordingly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design

These two principle existing NOW for browsers, and they can easily be applied to QML in Ubuntu.
And for web apps in Ubuntu they will use them

Seriously its a shame that technical people that are lambasting Mark and the organisation over this dont know that what he and the organisation is proposing is easily possible AND its a fantastic way forward for Ubuntu users.

Hardware Partner by robmv · 2013-02-20 02:28 · Score: 5, Interesting

Shuttleworth also addressed the fragmentation problem faced by Android. He says manufacturers and carriers don't want to fall into that trap again, and that they've been receptive to the idea of leaving the core of Ubuntu alone while tweaking their individual services instead.

And this shows how much Mr. Shuttleworth doesn't get the phone and tablets manufacturers and carriers and why there is no hardware partner and in my opinion they will not have one soon, like Ubuntu TV still doesn't have one. The reason Android took off is because Google was very careful to rebuild a lot of common Linux distribution modules by Apache licensed ones, for example the libc library. Manufactures and carriers want full control, they tolerate the GPL in the Linux kernel because they have no other viable option, but they don't like it (I am talking about them, I am not saying that I hate the GPL before people start implying that). Do you think Samsung will be happy to be forced to share their Android modifications that allow multiple applications (some vetted ones) on the same screen with all other OEMs?

These words of Mr. Shuttleworth only gives me hints that they have no secret hardware partner

Re:Hardware Partner by robmv · 2013-02-20 02:32 · Score: 1

and by the way if some OEMs don't want to "fall again" on the Android "fragmentation trap" it is more easy for them to stop modifying base Android that switch to Ubuntu, so this sounds like a marketing lie to me
Re:Hardware Partner by pmontra · 2013-02-20 02:50 · Score: 1

Unity is copyrighted by Canonical so they can multiple license it. It is GPL3 by default but anything else for anybody they make a deal with.
This means they could license their code to Samsung so that Samsung can make all the changes it wants without sharing them back to the world. Probably Canonical will ask some money for the privilege.
Re:Hardware Partner by robmv · 2013-02-20 03:05 · Score: 1

And Unity is only a module of an Ubuntu installation, there are many dependencies that aren't copyrighted by Canonical
Re:Hardware Partner by Dr_Barnowl · 2013-02-20 03:52 · Score: 1

But only for the libraries ; not for things that depend on the libraries.
Re:Hardware Partner by Teckla · 2013-02-20 10:04 · Score: 1

...they tolerate the GPL in the Linux kernel because they have no other viable option...
Just curious (really curious, not trolling) -- why is something like FreeBSD not considered a viable option?
Re:Hardware Partner by maxwell+demon · 2013-02-20 10:24 · Score: 1

I don't think many phone manufacturers feel the urge to modify libc.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:Hardware Partner by robmv · 2013-02-20 10:36 · Score: 1

Nobody has given them a platform of the size of Android using a BSD kernel, no that the FreeBSD kernel is unable to do that, but Google is a Linux shop. If four years ago someone did that, it should have worked, today after the success of Android, OEMs need more than a simple switch to a BSD kernel. Ubuntu is offering them less "freedom" (notice the quote, freedom to the OEMs) to do what they want with the code without sharing than Android
Re:Hardware Partner by robmv · 2013-02-21 11:22 · Score: 1

not libc, but what about some OEM optimize the bluetooth stack (bluez) for less power consumption and don't want to share it? bluez is a real example, Google replaced on Android 4.2 the bluez stack for an Apache licenced reimplementation looking for better performance on constrained devices

Re:It also looks out for your best interests... by ais523 · 2013-02-20 02:37 · Score: 1

I'm subscribed to the mailing list at the moment; they're at least aware of the problem. The latest suggestion's been to put a really visible kill switch on the Dash that causes it to do no network traffic at all, even with a sandbox to make sure that none gets out by accident. Not as good as turning it on by default and letting the user turn it off, but it's at least an improvement.

--
(1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"

Re:It also looks out for your best interests... by Dr_Barnowl · 2013-02-20 02:45 · Score: 2

On the other hand, most people don't think twice about using a search engine (regardless of whether you log in or not, they can and do track your preferences), email (a plaintext postcard that any SMTP server on the transfer path can read), or even just the normal web (cross-site advertising cookies, etc).

You can turn it off. The desktop environment makes a point of telling you about it, and explains how to turn it off. You can even uninstall the components that do it, without breaking anything (except of course, the integrated shopping lens). It provides a settings panel dedicated to turning it off - no CLI required.

I had a look at Google and nowhere obvious does it have a "stop tracking and analyzing everything I do" button.

I find it reassuring that out of all the people who are aggregating and monetizing your habit data (ie - almost everything with an online presence), Canonical actually goes out of their way to tell you about it and that you can stop them doing it.

Yes, I'd be more comfortable if they just didn't do it. But I'm happy that my preferred Linux distro will be more viable as a result of them gaining a revenue stream. And for those of us that care enough to post about it on a forum, it's laughably simple to spend a few seconds with a search engine and just disable it.

Or didn't you know about that, because you avoid everything like search engines that might track your habits?

Easy target by Shaman · 2013-02-20 02:51 · Score: 1

This time Mark is picking on the operating system with the most jarring experience ever found in operating systems. Well, maybe not, the Windows 3.x days are long behind me, but I do remember how bad that could get....

--
...Steve

All maximized all the time by tepples · 2013-02-20 02:53 · Score: 1

Mark Shuttleworth said in the article: "What's nice about Ubuntu is the phase change to the PC experience up from the tablet really just introduces window management." Does this mean that Ubuntu on tablets will run all maximized all the time, even when a tablet is docked to a keyboard? That hurts my use case, which involves doing a little Python coding during the commute. I currently have a 10" laptop, and my setup in IDLE puts a source code editor window down one half of the screen and a second source code editor or the output window down the other. But with the discontinuation of 10" laptops at the end of last year, I don't know where I'd go.

Tablet size vs. phone size by tepples · 2013-02-20 02:58 · Score: 1

Anonymous Coward wrote:

You don't want to tile anything on a small mobile device screen.

Could you elaborate? A 7" tablet's screen is big enough to contain two windows the size of a phone's screen, and a 10" tablet's screen is as big as that of the laptops they were selling from 2009-2012. I have one of those laptops, and I have no problem putting two 80-column text editor windows side by side. The only thing missing from Android is a manifest flag for flexible screen size that would allow this sort of window management. Currently, applications are allowed to assume window size is fixed at install time.

Re:Tablet size vs. phone size by mutube · 2013-02-20 07:09 · Score: 1

The point would be it would be configurable. I think there is more mileage in allowing default desktop tiling arrangements (even on a per-virtual-desktop basis). A lot of time you're either using the window fullscreen or rearranging things on the desktop. The recent ability to drag windows to an edge to split the screen is an acknowledgement of that.

--
Python coder | PyQt Applications | Writer

Good news: This is no longer the case by tepples · 2013-02-20 03:08 · Score: 2

I continued to page two, and I am excited about something that it says "Shuttleworth is really excited about": Ubuntu for tablets allows a phone-sized application to be snapped to the side in "side stage".

UI design by MaWeiTao · 2013-02-20 03:16 · Score: 1, Interesting

The OS certainly looks nice, but how is it any different than mobile or tablet OS? I'm seeing a bit of sensationalism due to the mere fact that this OS didn't come from one of the big three. I was expecting a lot more to this claim than a mere jab at Windows 8's desktop mode. I agree, that was a massively botched example of UI design and an indication of compromise. But it's jarring for the first half an hour of use; it's not some sort of profound UI issue.

The issue facing mobile and tablet UI is more one of consistency. It's functionality being uniform, apps following standards, and buttons having consistent functions. The back button should always mean back. Apple has generally done a good job and the OS translates pretty well between the iPhone and iPad. Regardless of what people are saying here, Windows Phone is one of the best out there and I haven't come across anyone yet who wasn't impressed. What it does make me wonder why Microsoft didn't implement that OS on the Surface RT.

Android, while I like the OS, does have a lot of issues with unintuitive UI. Every environment functions a bit differently, like each was designed by it's own team with it's own UI philosophy and aesthetic. It's not a problem with anything that's used frequently, because users do internalize a lot of the variations. But I think it's still a problem to go from one screen that navigates via scrolls to another that relies on swipes. The custom variants from HTC, Samsung and others only make things worse. Unfortunately, I don't think it's something Google will ever be able to fix, user interface isn't their strong suit.

From that perspective Ubuntu looks very promising. But it's crucial they prevent fragmentation, which seems difficult to pull off in the open source world. That would mean no first-party custom skins and no third-party redesigns. This is the interface everyone gets.

It comes down to this by slashmydots · 2013-02-20 03:18 · Score: 1

If it has a "start" button and some semblance of a menu, it already wins

Sounds cool on the surface by Chewbacon · 2013-02-20 03:38 · Score: 1

But it sounds like you'll need cloud storage forward to work. That's something I'm not very crazy about. And then there's the privacy issues that have been plaguing Ubuntu lately. It seems to be driving a lot of Linux users away, including me. The integration strategy sounds really cool.

--
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.

Re:Sounds cool on the surface by Knuckles · 2013-02-20 05:15 · Score: 1

How exactly does it sound as if it needed cloud storage to work?

--
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:Sounds cool on the surface by Knuckles · 2013-02-20 06:26 · Score: 1

First of all, this does not answer my question what exactly it is that makes it "need cloud storage" to work. Even if we accept that Ubuntu "pushes" cloud storage, what is it about the desciption that makes you think it would require it?
Never mind that all that Ubuntu does with cloud "storage" is to offer you a 5 GB Ubuntu One account when installing the OS, which you simply can ignore or disable. And even if you are opposed to the Dash search (which also utilizes remote servers, though not for cloud storage) and that's what you actually complained about, I can't see what it is about the description that would make it "need" that, either.

--
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:Sounds cool on the surface by Chewbacon · 2013-02-20 07:21 · Score: 1

I was speculating and, if those speculations are true, expressing my distaste. Want to argue about something else?

--
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
Re:Sounds cool on the surface by Knuckles · 2013-02-20 07:28 · Score: 1

I don't know why you are posting if you can't stand replies asking you to substantiate wild claims you made based on nothing (as you have demonstrated since),

--
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Re:Sounds cool on the surface by Chewbacon · 2013-02-20 07:42 · Score: 1

You need to get laid (as you have demonstrated).

--
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
Re:Sounds cool on the surface by Knuckles · 2013-02-20 08:16 · Score: 1

You know, I just asked a simple question. If you had a point, you would have made it and I might have agreed and learned something.

--
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns

160 columns on 10" display by tepples · 2013-02-20 03:39 · Score: 1

Two 80-column text editor windows side by side on a 10" screen? That would mean an extremely small font.

On a 1024x600 pixel netbook display, it'd mean a 6 pixel wide font. Currently, Terminal is using Droid Sans Mono 9, IDLE and gedit are configured with Liberation Mono 8, and Leafpad uses Droid Sans Mono 8.

Sounds just painful.

In practice, 6 pixel wide monospace fonts haven't been painful to me, especially with subpixel antialiasing and the fact that a laptop display sits closer than the arm's length of a desktop PC's external monitor.

Re:160 columns on 10" display by Anne+Thwacks · 2013-02-20 06:57 · Score: 1

Just wait til you are over 40!

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII

Promising by ediron2 · 2013-02-20 04:30 · Score: 1

I mentally and emotionally left ubuntu behind when this 'train wreck' started, and have been churning along with Mint and Debian (for servers) getting most of my love.

This clarifies what the intent is for Ubuntu. More importantly to me, it resonates in a way that win8 and 'just like tablets and the new windows' never did -- this hints at a unix / X11 / 'network is the computer' mindset, where the UI and the data/computation are decoupled in ways that add flexibility, rather than straitjacketing power users.

I'm still hesitant, but I'll give Ubuntu a second chance based on this. Personal cpu/data devices and UI portability / flexibility wouldn't suck -- As long as Canonical sticks with a goal/plan for the UI being a realignment-to *AND* extension-of tablet UI design concepts, and not just carving off the complexity, or rearranging shit to be win00b-friendly.

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by Sloppy · 2013-02-20 04:56 · Score: 1

"Developers will be able to ship a single application binary which itself can respond to the different form factors," Shuttleworth said. "You will be able to write a single application binary that can run on a phone, or a tablet, a PC, or a TV, and it will declare to the system which of those form factors it can support and we will present the appropriate interface for that application on each of those form factors."

The reason people are skeptical about that, is that Ubuntu's default packaging suggests that Canonical thinks Unity might be "an appropriate interface" for the desktop.

Perhaps a good test of Canonical's brand new magic tech, will be to see if they can ship a certain application which does what they describe. The application I have in mind is .. oh .. let's say .. application launcher. Can a version of, or an alternative to, Unity be made, which uses this new toolkit?

And not suck? :-)

Shuttleworth, please don't say that one kind of application is a special case, somehow outside the scope of your toolkit. We're just talking about an interface where users somehow pick something out of a potentially long list of things. Lots of apps are variations of that theme, not just program launchers.

--
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by ShieldW0lf · 2013-02-20 05:25 · Score: 1

"Developers will be able to ship a single application binary which itself can respond to the different form factors," Shuttleworth said. "You will be able to write a single application binary that can run on a phone, or a tablet, a PC, or a TV, and it will declare to the system which of those form factors it can support and we will present the appropriate interface for that application on each of those form factors."

The reason people are skeptical about that, is that Ubuntu's default packaging suggests that Canonical thinks Unity might be "an appropriate interface" for the desktop.

Perhaps a good test of Canonical's brand new magic tech, will be to see if they can ship a certain application which does what they describe. The application I have in mind is .. oh .. let's say .. application launcher. Can a version of, or an alternative to, Unity be made, which uses this new toolkit?

And not suck? :-)

Shuttleworth, please don't say that one kind of application is a special case, somehow outside the scope of your toolkit. We're just talking about an interface where users somehow pick something out of a potentially long list of things. Lots of apps are variations of that theme, not just program launchers.

What does that have to do with applications?

If I design a tool to, say, track what you eat and how much exercise you do and give you information, and I'm able to design a user interface for my application that is appropriate for desktop, tablet and phone, and the right one shows up at the right time, the issue of how appropriate Unity is as a desktop application launcher is totally irrelevant.

Don't get me wrong... I miss Gnome2, but these are two different issues.

--
-1 Uncomfortable Truth

Can't wait... by SpectreBlofeld · 2013-02-20 05:27 · Score: 1

...to get one and replace Unity with KDE :)

Approach by fahrbot-bot · 2013-02-20 06:15 · Score: 1

That's what's really different certainly between our approach to convergence and for example Windows 8, where when you're in the desktop mode, which looks like Windows 7, and suddenly you get the new tile-based interface, it's a stark transition that can be jarring for users.

Um. That's because you made the Ubuntu Desktop look like a tablet interface, so of course there's less difference - duh.

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .

Enough Canonical by Animats · 2013-02-20 06:51 · Score: 1

For three days, there's been flacking for Canonical's attempt, yet again, to commercialize Linux on end user devices. Canonical previously claimed their product was going to ship on the EeePC (it never reached retail channels), and on Dell (where it was more expensive than Windows). Worse, Canonical ships a Linux preloaded with ad-supported crapware.

Linux tablets are available from China. Some are good, some are awful, most are cheap.

in my opinion, the jarring was already there by Yaddoshi · 2013-02-20 08:14 · Score: 1

I find Unity jarring. I gave it an honest go on three different Ubuntu releases, then finally couldn't stand it anymore, switching first to Gnome 2 fallback mode, then to Gnome 3 (very briefly), then ultimately dumping Ubuntu entirely and reverting to Gnome 2 on Debian Squeeze. So to me, Mark is saying Ubuntu on the tablet wouldn't be any MORE jarring than it already is on the desktop. I'm fairly certain I'll pick up negative karma for sharing that opinion, but it is honestly my opinion.

Ultimately it doesn't matter to me, I believe Canonical sold out its initial user-base and is now riding the wave of notoriety created by that user-base, many of whom have since moved on to Mint or some other distro. I also am of the opinion that the novelty of this tablet-to-desktop / phone-to-desktop docking will soon wear off when people experience the performance difference when compared to an actual desktop computer or laptop, especially after factoring in the price.

In other ringing endorsements.... by coinreturn · 2013-02-20 08:16 · Score: 1

It's also better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick!

HP Touchpad by RoccamOccam · 2013-02-20 08:45 · Score: 1

I understand that Desktop Ubuntu is possible for the HP Touchpad, but is there any word on Ubuntu for Tablets?

I am not trained yet by SmallFurryCreature · 2013-02-20 08:57 · Score: 1

I have got a tablet and am REALLY in the market for one that has TRUE multi-tasking and DOES keep state and not have to constantly swap out apps to save memory.

Mind you, I am NOT that hopeful any of the tablet makers in business can supply. Take something as simple as storage space. micr-sd cards are tiny AND at the expense of the customer. A slot makes your device more capable at the cost of a few dollars at most. Yet how many devices have say a dual slot capacity? Why not a quad slot? Why not an optional back to phones where you can slot in a larger battery and a raid of SD disks?

In a crowded market, you need to set yourself apart yet we are overwhelmed with "me too" devices that are just copies of what the makers hope is trending. Learn from MMO makers, there is no market in copying the leader, if people wanted a product like the leader is providing, they would buy the leader product.

MP3 player makers are even more silly, mobile phones are getting better at playing music all the time AND are increasing (slowly) storage space. What was iRivers brilliant marketing scheme for the last few years? Release SMALLER capacity players...

Here is a hint, IF I am in the market for a specialist device like a MP3 player or a non-iPhone, I am inthe market for something SPECIAL. Enough storage for say 16 hours of music playback SOUNDS nice but I listen to music 12 hours a day... with such limitted storage, it get really repetitive fast.

Oh, of course, a large capacty music player isn't for everyone. Absolutely... and nobody wanted a walkman either and everyone knew that MP3 players before the iPhone had only a niche market and that would never ever chance and no MP3 player maker would sell millions of the same model at outrageious profits.

Markets are created by creating a new product and then selling it to customer who never knew they wanted it. Nobody wanted an iPod until they became available. Hell, nobody wanted a car, before say the 1800's you could go to any car showroom and find ZERO customers all the way back to the dawn of time. If that is no proof there is no market for the car, what is.

Most companies are far to conservative, they want a sure fire hit and don't dare to innovate. The Sony that created the walkman totally failed to create the iPhone despite being perfectly suited to do so, they had the tech AND the content, the iDevices and iTunes should have been theirs but the suits had taken over from the engineers and all we got from them is "me too" devices.

Want to know who right now sells the BIGGEST storage MP3 players? Is it iRiver with the 600 dollar AK100 with DUAL micro-sd slot? No... that with two cards goes to just 96GB. Is it Cowon? 32GB and with an sd card of 64GB you can get (if lucky) 96.

But the iPad (oh okay, it is cheating a bit because it is atablet) is now on sale with 128gb. In your average store (at least in holland) the non-iMP3 players hover at a max of 16 gb, the iPhones are readily available at 64gb. Often cheaper too then top end other brand players with far less memory.

The Galaxy Note 2 sells in holland with just 16gb memory, the 64 gb variant can only be obtained in Korea... in very limited amounts.

The iPod classic meantime comes with a 160gb HD. The only one coming close is Archos... in large near tablet sized players not its mp3 players.

Apple ripped open the MP3 player market and did what Blizzard did with WoW to the market. It showed that ALL the tiny players could have been tech giants, no THE biggest company in the WORLD for a long time... if only they had dared to simply sell to people devices that could hold a bit of music.

There is a market out there for far superior tablets... but it won't visible until someone starts selling one. I can't buy what you don't sell.

Here is another hint for mobile device makers: Men are half the population, we got big pockets and large hands, we can handle a phone that weight twice the weight and is twice as thick. Nokia could supply the brick sized n900 fast enough. Give me a device that is CAPABLE.

EVERYONE knows the original walkman was to large to sit in a shirt pocket and they STILL sold like crazy. If you make it, they will buy it. But if you don't... well... that can't.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:

You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

Re:I am not trained yet by maxwell+demon · 2013-02-20 09:37 · Score: 1

before say the 1800's you could go to any car showroom and find ZERO customers all the way back to the dawn of time.
Actually, all the car showrooms which existed at that time were overcrowded with visitors. :-)

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:I am not trained yet by exomondo · 2013-02-20 10:49 · Score: 1

Apple ripped open the MP3 player market and did what Blizzard did with WoW to the market. It showed that ALL the tiny players could have been tech giants, no THE biggest company in the WORLD for a long time... if only they had dared to simply sell to people devices that could hold a bit of music.
But Apple weren't the first, they didn't have the most storage and they didn't have the most features...they dared to strip away the commonplace features and focus on design and user experience.

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by Sloppy · 2013-02-20 10:01 · Score: 1

If I design a tool to, say, track what you eat and how much exercise you do and give you information, and I'm able to design a user interface for my application that is appropriate for desktop, tablet and phone, and the right one shows up at the right time, the issue of how appropriate Unity is as a desktop application launcher is totally irrelevant.

Huh. I guess there are two ways to take what he said.

If the way the toolkit works, is that developers are required to design three UIs for each app, then your point stands. (e.g. in your energy tracking app, you're actually thinking about how it looks different, on different devices.)

I took Shuttleworth's words as suggesting there's some kind of high-level UI or abstract signals of intent or relationships, which the toolkit (not the application programmer) resolves differently for different devices.

(Why do I think that? Because that's what I always try to do (to varying degrees of success); call it projection. Whenever I'm doing something "application-ish" rather than "library-ish," I don't want to ever be thinking about handheld vs desktop vs $NEXT_THING(glasses?). And every time I make an exception, I view that as a weakness, and probably symptomatic of having made a design mistake in the library.)

And if they take that approach (and maybe they're not doing that; I could be all wrong) then all/most/many application UIs which use this toolkit (probably including your energy tracking app), when run on desktops, would come out with a similar look'n'feel to them. Nothing wrong with that! But Unity is an expression by Canonical of how things should be, and Yog-forbid it's the result of an early prototype of the very toolkit in question.

--
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by CAIMLAS · 2013-02-20 16:37 · Score: 1

How much do you want to bet that Steam will be one of the first adopters of this new Ubuntu?

--
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by olivier69 · 2013-02-20 20:21 · Score: 1

Didn't read TFA, did you ? Well it's /. ... The point is : he's not mixing tablet apps and desktop apps like Windows 8. If you look at the video you'll see that if you use your tablet as a tablet, you see tablet UIs. But if you plug your tablet to a keyboard / mouse, the apps switch to desktop mode. That seems really nice.

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by knorthern+knight · 2013-02-20 21:12 · Score: 1

> But if you plug your tablet to a keyboard / mouse, the
> apps switch to desktop mode. That seems really nice.

You're assuming that Unity is a functional "desktop mode". A lot of people disagree with you.

--

I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user

Re:Hey, Shuttleworth, Listen up by olivier69 · 2013-02-20 21:20 · Score: 1

I'd mod you +1 Funny but I'm not speaking of Unity here, only of the following sentence about the switch from tablet mode to desktop mode :

just introduces window management, and it also introduces things like menus and dialog boxes

It's quite clever, more than the Metro solution, and could be adopted by more desktop environments.

Slashdot Mirror

Ubuntu Tablets: Less Jarring Than Windows 8?

126 of 179 comments (clear)