Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu 14.04 Brings Back Menus In Application Windows
sfcrazy writes "Canonical is bringing back menu integration with application windows. In 14.04 there will be an option for users to enable menus in application windows. That's a huge u-turn from Mark's stand on Global Menus which upset a lot of Ubuntu users."
I didn't like global menus at first, it was different. Then I got used to it. Now I don't think too much about it.
I suppose it is nice to give the users the ability to choose between the two.
I always thought linux users were not afraid of change and welcomed the new. Sometimes I think some linux users are a bunch of luddites with strong
right wing conservative leanings. Who would have thought.
Menu is.
The xxx belonging to menu.
Choose which you meant.
I did not realize people still use Ubuntu.
I can live with them or without them, but they need to pick one way to do it and stick with that.
It drove me batty with the global menu. I want to to shrink this window. No sorry you are not on the correct active window. Try again. *groan*
As a big fan of focus-follows-mouse, this will finally make Ubuntu at least *usable*, if not pretty. FFM is in direct odds with global menus.
Bonus points if they label the configuration settings "be like a Mac" and "be like every other computer on the planet". Maybe this signals the end of the continual macification of Unity?
So long and thanks for all the fish, sucker.
A good property of UI is to remain stable so that user can get used to it. It would be nice if they could stop changing stuff on every release.
When I launch a program, preferebly from a menu, I expect the program to offer a menu that provides a way for the program to accomplish the things that I want to do. Sure most will need to open a file, edit that file, and close that file, but some need to simply display that files data while others need to provide a way to change that files content. And yes, there are nealy infinite amounts of variations of just how users need to manipulate a file. A universally consistent and simple system that encompasses all the possible things that a person might what to do to data is simply not possible.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Is there any compelling reason for them to "stick" with something? Having the choice is a positive good. Unity's lack of options is what drove me away from it.
This is an "opt-in" if you will - not a direct change.
Seriously...
I've been mostly fine with the UX of Unity, but it really is a damn laggy and slow desktop, and also buggy as heck. I thought Canonical had the resources to set things straight but the quality assurance is just horrible. The Fedora KDE spin is my current happy place in Linux world.
Ubuntu backtracking with 14.04, Microsoft backtracking with "Windows 9".... It's as though suddenly this ridiculous small-form-factor bubble has burst. And about goddamn time.
Agreed, but this is an opt-in. I'll develop muscle memory when I have a UI configured to my tastes rather than rewire my sinews to a forced interface.
But, when you use a real computer with multiple programs/windows it's anoying to switch from one another app to perform act like transfering content from Writer and Calc.
Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
I've never understood why we can't get the window-manager and the application to play nice, and share one bar. Usually, there's plenty of space horizontally, and too little vertically. So, why not have the combination of: ....... "The window title goes here" ....... _ [] X
[icon] File Edit View History Bookmarks Tools Help
I've been okay with the dash and the side bar look of new ubuntu. It's mostly been the same for me. I switch between different desktops all the time, so I'm not particularly attached to any one or the other as long as it doesn't really impede my workflow. What I hate and still can't get used to is the global menu. I accidentally close out of so many applications because I don't realize I'm actually focused in another window. It annoys the piss out of me, and takes away the concept of the window. The window is it's own little self contained world. Menus for that window should be with that window. I still can't get used to clicking for focus on a window, and then dragging my mouse all the way back up to the top of the screen to get a menu for a window. It really only works well for a full maximized applications.
So the rest of the menu complaints are irrelevant.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
You mean like the old versions of MacOS? What are these Linux people smoking?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
If you don't like it, change it yourself!
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Maybe this can help Ubuntu to recover some of Us that fled away because of Unity and global menu. Okay, Im using 12.04; but I have some fresh Arch Linux waiting to take over this f*cked Acer all in one that have a crappy uefi-BIOS. --
FFM is not actually fundimentally incompatible with focus-follows-mouse. Gnome 3 works around it by providing an option called 'focus-change-on-pointer-rest'. It works extremely well on a trackpad because you general lift your finger once the pointer is over a window. With a mouse, it gives a slight lag because your hand isn't as steady.
Why does this work well with global menus? Because when you use global menus, you throw the pointer to the top of the screen, using fits law.
The reason I use FFM to begin with is because I hate having to aim and make sure I hit a tiny widget or make sure I don't accidentally click a link on a webpage when trying to give focus to the window. Having menubars in windows is an extension of that problem. I would probably care less if mouse motion was actually one-to-one, but it isn't.
Eric Raymond wrote a wonderful essay on why open source GUI's often suck so much: Canonical was violating *all* of his guidelines when they cloned Win8^H^H^H re-invented the GUI. Check out this old essay to see how some things stay the same in the world of bad interfaces:
http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cups-horror.html
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writi...
Ubuntu is like Slashdot Beta but I give them points for trying to bring users back...
Extra apostrophe's! Use 'em for plural's!
I'm very glad that users will have a choice. I'm sticking with Unity and Global Menus. I love them.
All of these menu's are driving me crazy. I's don't need so many menu's. You's should all's agree with me.
I miss the craftsmanship of professional journalists sometimes, and if not the journalists, then at least their attentive copy editors who know basic English pluralization rules.
--Jim (me)
Why Apple has made the perfect UI, how could you not love the best design for DJs and Photoshoppers? There are about 10 things wrong with OSX and they are all random design crap Jobs picked -
Global menus,
Single mouse click,
Left window controls (yay for all the left handed and left eye dominant people, boo for the other 95% of the world)
Launchpad (how is the start menu missing causing a revolt and launchpad even exist? Launchpad is the initial SIN!)
Finder layout straight out of system commander circa 1988.
Crap loads of docked icons you never use be default.
A separate contact and calendar app....
General iOS crap
Hardwired application dependency locations (the whole point of application folders is to stop that!)
Scroll bars that disappear even if your mouse is near them and appear at the bottoms of pages OVERTOP content.
I could go on and complain about the apps, but lets say OSX is great for people who use a computer like they use iOS and leave it at that....
One happy user... ...Millions minus one to go.
Go Mark, go!
There actually are some good reasons for going with a global menu bar. When developing the original interface for the Mac, Apple studied the various options for the menus in depth. What they found is that when the menus are at the top of the screen, they are significantly faster to access, as they have infinite depth, thus you do not have to be anywhere near as accurate in your pointing to access them. In effect, you only need to have to worry about the left-right position of the cursor, as you can just fling it to the top of the screen and not be precise in that dimension. If the menu bar is attached to the window, you have to position the the cursor in both dimensions. The ultimate of this is the screen corners, which is also the reason for the Apple Menu being up there. This is a subtle effect, but is backed up by some good hard data.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
Yeah, but does it have Amazon(TM) everywhere?
Fluxbox with keybindngs makes life much easier. Linux was never about the androids and the unity's ... It was about reconfiguring the meal no matter what is served . And in rare cases cooking your own meal . (LFS etc. )
Apple is not Linux, We are not apple... (we are Devo), why care about apple's study? Their research is FOR Their products, PC/laptop aren't apple, Linux is not apple(Thanks God!), what works with apple can or cannot work for others.
In southpark some can eat with their ass, but not the rest of us (I don't want to try it, btw).
Mac OS has been like this since System 1. And it makes sense; whatever you're doing, its menu is going to be in the same place. Fitts' law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen.
Mac OS has supported multiple mouse buttons for at least 16 years. Even when using a now-extinct one button mouse, control-click presented a dialogue box.
Because it's easier to move a mouse up/left with your right hand, and was developed in a country that reads left-to-right.
The start menu missing is causing a revolt because Microsoft removed something and replaced it with an abomination. Launchpad - and other questionable features like Dashboard - can be completely ignored.
Column view in Finder is optional, with icon and list view still available. Also, Finder has had its sorting options greatly improved throughout OS X's history.
If you go and buy a Mac today, this is in the Dock:
- Finder: File management
- Launchpad: Access to all apps not in the Dock (And easily ignored, as previously discussed)
- Safari: A web browser
- Mail: Email client
- Contacts: An address book
- Calendar: A calendar
- Notes: Short notes
- Maps: A map of the entire planet
- Messages: Text messaging and IM
- FaceTime: Video chat
- Photo Booth: Something fun to play with on your new computer
- iPhoto: Something to talk to your camera
- Pages: Word processing
- Numbers: Spreadsheets
- Keynote: Presentations
- iTunes: Play and purchase music and TV/movies
- iBooks: Read and purchase books
- App Store: Install and purchase software
- System Preferences: Change settings on your computer
The default Dock icons cover managing your computer, using the big two features of the Internet, syncing 'organisational' information with your phone, finding locations, messaging and video chatting with other people, photography, writing, processing numbers, creating presentations, watching media, reading, and installing an app to do anything else you want your computer to do. The default Dock is a slam-dunk for covering what the majority of people use computers for, points users in the right direction to add new capabilities to the computer, and is easily customised to remove the things you don't want. (Launchpad, again...)
The Dock is setup perfectly for you to get started with your computer. Anything else you need to get to can either be accessed through Spotlight (power users) or Launchpad (for people with more experience with iOS).
Just like iOS... but also NeXTSTEP; they have always been separate apps, which makes finding what are ultimately different tasks easier *and* they also seamlessly share the same databases behind the scenes.
Integration with touchpads is great. Removing always-visible scrollbars removes needless clutter. Things like Launchpad - and pretty much anything else you don't like that reminds you of iOS - are easily disabled or ignored.
I won't allow you that! gnome and kde started fucking their users before before it became mainstream.
[quote]I always thought linux users were not afraid of change and welcomed the new[/quote]
That made my day. Linux users are probably the biggest set of "no change here" people in the existence of computing.
...and while we're at it of Slashdot beta!
Life would be sweet again!
Diclaimer: I use Linux every day for work. I use Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. I don't use Unity.
The usability problem with Unity menus is not that they are either local or global, it's the fact they they disappear every time you take your mouse away from them, please don't make me have to mouse over the window title to get the menu to appear. While this sounds simple enough to do, it causes you to haltingly mouse over the general area of the menu bar, then wait for the thing to render, then visually locate what you want, then mouse over it and click. In the good old days, one could just mouse over to the precise menu location and click-it in a single move
Unity now provides the user with a choice as to whether they would like to break your menu in either a local way or a global way, sadly the problem still exists. Please stop breaking user interfaces with stupid design!
For the record, I use MATE as my desktop because all this new fangled sausage-finger friendly crap is simply not a productive place to work
meh
Well said. If I had mod points I'd mod you up for this.
Note it's been a while since I've used OSX more than some trivial playing with the newer touchpad in a Macbook Air, so I've refrained from commenting on more recent things.
This said, the post a couple above yours was specifically about *older* versions of Mac OS and I think that's still relevant.
Fitts' law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen
The problem with the Fitt's Law argument is it only makes sense if your computing experience ends with clicking that menu item.
For instance, if you now have to move the mouse to the window, it's now maximally far away from your cursor and not near a screen edge, and Fitts Law says you just made things a kazillion times worse.
And if you want to interact with two windows (eg. copy from one, paste in another, using menus), you've added another step to switch which menu is available. Admittedly, virtually the whole world has figured out the keyboard shortcuts for cut, copy, and paste, since those are some of the most universally useful commands.
This all means that hot corners and hot edges for the mouse should be reserved for the sort of interactions that are fairly universal between apps, and which logically terminate a sequence of actions. For instance, closing an app (debatable because of accidental clicking, but common), switching to another app that's behind the current app, that sort of thing.
Mac OS has supported multiple mouse buttons for at least 16 years.
It was supported but not really seriously encouraged until more recently than 16 years. But yes, it's an out of date argument now. Just...not 16 years out of date.
Left Window Controls
I don't believe either your argument or the GP's. I'm very skeptical that it's "easier" to move up and to the left with your right hand rather than up and right, which is directly away from you rather than going across your body. But frankly, a mouse is not hard enough to use to justify left vs. right in any way. Window control positions are basically arbitrary (so long as they are in a consistent place within the OS, eg. corner of the window as we've all settled on).
General iOS crap
Integration with touchpads is great. Removing always-visible scrollbars removes needless clutter.
Touchpads are not iOS. I can see how they might seem related, but it is a fundamentally different interaction model when you're operating on a device distinct from the screen. Minimizing input delay is not as important, pinching takes on a different aspect, different opportunities exist simply because your hands aren't covering the viewport, etc.. Don't get me wrong -- I think improved touchpad support is great. I just don't think it has all that much to do with "General iOS crap". I guess maybe the fact that people were trained on iOS to perform certain gestures?
Acorn mice had a dedicated middle button for bringing up menus wherever you were in a window.
The other thing I really miss is being able to use the right button ("Adjust") to select a menu option and keep the menu open. I've never seen this in any other OS (not that I've seen many).
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I agreed with all of that except your comment on the scroll bars.
Scroll bars are NOT needless clutter. They are a visual cue on the amount of content on the screen vs the amount of content that you can't see. Right now with a quick glance I can see I'm only half way through reading the comments. I can't do that if the bar is hidden, and I'd need to do something like move the page.
I hate this on touchscreens as well but it's more forgiveable since any finger touching the screen will make the bars reappear. I can't do that while I'm typing on a keyboard.
I'm still using a physical keyboard because it's better than a touch keyboard. The Windows 8 interface was an unnecessary and inconvenient change and yes I know you can do X, Y and Z to make it less annoying but then what was the point of the change? It hasn't improved anyone's experience and just puts extra, undocumented steps in that confuse everyone, even the techies. That goes double for Server 2012 where Metro is a completely unnecessary nuisance.
x --- Ubunut
^ -- The Shark.
/ \
~~~~~~
~~~~~~
~~~~~~
Good!
Continuing in this direction, Ubuntu 18.04 might be as good as Ubuntu 10.10!
OS X being the "Gold standard" in UI design is mostly hype and PR from Apple and Apple Zealots.
Frankly, their design isn't perfect and it's not that much better than any other design.
OS X users like the OS X design because that's what they're used to.
Windows users like the Windows design because that's what they're used to.
Linux users like a quake-style console because that's what they use to do real work while the OS X and Windows users ramble on about how superior their GUIs are.
I for one welcome the almighty Unity interface, with Global Menus.
Now, 12.04, Unity is really working fine, and BIG ADVANTAGE, very LEAN and MEAN on 16:9 / 16:10 monitors.
In my setup, I only have 1 bar at the top for application menu and status icons. Launcher is set to auto-hide. No waste of screen estate.
What I find always funny is people with billions of application launch icons, or an application task bar that eats 20% of their screen, then complain about bad UI. The point of Unity is that it disappear immediately as soon as you don't need it. That's basically the best it can do. Simple and efficient.
Mac OS has been like this since System 1. And it makes sense; whatever you're doing, its menu is going to be in the same place. Fitts' law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen.
I've read the question 5 and its answers about global menu superiority.
I would like to emphasize this:
- I've been using Macintosh, Unix workstations, MS PC (DOS,Win3.1 up to Win8), Linux PC with various WM/Desktop, etc.
- Global menu was fine for me on Macintosh Classic 9-inch display, for any task.
- Global menu is painful and irritating on 24-inch display, for most of the creative tasks.
I suspect that this is not only a matter of how long the cursor travel though the screen, but also about how much you have to adjust your gaze on the area requiring your attention.
Fitts' law fails to address that point, even if you can do things quicker it might not be as productive if it's uncomfortable and tiring.
Regarding GUI, Apple has failed on several points with nowdays huge displays, for instance it tooks them years to allow window size adjustment on any border (instead of a tiny triangle on bottom right). The feature comes with Lion in 2011... That's a shame.
I must agree with this (apple user myself). after years of using my macbook i still can't remember which button i need for "right click" (control, command, alt ???) eg to kill an application from the dock. and i still didn't figure out how to use finder efficiently. and the scroll bars you mention sometimes drive me crazy. and the fact that i can't predict what the "maximize" button will do this time i click it.
(but apart from that i'm a happy user, all these things don't matter too much when you have terminal, sherlock and enough screen space.)
But the bigger the screen, the stupider a global menu becomes. Users more likely have more than one app open at a time, and they're more likely to be unmaximized - either stacked, tiled or some other arrangement. It's a pain to have to activate an app to see its menu. It's a pain to then haul the mouse to the top to navigate it's menu. I bet if someone ran a mousemeter comparing the two systems that the global menu would involve way more travel.
Therefore, there should be an option to control this behaviour. It should have been there from the beginning in fact. The same goes for those ridiculous elevator style scrollbars in Ubuntu. They're great for saving space when you need to save space but boy are they unintuitive and fiddly. If someone has a hi resolution screen the scrollbars should always be visible and easy to locate.
If you're on a macbook, one finger is a "left click" and two fingers is a "right click". Using a keyboard modifier would be odd and uncomfortable IMO. Go to System Preferences -> Trackpad -> Point & Click to enable this if someone's disabled it.
For scroll bars, you can go to System Preferences -> Show Scroll Bars -> Always if you wish. I have mine enabled that way too.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
Replace ios and OSX with Windows and Windows 8 and you have the EXACT SAME arguments for what Microsoft has been doing.
You forgot some real problems though. No way to disable out of control scrolling on touchpads and mice. go ahead and use Google maps with the "super mouse" it is constantly zooming at insane rates.
Zero application support from Apple. Garage band and iWork has some huge bugs and when you contact support they just refer you to the forums where users try to stumble through it. At least Microsoft will let you give them a credit card number and make a fake attempt at helping you while you pay for a tech support newbie to look on the internet for answers while you are on the phone.
I love OSX and apple, It is zero effort to maintain compared to windows and honestly Linux is currently in a broken all to hell state for desktop use. (Linux does this in a 4 year cycle, it will come back again) But it's not without it's nasty festering warts and zits.
The problem is all operating systems right now are utter crap. From server to desktop to mobile. They all suck, and no company or group has any interest in making it not suck , they just want to add new shiny features in hopes of distracting you from the suck that has existed in the OS for the past 5 years.
and dont get me started with the Unholy abomination of "in app purchases" that has taken off. The funny part is using piracy makes it easier. GarageBand on OSX most people can not sucessfully download the lessons or added content, Apple devs half assed the download portion of the code. So I go to pirate bay and find a Pirated pack of all the content and install it. Worked better than fighting over and over to get what I paid for to install because the developers cant bother to finish debugging a program before release.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
ubuntu is a steaming turd because they tried to remove the scroll bars, I see freaking Chrome and Firefox also doing this stupid trick as well on all platforms.
It makes me want to beat developers with a sack of doorknobs.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I'll be dropping iPhone at the end of my contract; iOS 7 drives me nuts. I have to scan icons for common apps and way too many unexpected actions when I'm try to scroll.
Imho unity is great, in 11.10 i didn't like it, yet after being shown the basics I grew to like it and see the excellent implementation it is.
For me I'll continue to use the default menu bar, yet I expect some will prefer this. Nice change for flexibility.
this is the title the parent post should read
Ubuntu (or any other distro) isn't bound by a UI/WM/whatever,
i used GNOME2 ( and 3 for a while), while ditching unity..
But i have to say that my old , but still living P1 133mhz laptop with 96Mb, ran blackbox without ( to much of ) a fuss, and running it now on an i7 would make it ridiculously fast and efficient...
'll try that on the 14.04 and if that doesn't work go back to debian (or even better : going back to openbsd, lazy me... )
but on the whole i don't dislike unity, it looks a lot like, mer ( Maemo ), and is probably the evolution of..
it's just that it isn't always stable and you have to modify your desktop launchers if the global menus don't work... (like driving a car, and stopping from time to time to put the wheels back in place.... )
so if i can launch eclipse without having to jiggle with lauching it correctly, that 'll be one problem less...
Global menus (for some applications and not others) was my main reason for dropping Unity. If I can have my menus integrated back into the application window then I might go back and use Unity again when 14.04 launches.
Now if they'd just ditch Unity and go back to Gnome, we could all love Ubuntu again.
FTFY.
For that to happen someone would have to admit that he's wrong. Good luck with that.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
In the meantime I found out that the desktop in Debian is now perfectly usable even for non-tech users.
I guess people don't learn keyboard shortcuts any more... :-/
Application folders are as poorly thought out as Program Files was. Here's why:
;-) :D
Path inconsistency - Crack open a terminal and try to run your app from there. I'm sure environment variables have a length restriction, even if it's really long
Lack of security - try to patch all those apps using the same non-core shared libraries, you'll have one hell of a time as you'll need to either manually copy files or wait on the vendor!
Disk space wastage - see above!
Power-user hell - let's say you can do a little bit of coding, enough to work around a few small bugs; tried compiling larger XCode projects without manually replicating the dev environment?
Now for other flaws in modern OS X:
App Store - This is a poor man's APT/YUM repository. You can't mirror it so if your Internet is unavailable you can't install apps, plus you need to hand over personal info to use it!
Global menus - Modern systems have many applications running at one time, you need to activate the window before you can access the menu, thus increasing click count if multitasking.
Style inconsistency - OS X apps are inflexibly styled; so when the designers of OS X change fashion, the apps don't match. Compare this to most GTK/Qt apps, centrally rethemed easily!
Single mouse pointer - Linux and Windows can use multiple mice/tablets/touchpads independently with each having their own mouse pointers. Mac OS X assumes one pointer even today!
For window management on OSX, try shift+click on the plus for full screen maximize. Another option is to install ShiftIt (which is a life saver for multiscreen work as well).
Using shiftit:
ctrl+alt+cmd+m (full screen)
ctrl+alt+cmd+n (next screen)
ctrl+alt+cmd+left arrow (left half maximize - like in windows)
ctrl+alt+cmd+right arrow (right half maximize)
With this too, you can't forget which key to press (it's all of them!).
They should get rid of the rest of the annoying Mac rip off features too. And MS should ditch that hot corners crap that nobody likes on Apple computers in the first place.
Global menus
Mac OS has been like this since System 1. And it makes sense; whatever you're doing, its menu is going to be in the same place. Fitts' law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen.
First, the corners of the screen are the fastest to access merely because they require less dexterity. And your menu button must actually occupy the most extreme pixel to work for this purpose, and the menu buttons do not. Perhaps they meet the edge of the screen, but I'm not even sure about that (I don't think they do).
Second, the paradigm of universal menu location is a violation of basic psychology. Our brains prefer that things which are related are grouped together. E.g. if I have two windows open side-by-side, and I have the right-hand window selected, why are my menus adjacent to the window I am not using? My mouse, my eyes, and the scope of my perception are locked on the window at hand. Claiming I can move my mouse faster to some distant area on the screen does not seem like a good enough reason. (That you are used to it and don't want to learn a new paradigm is a valid reason to keep it, though.)
Single mouse click
Mac OS has supported multiple mouse buttons for at least 16 years.
I'm pretty sure he meant one click to open a program. (Or was the statement damaged in translation?) To be fair, I'm not entirely sold on the double-click paradigm, despite being thoroughly imersed. (Don't Macs use double-click to open desktop/folder contents still? And everyone does one-click dashboard/quickstart/panel open AFAIK.)
Hardwired application dependency locations (the whole point of application folders is to stop that!)
Wait, what? Apps install into /Applications by default, but the system works just fine with app in ~/Applications. Beyond that, moving apps around is making things needlessly complicated for yourself. Even then, the vast majority of apps are self-contained bundles and can be run from anywhere.
Don't Macs have a $PATH variable? If not, I consider this a huge flaw, but I'm pretty sure gp is clueless? (Why would Apple remove such a basic feature?)
There are about 10 things wrong with OSX and they are all random design crap Jobs picked -
Global menus,
This goes back about 30 years to the original Mac, which came with a 512x384 monitor. A global menu made eminent sense.
Menus should have been solved by now.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
That would be nice.
Ubuntu 14.04, or Ubuntu 8.1?
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Why would "Fitts's Law" be applicable to a global menu, even if it mattered (it doesn't)? The menu isn't in the corners. I've also never met anyone who took it on faith that their mouse pointer got to a point on the screen without looking.
Why does a theoretical benefit in motor functionality (easier to go up-left than up-right for right-handed users) matter when (again) it's about where the user is _looking_, not what is imperceptibly "easier" for their hand to carry out?
Why are so many of you idiots still going on about the Windows 8 start screen when you clearly haven't known how to use Windows since at least the ’90s? Clicking through trees of redundant folders has not been the optimal way to use Windows in a long, long time. Windows 8 makes actual common use cases for the former start menu functionality easier, and even improves things if you want to click-click-click like a baby as well. Windows 8.1 takes a step backward by tacking on a start button that provides no useful functionality while taking up space on the taskbar.
Unlike the Windows 8 start screen, the stupid Mac Launchpad provides nothing whatsoever.
It's amazing that you think such stupid thoughts are worth sharing.
I'd rather have the global menu. It's a lot cleaner than having menu bars in every damn window.
The Amarri pray for god, the Caldari pray for profit. the Gallente pray for peace, but the Minmatar pray their ships hol
Agreed. Global menus are horrible. They most definitely waste time when app switching a lot and using the menus. Newsflash: most consumers don't know simple keyboard shortcuts.
Ideally an OS would let the user choose.
Keep the Classic Slashdot.
sudo apt-get autoremove appmenu-gtk appmenu-gtk3 appmenu-qt
granted the new thing is more flexible. But you can type the aforementioned command faster than all these bitch fest comments.
very very god
tokoobatbiusasli.blogspot.com
tokoperalatansex.blogspot.com
very very god
tokoobatbiusasli.blogspot.com
tokoperalatansex.blogspot.com
i like you
thanks,,,
Ok, I'm sure there is a simple thing I'm overlooking, but it is driving me crazy: is there a file browser on OSX? We recently replaced a bunch of old computers at home and I decided to get a Mac Mini. It works great for our general family computer needs. I have not used anything Mac since 1988, but for the life of me I can't figure out how to browse or navigate the folders in my account without using the command line.
I have some doorknobs that I'd like to contribute to your sack.
Actually, on the Mac, you can't click above the menu items at the top of the screen. Clicking at the edge of the screen activates the control.
As a Mac user it used to be infuriating that with other common desktop environments if you dragged the mouse to the edge of the screen they would miss the button by one pixel. Now it's common on systems using other common desktop environments, too.
Downloads, documents and other cruft on the right side of the Dock look quite cluttered indeed. Especially with the long list of apps you just presented.
Mac OS X is okay but the keyboard shortcuts are a clusterfuck. Finder isn't awesome at networked drives (better than Windows, at least) and I'm always annoyed at BSD utils over GNU but that's subjective anyways.
KDE is still my favorite environment for getting shit done, for almost any definition of "shit."
When you have an idea (and this applies especially to software, where it's easy to run this course), a good idea is to run an experiment -- see if your idea actually holds water.
100 million kudos points, however, to the person who recognises the experiment for what is is (an experiment) and has the kahunas to recoginise failure and roll back.
Personally, I don't like global menus, But if they had worked for most users, then that alone would have given them value -- and I'm free to not accept and work around them. I, for one, applaud the ability of Ubuntu and Shuttleworth to run an experiment, recognise failure and go back to what is known to work. It shows respect for the user.
Is it since downmods you applied cheating the moderation system will go away http://games.slashdot.org/comm... or is it since you're still eating your words after http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... for libeling him then you ran away like a scared little girl for opening your mouth and inserting your foot while you ate your words seasoned with the bitter taste of self-defeat. You also called apk a loser that can't program here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... well it looks like you lost on all accounts since apk's program http://start64.com/index.php?o... he can show for himself against your libelous bullshit that works well and is hosted by members of the security community (malwarebytes hpHosts) and you have nothing to show for yourself like he does. You were reduced to name calling and using anoncoward sockpuppets to support you to me and projecting your own issues in being an uber loser.
I've switched from GNOME to KDE a long time ago... - Anthony David
ubuntu is a steaming turd because they tried to remove the scroll bars, I see freaking Chrome and Firefox also doing this stupid trick as well on all platforms.
It makes me want to beat developers with a sack of doorknobs.
On what platforms does Chrome not have scrollbars? I'm using Chrome right now and it has one.
Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.