Note, I was talking about how Ubuntu originally got my attention, 3 or 4 years ago. Admittedly, USB sticks were cheap back then, but I only had a 1 gig stick at that time. At this point in time, they can probably consider going up to DVD sized, but is sticking to a CD size really that onerous? It does force Ubuntu to improve its software download process, and I have seen some nifty features where they are making it easy for users to know what software is available for immediate download and installation. With broadband speeds becoming more common, size limits (whether it is CD or DVD) seems fairly arbitrary.
And like I said, I think Ubuntu is heading towards making DVD sized images available as well as CD-sized "core" installs as well.
I could, but I wanted to have a "Linux-on-a-Stick"-like LiveCD on hand. It has been a very useful tool for diagnosing troublesome Windows and Linux computers where-ever I go. Also, it is useful for doing trial spins of alpha and beta releases of Ubuntu, especially with its persistent storage feature allows me to test the update programs as well. Nothing against PXE, I just find the USB image to be more useful for my purposes. Admittedly, the startup times are killing me...
True, but this is better in a registry how? (Btw, my point is merely that this sort of thing would likely only be found by perusing the docs or having someone tell you about it, regardless of how the setting is stored)
You arent alone. I rather like unity on my eeepc, but that might be largely because unity came from netbook remix. I haven't tried unity on a larger desktop, but I have a hard time imagining it's current incarnation to work well. But I certainly do see the direction it is heading, and I think it will work well.
Ditto to this. Ubuntu really got my attention originally by making it dead easy to set up a USB stick with a live image. This was perfect for my netbook.
Also, for the GP, I think they are heading towards DVD. I have noticed a couple of DVD images for natty on their cdimages website.
A) Windows
A1- look for the doc
A2.1- click the "run command" taskbar item
A2- type regedit
A2.2- supply credentials (assuming proper security setup)
A3- change the key as indicated
Done !
B) Linux
B1- look for the doc
B2- open a terminal
B3- sudo
B3b- type in credentials
B4- open the file
B5- edit as per doc, being careful of where you add your line, misspellings
that's already a few more steps and more possible mistakes... but now the real fun begins:
Additions mine... Let's be fair when discussing these comparisons. First off, you have to find the documentation regardless of a windows or Linux system. You can't just say that someone will hand you the docs in one situation but you have to hunt in another. Next, opening a terminal is just as easy as clicking (or having a keyboard shortcut), and in windows, you also have to click somewhere to enter the regedit command. I would also hope your system is set properly that modifying the registry requires authentication.
Next, you talk about making sure you place some particular option in exactly the right place with the right value. First, most configuration files don't care about order. Many follow the.ini approach. Second, good configuration files should come loaded with comments and examples. For example, the apache and sendmail configs are chock full of information. Personally, I have found the descriptions in regedit to be fairly limited.
Don't get me wrong, there are definite benefits to a centralized registry system, but I think that there are pros and cons to both approaches, and I lean towards the linux approach.
B6- find out the doc was only good for Horny Huckster (which is 9.7), you have 10.5 (which is... Priapic Prong ? maybe), look again
B7- don't find any doc you're 100% sure is germane to your setup/issue
Lastly, while documentation for open source projects can definitely be a weakness, (although programs on windows aren't completely immune to this criticism) getting the wrong version of the docs is a pebkac issue. If the man pages don't have the info you need, the distro should have the docs available for your version, or the project's website should have the docs for your version. Checking the docs' version should always be the first step.
There just isn't a mod-option for me to choose for this post. Because of the line-of-sight between myself and the sensor is disrupted by a divider, the lights going off is an awkward reminder that everyone else left the room... at least no one sees me having to stretch out and wave over the divider for the sensor to see me.
Oddly enough, I am not convinced. What the heck does it mean that PS can extend the.Net framework, and itself be extended by.Net? Also, for a program to have "built-in support" for PS doesn't make much sense at all because PS is a shell environment. Quite honestly, your post just seems like a bunch of buzzwords. To be more convincing, I would like to see some example commands showcasing the power and flexibility of PS.
Good questions. I don't have an answer for you because my advisors have been too cheap to let me get a new computer or any hardware good enough for dual-monitor output...
- I did not even know about it until the upgrade on one machine. The other I got as a gift actually, with this thing pre-installed. I use the machines for development work, it's not a phone or a tablet. I didn't as much 'test it out', as I was put in front of this fact: here is Unity. Apparently starting from some later version of Ubuntu there will be no easy 'log out/log into Classic' choice, so I don't like the way things are going (starting from the minimize/maximize/close buttons shifting to the left), I will definitely move to another distro, likely Debian and likely with the BSD core.
I am starting to wonder exactly which versions of Ubuntu you have had and now have. The movement of the buttons from the right to the left has been in Ubuntu since 10.10 (might even have been 10.04). This is nothing new (and there was a huge thing about it then, too). In that case, if you have 10.10, then that might explain the lack of an option to easily switch to classic view. The option is right there for me in the login screen to select desktop environments. If you do have 11.04, then this is clearly some sort of odd bug with the upgrade process. It is certainly not the intended behavior.
Maybe that would address your issue?
- no, my issue is the fact that one button now starts an application or is used to maximize one that is running already (in this case), is that how it works? My issue is only addressed by not using such an interface, clearly the entire paradigm is going somewhere that is at odds with my preferences.
The button doesn't act as a maximization button. If the application isn't running, it starts it. If it is running, but not in focus, it brings it to focus. If it is running and is in focus, it makes all of the application's windows available for selection. So, if I have no gnome-terminal windows open, then clicking on the terminal icon (which I added myself) would start a terminal window. I can easily add more windows (with a Ctrl-Alt-T or somesuch). If I also have firefox already open, then clicking on the FF icon would bring back firefox to focus. Clicking on the terminal icon would bring the last active terminal window to focus. Clicking on the terminal icon again will let me choose which terminal I want focused. This borrows a lot from OSX. It is different from the normal taskbar behavior I am used to, but I like the Expose-like behavior the second click brings.
2. On one of the machines I didn't have any settings, it was a new notebook. On the other I didn't see the icons. I don't know why, but why would I file a bug about something I am not going to use anyway?
I wouldn't expect you to if you aren't going to use it. But, then why did you test it out? If it was just to see if there was anything interesting as a casual interest, then why are you commenting on its limitations -- unless you actually do care about it being improved? If you don't want to file a bug report, that's your decision. but it is unfortunate because then Ubuntu would not get the benefit of your experience. It is hard to diagnose your problem otherwise.
3. If I don't see a window icon somewhere for a window, then I minimize it and again, I don't see an icon anywhere, then I assume the window is gone. Closed. If I have to click on the startup link for it again, it means to me I am launching a new instance of the app. If that's not how it works - it's broken from my perspective.
I think your issue is more along the lines of the auto-hide feature of the menubar. Auto-hide has been great for me, but if you have a large enough desktop, then maybe the benefit of the extra desktop space doesn't offset the negative impact of not having a constant visual clue of your running applications. Another comment elsewhere mentioned how to turn off auto-hide. Maybe that would address your issue?
4. Whether my opinion is 'shared by all' or not is really irrelevant, isn't it? I am not 'all'.
I think that was my point I was trying to make. Which is why I called it "perfectly valid". The point was that I could not address the opinions from a technical perspective, and that your preferences and workflow are your own. Obviously, if Unity can not work well with your current workflow, or can not convince you of an alternative (or better) workflow, then Unity is not the tool for you. If you care enough to make Unity better, then feel free to submit constructive criticism to the proper forum. If not, then find another desktop environment that better suits your needs. That's all.
Good to know. It will be interesting to see if they can better organize the configuration system so that one doesn't need to install additional packages for various "basic" config options.
It's okay that it's broken! You don't have to use it! It's only a default!
These things are marginally acceptable when you're talking about Fedora or Arch, but I was under the impression that Ubuntu held itself to a different standard.
Did I say that it was OK? No. I was merely tempering your statement that it was "forced" onto the users. Your language might even be acceptable as hyperbole if the "Classic Desktop" option was hidden, or if that option was some sort of second-class citizen in the ecosystem. But it isn't.
Does Unity need a lot more work? Yes. Is it completely un-usable? Not by my estimation. Are there alternatives equally accessible and equally supported? Yes.
I think that it has potential, but that they tried to remove too many settings, we ought to be allowed a convenient way of forcing the menu to stay open rather than have it randomly closing at times.
Agreed. It didn't make much sense to me to not have an option to turn off auto-hide.
Were you implying that there are ribbon interfaces in 11.04? Or maybe you were just making it clear that you aren't a Windows fan either? I am not sure, but I am guessing the latter because there are no ribbons in 11.04.
Anyway, from point of view of a developer, this GUI is a POS. No way I am going to use something that takes a chunk of my screen like that, gets rid of the battery power/network status icons (and whatever else I want to see on the launch bar).
If the battery power/network status icons are missing, then somehow your settings got cleared. That would be a bug and should be filed. My upgrade kept those icons exactly where they belonged. It is also fairly straight-forward to turn them back on in the Power Settings (where you can specify to always show an icon) and in the Network Settings (same thing). I will admit that it is more difficult now to add various applets, but I did managed to get the weather applet up and running after installing its package. Turns out that they don't include that by default anymore...
I honestly do not have patience to figure out where the application window goes once I attempt to minimize it. Is the window closed then and the application is killed? Is it somewhere on the background, and if so, how do I get it back? Where is the minimized window icon?
It doesn't "go" anywhere. If you want it back, click on its icon in the menu bar, and the last active window for that application will come up. Click again, and you will be able to choose which of the application's windows you want to view in a Expose-like manner. The program is not killed, there is just no individual icon representing the minimized window. You also can still use Alt-Tab.
That crazy search window that pops up only when I want to see the normal menu with the usual items in them - the entire idea of a menu tree is gone?
Pretty much. This has been my major qualm with Unity. While I am liking the interface on my netbook, I don't know how I would feel about it on my desktop. At the very least, I would like some way to get to the menu tree if I so desired. In addition, the current search menu/application "thingy" is a bit wonky. If I select a program to run from it (like mouse options), make a change, and then go back to it to select the next program to modify settings with, I am back to its starting position. I would rather it go back to where I left off. Luckily, you can select "System Settings" from the power button menu and you can get an app with all the system settings applications available for easy use.
The rest of your comments I consider to be perfectly valid opinions, but ones that aren't necessarily shared by all.
But I only lasted about 30 minutes with it on my laptop until I switched back to Gnome, because having 30 launcher icons scrolling up and down the screen and having to move the mouse to random parts of the screen to make them appear and scroll through the list to find the windows that are actually open is just awful.
I found that to have been a huge problem on my Eee with 10.10. However, with 11.04, I think they got this to be much better. The "scroll" is a lot smoother and less resource-hungry. I will definitely agree with you about large-workspace users. I have never felt that the OSX approach to be very friendly to people who like managing many windows simultaneously.
My other complaint is that the icon bar is stuck on the left. I'd prefer it on the right, or on the bottom. It's also annoying because it doesn't always stay out -- sometimes it hides, sometimes it takes multiple clicks to get something launched, sometimes it pretends to poke out, but then goes away... It's not as simple as "when I put my mouse over there, stay open until I move my mouse away". There seems to be other logic going on that I can't figure out.
Agreed, and I would imagine that that would be a feature to be introduced in the next version. As for the auto-hiding, I found the default logic wonky, especially on my netbook. If you go to the upper-left corner (all the way to the corner), you should have a guaranteed open of the menu bar. In addition, as I noted in another comment, there is an option somewhere that would let you set the activation area for opening the menubar to be just the upper-left corner. I found that option's auto-hide behavior to be much more intuitive. Unfortunately, I don't remember the exact location of the option.
I agree. I was using Unity (or whatever its precursor was called) in 10.10 because it was part of the Ubuntu-Netbook-Remix (note that the netbook edition is now only intended for ARM netbooks), and 11.04's Unity is a huge leap in stability, usability and just general look-and-feel. Are there still some more to be done? Absolutely, but for someone to claim that Unity is "throwing away years of UI experience" is hyperbole at best and disingenuous at worst. I think that we are going to learn a lot from the Unity/Gnome-Shell "experiments" and when the dust settles, we may have something that is a lot better than Gnome 2 ever was.
Had the same problem. I solved it by selecting an option to have the bar show when I touch the upper-left hand corner rather than the left-hand side. I forget exactly where the option is and I don't have the computer with me at the moment.
The members of OIN are not allowed to use their patents against other members.
First of all, that is only true for the disclosed patents, not any other patents they may have.
And second, it's a worthless promise.
Say I run BigCompany, and find through my association that my patent #12345678 could smash AnotherCompany and get us millions. I transfer my patent to BigCompany Holding, our parent company, who then in turn transfers it to BigCompany Law, another subsidary. They successfully sue AnotherCompany, and I get a big fat bonus from BigCompany Holding.
And I've done nothing wrong - my company didn't sue anyone, and I don't even hold the patent anymore.
I don't think it works that way. It is more likely that the company would be bound by contract to sell (or transfer) the OIN agreement with the patent. Of course, I don't know if that is the case, but given that your case requires everyone else to have completely incompetent lawyers, I highly doubt such an action would be possible.
I don't understand the love people have for One Note. I had it on my tablet a few years back. It was pretty bad at handwriting recognition and I just couldn't see the point of taking handwritten notes on a tablet when I could do it faster and more accurately on a keyboard.
Actually, it wouldn't be for handwriting recognition -- I would likely turn it off. I rather would like the ability to have an audio recording of a presentation synced with the notes that I take. Also, my notes involve lots of diagrams and math formulas. My LaTeX-fu just isn't that strong.
I remember the old Palm days with their shorthand and such. Adapt that idea. Give me alternative methods of entering data. Tie it all together with One Note.
This.
I have been a devout Linux user for the past eight years, and have been completely Windows-free for about six years now. But I have said over and over that I would love a pen-entry & One-Note device for my academic and research work. Alas, it just doesn't exist. There is a fellow student in my research group that has a Win7 touchscreen laptop with the flip-around screen. He uses it primarily for OneNote, but he has had so many problems with it (too heavy, driver issues, loose connections and randomly unresponsive screen) that I just couldn't convince myself that it was worth it.
Slashdot Mirror
Please!
And like I said, I think Ubuntu is heading towards making DVD sized images available as well as CD-sized "core" installs as well.
I could, but I wanted to have a "Linux-on-a-Stick"-like LiveCD on hand. It has been a very useful tool for diagnosing troublesome Windows and Linux computers where-ever I go. Also, it is useful for doing trial spins of alpha and beta releases of Ubuntu, especially with its persistent storage feature allows me to test the update programs as well. Nothing against PXE, I just find the USB image to be more useful for my purposes. Admittedly, the startup times are killing me...
True, but this is better in a registry how? (Btw, my point is merely that this sort of thing would likely only be found by perusing the docs or having someone tell you about it, regardless of how the setting is stored)
You arent alone. I rather like unity on my eeepc, but that might be largely because unity came from netbook remix. I haven't tried unity on a larger desktop, but I have a hard time imagining it's current incarnation to work well. But I certainly do see the direction it is heading, and I think it will work well.
Also, for the GP, I think they are heading towards DVD. I have noticed a couple of DVD images for natty on their cdimages website.
I'll bite
A) Windows A1- look for the doc A2.1- click the "run command" taskbar item A2- type regedit A2.2- supply credentials (assuming proper security setup) A3- change the key as indicated Done !
B) Linux B1- look for the doc B2- open a terminal B3- sudo B3b- type in credentials B4- open the file B5- edit as per doc, being careful of where you add your line, misspellings
that's already a few more steps and more possible mistakes... but now the real fun begins:
Additions mine... Let's be fair when discussing these comparisons. First off, you have to find the documentation regardless of a windows or Linux system. You can't just say that someone will hand you the docs in one situation but you have to hunt in another. Next, opening a terminal is just as easy as clicking (or having a keyboard shortcut), and in windows, you also have to click somewhere to enter the regedit command. I would also hope your system is set properly that modifying the registry requires authentication.
Next, you talk about making sure you place some particular option in exactly the right place with the right value. First, most configuration files don't care about order. Many follow the .ini approach. Second, good configuration files should come loaded with comments and examples. For example, the apache and sendmail configs are chock full of information. Personally, I have found the descriptions in regedit to be fairly limited.
Don't get me wrong, there are definite benefits to a centralized registry system, but I think that there are pros and cons to both approaches, and I lean towards the linux approach.
B6- find out the doc was only good for Horny Huckster (which is 9.7), you have 10.5 (which is ... Priapic Prong ? maybe), look again
B7- don't find any doc you're 100% sure is germane to your setup/issue
Lastly, while documentation for open source projects can definitely be a weakness, (although programs on windows aren't completely immune to this criticism) getting the wrong version of the docs is a pebkac issue. If the man pages don't have the info you need, the distro should have the docs available for your version, or the project's website should have the docs for your version. Checking the docs' version should always be the first step.
There just isn't a mod-option for me to choose for this post. Because of the line-of-sight between myself and the sensor is disrupted by a divider, the lights going off is an awkward reminder that everyone else left the room... at least no one sees me having to stretch out and wave over the divider for the sensor to see me.
Oddly enough, I am not convinced. What the heck does it mean that PS can extend the .Net framework, and itself be extended by .Net? Also, for a program to have "built-in support" for PS doesn't make much sense at all because PS is a shell environment. Quite honestly, your post just seems like a bunch of buzzwords. To be more convincing, I would like to see some example commands showcasing the power and flexibility of PS.
Good questions. I don't have an answer for you because my advisors have been too cheap to let me get a new computer or any hardware good enough for dual-monitor output...
But, then why did you test it out?
- I did not even know about it until the upgrade on one machine. The other I got as a gift actually, with this thing pre-installed. I use the machines for development work, it's not a phone or a tablet. I didn't as much 'test it out', as I was put in front of this fact: here is Unity. Apparently starting from some later version of Ubuntu there will be no easy 'log out/log into Classic' choice, so I don't like the way things are going (starting from the minimize/maximize/close buttons shifting to the left), I will definitely move to another distro, likely Debian and likely with the BSD core.
I am starting to wonder exactly which versions of Ubuntu you have had and now have. The movement of the buttons from the right to the left has been in Ubuntu since 10.10 (might even have been 10.04). This is nothing new (and there was a huge thing about it then, too). In that case, if you have 10.10, then that might explain the lack of an option to easily switch to classic view. The option is right there for me in the login screen to select desktop environments. If you do have 11.04, then this is clearly some sort of odd bug with the upgrade process. It is certainly not the intended behavior.
Maybe that would address your issue?
- no, my issue is the fact that one button now starts an application or is used to maximize one that is running already (in this case), is that how it works? My issue is only addressed by not using such an interface, clearly the entire paradigm is going somewhere that is at odds with my preferences.
The button doesn't act as a maximization button. If the application isn't running, it starts it. If it is running, but not in focus, it brings it to focus. If it is running and is in focus, it makes all of the application's windows available for selection. So, if I have no gnome-terminal windows open, then clicking on the terminal icon (which I added myself) would start a terminal window. I can easily add more windows (with a Ctrl-Alt-T or somesuch). If I also have firefox already open, then clicking on the FF icon would bring back firefox to focus. Clicking on the terminal icon would bring the last active terminal window to focus. Clicking on the terminal icon again will let me choose which terminal I want focused. This borrows a lot from OSX. It is different from the normal taskbar behavior I am used to, but I like the Expose-like behavior the second click brings.
2. On one of the machines I didn't have any settings, it was a new notebook. On the other I didn't see the icons. I don't know why, but why would I file a bug about something I am not going to use anyway?
I wouldn't expect you to if you aren't going to use it. But, then why did you test it out? If it was just to see if there was anything interesting as a casual interest, then why are you commenting on its limitations -- unless you actually do care about it being improved? If you don't want to file a bug report, that's your decision. but it is unfortunate because then Ubuntu would not get the benefit of your experience. It is hard to diagnose your problem otherwise.
3. If I don't see a window icon somewhere for a window, then I minimize it and again, I don't see an icon anywhere, then I assume the window is gone. Closed. If I have to click on the startup link for it again, it means to me I am launching a new instance of the app. If that's not how it works - it's broken from my perspective.
I think your issue is more along the lines of the auto-hide feature of the menubar. Auto-hide has been great for me, but if you have a large enough desktop, then maybe the benefit of the extra desktop space doesn't offset the negative impact of not having a constant visual clue of your running applications. Another comment elsewhere mentioned how to turn off auto-hide. Maybe that would address your issue?
4. Whether my opinion is 'shared by all' or not is really irrelevant, isn't it? I am not 'all'.
I think that was my point I was trying to make. Which is why I called it "perfectly valid". The point was that I could not address the opinions from a technical perspective, and that your preferences and workflow are your own. Obviously, if Unity can not work well with your current workflow, or can not convince you of an alternative (or better) workflow, then Unity is not the tool for you. If you care enough to make Unity better, then feel free to submit constructive criticism to the proper forum. If not, then find another desktop environment that better suits your needs. That's all.
s/your/his/g I didn't notice that you were a different user than who I was originally replying to.
Good to know. It will be interesting to see if they can better organize the configuration system so that one doesn't need to install additional packages for various "basic" config options.
It's okay that it's broken! You don't have to use it! It's only a default!
These things are marginally acceptable when you're talking about Fedora or Arch, but I was under the impression that Ubuntu held itself to a different standard.
Did I say that it was OK? No. I was merely tempering your statement that it was "forced" onto the users. Your language might even be acceptable as hyperbole if the "Classic Desktop" option was hidden, or if that option was some sort of second-class citizen in the ecosystem. But it isn't.
Does Unity need a lot more work? Yes. Is it completely un-usable? Not by my estimation. Are there alternatives equally accessible and equally supported? Yes.
I think that it has potential, but that they tried to remove too many settings, we ought to be allowed a convenient way of forcing the menu to stay open rather than have it randomly closing at times.
Agreed. It didn't make much sense to me to not have an option to turn off auto-hide.
You would be right if it was "forced" on you with no alternative. But, you can always select "Classic Desktop" at login. Nothing is forced upon you.
I hate the 'ribbon' garbage as well, BTW.
Were you implying that there are ribbon interfaces in 11.04? Or maybe you were just making it clear that you aren't a Windows fan either? I am not sure, but I am guessing the latter because there are no ribbons in 11.04.
Anyway, from point of view of a developer, this GUI is a POS. No way I am going to use something that takes a chunk of my screen like that, gets rid of the battery power/network status icons (and whatever else I want to see on the launch bar).
If the battery power/network status icons are missing, then somehow your settings got cleared. That would be a bug and should be filed. My upgrade kept those icons exactly where they belonged. It is also fairly straight-forward to turn them back on in the Power Settings (where you can specify to always show an icon) and in the Network Settings (same thing). I will admit that it is more difficult now to add various applets, but I did managed to get the weather applet up and running after installing its package. Turns out that they don't include that by default anymore...
I honestly do not have patience to figure out where the application window goes once I attempt to minimize it. Is the window closed then and the application is killed? Is it somewhere on the background, and if so, how do I get it back? Where is the minimized window icon?
It doesn't "go" anywhere. If you want it back, click on its icon in the menu bar, and the last active window for that application will come up. Click again, and you will be able to choose which of the application's windows you want to view in a Expose-like manner. The program is not killed, there is just no individual icon representing the minimized window. You also can still use Alt-Tab.
That crazy search window that pops up only when I want to see the normal menu with the usual items in them - the entire idea of a menu tree is gone?
Pretty much. This has been my major qualm with Unity. While I am liking the interface on my netbook, I don't know how I would feel about it on my desktop. At the very least, I would like some way to get to the menu tree if I so desired. In addition, the current search menu/application "thingy" is a bit wonky. If I select a program to run from it (like mouse options), make a change, and then go back to it to select the next program to modify settings with, I am back to its starting position. I would rather it go back to where I left off. Luckily, you can select "System Settings" from the power button menu and you can get an app with all the system settings applications available for easy use.
The rest of your comments I consider to be perfectly valid opinions, but ones that aren't necessarily shared by all.
But I only lasted about 30 minutes with it on my laptop until I switched back to Gnome, because having 30 launcher icons scrolling up and down the screen and having to move the mouse to random parts of the screen to make them appear and scroll through the list to find the windows that are actually open is just awful.
I found that to have been a huge problem on my Eee with 10.10. However, with 11.04, I think they got this to be much better. The "scroll" is a lot smoother and less resource-hungry. I will definitely agree with you about large-workspace users. I have never felt that the OSX approach to be very friendly to people who like managing many windows simultaneously.
My other complaint is that the icon bar is stuck on the left. I'd prefer it on the right, or on the bottom. It's also annoying because it doesn't always stay out -- sometimes it hides, sometimes it takes multiple clicks to get something launched, sometimes it pretends to poke out, but then goes away... It's not as simple as "when I put my mouse over there, stay open until I move my mouse away". There seems to be other logic going on that I can't figure out.
Agreed, and I would imagine that that would be a feature to be introduced in the next version. As for the auto-hiding, I found the default logic wonky, especially on my netbook. If you go to the upper-left corner (all the way to the corner), you should have a guaranteed open of the menu bar. In addition, as I noted in another comment, there is an option somewhere that would let you set the activation area for opening the menubar to be just the upper-left corner. I found that option's auto-hide behavior to be much more intuitive. Unfortunately, I don't remember the exact location of the option.
I agree. I was using Unity (or whatever its precursor was called) in 10.10 because it was part of the Ubuntu-Netbook-Remix (note that the netbook edition is now only intended for ARM netbooks), and 11.04's Unity is a huge leap in stability, usability and just general look-and-feel. Are there still some more to be done? Absolutely, but for someone to claim that Unity is "throwing away years of UI experience" is hyperbole at best and disingenuous at worst. I think that we are going to learn a lot from the Unity/Gnome-Shell "experiments" and when the dust settles, we may have something that is a lot better than Gnome 2 ever was.
Had the same problem. I solved it by selecting an option to have the bar show when I touch the upper-left hand corner rather than the left-hand side. I forget exactly where the option is and I don't have the computer with me at the moment.
The members of OIN are not allowed to use their patents against other members.
First of all, that is only true for the disclosed patents, not any other patents they may have.
And second, it's a worthless promise. Say I run BigCompany, and find through my association that my patent #12345678 could smash AnotherCompany and get us millions. I transfer my patent to BigCompany Holding, our parent company, who then in turn transfers it to BigCompany Law, another subsidary. They successfully sue AnotherCompany, and I get a big fat bonus from BigCompany Holding. And I've done nothing wrong - my company didn't sue anyone, and I don't even hold the patent anymore.
I don't think it works that way. It is more likely that the company would be bound by contract to sell (or transfer) the OIN agreement with the patent. Of course, I don't know if that is the case, but given that your case requires everyone else to have completely incompetent lawyers, I highly doubt such an action would be possible.
I don't understand the love people have for One Note. I had it on my tablet a few years back. It was pretty bad at handwriting recognition and I just couldn't see the point of taking handwritten notes on a tablet when I could do it faster and more accurately on a keyboard.
Actually, it wouldn't be for handwriting recognition -- I would likely turn it off. I rather would like the ability to have an audio recording of a presentation synced with the notes that I take. Also, my notes involve lots of diagrams and math formulas. My LaTeX-fu just isn't that strong.
I remember the old Palm days with their shorthand and such. Adapt that idea. Give me alternative methods of entering data. Tie it all together with One Note.
This.
I have been a devout Linux user for the past eight years, and have been completely Windows-free for about six years now. But I have said over and over that I would love a pen-entry & One-Note device for my academic and research work. Alas, it just doesn't exist. There is a fellow student in my research group that has a Win7 touchscreen laptop with the flip-around screen. He uses it primarily for OneNote, but he has had so many problems with it (too heavy, driver issues, loose connections and randomly unresponsive screen) that I just couldn't convince myself that it was worth it.
P.S. - I loved Graffiti too.