Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Are Power Users Too Cool For Ubuntu Unity?

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the twm-or-bust dept.

Ubuntu 798

darthcamaro writes "There are a lot of us that really don't like Unity. Ubuntu Founder Mark Shuttleworth defended Unity today, arguing that even 'cool' power users should like usability and ease of use. Then again he admitted that some of us are just too cool even for Unity. 'There is going to be a crowd that is just too cool to use something that looks really slick and there is nothing we can do for them,' Shuttleworth said. 'Fortunately in Ubuntu there are tons of options and lots of choice and ways to skin the cat.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Or just maybe... (2)

TheInternetGuy (2006682) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902404)

Unity is too cool for power users?

Slackware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902436)

is what comes to mind. Making users work hard for no reason since 199*.

Or Arch Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902472)

The new slackware, in my opinion.

Re:Or Arch Linux (1)

2.7182 (819680) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902624)

I remember a friend who was really into slackware telling me he could put it right on my new Sony Vaio around 2000. Sure I said, and then after 10 hours of stubborn attempts he had it on. Not much worked, but it was dual bootable with win98. So anytime I needed to connect with the outside world, I'd dump whatever files into some dual drive space and reboot into linux so the modem would work. I am a little more practical now and over my need to have the most macho linux.

Re:Slackware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902604)

Unity is the reason my desktop is now running Slackware with XFCE. Yes it's a little more work with some things (not everything, though) but it's also not crippled by a mobile phone interface.

IMHO, Ubuntu died after 10.04 and I shall mourn it's loss from my fully functional Slackware system.

Re:Or just maybe... (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902492)

In Soviet Russia, Unity is usable!

Re:Or just maybe... (2)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902686)

I think you need to be deported back to meme joke school. I recommend starting with this batch of actual Yakov Smirnoff jokes [] and this collection of barely funny "In Soviet Russia" jokes [] . See if you can spot the pattern, and determine what you did wrong. (HINT: just "is" never works as a verb.)

Re:Or just maybe... (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902744)

See if you can spot the "In Soviet Russia, (thing is backwards/reversed)" pattern in my previous post.

Re:Or just maybe... (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902822)

Your post implies that "usable is Unity". Somehow I don't think that's what you wanted. Soviet Russia jokes aren't about negation, they're about inverting.

Re:Or just maybe... (3, Insightful)

Garridan (597129) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902514)

Cool? Hell no. Unity is too 1989 [] for me. Also, way too buggy to be a no-questions-asked replacement UI in a stable release. I haven't used it since Natty, since it crashed so hard I had to hard-reboot the machine, less than 2 minutes after boot (just clicking around in the menus, looking for a way to configure the system). That experience really made me wonder: do ubuntu devs eat their own dogfood?

Re:Or just maybe... (-1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902566)

Or just maybe "power users" bitch about every tiny change. That's why Slashdot still looks just like it did 10 years ago.

It's the same crybaby attitude people had about Vista's interface, KDE 4's interface, the redesign, etc. etc. Heard it all before.

Yes, design changes can truly make something unusable. But chances are if you say that, you're just whining and being overly dramatic.

Re:Or just maybe... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902642)

That's why Slashdot still looks just like it did 10 years ago.

Hey! Bring back my javascript-free /. !

Re:Or just maybe... (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902670)

Or just maybe "power users" bitch about every tiny change. That's why Slashdot still looks just like it did 10 years ago.

Slashdot had a major overhaul in '06.

Re:Or just maybe... (3, Insightful)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902824)

That's why Slashdot still looks just like it did 10 years ago.

Not true at all. I there have been a number of instances of significant degradation of /.'s look and feel over the last decade.

Re:Or just maybe... (1)

mattventura (1408229) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902826)

Your post completely ignores the fact that there is no objective evidence that this interface is better. Therefore, it becomes a change for the sake of change, something which is pointless and does nothing but confuses users. If they could make something that was actually an improvement, I could get behind it.

Re:Or just maybe... (5, Insightful)

TheInternetGuy (2006682) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902652)

Some of the negative comments on this post, has made me realize that I probably need to clarify my intended meaning somewhat.
As a power user, the last thing I need is for my desktop to try to be 'cool'.
It should help me perform the basic tasks of starting and managing running applications. It should be light weight and customizable.
So by trying to be 'cool' Unity alienates the power user community. And then by taking away the possibilities to customize it makes them install something else.

Re:Or just maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902788)

Welllll..... He's right about the cry baby attitude from people on slashdot. There are a ton of whiners on here. I agree with you on why a computer does NOT need to look cool unless your an Apple Zealot. Computers are supposed to 'work'. That is do things. Same reason I could never understand screen savers that people 'wanted' to look at. Turn off your monitor and stop waisting power. I just can't see all the junk between me and the command line. Or, more appropriately the programs. Yet, on the other side of it, I really do think there is a lot of waisted space on GUI that could be used for a lot of really neat things. What about debug feedback in the title bars? Or resource feedback. Stuff like that.

I guess the ultimate difference here is the difference between people who use computers for entertainment and those who use them to work.

Re:Or just maybe... (2)

similar_name (1164087) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902774)

If you're going to use Compiz for your eye-candy at least install the Compiz manager by default

If you're going to take 3 icons to display 'office' programs at least spare one for a menu.

I'm writing this from 11.10. Installed Saturday. My biggest complaint is that processes are allowed to take 100% of the CPU and freeze the user.

E17 already. (3, Insightful)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902406)

It's fine if you don't mind a slightly looser integration of GNOME.

Plenty of eyecandy to spare.

Re:E17 already. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902592)

To be honest, I think KDE, Gnome, E17, XFCE, hell even plain FVWM are too dumbed-down. In fact that includes everything designed after the Xerox Alto's ideas.

And don't get me wrong: I love eyecandy, as I've got emotions too. (But it has to have a point or a use. Even if that is just to make me feel better. [Which is pretty important to me.])

And I like when I have to think less to achieve something.
It's just that I notice how often I just press the key on the top right of my keyboard that drops down Yakuake (Quake-style console) [] and just type it in, because going through the GUI is such a hassle. (I use KDE, but it's true with Windows XP and OS X too).

It's because the GUIs are so dumbed down, that only a dumb person can still use them.
The moment I noticed this, was when I tried to help my n00b brother with his new Mac Pro. I couldn't do simple things like configure the network unless I started to think "Hmm... what would a dumb person do?". And what do you know, that worked! But since everyone else is just copying off each other and OS X, this is true for all of them too, to some extend.
I was a bit shocked.

One day I realized the core problem: It's NOT simplicity that is the ideal we should all strive for. Because simplicity, driven far enough, makes it less efficient again.
The original ideal we should go for, is efficiency!
Doing more with less does only mean "simpler" half of the time.

And here's the kicker: We're WAY past the point of maximum efficiency, deep is the territory where it just slows you down.

All just because we want to save brainpower?
You know what we call somebody who saves so much energy that it actually costs him more energy?
LAZY! :)

Long time Ubuntu User here (4, Insightful)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902408)

But I fucking hate both GNOME 3 and Unity with a passion.

Canonical and the GNOME tools fucked up a good thing that was GNOME 2.

Now get off my lawn.

Re:Long time Ubuntu User here (5, Informative)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902522)

I've never met anyone who has used Ubuntu and who likes Unity, power user, novice, script kiddie... It is bloated, slow and difficult to use (I suppose unless you're on a tablet/netbook). Gnome 3 still sucks as a UI, but it's at least responsive. The worst feature of unity is changing the "start menu" to that stupid search box. We use UIs because we're not able to remember names and obscure commands and parameters, but now they give us a UI that may as well have been a command prompt with find / -name "$1" built in to it.

Netbooks or tablets MAY take over one day, I personally don't think so, but for now if it's not iPad it's irrelevant, and if you're using Ubuntu you're not using an iPad. Stop dicking around, learn from Microsoft and the benighted ribbon interface.

Re:Long time Ubuntu User here (1)

Brad1138 (590148) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902650)

We use UIs because we're not able to remember names and obscure commands and parameters

Exactly, I may have found/installed an obscure program I may use twice a year at best. I can't always remember what it is called. With no easy way to find it, I'll end up with multiple installed programs I forgot I had cluttering up my machine. When I do remember the program, I may not be able to find it.

Re:Long time Ubuntu User here (2, Insightful)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902662)

Yup. Microsoft's ribbon and Ubuntu's Unity are like those lame attempts of annoying high-school kids trying to compensate for their lack of personalities by dressing and behaving outrageously annoyingly ("Look how different we are, man! You're just a conformist square!").

There's a reason why Just Works(tm) just works. Operation, not appearance, is the better indicator of personality.

Re:Long time Ubuntu User here (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902598)

Canonical and the GNOME tools fucked up a good thing that was GNOME 2

I believe its still there.

Re:Long time Ubuntu User here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902682)

but mr. mr. Please can we have our ball back. The desire to be cutting edge is perhaps a glowing one, but stability, or lack of it, is the make or break issue. An unstable operating system is the last thing any one wants or needs, even the cool people. I know I could open up a terminal write six or seven hundred lines of code if I wanted to open my browser or get my video to work, but I am not looking for a toy. I want to do things other than screw around with the operating system.

Dilettante (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902412)

Jack of all trades, master of none.

Fuck unity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902416)

There I said it. The first thing everyone does after installing 11.X on a desktop platform is install a different UI.

Mod me down all you want, working at a 50% ubuntu shop full of power users it's the truth.

'cool' power users should like usability and ease (5, Insightful)

JustNiz (692889) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902420)

>> 'cool' power users should like usability and ease of use

I do. Thats why I avoid Unity.

Unity gets in the way. It takes way to many actions to find and launch something compared to gnome 2.

Re:'cool' power users should like usability and ea (0)

msauve (701917) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902482)

"It takes way to many actions to find and launch something compared to gnome 2."

ITYM "...the bash shell."

Re:'cool' power users should like usability and ea (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902548)

The terminal and bash shell are still there. They're just harder to find. I just went to this, and the abrupt change was disconcerting. I suspect I'll get over it.

Re:'cool' power users should like usability and ea (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902544)

I love unity and the slick interface it provides. Unfortunately, it doesn't love me. I want the launcher at the bottom. Can't figure out how to do this. It runs slower than KDE 4 on my netbook and I could have sworn it was a netbook interface. I can't justify the lost productivity as I wait for things to load or while I fruitlessly hunt for my stuff at the bottom of the screen. In my opinion it should run faster since there is less to it. Fundamentally, I switched to Debian and realized that I'd forgotten what a fast responsive UI felt like!

Re:'cool' power users should like usability and ea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902580)

Yeah man that one click is just killing me. I can't believe they made it so hard. Did I just get trolled?

Shuttleworth: (2)

Georules (655379) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902430)

I think the unity interface looks kinda cool, and the first thought I had was that it would be neat on a tablet. However, it does nothing for usability on my desktop. Especially when programming via multiple terminal sessions. Which, is the only time that I really ever use linux. Thanks for judging me, one of Ubuntu's previous fans, asshole.

Piss off, Shuttleworth (2)

cameroneagans (917651) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902432)

It's not about being "too cool". It's about being sick of a crappy, poorly thought out interface that caters to users that want everything done for them. Power users and people that know what they're doing typically don't want magic - they want to know what's happening on their system and to not have an interface like Unity shoved down their throat.

Re:Piss off, Shuttleworth (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902600)

I'm a developer and I love "magic" in a home computer. The problem is that Unity's "magic" is more like a magician making you do all the work blindfolded, and then declaring, "How did it happen? Must be magic!"

-1 To Slashdot (4, Insightful)

liquidweaver (1988660) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902440)

Is it possible to mod the base post down as flamebait?

Re:-1 To Slashdot (1)

lgarner (694957) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902594)

Sounds like a good idea, but there wouldn't be many posts left. Maybe it's still a good idea.

I guess I am just too cool. (1)

Gunfighter (1944) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902452)

I tried Unity. It cut my productivity, so I switched to Xubuntu. Now I like it better than I did the original Ubuntu Classic.

Re:I guess I am just too cool. (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902622)

i've used xubuntu all along as i used linux to "refurbish" a dated laptop with a damaged windows xp recovery partition (i have since found the oem restore cd but i have grown accustomed to my wifi working when i switch it on and not having to uninstall and reinstall drivers from time to time to convince it to connect, i have also grown far too accustomed to repositories instead of having to hope the website i found for a particular freeware app is the real website and not a clone or domain squatter delivering a trojan'd version or a legit freeware site delivering a version 2 years out of date.

Re:I guess I am just too cool. (2)

Brad1138 (590148) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902678)

I switched to Mint and like it better than Ubuntu, mainly because a number of the programs I had to install after every Ubuntu install are already installed. That and it reminds me of 10.04 or 10.10, it just works well. Don't know what I'll do when Mint 12 comes out with Gnome 3...

ya (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902466)

I don't like unity, gnome 3 is somewhat bearable

Why I hate unity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902468)

Every time I'm browsing and I have to hit the back button, poof unity swoops in and blocks me. This annoyed me so much after a week I have to apt-get remove unity. Then just install cairo-dock and thats all you really need.

Re:Why I hate unity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902790)

Is "poof unity" the value George Michael and Elton John converge upon as they move in for a hug?

No it's just the wrong solution to the problem (5, Insightful)

brainchill (611679) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902478)

The unity interface turns every computer into a netbook interface that just isn't appropriate for regular computer use or users ....

Re:No it's just the wrong solution to the problem (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902634)

All other problems aside, it also makes the UI perform like it's on a netbook.

Re:No it's just the wrong solution to the problem (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902772)

All other problems aside, it also makes the UI perform like it's on a netbook.

Unity actually works OK on a netbook; it just sucks for doing real work on a real screen. And the 'global menu' sucks everywhere unless you always run your windows at full screen size.

Ubuntu ... (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902480)

... Bantu for "I don't know how to configure Debian".

Re:Ubuntu ... (2)

TavoX (962277) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902582)

I'd say that Debian is just as easy to configure nowadays due to Ubuntu's bloat. And It's maybe easier if you want to customize things.

Try Lubuntu! (2)

mercury7 (212316) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902484)

I upgraded from Ubuntu 10.04 to 11.10 and was very unhappy with Unity. Fortunately I found out about Lubuntu, which is "a variant of Ubuntu that is lighter, less resource hungry and more energy-efficient by using lightweight applications and LXDE, The Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment, as its default GUI." It is wonderful, fast and efficient! Get it here: []

Re:Try Lubuntu! (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902526)

LXDE drives me nuts, use XFCE, same concept, but every little annoyance is not there

Re:Try Lubuntu! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902590)

Mod up.

Lubuntu isn't the usual "lightweight" that means a stripped-out GUI that requires CLI for config and sometimes even daily tasks. Instead it's the classic w95 style startbar GUI and the Lubuntu folks have made sure all the usual dialogs expected by Ubuntu users are in place. It's the cat's whiskers.

Seriously, if you don't like Unity, try Lubuntu. It's probably exactly what you want.

Cannot figure wtf Shuttleworth is smoking. Back when Lubuntu started, my guess was he had looked at the KDE4 trainwreck, then looked at GNOME3 on the calendar, and started Lubuntu as a way out of that mess. Then he says crap like this. Honestly don't get the man at all.

Disclaimer: I'm not cool. I'm 50 and use L/Ubuntu for godsakes. How the hell is that "cool"?

KDE? (1)

SBJ95 (992570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902490)

Am I the only one who uses KDE anymore? The latest in the KDE 4.x line is plenty stable, and imho it's the best, most usable, most stable, etc. desktop environment out there.

Re:KDE? (1)

jax555 (1406263) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902546)

I agree - Would love to have stayed with KDE3 rather than 4. But always hated Gnome and somehow Unity made Gnome seem nice.

Re:KDE? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902556)

I love KDE.. No, you aren't the only one who uses KDE...

I'm a heavy Linux user, but I've been helping the KDE team out getting those KDE apps running on Windows... So yea, I haven't been spending my time working under Linux like I used to, because a lot of the action in 2012 is going to be on tablets (Plasma Active One) and MS Windows (KDE for Windows).

Re:KDE? (1)

TavoX (962277) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902558)

I'm using KDE since Ubuntu 11.10 dropped Gnome Classic (which was really much more stable than both Unity and KDE). I Turned off nepomuk and now it is driving me crazy with notifications that appear even after turning them off. Even then, it's the best I could find in this distro.

Re:KDE? (0)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902730)

Am I the only one who uses KDE anymore?


The latest in the KDE 4.x line is plenty stable

Too much, too late. It has been years since I touched KDE, and the other day I received an email from the bugzilla asking about a bug I opened. If bugs can remain open for that long, you know there is something wrong.

Sorry, but throwing away your entire codebase and starting from scratch is a universally bad idea, and focusing on cool looking features while failing to fix showstopper bugs makes things even worse. The KDE team said that the 3.5 branch was intended for people who wanted stability, and they did not even address critical bugs there. I need my software to work today, tomorrow, and next week, and I do not have time to fix showstopper bugs for the KDE team while they try to make useless desktop widgets look fancier.

Re:KDE? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902738)

You're not the only. KDE 4.7 is the best power-user desktop going at the moment, in my opinion (and that includes non-Linux desktops like Win7 too).

It's not me, it's you... Wait, that's backwards... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902496)

It's not that we're too cool. It's that Unity is too shit.

bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902516)

no problem.. will use Mint/Debian until they come to their senses!

Power users should like usability and ease.... (3)

tbird81 (946205) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902520)

That's the exact problem!

Unity is not usable. It is not easy to use or intuitive.

Right-clicking should allow us to alter things. Things should be consistent. We don't need have the screen taken up with giant buttons - that doesn't help and it's not easy to use! It's just annoying.

Unity drove me away from Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902532)

When Unity first came out I thought it was pretty neat. I liked it, thought it was a nice looking desktop. But it fell flat on its face the moment I needed to do some serious multitasking. At that moment I decided I needed a new desktop environment, and considering 11.04's bugginess I figured I might as well try out a different distro while I'm at it. I'm now happily running Arch Linux with XFCE. It's not quite as pretty looking, but it lets me get my work done without getting in the way.

How old are you??? (5, Insightful)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902536)

Did I blink and end up back in primary school? Does anyone who refuses to use Ubuntu have cooties too?

And how ridiculous is it to say geeks are "too cool" to use a product. What are you smoking!?!? Geeks love new things that function well and allow them to do cool things. They do not shun these things based on idiotic social protocol.

So take your poorly written crippled little interface and put it back in a dark cupboard, or if you're out of room shove it somewhere the sun don't shine!

I am sick and tired of free software developers thinking that because their product is free (in both senses) they can dictate what I do or do not like, or what features I do or do not want. If you take a feature away, either give me a way to re-enable it or suffer my ire. Firefox devs, Google, Ubuntu...that means you. Apple, Microsoft, you're not exempt because I pay for your product.

Re:How old are you??? (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902766)

And how ridiculous is it to say geeks are "too cool" to use a product. What are you smoking!?!? Geeks love new things that function well and allow them to do cool things. They do not shun these things based on idiotic social protocol.

You must be new here.

c'mon really!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902554)

at least give us an option.. gnome 2 worked great on my old laptop, unity doesn't! Isn't that supposed to be one of the perks of Linux?. rejuvenating old hardware?

Almost... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902572)

Almost Shuttleworth... I don't use unity because I like to skin puppies... key difference.

Why Unity/Gnome3/Windows8... (2)

Brad1138 (590148) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902574)

I don't get why there is this push away from the program menu we have been using for over 15 years. I still like it. Just because it has been around a while doesn't mean it needs to be replaced. I switched from Ubuntu after 5 years to Mint to get away from Unity, now Mint is going to Gnome 3. I'll try that, but if it is too much like Unity, I'll probably go to Xubuntu.

Re:Why Unity/Gnome3/Windows8... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902644)

a hierarchical categorization of the tools and applications installed on your system is far too 'technical' and 'bookish'.

Just tell your computer how you 'feel' and let it guide you to apps it devines to be appropriate.

Re:Why Unity/Gnome3/Windows8... (1)

QuasiEvil (74356) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902722)

Likewise - I don't understand why the current trend is to throw away time-tested interface metaphors for something completely different that - as best I can tell - nobody likes.

Re:Why Unity/Gnome3/Windows8... (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902792)

I don't get why there is this push away from the program menu we have been using for over 15 years.

Apple. If Apple does it, everyone thinks it must be the right thing to do.

Just because it has been around a while doesn't mean it needs to be replaced.

How about technical reasons? Linear menus are terrible in terms of how people learn motions. Radial menus have always been superior, but it is hard to make radial menus work when you have dozens or even hundreds of items to choose from. Too bad Unity doesn't use a radial menu either (perhaps combined with some search features to reduce the number of options).

Very useable (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902584)

I agree with Mark, Unity is very easy to use and it's a very discoverable environment. That's not the problem. The reason I don't use Unity as my main desktop is it's not configurable. Power users like easy-to-use and accessible, they also like to configure things to suit their work flow. That's what makes them power users. Unity is also a bit buggy (as of Ubuntu 11.10).

Re:Very useable (1)

TarMil (1623915) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902778)

Looks like you've been modded "-1 Disagree"...

I like usabiity (5, Insightful)

grumbel (592662) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902586)

I like usability, but usability doesn't just mean that a dumb user can figure it out, it also means that it gets the job done with the least amount of effort and Unity just doesn't cut it right now. One thing for example really nice in Gnome2 was that i could have multiple panels, spread across different monitors and filled with the apps needed for that monitor. With Unity I can't even move the dock thing, let alone place it on a monitor of my choice. Also starting an app: Yeah, for big applications, having the icon click be turned into a 'switch to already running app' is great, however for terminals is awkward as hell and makes no conceptual sense. That's simply not how you use a terminal and the dock doesn't provide any proper way to change that behavior. Menu on-top, same issue, great when you have a small screen, awful and confusing on a big screen one, especially when an app spawns multiple windows.

There are also very basic issues with Unity, such as: Does it even work? Well, right now with my ATI drivers, no it doesn't. It produces counterless ugly graphic glitches and problems that make it unusable.

I mean in essence I don't even get why Unity exists. Desktop environments are not that complicated, you have buttons to click on stuff and they make windows open, hardly anything has changed with that in 20 years. The thing that makes the environment more usable lies in making it consistent and bug free. Throwing what we have and starting a new doesn't make it better, it just makes it different for being different sake.

Wanna make application installation easier? Don't twiggle with the start menu, fix dpkg and allow me to easily install software from third party sources across distributions and allow me to install multiple versions of the same app.

Too crappy ... Not too cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902588)

Sorry guys Unity isn't nice or usable. I enjoy my macs for that aspect of computing. I find Unity annoying and clumsy without any benefit over gnome. That isn't to say gnome is the last word in usability (see the mac remarks) ... But Unity was a leap in some direction other than ease of use and/or forward

What now for desktop linux users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902602)

I used Ubuntu since I did not want to be bothered any longer with lowish-level sysadmin, and I've convinced a fair number of (formerly non-linux) users at work to adopt it. Seriously, what is the best option now? (no, this is a real corporation doing real work, it's not an option to move everyone to slates. It's also not an option to tell the two-monitor guys to just get by with one and pretend they are working on a slate.) IMO Ubuntu was just superb at giving a no-brainer reliable linux desktop for PCs.
    What is the consensus best choice now? Reliability, being fairly up-to-date/secure, and low/zero sysadmin overhead is the goal here; I understand there are some tradeoffs in this wish-list. But I need an Ubuntu level of goodness and, moreover, _well known_ goodness so as to recommend to management.
    (N.b. I kind of wish Ubuntu had not been free. We would have happily paid them nontrivial to keep maintaining desktop support - at least for a couple more years)

That's why we didn't go ubuntu (4, Interesting)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902606)

I run about 100 linux servers. Currently they are ubuntu servers and are unsupported. We are about to do a refresh and my boss asked me to get official support. I looked at ubuntu support, but honestly the direction ubuntu is going on their desktop and the way their mouthpieces act has caused my team and I to not want to risk staying with ubuntu. We are looking at Redhat.

I guess we are too cool to give them money.

You Know Why Unity Will Fail? (3)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902608)

Because if we were happy to have someone else dictate to us how we should use our systems, we'd have stuck with Windows or OSX. The UNIX world hasn't even managed to settle on a single window manager, much less a desktop environment that no one but the guy who created it seems to like.

Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902616)

I switched to Xfce, not because I'm too cool, but because I'd like to be able to use a menu if I need it.

But where to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902618)

I just installed Debian on my main computer the other day for the first time in 6 years. It was right after I did the upgrade to Ubuntu 11.10. The thing is though, all the distro's are heading in similar directions, with Gnome 3 on Debian's horizon and already prematurely part of Fedora. I played with Gnome 3 briefly and found it slightly (but not much) better that Unity, but still not as good as Gnome 2.

While Debian is great, it just lacks the 'finish' of Ubuntu. So I've fallen back to a safe haven out of necessity but feel kinda distribution-less.

What if we are right, Mark? (4, Insightful)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902628)

Mr. Shuttleworth should stop for a moment and think: "What if they are right? What if Unity is a poor design? What if putting a smartphone-ish interface on a desktop computer is a damn stupid idea?"

Are Power Users Too Cool For Ubuntu Unity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902632)


Once and for all (4, Insightful)

RenHoek (101570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902640)

The Ubuntu people better read this thread because I'm only going to say it once more..

It's a goddamn OPERATING SYSTEM!

People use it to start and control applications. It's not supposed to be shiny, wobbly and sparkly. I still set Windows7 to Classic Mode because I don't want it to use up resources for bullshit and the menus are set up sane in this mode. The only thing I somewhat liked about Unity is that you have more screen real-estate, but last time I used it, it was messing up even something as simply as Alt-Tab.

Mark Shuttleworth may classify me as 'too cool' and beyond hope of ever being pleased. But the fact is, I'm a pretty laid back user. The only thing I'm not is a 14 year old girl who wants everything to be pretty or a Mac user who values looks over functionality.

And what the hell is it with things needing to be changed for change sake? I recall most of my friends rebuilding their webpage from the ground up every 6 months, just so that it would be new. It seems Ubuntu is suffering from the same problem. Gnome2 was just fine, and if there was something wrong with it, they should've just fixed it instead of throwing it out the window. I still have to see any real advantage of Unity over Gnome2. All I encounter is a ton of things that don't work. And even if you make the argument that they are only small things, Unity is killing the user experience by a thousand cuts.

Nothing to do with "cool" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902654)

Unity is completely unusable. When I upgraded and it took over my laptop, I couldn't actually perform basic functions, like opening a terminal, or logging out, or browsing files. I tried to give it a fair shake, I really did, but when you completely remove nearly all basic functionality, you can't expect anything else. It's garbage. Switched to Lubuntu to get a sane interface, one that actually performs functions a user needs.

Right... (1, Insightful)

cshark (673578) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902664)

I'm too cool for an os interface that sucks my productivity, limits my control over a system I own, that doesn't allow me to multi task, that changes my security settings because I'm too stupid to know what I want to do to my system. Go fuck yourself Mark Shuttleworth. The power users have been the only thing that keeps your self important little distro in business over the last decade. You sniveling piece of human garbage. It's one thing to change your user interface. It's another to piss on the only people give a shit. Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you.

click Behavior (1)

dieu1979 (993752) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902666)

If you add more click to go somewhere in a Gui i call this regression!

Does it matter? (1)

Codeyman (1098807) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902684)

I've been using wmii for few years and gnome as the fallback DE.. All I do on any DE is assign a keyboard shortcut for terminal, browser and IM client. For most users that is good enough. And aren't power users on linux supposed to be good on the terminal anyway. I fail to see why desktop environments are an issue.. I think Mr Shutteworth was referring to self proclaimed geeks who really aren't .. And as to why he is thrusting Unity down our throats is convergence, it is because no one in the tech industry doubts that we are moving away from desktops, so Microsoft, Apple and Canonical are taking steps to ensure that they make enough changes to their DEs so that the shift to a primarily mobile crowd isn't that disruptive.. but some disruption _will_ happen. I'm not a big fan of Unity, but whether it is good or bad is not relevant here. These ToysRUs desktops are here to stay (Windows 8, Unity, Gnome 3, iOS, ChromeOS etc)..

Unity is a half-assed tablet GUI. (1)

Andrewlightstar (529897) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902688)

I have to agree with most of the previous posts Unity UI sucks! Unity feels like a half assed tablet UI. I was a big fan of the Gnome 2.0 interface, I love me compiz fusion, I love my screen savers (BSOD was my favorite) and I liked being able to add cute little stuff to the tool bar like local weather. Don't have any of that in new Gnome 3.0 or Unity. Far as I am concerned Gnome 2.X was a good easy to learn front end for linux with a lot of extras for the power user, KDE looked way to much like Windowz for me. Unity UI and Gnome 3.X is a step back.

A challenge for the GNOME 3 / Unity developers (2)

dskoll (99328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902690)

To all those who make snide remarks about grumpy old UNIX geeks not wanting to change, I issue a challenge: Switch to a Dvorak keyboard for a week.

After all, the Dvorak keyboard is more efficient and more usable than the QWERTY one (at least according to Dvorak proponents.)

Oh, and if you are already using a Dvorak keyboard, you're obviously far too cool for Unity.

This is a sign (1)

Foxhoundz (2015516) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902694)

Ubuntu's abrupt GUI makeover isn't something radical. It's a sound marketing decision by Canonical, similar to the radical design of Chromium/Chrome OS Google has been quietly making for a while now. Many experts have predicted that the future is going mobile. Let's get real here. Even if Ubuntu dropped Unity, they still would have updated GNOME to version 3. In any case, Ubuntu still wouldn't compete with Windows on the desktop market. The next logical arena is the mobile market. Between iOS, Android, Win Mobile, and et al, Ubuntu would be a breath of fresh air, especially for the tablet market that has grown weary of Android-based operating systems.

Re:This is a sign (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902796)

Tablet interfaces are fine for tablet devices.

Knock yourself Canonical. Go after the brass ring in tablets and phones and whatnot.

That doesn't mean it makes sense to force that UI on things that are not tablets.

Re:This is a sign (1)

Foxhoundz (2015516) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902828)

I believe they're attempting to unify(get it?) their operating system. Keep in mind a while back they dropped their Netbook Remix flavor of Ubuntu which originally had the Unity interface. I'm guessing they aim to create one singular OS that will satisfy both desktop, laptop and mobile users alike.

Unity is why many left Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902700)

Unity is why many left Ubuntu. Even part of the development team got fed up when Shuttleworth decided against their advice to go with Unity. I believe it had something to do with Gnome's refusal to go in step with Ubuntu's 6 month release schedule (it may be that he felt slighted that they wouldn't do his bidding).

Some of the development team went to other distributions to help with their development. One that I'm aware of went with Linux Mint Debian Edition to help them in their development. Another went to SUSE's dev team.

As a user (not part of the development team), I left Ubuntu because of Unity. I didn't even waste time trying it out after reading what it was like and some of the issues it had when it first became part of that distribution. I haven't settled on another distribution to stick with yet, but I've been impressed with Linux Mint Debian Edition and a version of Mint that used LXDE, which runs very well on an otherwise slow netbook. I have some time invested in learning Debian-based Linux distros, so I will likely stay with one of those.

I think the "power" of being head of Canonical and not being able to get Gnome to follow his lead went to his head and hurt his pride, so he settled on something different, anything other than Gnome, for the base Ubuntu distro. There already was a version with KDE and a couple of others. He just wanted to ditch Gnome.

Many just install Ubuntu and install Gnome, so you can have the best of both. But it could be much better if Ubuntu was developed with Gnome in mind.

He can keep it (1)

Staticharge (2497386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902702)

Not only is he trying to clone OSX more and more every version, but now he's taking up an arrogant attitude about it as well. I wouldn't be surprised if his main computer is a Mac at this point.

whats a power user? (1)

user317 (656027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902714)

i use it with unity2d + xmonad. but chromium is the only non terminal application that i use. I mostly use vim, make and a collection of compilers and debuggers, so i am not sure i am a "power user". I do really like the fact that all my hardware just works, it installs missing plugins and codecs. Ubuntu One is a pretty simple way to make sure you have the same .*rc files across all your machines :). I know I can do this with other tools on other distros, but the whole draw of ubuntu to for is that basically everything is preconfigured and ready to go without me having to do my own administration. I've used and loved Gentoo for 8 years, and it was a lot of fun to be completely in control of every aspect of my workstation, but I just stopped caring less about the machine i am working on and more about the code i am writing. What i would love see them do is more default cloud integration, like making sure that anything you install on one machine is available on all your instances, remote desktop access/vpn for all your machines etc...

Nah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37902756)

Power users are cool enough for XFCE + compiz running in virtual box on OSX in order to put a gorgeously well evolved set of tools on top of everything. Life is too short to get tripped up on what's pretentious, kool-aid driven, and unappreciative of complexity inherent in sophistication instead of using what is not.

KDE (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902760)

After hiding out in Gnome 2.3 while the KDE folks got their shit together, I tried KDE 4.7.2 in Ubuntu.

I'm staying. It's spectacular. It's really, really nice.

While I didn't find Unity bad, I found KDE so much better.


Shuttleworth has contributed a lot... (1)

jampola (1994582) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902802)

But that is one of the stupidest things I have heard. Power users are usually people that use their PC for work, not fight to get Unity working the way it should.

To be honest, 11.04 should have been what 11.10 is but sadly, 11.10 is still a buggy peice of poo that slows down my working day.

When you fix your dual monitor issue and why unity mysteriously has a fit for no reason, then I might try convince my Mum and Dad to switch from Debian. (Yep, my folks rock a dual head setup!)

To be fair, Unity and Ubuntu has a place and I the community behind it allows a great stepping stone for newies to jump abroad the Linux ship but Shuttleworth need's to re-evaluate what who he thinks "Power Users" are.

Ubuntu Unity and Gnome 3 both suck (1)

calc (1463) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902804)

I've used Linux since 1995, Debian since 1998 and Ubuntu since mid 2004, when the first 4.10 test release came out. Ubuntu Unity and Gnome 3 may be perfectly useful for computer newbies, who have no prior experience with any OS, but they are both very annoying for experienced computer users and unfortunately Windows 8 looks to be more of the same. So I switched to Xubuntu apparently the only decent option left, and I seem to be in good company there with Linus having switched to Xfce as well. I used to work for Canonical but really don't get what they are attempting to do. They kept talking about wanting to jump the chasm but it seems to be more of jumping the shark, losing a lot of their long time users in the process.

If they are attempting to reinvent all the OSes for tablet use, which is the only sane reason for this interface change, they are going to fail badly and lose their desktop and laptop share in the process. Apple's already won the tablet market, with Android trailing far behind, and chasing after it this late in the game is not going to be of much use.

The problem.. (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902810)

The problem is not that the interface is accessible to people with no training and therefore not 'exclusive' enough for power users. The problem is a lack of capability that can be found in more complex UIs. Considering those are pre-unity compiz and KDE, they aren't particularly complex at the surface, just complex when you dig into it.

Really guys? Come on!? (1)

levicivita (1487751) | more than 2 years ago | (#37902830)

As a proponent, advocate, and consumer of free open source software, I cannot help but wonder what is wrong with the community... I had read some many vitriolic comments about Unity before I ever tried it that I was profoundly skeptical of it and expected a massive failure. The reality has been completely different. If anything the extent of differences is fairly underwhelming, and I generally find it mildly more polished than the previous interface. It's almost the same in many respects, and I could not care less if I run Gnome 2 or 3 or Unity. As long as I can quickly bring up a terminal and they don't crash, they're all interchangeable.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?