Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Ubuntu Unity: The Great Divider

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the line-in-the-sand dept.

GUI 729

Barence writes "Canonical's decision to impose the new Unity interface on Ubuntu 11.04 users appears to have split the Linux distro's users, according to PC Pro. Features such as a moving Launcher bar and invisible scrollbars have angered many users, with one claiming that 'Ubuntu is doing a great job throwing away years of UI experience.' The rush to meet the six-monthly release schedule also appears to have harmed the release, with many users reporting graphical glitches with the new user interface."

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

Tiny penis! Tiny penis! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012346)

CmdrTaco has a tiny penis! Japanese toddlers look like mandingo in comparison.

unity (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012356)

I hate unity.. but just logout and go back into ubuntu classic.

Re:unity (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012602)

I hate unity.. but just logout and go back into ubuntu classic.

Agreed, I do that when I run into Unity issues.

My biggest gripe (aside from media performance, lack of a full menu, and lack of my customer GNOME widgets) is that you can't choose the GUI to use next time you log in from within the GUI (e.g., as a log out/restart/etc. option).

Oh, did I mention the lack of widgets? (Are there widgets that I just don't know about?) I want to see when something's sucking the CPU without having to run the full System Monitor.

Re:unity (2)

darkshadow88 (776678) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012782)

The biggest problem is that Canonical has said that the option to switch back to GNOME will be completely removed in 11.10, leaving Unity as the one and only option. Sure, being Linux, it's possible to install GNOME on your own and use it, but I have better things to do. Thus the search begins for a suitable replacement that isn't going to force its user interface decisions on me. If Linux Mint (based on Ubuntu) sticks with GNOME, that may well be the best choice--all the compatibility of Ubuntu with none of the Unity.

Re:unity (2)

darkshadow88 (776678) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012954)

Correction: Apparently, GNOME 3 will be an option in 11.10. I don't like GNOME 3, but at least it's better than Unity.

Re:unity (1)

qwijibo (101731) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012706)

Since I couldn't figure out if there was a non-Unity option from within Unity, I was about ready to give up on Ubuntu entirely before I figured out that you could log out and log in with classic to get rid of that steaming pile.

Re:unity (2)

poptones (653660) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012816)

Problem is they seem to have focused so much on the new shit they forgot to qc the rest of it! Since I upgraded to 11.04 the goddamn panel has crashed SO MUCH that I have just added a custom launcher in the lower right that I can find and easily press when the panel suddenly decides to become invisible again.

There's a lot to like here, and much to despise. I've worked out enough adaptation that I'm really, really regretting the upgrade. How many months before my system is as stable as it was under 10.10? It seems a pattern is emerging here: AVOID the LTS releases until a year after release! How sad.

first (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012360)


Re:first (1)

menegator (539434) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012622)


Unity divides userbase (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012364)

Who knew with such a catchy name?

Canonical understands that people don't want to use a desktop environment with a smelly foot as its logo.

Re:Unity divides userbase (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012994)

Wouldn't it be easier to just replace the foot on the ubunto installs? Oh well, They should have known that people do not like change. I don't like Gnome to begin with which is probably why I never jumped into ubunto. But I have jumped ship in the past from other distros who tried to force gnome on me and I found a replacement for Firefox when I stop recieving updates to the 3.X version (I don't like the UI in the 4.X version and work arounds to get it back just aren't sufficient).

So in the end, the world still turns, software gains and loses support, and we are at the same as when we started.

Yay choice (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012366)

Now aren't we glad about the 'fragmentation' in the Linux desktop space? If Ubuntu sucks, you simply switch to Debian or Mandriva or Fedora or Slackware or another distro that doesn't include this insanity. Choice is great.

Switch to KDE (2)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012470)

If you want to keep the Ubuntu distro with a good UI all you need to do is install KDE [psychocats.net]

Despite still not being up to its best 3.5.9 shape, KDE 4 is much better than that unity abomination Ubuntu is trying to impose.

Re:Switch to KDE (2, Informative)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012708)

I actually began the switch on my laptop to KDE this weekend. I updated using the automatic dist-upgrade button and when my laptop rebooted, Unity had failed to load and it didn't revert to classic automatically. Logging out and back into classic failed as well. If I were a less technical user, I'd think I needed to do a complete rebuild and lose all my data.

Luckily (and oddly) I could switch to another tty and run unity. Somehow, unlike other managers, it loaded on the GUI terminal instead of giving me an error stating that it couldn't find the display.

Unluckily, I found out that I hated the "Fisher Price" feel of what I'm going to call the Ubuntu Start Menu with all it's 128 pixel icons, fat borders, and Win7 like search feature. Add that to the stupid auto-hide (I HATE auto-hide!) sidebar that didn't always show itself when you had your mouse on that edge of the screen. The simplistic interface lead me to believe there was no customization options, so I removed it and went to KDE since gnome was no longer loading properly and I didn't feel like messing with it. Also, the close buttons got pushed to the left again! /smackhand "Leave it on the right."

They messed up something big with this switch and it's left a terrible taste in my mouth regarding Ubuntu. I'm considering going back to Debian and dumping the KDE/Gnome setups and digging into OpenBox or something. I dreaded doing it before because the default Gnome 2 desktop was great and I have a feeling they are going to GnomeShell/Unity like (or planning on it.)

Re:Switch to KDE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012896)

I'd sooner jump off a bridge than use KDE. What's next, are you going to tell me to use Emacs?

I'll stick with XPGnome [online02.com] and nano, thank you very much!

Re:Yay choice (1)

piripiri (1476949) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012780)

Before: Gnome vs. KDE
Now: Gnome vs. KDE vs. Unity

There is too much choice!

Absurd (2, Insightful)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012370)

This is an entirely configurable option. Users who like it will keep it, users who don't will switch it. Anyone complaining is just doing it to hear his own voice.

Re:Absurd (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012488)

Yeah hi, this is Slashdot. Apparently you're new here? Which seems unlikely given your UID but one never knows.

Re:Absurd (5, Informative)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012578)

This is an entirely configurable option. Users who like it will keep it, users who don't will switch it. Anyone complaining is just doing it to hear his own voice.

Gnome 2 goes away in the next release of Ubuntu. Then it's a choice between Unity and Gnome 3, which both appear to be following similar 'you will do things the way we want you to because we know best' philosophies, or KDE which is OK but just feels blah whenever I try a new release.

Re:Absurd (5, Informative)

sensei moreh (868829) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012846)

Gnome 2 goes away in the next release of Ubuntu. Then it's a choice between Unity and Gnome 3, which both appear to be following similar 'you will do things the way we want you to because we know best' philosophies, or KDE which is OK but just feels blah whenever I try a new release.

or XFCE (Xubuntu) or LXDE (Lubuntu) or . IMHO, XFCE is now very similar to GNOME2; close enough that if I were a GNOME2 user who'd rather switch than whine, that would be my first choice. Personally, I prefer LXDE.

Re:Absurd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012854)

Nobody is maintaining Gnome 2. If you would like to do so, the source code is free, open, and easy to get! Fork it and fork it well. Have fun. There's lots of people complaining about Gnome 2 going away, you should find lots of people willing to help you, right?

If nobody forks Gnome 2.32, I will have to conclude that the whiners don't really care enough about the change to do anything. It's easy to stamp your feet and yell "Other people aren't doing exactly what I want them to do!" It's harder to actually write code.

Personally, I like Unity, although it's got a few maddening rough edges that will probably get filed down in the next few releases. No software comes out perfect the first time, but this release of Unity is working a good deal better than Gnome 3 did when I tried it.

Re:Absurd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012620)

They (IMHO) started off on thr wrong foot.
This should have had Unity as an option not the default. Those who wanted to (& had the hardware) could have tried it and with their efforts hopefully got a whole lot of the bugs/features ironed out before it became mainstream (ie the default) in a later release.
This is such a major change and I know if I'd tried this on my customers they would be voting with their feet. I see lot of previously quite vocal Ubuntu supporters seriously considering moving to Debian or Mint in the very near future.

The Canonical/Ubuntu honeymoon period is well and truly over.

Re:Absurd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012624)

Users who don't like it will not switch, because the options to do so are hidden too deep in the operating system.

Here's a hint: if you have to install extra software to make an option work, then the option doesn't exist in the first place. Likewise if, in a GUI operating system, you have to drop to the command line to make an option work.

Re:Absurd (1)

Vorpix (60341) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012730)

on the login screen you type in your username then at the bottom select "Ubuntu Classic" from the list of options. It's not "hidden deep in the operating system", in fact it's the first screen you see.

Re:Absurd (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012672)

Fuck you nigger.

Re:Absurd (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012728)

(1) It's going away on the install CDs in the future. Yes, you might still apt-get, but Linux novices won't know how or even that they can.

(2) Most people dislike it strongly, claiming it's a "cell phone UI force-fit onto their computer", but it's the *bloody default*. Canonical has received absolutely MASSIVE feedback that people dislike it, but they refuse to listen. Ubuntu is the most popular Linux distro, it's the one people brand new to Linux try most of the time. When they experience the mess that is Unity, they will be put off of Linux entirely.

People don't know or understand that unlike Windows, you can change the default thing. They see Unity and think it's what Linux is, and they hate it. Believe it or not, first impressions DO matter, and the out-of-the-box experience people have with Linux can sour them on it forever.

Unity is doing that. It's driving people away en masse.

Perhaps for other distros. (5, Insightful)

pavon (30274) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012792)

But the original selling point of Ubuntu was that it was the distro that "just worked". You didn't have to spend days tracking down hardware problems, or hours figuring out how to change all defaults to something that worked. That meant the defaults were set to those that would be most familiar and comfortable to most computer users.

It is nice to have a distro like that to recommend to Linux Newbies, but Ubuntu is moving in a direction where it no longer is that distro.

If you want a bleeding edge Linux distro ... (1)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012374)

... then maybe it's time to switch to Fedora?

Re:If you want a bleeding edge Linux distro ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012750)

... then maybe it's time to switch to Fedora?

or Arch.

Re:If you want a bleeding edge Linux distro ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012870)

... then maybe it's time to switch to Fedora?

or Arch.

Ah yes, Arch, the distro that tries to convince its users that it's a BSD (hint: aur is NOT the same as ports), and contributes nothing upstream. Are you guys still throwing everything in /usr/bin?

Meh (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012388)

I've been starting to use it, but it's kind of meh. My main annoyance with it is that the bar doesn't seem to work very well. Getting it to stay open long enough to click has been sort of hit or miss so far, but it is somewhat interesting. It really should have an obvious way of getting it to open up and stay open as it is sometimes it stays open and sometimes it doesn't. Plus it doesn't work very well in virtual box if you haven't a hard monitor border on that side.

Re:Meh (3, Interesting)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012716)

I tried it, but have found it lacking. In 'classic' Ubuntu, I remove the bottom panel, and use Docky. I use Gnome-do for quick-run functionality. I have several indicators (temperature, network i/o, weather, dropbox, etc) some of which work or have replacements, and other which don't. The fonts on the Unity Panel seem blurry or low-rez. The Apple-style menu at the top is exceptionally annoying when using multiple monitors, or for those of us that don't like the buttons on the left side of the window. In general, I find the interface a step down from Gnome-do/Docky, although I do like the new scroll bars so far.

I also find that Natty is slower, and has introduced a lot of problems in Compiz, and my wireless performance is much reduced. I was reading about an interview with Mark Shuttleworth where he apparently said that perhaps power users should switch to a different distro. I respect him for saying that, but it's unfortunate, as I like the Ubuntu release cycle. Unfortunately, I think I'm going to have to do just that, or perhaps switch GDMs. Both LXDE and XFCE are looking quite nice ... not quite Gnome, but nice enough.

Re:Meh (1)

WeatherGod (1726770) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012832)

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.

Works fine for me (2, Interesting)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012394)

I installed it the day it was out. The menubar is somewhat different, so what?

For me, it's working fine and I'm sticking with it. Gnome fanboys will not appreciate it, but Unity feels a bit slicker than Gnome. And the user experience is so close it's almost undistinguishable.

Re:Works fine for me (4, Insightful)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012534)

For me, it's working fine and I'm sticking with it. Gnome fanboys will not appreciate it, but Unity feels a bit slicker than Gnome.

Isn't anyone that describes a UI as "slicker" a fanboy by definition?

And the user experience is so close it's almost undistinguishable.

I don't think that most of the people complaining about unity are comparing to Gnome3 -- they are comparing to KDE4 and Gnome2.

Re:Works fine for me (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012734)

I've used it vs Gnome-Shell, which was removed in 11.04 and slated for 11.10. I'm HEAVILY anticipating 11.10 because DAMN, Gnome3 is awesome in comparison. It's like Unity is an impressive knock-off of Gnome-Shell, like Saccharine diet pepsi is an impressive knock-off of regular cane sugar pepsi.

Re:Works fine for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012794)

I'm HEAVILY anticipating 11.10 because DAMN, Gnome3 is awesome in comparison. It's like Unity is an impressive knock-off of Gnome-Shell, like Saccharine diet pepsi is an impressive knock-off of regular cane sugar pepsi.

Surely it's more like the burger you dug out of the dumpster at the back of McDonalds is awesome in comparison to a dog turd sandwich?

Re:Works fine for me (4, Interesting)

WeatherGod (1726770) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012980)

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.

No problems here - No option to use Unity (1)

snarfies (115214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012396)

So I upgraded to 11.04 on my laptop, a Dell D620. Its a decent laptop, dual-core CPU, works quite well for what I use it for (not games).

Well, when I first logged on after the upgrade I was notified my computer could not handle Unity and would default to the old desktop. So that's where I'm at now, and I have no problem with that. I'd have LIKED to try Unity, but I've been given no option to.

Re:No problems here - No option to use Unity (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012524)

You can install a package called "unity2d" to get Unity with your graphics hardware.

Re:No problems here - No option to use Unity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012676)

It's still broken though. I encountered the same situation, and my nvidia 7200 go is outright blacklisted even though it supports the unity 3d requirements.

Re:No problems here - No option to use Unity (2)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012866)

Bingo, though it's "unity-2d". I use RDP with my ubuntu computer so no hardware acceleration, and it works just fine. Only real difference is that reordering windows in the taskbar requires you to click and hold the icon for a bit before dragging, whereas in normal Unity you drag the icon out of the bar and drag it back in at the drop point.

Re:No problems here - No option to use Unity (1)

kayumi (763841) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012948)

actually it is called unity-2d

Re:No problems here - No option to use Unity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012532)

That's funny.. My two year old netbook runs Unity..

Re:No problems here - No option to use Unity (1)

Scragglykat (1185337) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012834)

Could be the non-proprietary drivers for his laptop video chip didn't support the 3D compiz functionality that Unity requires. He might be able to switch to it after installing the appropriate driver. With that said, Unity works on a five year old laptop I own, as the open source ATI video drivers work fine with it.

The missing ingredient (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012414)

I upgraded the girlfriend's laptop to Natty Narwhal. The interface is nice, but she's still bugging me about buying an iPad2 (no MS ever again for her after she experienced Vista) so that she can have Netflix and iTunes. Really, I don't think the interface is as important as what you can do with it.

Re:The missing ingredient (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012856)

I understand wanting netflix, but iTunes... Really?

Re:The missing ingredient (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012906)

> so that she can have Netflix and iTunes. Really, I don't think the interface is as important as what you can do with it.

Linux people have a way of dismissing this, but it's really a critical point. Normal people WANT to stream netflix - in fact, it's the biggest source of internet bandwidth use in the USA. If they can't do it with Linux, that makes Linux a non-starter on the desktop.

Not a fan of Unity (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012416)

Unity is an ugly hybrid of a desktop GUI and a mobile phone GUI.

I can see the kernel (hehe) of the good ideas behind it, but this is one they should have kept in the lab and refined for 6-12 more months. It isn't ready for prime time.

Re:Not a fan of Unity (2)

Carcass666 (539381) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012562)

Agreed. They are trying too hard to accommodate the tablet crowd. And while it's nice to be able to type what you want instead of dealing with cascading menus, it's a bummer to have to guess whether I need to type "configuration", "settings" or "appearance" to get what I want.

Unity 3D was a bust for me. Although I had Compiz working fine on Ubuntu 9 and Gnome, compositing was broken horribly on my notebook (partial screen drawing, artifacts left "stuck" after mouse over, and other fun). The notebook is a Dell with an Intel graphics adapter so, while somewhat underpowered, has had open source drivers for a while. Canonical needs to do a better job in looking at the hardware, and enabling/disabling features appropriately. Unity 2D works okay but, to me, ends up being not much more than a different app bar and really stupid scroll bars.

another cycle (5, Insightful)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012448)

Let's all remember how much we hated XP when it came out, and then how much we wanted Windows 7 to be XP when it came out.

Re:another cycle (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012512)

But that wasn't the user's fault, that was Microsoft's fault, if you recall ;)

Whatever. Ubuntu/Canonical can change Ubuntu to their liking. I use it because it's free, I can't complain much as long as the interface works. Switching to a Mac is a pretty significant UI change from Windows, but nobody seems to think that's such a big deal (or if it is, it's just the user being silly or something).

That said, I haven't actually upgraded yet. hehe...

Re:another cycle (5, Insightful)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012558)

Let's all remember how much we hated XP when it came out, and then how much we wanted Windows 7 to be XP when it came out.

And let's remember how much we hated Office 2007's "ribbon" interface when it came out... and how many of us still hate it today.

Re:another cycle (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012684)

I *still* hate XP, Vista and Windows 7. The first thing I do on any of those machines is turn off the theming service.

I like Windows to look like 2000. Although I use a Mac most of the time, Microsoft seems to have gone overboard on the form over function. Sure I have pretty GUI widgets, but they're not obnoxious and in my face like the Play School theme of XP or the default Windows 7 theme.

Re:another cycle (2)

equex (747231) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012688)

Doesn't matter if it's MS or Canonical, some people just want their OS to work 100% out of the box and not wait for future updates to fix it. If XP came out at SP2 level it would be totally different. Nobody pays for Ubuntu but still people don't like to be crash test dummies. Now that the mainstream starts to use Linux like we all wanted, it's up to the various distros to make the transition smooth and not 10 more years of testing before its stable enough . (Like MS did, causing the general population to think that computers are broken by default)

Re:another cycle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012736)

there's one piece that is always left out when people say "everyone hated xp when it came out". The people that would say that were all sticking with win98.

I wonder how many people are still sticking it out with win98.

Re:another cycle (2)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012838)

Still hate XP. The UI still looks like FisherPrice made it to me. Windows 7 is much better but I want to beat Microsoft for moving the 32bit executables to Program Files (X86) instead of putting the 64 bit executables in Program Files (x64).
DUMB and brakes old programs for no good reason.

Re:another cycle (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012924)

Let's all remember how much we hated XP when it came out, and then how much we wanted Windows 7 to be XP when it came out.

...and remember how people hated Vista so much that it flopped and would have sunk any company that didn't have MS's dominant position and cash reserves.

Actually, ISTR the main hates about XP were product activation, driver hassles and its unquenchable thirst for more than 256MB of memory. The only UI quibbles were that it looked a bit Fischer-Price - it worked much the same way as Win95/2000.

(Waiting for the reaction when OSX 10.7 hits the street...)

Re:another cycle (1)

FauxPasIII (75900) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012988)

Well, XP was displacing Win2k, still in my opinion the best offering MS has made to date.

Win7 was displacing Vista.

Re:another cycle (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36013010)

We did?

Pretty much from day 1 I found Windows 7 to be superior to XP. Sure I may want a small handful of things like the old XP network config interface back, but 7 is far and away the better UI, which isn't even counting that the underlying OS is way better as well.

Wow, so ...it's not all perfect in LinuxLand? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012484)

OSX Crimeware kit released yesterday, rushing releases cause glitchy behavoir in Ubuntu ... Windows people are smiling today...

Some annoyances (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012504)

I'm not "angry" or anything, but there are some things that are annoying about the interface. My main problem is the title bar. I love the idea of trying to make the client area as large as possible -- and I love that Firefox takes up nearly the entire screen. However, to make that work, they have really goofy title bar logic. The menu and title bar are basically sharing the same area. If you mouse over the title bar, it turns into the menu. However, if the window isn't maximized, then the menu is still at the top of the screen (like Mac OS). If you have two windows open, one maximized under a non-maximized window, then the title bar looks like it belongs to the maximized window, but it really belongs to the window with the focus.

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.

Lastly, my Wi-Fi broke upon upgrading (BCM4322). I had to do some command line modprobe stuff to get it back running. Not a Unity issue, but still annoying, and hurts usability.

Not bad for a netbook, not good elsewhere (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012506)

I've been running Unity on my netbook for six months and it's not bad there as it's a bit more space-efficient on the screen and all I do is web browsing and type the odd document in Office; hence the half dozen launcher icons are all I need.

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.

IMHO the big problem is the idea of a 'one size fits all' GUI for everything when people have very different requirements on different systems. Unity is an improvement on small screen devices where you don't need to open six out of thirty different applications at a time, but not good when you do.

Danger Will Robinson, precipice ahaid (1)

menegator (539434) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012520)

I kinda like... the option of using the classic theme. If I had a touchscreen I think I would like the new interface. But I don't, neither at my desctop nor at my laptop. And for the love of God what did they have in mind with the new obscure scrollbars? I think that Ubuntu took the wrong turn and there is a precipice ahaid

Won't reboot or shutdown (1)

MeNeXT (200840) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012546)

My problem with it is that it won't reboot or shutdown even with shutdown -r now or shutdown -h now. The screen stays lit.

I don't have much time to figure it out but my overall impression is somewhat NeXTish but needs work. Useable. Nice to see someone trying something different.

Classic desktop? (1)

babai101 (1964448) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012586)

Choosing the classic desktop from the login screen is a click away, don't get why people are shouting and whining so much. Unity will take at least another cycle to mature. The most disturbing thing is that canonical have not provided a helpful unity development guide for geeks to jump into and have a chance to give back to the community.

Re:Classic desktop? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012958)

Choosing the classic desktop from the login screen is a click away

A click every time you log in, or a "damn", logout, click, login if you forget.

Doesnt even work! (4, Informative)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012590)

I tried it on our family machine which has been running Ubuntu for about 5 years. It declares that the hardware is inadequate to support the new UI, and advises you not to use it - but not until you have already started it, and cant find a way to stop it. If it knows the hardware wont support it, why does it even try? (fortunately, I happen to know about ctrl-alt-f2, and am confident using the CLI. My grand-childen are not in the same boat.

I admit its not the latest hardware, but I regularly use older hardware. The VGA card is on the motherboard, and is probably rubbish too. It draws a solid colour areas over the tops of windows you are trying to use, and hides the bar which would enable you to logout!

Once you manage to get back to "classic, without effects" its OK. But for bad user experience, I'd still give it 10/10.

Gnome 3 isn't much better. (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012594)

I'm not sure who decided that we needed Cell Phone UI's on our desktops, but I'd like to slap the person(s).

For me personally, Xfce4 is the only sane desktop solution left.

Compiz configuration tool (5, Informative)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012600)

sudo apt-get install compizconfig-settings-manager

Go nuts.

"the six-monthly release schedule"?? learn to edit (1)

MichaelKristopeit424 (2018894) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012606)

it's called a bi-annual release schedule.

rob malda has no self respect.

slashdot = stagnated.

Classic (5, Interesting)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012678)

Have the Ubuntu 11.04 on a couple of machines, but immediately switched to classic desktop on both. This thing is ridiculous, retarded and useless to me. I am not an Apple user, I don't own any iProducts and don't want to in no small part because I absolutely despise their way of doing interfaces. I hate the 'ribbon' garbage as well, BTW.

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). 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? 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?

Anyway, you may want to use your computer as some sort of a weird appliance... I need a predictable, stable system, things should be where I am used to them, not hidden and removed in ways that defy any logic. The minimize/close/maximize window icons will be on the right side of my windows and there will be a normal tree like menu with items where I will find them every time I look there and there will be an icon for every window on the bottom of the screen, period.

It is (1)

hellraizer (1689320) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012690)

Slow, ugly buggy just like gnome3 it sucks .... sad days for gnome/ubuntu users ...

HTPC interface? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012698)

Has anybody used unity as a HTPC interface?

Re:HTPC interface? (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012710)

Has anybody used unity as a HTPC interface?

Why would you do that? Mine just boots straight into XBMC.

Single Menu is Useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012704)

If you use focus-follows-mouse, as anyone who has used X11 for a long time does, then the single menu at the top is useless, because on the way to go click something you invariably pass over a different window which then changes the focus, and thus the menu.

Also, attempting to run something from a Unity system to display on a remote machine (or Xvnc) means that you just don't have a menu at all.

Finally, you can't start more than one instance of something. If I click on the Terminal icon in the "dock" for example, unlike a launcher panel, which starts a new one where I am, it takes me (possibly to a different workspace) to the one currently running.

Yes, I can just log into "Classic" but that doesn't change the fact these deficiencies exist.

Also, no dual screens (1)

davidiii (1983894) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012718)

Unless all you want to do is look at what your desktop image is then dual screens (w/ nvidia drivers) do not work at all.

Re:Also, no dual screens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012962)

Same here. Even in classic mode things aren't right in my second screen. I just got a GTX460 that was working really well in 10.10

Re:Also, no dual screens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012974)

Thanks for the warning, I'll save myself a few hours and not bother trying it, that's a must-have feature for me.

Gotten use to waiting a few months before upgrade (1)

systematical (1394991) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012738)

Ubuntu's rapid releases and sometimes shotty releases have made me get used to waiting several months, sometimes 6 months, before upgrading. It's likely I'll just move 100% to Debian or something like Mint next time I upgrade my computer. Thanks for all the years Ubuntu, buts its time I go back home to Debian.

Where was this post last night? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012744)

Before I upgraded!

Ubuntu need to decide... (4, Insightful)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012762)

Ubuntu need to decide whether they are "the Linux for the rest of us" or "the bleeding edge".

When they started out, making Linux more polished-looking, consistent, user friendly, easy to install and the Linux you'd recommend to Aunty Agatha, that was bleeding edge (even if it wasn't exclusive to Ubuntu, they did a lot to advance that field, and to promote Linux in general) so there was no choice.

Now that most Linux distros are, at worst, no harder to install than Windows, and make a good College try at auto-detecting your hardware and helping you locate drivers they might want to think twice against "forcing" major changes on mainstream users (even if there is a way to revert, making them the default will give some people a WTF moment and fragment support and documentation). They also tend to introduce other major changes to subsystems with their regular releases.

If I were Ubuntu I'd have the last LTS version "headlining" the website as the recommended download, with the latest 6-monthly release as an option, and divert a bit more effort to backporting new versions of applications (not just bug/security fixes) to LTS so that non-techie users had an easy way to install the latest & greatest applications without a major OS overhaul. Of course, that's very unsexy work, especially if you're not being paid.

Re:Ubuntu need to decide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012916)

If you were Ubuntu you would be an operating system and we would all be talking about how we don't like the way you look these days...

Great timing - just upgraded and hate it. (1)

slashpot (11017) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012772)

Huge ubuntu fan - no more. Took me 6hrs to get my workstation back to sane/stable after 11.04 upgrade. Unity kept disappearing leaving me with a desktop and no way to launch anything. Finally got my login changed to where I can pick the session type - and set it at "Ubuntu Classic" to get back to the gnome2 setup I love so much - and don't like having major clusterfsck changes like forced on me - period.

This is the first time in many years of using Ubuntu (so stuff just works, so I can spend my time admin'ing servers) - where Ubuntu really, really dropped the ball.

Ubuntu + Unity = Fail

I think I could like Unity... (1)

ndogg (158021) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012784)

if it wasn't so buggy.

I can't count how many times X has shut down just randomly with Unity.

On top of that, I think some of the concepts behind it are better than Gnome Shell, but I haven't tried Shell in a long time.

Re:I think I could like Unity... (1)

ndogg (158021) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012878)

On top of that, changing just about anything from CCSM causes it to crash, and suddenly there is no Compiz or Unity.

Experience of a linux newbie who tried 11.04 out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012790)

While I consider myself fairly tech savvy, Linux is something that I have never had the fortune/misfortune of toying around with and learning. One of my biggest regrets was never having the chance to tinker with Linux while growing up as a kid. In any case, with all the hype surrounding the 11.04 release, I wiped out my old XP installation on my dual-boot Windows 7 desktop and installed Ubuntu. Here are my thoughts:

- Installation was exceptionally nice and easy for a Linux OS. Simple point and click experience. I did have issues with GPT info in my bootsector that was preventing Ubuntu from seeing my Windows 7 disk. So I had to use FixParts to fix it (with the help of some great support from the ubuntu forums). I don't count this against Ubuntu though, as the issue can be chalked down to MS

- OS design and interface (Unity) - Since I've never tried GNOME/KDE, etc, I didn't have any biases when starting out with Unity. I actually quite like it. While I am a big fan of being able to search for apps/files rather than navigating menus (similar experience in Windows 7), I do feel that Unity should also provide a nicely organized menu system of browsing through all the installed apps. It's well and good to be able to search for the app you're looking for, but as someone new to the OS, I don't even know what apps I should be looking for. In that respect, I did find Ubuntu Classic (similar to 10.10 interface) to be nicer

- The launcher bar (on the left) is okay. Not particularly sold on it, and one thing that was quite annoying is that there is very little difference between whether an application in the bar has launched windows, or has not been opened yet. I prefer the Windows 7 taskbar in that respect as it makes it a lot easier to tell with a quick glance if an app is open and if there are multiple instances open

- I really liked having multiple workspaces (of course, not unique to Ubuntu, but novel to a Windows user) as well as all the neat hardware accelerated transition animations you can access via compiz settings manager.

- Ultimately I had to go back to Windows 7 because of the terrible graphical glitches. This is a common complaint on the forums, more so for ATI users (I have an HD 5770). I tried the open source Radeon drivers as well as the fglrx proprietary ones, but had no luck with either. Dual monitor setups were also very finicky, and there doesn't seem to be any easy way to correct for overscan on my HDTV since it detects it as a projector for some strange reason (there are other posts about this from 10.10 on the ubuntu forums with no solutions suggested by anyone in the community).

I use my desktop also as an HTPC using XBMC, and on Windows 7, I can have XBMC playing stuff on the TV while I can still use my PC with the other monitor. This allows my wife to watch her shows while I am doing my own thing on the PC. This seems almost impossible to get working on Ubuntu, and is made worse by all the graphical glitches that kept forcing me to reboot. I really wanted to like Ubuntu and I was hoping I could convince myself to make a serious attempt to migrate away from Windows, but I don't think Ubuntu is quite there yet *for my needs*.

Hopefully things will keep improving with Ubuntu. The one thing it also made me realize is that MS did in fact do a great job with Windows 7 after the steaming pile of turd that was Vista. It's been rock stable and I can go months without rebooting or having my system slow down to a crawl.

Can't you disable it? (1)

gosand (234100) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012812)

I do get that people are very particular about their interface, I am one of them. Maybe I am misinformed, but I thought I read that you can use "classic" Ubuntu interface of Gnome and set it at login. I'm using Kubuntu 11.04, and have been very happy with it thus far. There are other variants of *buntu as well. Just because something comes a certain way out of the box, it doesn't mean you can't configure it. Surely Linux users understand this.

Maybe (1)

hellraizer (1689320) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012836)

it is time for a Ubuntu/Gnome boycott , maybe this way the devs will listen to the users complaints

Wah wah wah... (1, Insightful)

Covalent (1001277) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012842)

I upgraded to 11.04 and I like Unity. It's a lot quicker and, while a little buggy, I'm already moving faster than with Gnome. That said, if you don't like Unity or Gnome 3, then either stay with 10.10 or 10.04 (LTS) or go to Linux Mint or Debian or pick a distro but quit bitching or pay for Windows / Mac. Either way, get off my lawn!

Unstable (4, Informative)

CynicTheHedgehog (261139) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012844)

Compiz crashes 2-3 times a day for me. Evolution crashes as soon as I start it (hangs fetching messages) and I have to do 'evolution --force-shutdown' on the command line because for some reason xkill is gone. Had to switch to Thunderbird, because Evolution was unusable.

I also uninstalled the appmenu because there were situations involving VirtualBox and Java/Swing apps where it would just go blank and stay that way, so I would have no menu at all. Plus, when you combine the app menu with Gnome's propensity to steal focus and raise windows to the foreground regardless of what you happen to be doing at the time, it's almost unusable.

After 4 days of tinkering and disabling things I'm to the point where I can actually do something (barring the compiz crashes, which require a reboot). Overall this is the glitchiest, most unstable Linux instance I've ever dealt with. I'll probably go back to KDE this upcoming weekend.

Re:Unstable (5, Insightful)

systematical (1394991) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012880)

This is why I've told everyone not to immediately update to Ubuntu's latest version. In fact, your best bet is to just stick with the LTS releases. Ubuntu has certainly proven not to be an option for production level servers and is starting to make me question its viability as a work station.

Re:Unstable (1)

CynicTheHedgehog (261139) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012908)

Forgot to mention: boot up times went from about 10 seconds in Maverick to well over a minute in Natty. That's a minute to get to the login screen. And now, after I log in, it takes 30-60 seconds to bring up the launcher and panel. Major step back. Wish I never upgraded.

Window UI on Mac and Ubuntu (copy cat) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012872)

I am a right handed person. I am used to and find it very convenient to see the minimize, maximize, and close buttons locate on the upper right corner. With OSX's window (and now ubuntu), those buttons are on the upper left corner. I don't know about you guys, but for the right handed person, I find this is a poor UI layout. Don't get me started with OSX borderless window!

Don't like it? Stick to LTS versions (1)

Cruciform (42896) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012904)

Every new release someone whines about a change in default apps or UI.
They could stick to one of the LTS versions, but they invariably jump on the new versions despite hating change.

I didn't like Unity, so I gave Gnome3 a go. No need to whine about it. If I didn't like either I could stick to classic or a previous release and update on an app by app basis.

It's pretty plain to see in the years of releases that LTS is stable, and the others are venues for experimentation and rapid change. But maybe that needs to be made more obvious to Joe User.

Multiple Monitors Killed it for Me (1)

Alternate Interior (725192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012920)

I tried on two machines, a 13" laptop and 40" combined dual-monitor desktop. Worked great on the laptop: I really liked it. On the desktop, though.... For one, mirror the menus is a big improvement compared to anything. They tray (notify area) was on both monitors, the focused app's menu stayed on that monitor (compare to multi-mon OSX where the app's menu shows on one central monitor regardless of which monitor app is on). But the launcher sucks. It lives on a single monitor, and being on the horizontal edge, means I've got potentially 40" to slide the mouse before I get to the bar. Now, it's got a text-driven launcher app too, like Spotlight or Gnome Do or Windows' start menu. That always runs on the primary screen. And then the app launches on the primary screen. Whereas with Gnome Do, it summoned on my active screen and then launched the app on the screen its active screen. Unity lost 10 years of advancements with multiple monitors. And that makes it a huge pain.

Awesome headline (1)

Lunaritian (2018246) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012936)

I don't know if it's intentionally ironical, but I laughed for at least a minute.

wait for LTS (1)

DCFusor (1763438) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012972)

Hopefully this will be sorted out by the next LTS release. I found awhile back that I'm much better off with those than being a guinea pig for whatever comes out twice a year.
After all, at least so far, if a nice new app comes along, I can still find a backport of it.

I'm not a computer newb at all -- I started way back before there were portable ones. I do some software development still as well as content management for a site I run. I'm always doing something a little closer to the metal than most users. I like the UI model as is -- since I know whats going on underneath, and I don't need any magic between me and the machine. Other people may feel differently, and may want a new look and feel -- the same way people might sell a perfectly good car that now bores them. For me, that boredom is glorious! I just want a stable platform to do my own thing with -- those are exciting enough, and I don't like the idea of having to learn a bunch of new habits to do the same old things (or worse, not being able to do them any more).

Could be the whole desktop thing needs a new way of going about it all for ever dumber users, or some sort of "look, shiny" for those of short attention span who thrive on anything that lets them be a little ahead of us old fogies who aren't into constantly changing things that worked fine already. If that's what it takes to get market share.....but in the case of ubuntu -- I don't really understand a need for that anyway.

At any rate, due to the short attention span driving this, again, I hope/predict it will be sorted out in some decent way by the time I care to go to a newer LTS version (of whatever distro I like then, for now, it's still Ubuntu).

suse - ubuntu - what next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012978)

I started with Suse until Suse screwed up their distro. They got it bloated by trying to go after the Windows/Apple crowd. They failed miserably.
Now, Ubuntu is going the same path. All right, good luck with chasing Apple.

So, guys, which distro shall we try next?
I want:
- non-bloated kernel that is fast and responsive
- non-bloated UI that is fast and responsive (best on plain VGA)
- and my good old TkDesk, X-Emacs, is still supposed to work
- and I want the middle mouse button back!

Sticking with LTS (1)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012986)

I have it running on my old EEE 1000 40g and it's running ok for the most part. I'm not doing anything serious with it but I'm really not going to use it on a main machine till there is an LTS release. I can say I already miss having my weather app up next to the clock. It's an OK experience but not enjoyable. Sadly Gnome is changing big time as well so I dunno... I feel like things are changing where they don't need to be changed because it worked fine as is.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?