[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Ayatana] Graceful degradation of Unity
- To: Ryan Prior <ryanprior@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Ayatana] Graceful degradation of Unity
- From: Spike Burch <spikeb@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:45:30 -0600
- Cc: Ayatana Mailing List <ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=DsIELNF9GdHcStdW/l0hMHztepUx8nfCgBknS6lm3dg=; b=LpVZWkt1h9lWw5Kp8rxeVuHFOhok4T91SfQG03ibmEngZd3FGD69navuTRFC0h18sx L9qCUUgDqrPLrdNoirD5iEWlVrnveSRhNELXSUtfIxqHFT0/xdk/3+vfnZTHUdQKva7s bTeNFpbrFZeHoWvYs884oNfFHDUEphQ9R3qYU=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=h/7iClSDYgVlSAJfQFyP1tyOMnw1Uuky1CIQRmNRzTSue3dRi3Hin1umzoa0cbU3LZ a9qGqBQ8rIrJYcUHPZ2UFfvx56lwzt8w8eizSrP8RXd/IFSbzwkRhriZVNl5Dj+GxFi3 dsKMm3erwWaYeTYkOHhVAjlzyGRNUsGQXNsXs=
- In-reply-to: <AANLkTikyEU4oyfd=U1n2Zj1ETv4Por+EJH8MeeZ27CA1@mail.gmail.com>
- List-archive: <http://lists.launchpad.net/ayatana>
- List-help: <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
- List-id: <ayatana.lists.launchpad.net>
- List-owner: <https://launchpad.net/~ayatana>
- List-post: <mailto:ayatana@lists.launchpad.net>
- List-subscribe: <https://launchpad.net/~ayatana>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://launchpad.net/~ayatana>
- References: <SNT106-W4DC0E52E8CBE5CCB7CA8CBB120@phx.gbl> <AANLkTikyEU4oyfd=U1n2Zj1ETv4Por+EJH8MeeZ27CA1@mail.gmail.com>
I don't think it is something that needs to be done now either. I
think the ideal time to revisit the idea is probably during the next
LTS cycle. That gives Unity time time to mature and become part of the
brand identity. If it takes hold, then we should definitely revisit
the issue for such an important cycle as LTS.
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Ryan Prior <ryanprior@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Mark Curtis <merkinman@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Unity requires 3d compositing. For those without adequate hardware, it
>> falls back to the GNOME Panels. While I understand for this cycle effort
>> should be put into getting Unity functioning, I think for the future a
>> better fallback should be created. For one the GNOME Panels won't be
>> supported forever so it's not a viable alternative in the long run. Two,
>> the UI change from Unity/Panels is drastic. Look at Windows 7, if the user
>> can't enable the compositing, the UI is still similar, it doesn't reset to
>> an XP style of UI.
>
> I don't agree, at least for the moment. In the future where the Unity
> look is an ingrained part of the Ubuntu brand, I'd agree that there
> should be a better fall-back for machines which still don't support
> Unity's technical requirements. However, for the moment the
> gnome-panels are part of the Ubuntu brand and Unity is the new-fangled
> outlier, which some users and vocal critics consider to be inferior to
> the gnome-panels. Maintaining an excellent legacy Gnome interface will
> help ensure continuity from previous releases or users who cannot use
> Unity, and I haven't seen any argument that creating a Unity-like
> fallback which would have to pursue a moving target would be worth the
> time it would take to develop.
>
> Ryan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> Post to : ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>