For example, Unity has the 1.) panel, 2.) web-browser tabbar, and 3.)
web-browser URL bar. A default install of Windows has the 1.) Windows
taskbar, 2.) web-browser URL bar, and 3.) web-browser tabbar, and 4.)
the titlebar if the tabs are not placed over it. Apple Mac is even
worse. It has titlebar and a bottom Dock.Unity's design is the best of
the three and the most useful for creating vertical space.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: giffgilll@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 15:24:53 +0000
Subject: [Ayatana] why global menubar/application menu isn't such a
great idea
Here are some reasons why I think the application menu in unity as it
is now
is a failed attempt at improving the user experience in Ubuntu.
1) Primary target of Ubuntu Unity are _net_books, accordingly the most
important
application is going to be the browser as repeatedly pointed out here:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/383
<http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/383%20>
The two most relevant browsers for Ubuntu Unity are Firefox 4 and
Chromium.
Both do not need or have a classic menubar, instead both, when run in
full screen
mode (the layout that makes the most sense on small screens) put the
tabs on top.
Why do they do that? Because tabs are the most frequently accessed
interface
elements of a browser chrome. At the screen edge they are easy and
fast to access.
Additionally it makes a lot of sense logically, metaphorically or
mentally to use the tabs
as the hierarchically primary element.
All interfaces that put a OS level "bars" at the upper screen edge
limit the usability of
these two browsers, the menubar reduces the space available for web
content
which is directly contradicting the explicit goal of Unity.
I filled a bug for this here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bug/749335
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bug/749335%20>
I think this can be solved by replacing the application menu with tabs
in the panel
without fundamentally departing from the design goals of Unity.
The rationale for the way it works now strikes me
as particularly unsatisfactory:
from http://design.canonical.com/2010/05/menu-bar
<http://design.canonical.com/2010/05/menu-bar/>/
>Tackling the corner cases
>(...)
>Many windows currently don’t have menus: for example, Open and Save
dialogs.
>For these, we’ll introduce a fallback set of minimal menus so that
the menu bar
>doesn’t look weirdly empty when those windows are focused.
A "fallback" menu" so it doesn't look stupid?
I'd say introducing additional clutter, actually wasting screen
estate, possibly confusing
users by duplicating functionality for the sake of dubious consistency
is stupid.
2) Probably repeating what has been said already: What about large
Desktop monitors?
There is the trend away from Desktops to more portable devices but for
those that still use
Desktops at all: Desktop setups tend to get larger and more powerful
all the time. Monitors
have higher and higher resolutions and multi-monitor setups are
becoming the norm.
Accordingly the users themselves tend to be heavy multi-tasker. Given
the hardware specs,
fast SSDs and large scree resolutions nothing is in the way of the
user, well except for the
user interface.
A bit of personal anecdotal evidence:
I've been using OS X for a long time on small Laptop screens, then I
got a large monitor
and hooked it up. I noticed how the interface made less sense and was
harder to use now that the menubar and a given window often
were apart several inches.
It's not so much about how far the mouse has to travel, it's about the
visual focus: On a
large screen and especially when using multiple screens one actually
has to turn the
head just to access a function for the window you are currently
working in.
Apparently I wasn't the only one annoyed by that so someone already
wrote a "solution":
http://homepage.mac.com/khsu/DejaMenu/DejaMenu.html
Are we going to need such hack in Ubuntu too?
At least I know there will always be a way to turn off the global menu
unlike in a closed
OS. But I'm here arguing to turn the "best" solution into the default
option...
The other problem, having multiple windows side by side but only one
menu at a time, requiring
an additional click and more mouse (and head!) movement has been
brought up elsewhere
sufficiently.
3)menu bar is so 1990s
It's not just Firefox and Chrome. MS Office is just the most prominent
application using the
ribbon interface. I think there is a broader trend away from the old
plain menu bar interface
design, especially given the trend with those newfangled fondleslabs.
Again, having used OS X for years, I notice how rarely I actually use
the menu bar.
For applications I use every day I know all the keyboard shortcuts I
use anyway and for other
applications, if they are designed really well, the interface elements
in the window themselves,
together with such great inventions like drag and drop and the context
menu are all I need.
Not only the interface is prettier but those in-window manipulation
makes more sense in terms
of workflow and metaphor: you directly interact with documents and
files, the interface follows
you (the mouse), related functions are next to each other, everything
is in one focus area.
Compare that with the application menu, it's at the top of the screen,
basically in a separate
window, you already need to know a) the name of the function and b)
where it is located.
It's less intuitive and when it gets in the way of a workflow, it's
slower, Fitts's law be dammed.
Of course that only applies to what I called "well designed"
applications and the whole problem
of UI consistency doesn't exactly get easier.
Broadly speaking there are two kinds of applications: Simple "apps"
that do one thing
(and do it well, hopefully), those often have no menu at all, have one
for consistency reasons
(but as I said, I consider this dubious if it's just for some visual
consistency but has absolutely
nothing to do with usability consistency) or they have a menu for some
few functions that
make no sense to directly expose via the main window because you only
access them maybe
once to initially set up the application. For those a single menu
button akin the one in Chrome
is sufficient, there is no need for nested hierarchy.
On OS X for example a lot of menus are filled with absolutely useless
entries like cut and paste
which everyone uses the keyboard or the context menu for or that
duplicate all the icons on the
window which again are faster to access via those icons or keyboard
shortcuts.
The second kind of application is one that huge, with tons of
functions and obviously a steep
learning curve. Photoshop or GIMP are a good example, Office suites
another.
Here the limitations of the textual hierarchical menu become apparent
again.
In case you are a "power user" of such application you probably
forgot about the learning
curve and don't have to think about how and where and why the
interface works. But for
casual or first time users the menubar is ill-suited. The ribbon
interface is one way to
improve the interface for such complicated applications, for said
first time and casual users.
Another option that doesn't upset the "pros" as much is what OS X does
with the searchable
menu.
Given that menubars are becoming a legacy paradigm I wonder if it's
such a great idea, when
designing a new UI from scratch in 2011 one should make that menubar a
prominent and
static, always on, no way to opt out, no way to replace with more
fitting things like tabs on
top element.
For natty it's to late now but I have hopes for oneiric, I guess user
feedback will help my
cause ;) However unlike most users I am not afraid of change, in fact
I welcome Unity.
But I get the feeling some things were rushed and there wasn't enough
usability testing,
feedback from real "users" and analysis. Well, just look at what
Mozilla has done with
Firefox 4, there was extensive UI testing going on yet the reception
of the final release
was very mixed. Getting the UI right the first time is pretty much
impossible.
I also worry that when released it will have some effect like KDE 4.0:
an exodus to
alternatives and a long hard fight to get them back.
In the end it's a good thing and everybody wins but at first it ain't
going to be pretty.
_______________________________________________ Mailing list:
https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help :
https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp