Re: [Ayatana] "Ubuntu" Applications

[Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jonathan Meek wrote on 07/09/11 19:33:
>
> Actually, I intended something more in depth than that. I asked one of
> the designers and am going to attempt to begin work on a comprehensive
> HIG. Everything about the design needs to be thought out, not just
> 'integrate with this.' The problem with this undertaking is that there
> are so few applications that can be considered "Ubuntu" applications.
> Less and more than you would think. (Though, I've only heard from one
> person, and his design choices may not be the consensus of the entire
> design team)
>...

I'd hope it isn't. ;-) But Thorsten Wilms was right: what will
developers make out of it? Interface guidelines are useless unless they
actually change developers' behavior. For example, Microsoft has
extensive Windows UX guidelines on MSDN, but given all the "copying
Apple" worry in this thread, it seems nobody here has even heard of them.

Now, imagine these responses from application developers if you wrote
some interface guidelines for Ubuntu:

*   "Ubuntu design guidelines? I've never heard of them."

*   "Jonathan Meek? I've never heard of him. Why should I do what he
    says?"

*   "Ubuntu? Ubuntu's just a distro, what business do they have setting
    'guidelines' for applications?"

*   "I use Fedora for development, why should I care what Ubuntu wants?"

*   "Ubuntu? You want me to take advice from the people who designed
    Unity? Hah!"

*   "I read a couple of pages but it was really boring."

*   "Gnome already has guidelines, this is just another example of
    Ubuntu trying to go their own way. Shame on them."

Improving the design of Ubuntu applications is a design problem in
itself. And even if those criticisms are unfair, they're going to come
up. So if you want to make a difference, you need to have a way to
minimize, or be able to address, each of those criticisms.

> Provisionally, Mr. Gifford is correct. The are going to be started on,
> and presented for peer review. I'm debating how to go about this now
> less than I am whether to go about it at all.
>
> I would like some opinions to feedback into this. I know what the
> designer said were good designed Ubuntu applications, but what do
> people here think are some? And why do you think that? (This includes,
> looks, structure, and behavior as well as integration.)
>...

This is the biggie. If guidelines are to be credible, they need to be
either self-evidently logical, demonstrated to succeed in real Ubuntu
applications, and/or written by people who designed successful Ubuntu
applications. The Windows, Mac, and iOS guidelines can all use
applications designed by the OS vendor as examples of what to do. But
there are very few applications targeted for Ubuntu first, let alone
Ubuntu exclusively. I think guidelines will be premature until that changes.

- -- 
mpt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk52NFkACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecrfYACgu152ebybXC0EsGhgSQ/nBtU0
g5kAnixYzKSiFcdmQjkxVCmZUR56wAgB
=0RD1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----