unity-design team mailing list archive

[GonzO <gonzo@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

HOORAY.  I can finally post to the list without it showing up as "Message
Unavailable".  :-)

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 2:54 PM, ello <tenniswithshovels@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> 1) Putting the launchers at the bottom/lense at the top impedes the
> function of the bar (as I see it): You want the things you want close at
> hand.  So, if you invoke the bar by moving the mouse, you don't want to
> move too much to launch the things you want.  A user uses the lenses
> less than the launchers IMO (the lenses are there to find programs you
> don't usually use or, if you do use them often, you put them in the bar)
>

I'm not married to either one being at the top or the bottom.

What I am OPPOSED to, is the lenses changing location when I add or remove
another launcher.  That's no good.  Something that serves as a natural
extension to the Dash should always be located in the same place, IMO.

I don't really care where they go, as long as they're separated and the
lenses are in a fixed position.


2) I agree that the Files and the Applications Lenses should be
> combined.
>

I don't want them combined.  I want the ability to remove the lens lanucher
square, without having to uninstall the lens completely (like it is now).

Imagine my surprise when I uninstalled the Apps and Files lenses (to get
them off my launcher), only to find I could no longer type my application
name on the dash's search bar and have it do anything.  :-(



> 3) The menu in the window title bar.  While it solves the space issue
> and the moving-up-to-the-top problem (the latter isn't much of a problem
> for me, but then I've got a tiny 1440x900 monitor) it restricts window
> size.  What if the user wants a window smaller than the length of the
> menu?


This problem is already solved by other programs, like OO.o and Chrome and
FF and...

">>" buttons.  Show what you can, expand what you cant.

Maybe I should add that to the mock-up.



> What about themes where the window title is centered?
>

Well I guess we don't use those.  We lose some form to gain some function;
it is certainly better than the current trend (of sacrificing functionality
to make things look nice, which happens with aggravating frequency in Unity,
and unbelievable regularity in Gnome 3).


Here's an idea: a single click on the window name (or F10) opens the
> global menu on the panel, with the mouse already there at the first
> entry.
>

Since my messages haven't been getting through, you may not have seen this,
but *in my opinion* (I highlight this because it is a strong opinion, but
opinion nonetheless):

No.

No, no, no.  Under no circumstances should UI elements as important as
pull-down menus *ever* be hidden, ever.  Yes, I know there's a push to clean
up useless chrome, but this isn't useless (nor is it really "chrome").  It's
a horrible idea now, it was a horrible idea before, it will continue to be a
horrible idea in the future.  It is Unity's biggest mistake, IMO, way more
offensive than the global menu location fiasco.

Users, especially new ones, should never have to play hide-and-seek with
something as fundamental as an application's menu system.  (They shouldn't
ever have to play hide-and-seek, or find-the-icon, or any other mini-game
with _any_ UI element, IMO, but especially big important things like
pull-down menus and the global menuing system.)

If a particular set of power users want an option that hides the menus?  I'm
fine with that; but OOTB, I strongly disagree with the idea of hidden
anything (first thing I do is stop the launcher from auto-hiding, in fact).


--G