unity-design team mailing list archive

[Jo-Erlend Schinstad <joerlend.schinstad@xxxxxxxxx>]

Den 28. aug. 2011 15:07, skrev André Oliva:
> Reducing buttons is one thing, ***hidding them*** is another very 
> distinct thing. It's not the same. Like the current hidden menus. The 
> first time I saw that, I searched why was that change done. And the 
> reason I found was something like: "the change was done because we 
> want new app designers to keep the UI simple" (elementary-styled). And 
> there was a comment that I liked: "hide things is not the way to 
> simplify an interface". Why not? When in GNOME 3 the maximize and 
> minimize buttons were eliminated, there was a *simplification*. 
> Hidding things is not a way for simplifying an UI. Well, you don't 
> show the element, the interface *looks* simple, but the complexity 
> added to having to learn about the interface makes it more complex, 
> actually.
Why would you want to add a menubar containing only a File menu
which itself only contains an Exit item? It is far easier to simply
click the button to close the window. So why is this being done in so
many applications? Because without the menubar, the application
looks primitive and weird compared to all the others. So, using a
menubar isn't really optional anymore. By hiding the menus, it
becomes easier for developers not to implement silly placeholder
menubars, while applications that do use them properly will work
as before. I am guilty of doing that myself, adding File > Exit and
Help > About just to have a menubar and not being able to come
up with any useful things to put in there. Your assumption that it is
only a matter of style and looks is therefore wrong. Hiding the
menubar helps developers add meaningless menus, which in turn
helps to improve usability.

You keep saying that learning to use this is complex. That makes
me think you haven't actually tested it. As I've said before, I didn't
even notice it at first, but when I did, I immediately liked it. I have
tested this on inexperienced users, and they grasped it immediately,
without any reaction of any kind.

> Hide all that is not my application is something called "fullscreen" 
> that a lot of applications have. By definition, to maximize a window 
> is not going fullscreen.

Fullscreen is entirely different. Maximized applications are not displayed
as fullscreen in Ubuntu. How did you get that idea?

> Any way, configuration options are needed. I personally don't like 
> that buttons and menus are hidden. And I see that some people like 
> hidden buttons and menus. And if I have to install Ubuntu for someone 
> new to Linux, I would like all the hidden items to be shown, because 
> current state, as I said before, is too confusive. Also think on touch 
> devices. I have seen some of this devices in YouTube using Ubuntu 
> 10.10 for netbooks, because of menus are hidden in 11.04 and in 11.10. 
> It's not possible to mouse over in a tablet computer.
Which device is it you're talking about and why are you talking about
it? By the way, please stop talking about Linux that way. A user can be
very, very used to Android and still being entirely new to Ubuntu or
Chrome OS. Linux is not a user experience. I don't think I've seen
menubars on any operating system designed for tablets, by the way.
And I don't think Unity is anywhere near a good UI for those kinds of
devices at this time. I also don't think it's meant to be.

> I think before someone makes changes like this, usability tests have 
> to be performed. Before, not after.

They have been. And as I said, my personal experience was that I
didn't even notice it. It just works. That is also the reaction I get from
inexperienced users I've tested it on. Watching a movie on Youtube
does not give an accurate sense of how it works in practice.

> And I also think that Unity shell has to be as simple as possible for 
> the end user. Unfortunately we can not force to all the users to read 
> a manual before using an interface, except when the user is totally 
> new to computers.

Well, in this case, there is absolutely no need to read a manual.
The buttons are always visible when you need them and they are
very discoverable. They should be made visible when you use the
indicators though. Most people are very used to tools being hidden
when not in use. Consider a wrist watch, for instance. When
you're not looking at it, it's often covered by a shirt or a jacket.
When you need to look at it, then it is exposed. No problem.

> I'm also worried about netbooks. I don't remember if the current 
> behavior maximizes all windows. In a desktop computer, when a window 
> is not maximized, the window controls are shown, and when you click 
> "maximize", the controls hide. At least you have an idea where the 
> controls are (but really, I'm assuming too much when I say this). If 
> all windows are maximized by default, you simply have no idea of where 
> the buttons are.

Again, you should try it before you get too frustrated and
opinionated. Applications are not maximized by default. I don't
think they've ever been. But even if they were, it simply isn't true
that you wouldn't get any idea where they were. There are lots
of good reasons why people would touch the top of the screen.
The controls and menus are very discoverable.


Jo-Erlend Schinstad