New Ubuntu System Panel Mockups

[Briquet]

I wanted to optimize my first mockups and so I did these ones, now I feel fine with myself because these are closer to the idea I had in mind.

There are some changes:
- Discarded the spare space from the first mockups to make this menu more compact which makes it easier to use.
- Changed the order of the options like it is in the gnome default's menu (Applications, Places, System)

Current USP:
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/1710/usp2gg4.png

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8213/usp1qo5.png


Mockups:
- Modified the Applications options and now it looks a little bit like the one in the USP, which I consider a good idea of design
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/2518/mockup1applications3rt4.png

- Places more organized
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/4929/mockup2places3md9.png

- Settings is just a copy of the Ubuntu Control Center adapted to this mockup. I also erased the explanation that was in each one because I think this could be shown in a tooltip.
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/5468/mockup3system3vw7.png

- Here in the Custom menu you should be able to add not only applications but also places and settings at your will (not some settings by default)
http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/4940/mockup4custom3ax5.png

- Deskbar integration and searching should work at any moment, this mockup is an example of a search while you were in the applications.
Also the cursor in the search bar should always be ready for a search by default (in a menu like this you don't need to write anything so it won't affect anything else)
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/6892/mockup5deskbar3bd4.png

Thanks
PS: Do you know how to close a poll?

[andlinux21]

Dang!!! That is awesome how do I get that?

[Briquet]

These are just mockups (drawings giving some ideas), but AFAIK developers are working on something to do it possible, thanks for your comment

[andlinux21]

:( Too bad I thought that was the Control Center I still think I will download that package and try it out. I hope they actually come up with something like your mockup..

[delfick]

i say there should be another option....

"both"

:D

(in case it's not obvious, i like both)

[gruvsyco]

I voted current USP. If I were going to attempt anything close to what you're proposing, I would suggest making the Settings menu functional like the current applications menu except using groupings from UCC (i.e. there would be a UCC button instead of All Applications and the layout would parallel the All Applications menu).

Your way just doesn't seem to work well for people that want to have 2 or 3 panes open at once, it would make for a very large menu and, if you're toggling each pane one at a time, why not just use the default gnome menu.

[_simon_]

I still much prefer the current USP.

[bulldog]

Yep,me too.
It's good for me as it is and changing the layout will get you spending more time to search for your app.
I use this one for some time and I get along with it.
Thus leave it that way,and spend time for loosing bugs if there are any :cool:
It's only a menu and should not need a book to read to use it.
Keep it simple and eventually a little configurable for the die-hards :) so everyone can use it.
Make it not too complex,it will scare people off.

[lazyd2]

I still prefer USP...
But, I wouldn't mind to have them as optional.

[Briquet]

Yep,me too.
It's good for me as it is and changing the layout will get you spending more time to search for your app.
I use this one for some time and I get along with it.
Thus leave it that way,and spend time for loosing bugs if there are any :cool:
It's only a menu and should not need a book to read to use it.
Keep it simple and eventually a little configurable for the die-hards :) so everyone can use it.
Make it not too complex,it will scare people off.

I think it's pretty simple, if you want places, pick the option places or settings, just choose it, if you want to make one application, bookmark or setting favorite just right click and you'll have it in your Custom option, what is too complex?
Also in my computer (not so fast) adding or quiting options of the current USP is "distracting" because the USP moves more than necessary for a new option (like jumping from one side to the other), not so smooth let me tell you.
And finally if they are going to do a plugin nobody would be hurt because you'll have the choice to use the way you want :D

[outdooricon]

The new mockups just seem to busy to me... I like current one because it's simple, and not much reading involved to do what needs to be done, but with the mockups there are link al over the place to show you exactly what you want to see... I dunno it just seems very busy.

[orb9220]

Yep current .33 and I prefer over mockups. They don't seem as easy to look at and grasp. Seem way to busy and cramped.

But for some may like it have it as a option. Flexability is what linux is all about.

[ursula_gb]

Eyyyy...those mockups are better than the last ones, I like them, they seem very easy.
Nice job :D
When are they going to be released?

[bulldog]

I think it's pretty simple, if you want places, pick the option places or settings, just choose it, if you want to make one application, bookmark or setting favorite just right click and you'll have it in your Custom option, what is too complex?
Also in my computer (not so fast) adding or quiting options of the current USP is "distracting" because the USP moves more than necessary for a new option (like jumping from one side to the other), not so smooth let me tell you.
And finally if they are going to do a plugin nobody would be hurt because you'll have the choice to use the way you want :D

When it comes like a plugin I don't mind at all :D
Thought the usp would change in something different.
I take my words back and wait to see the plugin.

[blizcoz]

Great man! those mockups look great.
I've tested the USP, which is a good job, but I prefer an easy menu.
I'm continue waiting for an option like your mockups.

[hgibson]

Hi.

Great work. I prefer the new mockups.

Perhaps you could add "Tasks" as a category. The tasks (bash scripts or other that run as first time wizards) could be saved in "/usr/share/task". Examples of tasks are;


Browse Internet
Read Email
Read Document
Print Document
Play Music
Play Game
Watch Video


The first time each task is activated a "wizard" runs to enable the task and all software/system settings needed to accomplish the task.

For example:

Browse Internet

Is ppp0 setup ?
What browser does the user prefer ?
Is this browser setup ?
Does the user need special proxy setups ?
And so on...
Until the user succesfully completes the task.

The same task flow control could be used for the other tasks. The tasks I have listed are my suggestion of the most common tasks.

Cheers

Hilton

[chanders]

Hi.

Great work. I prefer the new mockups.

Perhaps you could add "Tasks" as a category. The tasks (bash scripts or other that run as first time wizards) could be saved in "/usr/share/task". Examples of tasks are;


Browse Internet
Read Email
Read Document
Print Document
Play Music
Play Game
Watch Video


The first time each task is activated a "wizard" runs to enable the task and all software/system settings needed to accomplish the task.

For example:

Browse Internet

Is ppp0 setup ?
What browser does the user prefer ?
Is this browser setup ?
Does the user need special proxy setups ?
And so on...
Until the user succesfully completes the task.

The same task flow control could be used for the other tasks. The tasks I have listed are my suggestion of the most common tasks.

Cheers

Hilton

This is an excellent idea and the implementation is quite easy (the new plugin system is near completion ;)) however the critical problems are in your list

Is ppp0 setup ?
What browser does the user prefer ?
Is this browser setup ?
Does the user need special proxy setups ?
And so on...

How do we test to see if ppp0 is setup?
How do we test to see what browsers are installed?
How do we know if the browser is setup?
etc...

If these answers were available then this would be implemented in no time at all...

Maybe I will start a thread for questions and if you know the answer you can post it so we could be on our way to achieveing something like this...

[DBO]

I have a bit of experience writing shell scripts to detect those kinds of things chanders. Attempting to autodetect most of that is relatively simple, a simple matter of some pinging for live connection, checking /etc/network/interfaces and so on. Writing the scripts is really a peice of cake, of course getting the frontend is the hard part. We could just as easily use zenity, that would make the scripts much more accessable to a wider range of people than doing it in python. It wouldnt even be that hard to configure a simple firewall properly.

[chanders]

I have a bit of experience writing shell scripts to detect those kinds of things chanders. Attempting to autodetect most of that is relatively simple, a simple matter of some pinging for live connection, checking /etc/network/interfaces and so on. Writing the scripts is really a peice of cake, of course getting the frontend is the hard part. We could just as easily use zenity, that would make the scripts much more accessable to a wider range of people than doing it in python. It wouldnt even be that hard to configure a simple firewall properly.

In that case I can do the frontend for USP and maybe the wizard scripts...

If you would like to become part of the development team or just share your scripts PM me...

Keep in mind that displaying information directly in USP such as the 'Network' section under 'Computer' must not have the user waiting for the data to be available before the menu opens...

For example I could have used 'ipconfig' to determine the IP address of the machine but this prevented the USP from opening for a few seconds while it was getting the IP address. This wait was unacceptable so I had to find a much faster method..

I hope I explained it properly... Thanks for your info and I am looking forward to your input...

[Briquet]

Originally Posted by chanders:
"...the new plugin system is near completion ;)..."


GREAT!!!!!, thanks for all the nice comments people and I think the idea of hgibson is excellent, it may take this USP project to a new level

[DBO]

In that case I can do the frontend for USP and maybe the wizard scripts...

If you would like to become part of the development team or just share your scripts PM me...

Keep in mind that displaying information directly in USP such as the 'Network' section under 'Computer' must not have the user waiting for the data to be available before the menu opens...

For example I could have used 'ipconfig' to determine the IP address of the machine but this prevented the USP from opening for a few seconds while it was getting the IP address. This wait was unacceptable so I had to find a much faster method..

I hope I explained it properly... Thanks for your info and I am looking forward to your input...

so you actually want to run these setup scripts from within the USP panel itself? Not create a new window? To me that seems a little cramped doesnt it? I was invisioning something a little more simple. A new category with a bunch of different buttons for different tasks, the tasks launch their own script in their own window (USP closes). Or am I confusing your words?

[chanders]

so you actually want to run these setup scripts from within the USP panel itself? Not create a new window? To me that seems a little cramped doesnt it? I was invisioning something a little more simple. A new category with a bunch of different buttons for different tasks, the tasks launch their own script in their own window (USP closes). Or am I confusing your words?

Actually I wasnt talking about the setup scripts, I was talking about diaplaying information in USP in general...

The setup scripts would be run in a wizard fashion (I think this is best)...

I like where these ideas are going... If we can get someone to outline a frame work we could branch the project...

Ideas anyone?

[DBO]

Actually I wasnt talking about the setup scripts, I was talking about diaplaying information in USP in general...

The setup scripts would be run in a wizard fashion (I think this is best)...

I like where these ideas are going... If we can get someone to outline a frame work we could branch the project...

Ideas anyone?

That should be easy enough. I think the tasks should be a hidden pane myself, but thats really up to you. As far as the wizards go, they should launch in seperate windows, be written in shell, and maintain a consistant feel from one wizard to the next (reasoning for shell as mentioned before is to make the scripts easy to understand for all involved, this can be a learning tool for new users too). I am open to pygtk if that is what you really want, but I feel that may end up reducing the educational value for new users (plus shell is so natural for this sort of thing)

Proposed Wizard Guidelines:

-- GUI Frontend: Zenity
-- Wizard Layout:
-- Page 1: Welcome page with overview of tasks
-- Middle pages: Set all the options
-- Last Page: Overview selected options and present option to start over

Other considerations:

Ease of use:
Autodetection should occur for any and everything possible, this is not terribly difficult to acheive. Everything else should have a default answer, so that simply clicking ok through the entire wizard (even if this behavior is not desired) should result in at least a working configuration.

Logging:
Logging of any system wide changes should occur. Logs should be verbose all go to the same file, use a standard format, and be verbose enough to troubleshoot potential issues.

Security:
Usage of root privelidges is strictly not needed for most tasks. In situations where root is needs (such as configuring a firewall or the network) a message should display to the user explaining what is about to happen, and where logs can be found. After the root execution has finished, and undo option should be present (even after closing and relaunching the wizard) so that a user doesnt end up in without net access to gain support.

Range of Tasks:
Tasks can and should cover a range of things, from simple to advanced, and probably should be categorized as such. Simple tasks could including setting a new password, while more complex ones (as I have mentioned several times) may be configuring a proper IPtables firewall.

There, that about covers my thoughts.

As for why I keep coming back to the firewall, well, that will be my first contribution to this project. USP will gain its own task for configuring a secure, yet accessable firewall. I have already been working on this for a bit, so its mostly done. The idea behind the project is to make a firewall easier to configure than even firestarter is (you dont need to know what a port is to configure anything). It runs out of the box and requires no monitoring, sports several modes to configure (ranging from beginner to advanced), can manage remote computers (still highly experimental and buggy), read a standard file to add additional rules and so on (extensible). It is programmed in shell, so its a bit of a pain, but shell was chosen again so new users can play and toy with it too (common theme with me). I myself have been using it for a while now, so it DOES work, but the code is still very sloppy, using if elif elif instead of case... I was tired... and so on.

Just a bit of warning, it is a LARGE script, over 5,000 lines to be exact, but a lot of that is fairly redundant (once again with the sloppy code). Once the project gets an official greenlight from chanders, and guidelines have been layed out for tasks, I will release an updated version that conforms to the guidelines.

[chanders]

Sounds great..
Lets start with the first item (unless someone think another should be first)

*Browse internet
Is ppp0 setup ?
What browser does the user prefer ?
Is this browser setup ?
Does the user need special proxy setups ?
etc..

If I can get the scripts to get this done I will include the 'Tasks' pane as a trial... Better yet, I will make it a plugin so that others can write their own task plugins like 'Edit Photos' or 'Send Email'...

[Briquet]

Is there any way that developing ignorant people could help? maybe a new thread to give ideas about the wizard's topics? more mockups? :) lol (just kidding)

[DBO]

Is there any way that developing ignorant people could help? maybe a new thread to give ideas about the wizard's topics? more mockups? :) lol (just kidding)

actually you can help, we are just writing shell scripts. All you need to learn is how to use Zenity (its pie), and you are going to be good to go.

[DBO]

I need some help, I need anyone with a dial-up connection to help me run some tests so I can properly configure a dialup connection with a script.

[chanders]

GREAT!!!!!, thanks for all the nice comments people and I think the idea of hgibson is excellent, it may take this USP project to a new level

The plugin system is now ready! Hopefully we can see your mockups come to life ;) Developers? :D

[Briquet]

The plugin system is now ready! Hopefully we can see your mockups come to life ;) Developers? :D

Thanks man, now let's wait for a charitable soul that makes the plugin :)

[ursula_gb]

I want to know when the mockups are going to be released? I have tried the last USP but I stil prefer the mockups, seem to me simpler.

[H.E. Pennypacker]

I'd really like to have the option of going with one or another. But if not possible, the new ones look better.

[chanders]

I will start looking at these mockups as soon as I am finished with the current tasks of getting places in order...

[Briquet]

I've found an idea of the usability of the Mockups in the W3C web page http://www.w3c.com/
There you can see many options in the left hand and when you select one of them the white rectangule where the information is shown doesn't change in size or place, just the content. If the content is bigger than the rectangule an scroll bar appears but your eyes don't get "distracted" by sudden movements of the main window.

[MetalMusicAddict]

I like the mock-ups. Its a little tighter IMO.

[Skoezie]

These mockups look great. Looks like just the thing i'm looking for. I did in fact uninstall the original USP because i think the original menu works easier.:-#