Quote Originally Posted by ian-weisser View Post
Please don't save up big rants like these. You can benefit much more from a separate thread for each issue.

By the generally accepted definition of "more work" meaning more keystrokes or more mouse clicks, this is demonstrably not true. Common applications in the launcher bar: one click or keystroke. Occasionally-used applications: two clicks. Rarely-used applications: three clicks and/or a couple keystrokes. Unity gets easier as you use it in two ways - you discover more features, and Zeitgeist moves your most-used applications closer to the top of the search results.

If you don't like Unity, or you have imprinted on something else, that's okay. You don't have to like it. Nobody will force you to use it, and there are plenty of alternatives. But don't offer this they-are-just-wrong-and-unreasoning ranting. The Ubuntu designers publish their work, ask for feedback, are globally available at the online Ubuntu Developer Summits, and have done a huge amount of real usability research and testing in this field.

The average user doesn't want to point and click - that's Unity's point. The average user want the machine to be psychic, to adaptively understand what the user wants, and to provide the most common choices first. The point-and-click interface is the hindrance (and is tough on a tiny phone screen, too); the user wants the application at the end of the process, not the process itself.

It's okay to not like their work. But to reject their work with a rather childish political argument like "it's-merely-their-pet-project" really diminishes your credibility on the topic.

And I don't even use Unity very often. I imprinted on something else, and I still like something else.

Well, have your reported these bugs properly?
Have you helped to confirm other reported bugs?
Have you helped triage bugs so developers can spend time fixing the bugs instead of clerical work?
Have you helped test pre-release software? The developers have begged for more testing volunteers, on as many platforms as possible.
Have you contributed patches? Updated documentation? Packaged? Backported? Joined a LoCo? Helped other users?

It's not reporting the problem to you. It's reporting the problem back to daisy.ubuntu.com.
You can check the apport logs to see what was reported.
You can check http://errors.ubuntu.com to see the most common reported problems. The Ubuntu Bug Squad takes those reports very seriously.

That seems like a paying-customer attitude that strongly damages your credibility in this community.
If you are a paying customer, you have the right to complain about a product or ask for a refund.
But you're not a customer of the Ubuntu project. Canonical didn't earn a penny from your purchase price. You're a member of this community, and nobody in this community cares about unconstructive complaints or rants. Instead, we work together to improve it. Constructive suggestions and discussion are always welcome.

Who, exactly, do you expect to do all this additional testing...for free? Volunteers. Community members. The testing team. In other words, us.

I urge you to participate in next week's Ubuntu Developer Summit ( http://summit.ubuntu.com ) and see exactly how Ubuntu gets put together. You may be surprised just how focused and disciplined many teams are, how strong the focus on quality and testing really is, the strategies for better testing, more testing, sustainable testing, better bug reporting, automated bug reporting, and how the feedback process really works (well) in this community.

Ubuntu's quality has hugely improved in the past few years. System crashes and X crashes are *way* down. Boot is faster, and printing and video are no longer arcane magic. Honestly, given a choice between the system-killing X and print and other bugs we used to have against the rather lightweight missing-text field and other application bugs of today...I'll stick with today's bugs. Maybe you can help us figure out how to test applications more and better before release.

We're open to new ideas and new contributors like you.
I have an idea about the beta testing phase. Back when I was helping beta test Ubuntu the beta testers were reporting bugs as they were found. This is good, but I feel it can be better. Issues can be overlooked when a person is focusing on hundreds of items, but more attention to detail can be paid when a person is focusing on a few items.

Institute beta groups. Groups can be things like Office, Internet, File system, programming, etc.
Find volunteers to assign to a group, such as the Office group. The people assigned to this group should focus on testing office-related apps, such as the Contacts app or the Libre Office suite. These folks can report any bug they find but their primary focus is the apps that fall within their group. Have them use the app on a day-to-day basis and report what they find.

If you open the Contacts app that ships with Ubuntu and click the "New" button in the top left corner, you'll see that the text input box for the Address field is missing. I feel this issue would have been resolved prior to release had someone been focusing on Office apps during beta testing. If a large issue such as this cannot be resolved before release then that app is removed from the release, or replaced with a similar app.

I don't think I've beta tested anything since Dapper (Ubuntu 6.06) so this idea may have been implemented already without my knowledge. Has this type of thing been implemented? If not, can it be implemented? I would definitely be willing to volunteer to be a member of a group.

The reason I don't do beta testing anymore is because I once looked for a bug report, didn't find one, so I tested an app. Upon finding bugs I attempted to report them only to find that there were several reports made just prior to mine. I feel beta groups would help avoid duplicate work/reports.