Should we keep the compiz cube in unity?

[nidzo732]

Looks like compiz cube won't work (http://www.webupd8.org/2011/03/no-more-compiz-desktop-cube-plugin-in.html#more) on unity. It conflicts with desktop wall which is needed by unity. I'm very disappointed with that, when someone says that linux is a comand line OS, i show him the cube. This is a feature that attracted many people to linux. We shouldn't leave it. What do you think?

[slackthumbz]

To hell with unity, I'm sticking to the gnome 2 desktop style of things. If they take that away from me I'll use xfce + compiz. Probably going to go back to Debian before 11.04 is out anyway.

[Lucradia]

To hell with unity, I'm sticking to the gnome 2 desktop style of things. If they take that away from me I'll use xfce + compiz. Probably going to go back to Debian before 11.04 is out anyway.

You'll need emerald if you want compiz with xfce. XFWM4 isn't compatible with compiz, at least not yet. To be honest, I'm fine with the basic compositors in KDE / XFWM4.

[Grenage]

Looks like compiz cube won't work (http://www.webupd8.org/2011/03/no-more-compiz-desktop-cube-plugin-in.html#more) on unity. It conflicts with desktop wall which is needed by unity. I'm very disappointed with that, when someone says that linux is a comand line OS, i show him the cube. This is a feature that attracted many people to linux. We shouldn't leave it. What do you think?

I can't say I'd be bothered. It's one of those functions which looks great, but has no practical use.

[Paqman]

Looks like compiz cube won't work (http://www.webupd8.org/2011/03/no-more-compiz-desktop-cube-plugin-in.html#more) on unity. It conflicts with desktop wall which is needed by unity. I'm very disappointed with that

I was as well. I don't see any reason why we should be forced to use desktop wall. I much prefer the cube.

[slackthumbz]

You'll need emerald if you want compiz with xfce. XFWM4 isn't compatible with compiz, at least not yet. To be honest, I'm fine with the basic compositors in KDE / XFWM4.

You don't need to use XFWM if you're using compiz because you can use metacity instead (or emerald if you so please). Either way I don't hold out much hope for unity or gnome shell. I simply don't think there's anything wrong with the current desktop paradigm. This need for change for changes sake is infantile and unnecessary.

[Lucradia]

You don't need to use XFWM if you're using compiz because you can use metacity instead (or emerald if you so please). Either way I don't hold out much hope for unity or gnome shell. I simply don't think there's anything wrong with the current desktop paradigm. This need for change for changes sake is infantile and unnecessary.

using metacity requires compiz-gnome, and setting gnome compatibility on in ccsm though.

[slackthumbz]

using metacity requires compiz-gnome, and setting gnome compatibility on in ccsm though.

True, but even cludging it like that is worth it to get away from unity or gnome-shell. Emerald is probably the best option though and I'll be sad to say goodbye to gnome, it's been good friend to me for many years now. But unity and gnome-shell simply don't meet my needs as a desktop user so I'll have to find something else that does.

[WestCoastSuccess]

It's a deal-breaker for me - my workflow is set up with the cube in mind, and has been for the past 3 years or so. I won't upgrade from 10.04 if an upgrade involves loss of the cube.

After many years of Ubuntu love, it's sure getting to be one disappointment after another...when exacxtly did removing functionality become an afterthought?

[Philsoki]

It's a deal-breaker for me - my workflow is set up with the cube in mind, and has been for the past 3 years or so. I won't upgrade from 10.04 if an upgrade involves loss of the cube.

After many years of Ubuntu love, it's sure getting to be one disappointment after another...when exacxtly did removing functionality become an afterthought?
Wait... What? You are joking, aren't you?

[beew]

It's a deal-breaker for me - my workflow is set up with the cube in mind, and has been for the past 3 years or so. I won't upgrade from 10.04 if an upgrade involves loss of the cube.

After many years of Ubuntu love, it's sure getting to be one disappointment after another...when exacxtly did removing functionality become an afterthought?

You can re-enble the cube with a bit of hacking.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=10531902&postcount=6

(use alt + left/right to rotate the cube)
But it looks odd when the cube rotates as the Unity bar and the top panel don't rotate with it.

I hope this is only temporary and by 11.10 they would restore the cube to its full glory (the Compiz guy said on launchpad that they don't have the resource to work on it at the moment, so it is not the same as they won't work on it)

There is a guy who managed to make the cube and other effects work beautifully in Unity and he posted it on youtube, but it is in German http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjhFz-wv6Qw
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjhFz-wv6Qw)

EDITED: To the 5 kill joys who answered "no" to the poll, if Unity's functionality puts it in conflict with "eye candies" then it proves that it is a design failure. How come such conflict never arose before and we manage to have a desktop which is BOTH functional and beautiful? At this point Unity is neither.

[Philsoki]

You can re-enble the cube with a bit of hacking.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjhFz-wv6Qw)EDITED: To the 5 kill joys who answered "no" to the poll, if Unity's functionality puts it in conflict with "eye candies" then it proves that it is a design failure. How come such conflict never arose before and we manage to have a desktop which is BOTH functional and beautiful? At this point Unity is neither.

I'm one of the killjoys then, I voted no.

I can't believe more people voted Yes. It's down-right stupid. Just because it brought more people to Linux? That's ridiculous.
You've all essentially voted against progress, for the sake of a little eye candy. What is the functional difference between the Cube and the Wall? There is none.


No, unity's functionality is far more important than eye-candy!
As was implied in the poll, functionality over eye-candy. Any day.

[beew]

I'm one of the killjoys then, I voted no.

I can't believe more people voted Yes. It's down-right stupid. Just because it brought more people to Linux? That's ridiculous.
You've all essentially voted against progress, for the sake of a little eye candy. What is the functional difference between the Cube and the Wall? There is none.


As was implied in the poll, functionality over eye-candy. Any day.


Just because you don't use it doesn't make it stupid. YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE IT BUT PLEASE DON'T TELL OTHERS THEY SHOULD BE DEPRIVED OF THE CHOICE BECAUSE MR. AESTHETICS CHALLENGED THINKS IT IS NOT IMPORTANT.

As I said if you have to pit functionality against eye candy it is a design failure.

[Philsoki]

Just because you don't use it doesn't make it stupid. YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE IT BUT PLEASE DON'T TELL OTHERS THEY SHOULD BE DEPRIVED OF THE CHOICE BECAUSE MR. AESTHETICS CHALLENGED THINKS IT IS NOT IMPORTANT.
I didn't say [i]it[i] (Compiz Cube) was stupid. I simply stated that it's not necessary from a usability, or, design standpoint. The Cube and the Wall achieve the same thing, they provide you with an animation when switching workspace.

Also, when you suddenly went Compiz Cube fanboy and wrote in all caps "PLEASE DON'T TELL OTHERS THEY SHOULD BE DEPRIVED OF THE CHOICE BECAUSE MR. AESTHETICS CHALLENGED THINKS IT IS NOT IMPORTANT"

Tell me, where exactly did I say you should be "deprived" of your glorious cube? I didn't. Please, understand that what I write down and what you make up in your head are two different things.


As I said if you have to pit functionality against eye candy it is a design failure.Yes, it is a design failure - If you choose eye-candy over functionality. But you're actually implying the opposite using this statement. That the cube (Also known as "eye-candy") is more important than the actual desktop environments functionality.

Imagine:
Unity Dev: "It seems all the users want us to prioritize eye-candy over the functional design of our UI."
Other Unity Dev: "Cancel the stability schedule and break unity by giving it the cube ASAP."

[beew]

I didn't say [i]it[i] (Compiz Cube) was stupid. I simply stated that it's not necessary from a usability, or, design standpoint. The Cube and the Wall achieve the same thing, they provide you with an animation when switching workspace.

They don't provide the same animation and switching. It may not be necessary for your home to look pretty because you just care about "functionality" (roof doesn't leak, plumping works and door doesn't hit you on your way out etc), but there is a whole subject called architecture (which involves a lot of art and design) Just because you are ignorant of aesthetics doesn't give you the right to dismiss others' concerns.

That sounds incredibly arrogant and offensive.


Yes, it is a design failure - If you choose eye-candy over functionality. But you're actually implying the opposite using this statement. That the cube (Also known as "eye-candy") is more important than the actual desktop environments functionality.


Customizability is a very important part of "functionality" in my understanding, taking that away is to diminish functionality.

If you just want " bare functionality" why go through the trouble of inventing Unity? Just stick LXDE on Ubuntu with a couple of bug fixes and call it a day, that would be fully 'functional' in the engineering sense. A big point of Unity is to look pretty in order to attract new users (so the argument goes) If you say looking pretty is not important then why go through the whole exercise in the first place?

EDITED: With or without the cube Unity is not that "functional" because of bad design,--as in 'features' rather than bugs,-- like it would take a lot more mouse clicks to find and open an app than it is now and the global menu which is awkward to use if you have multiple unmaximized apps opened, but that is another subject.

[Philsoki]

It may not be necessary for your home to look pretty because you just care about "functionality" (roof doesn't leak, plumping works and door doesn't hit you on your way out etc), but there is a whole subject called interior designWhat are you talking about? I thought this was a technology forum... I didn't realize that interior design and UI Aesthetics went hand in hand now!


That sounds incredibly arrogant and offensive.Wait... What? Are you trying to imply I'm being arrogant? Didn't you just say:


Just because you are ignorant of aesthetics doesn't give you the right to dismiss others' concerns.


They don't provide the same animation and switching.
Never said they did... Here, I'll even show you by quoting myself. Because, well, you're a bit special.

The Cube and the Wall achieve the same thing, they provide you with an animation when switching workspace.
Does that make sense with the achieve underlined, or should I dumb it down a little more for you?


If you say looking pretty is not important then why go through the whole exercise in the first place?All I ever said is that I believe that the Unity devs should focus on stability and functionality over a rotating cube that does nothing more than provide you with some eye-candy when switching desktops.

Are you done embarassing yourself, or should we keep going?

[beew]

All I ever said is that I believe that the Unity devs should focus on stability and functionality over a rotating cube that does nothing more than provide you with some eye-candy when switching desktops.

Are you done embarassing yourself, or should we keep going?


You are sounding like the two are mutually exclusive, but I have said even in my first post that if the design is such that engineering functionality and a widely used and much loved feature such as the cube would come into conflict that means the design is poor in the first place.

We have NOW a desktop which is BOTH more functional and allows a lot more "eye candies", why is that?

[realzippy]

It's a deal-breaker for me - my workflow is set up with the cube in mind, and has been for the past 3 years or so. I won't upgrade from 10.04 if an upgrade involves loss of the cube.

After many years of Ubuntu love, it's sure getting to be one disappointment after another...when exacxtly did removing functionality become an afterthought?

+1
I don't care about the cube bringing folks to linux,btw,the same guys
leaving it a few days later after spamming the forum.
I need my cube,I need it fast,I need it 16xAntiAliased,and I also need my 4 MB
animated equirectangular skydome image.
For workflow. :P

[ctrlmd]

yes they should.... i hope
its the first thing that attract me to linux

[Philsoki]

You are sounding like the two are mutually exclusive, but I have said even in my first post that if the design is such that engineering functionality and a widely used and much loved feature such as the cube would come into conflict that means the design is poor in the first place.

Do you even know what the word "design" means? I guess ten years from now we better stick to the same depreciated libraries so we can maintain cube functionality. You know they could probably get a plugin for a cube feature in the future? Why you're so locked into compiz is beyond me. But, whatever.


We have NOW a desktop which is BOTH more functional and allows a lot more "eye candies", why is that?
Are you seriously asking me that, or is the objective question supposed to make you look wise and suddenly make sense of all your previous comments? Because, it doesn't.

Obviously you're talking about Compiz compatability with GNOME 2, KDE 3, KDE 4, XFCE and a whole bunch of other desktop environments. You think just because they can make use of compiz that they're somehow more advanced, is that what you're trying to say?

Like GNOME 3.0 and GNOME Shell, the unity developers probably wanted "tighter integration" between the panel and window manager than cooperating with the Compiz project would allow. From a design standpoint, it seems like a pretty sound plan to go by.

[beew]

Do you even know what the word "design" means? I guess ten years from now we better stick to the same depreciated libraries so we can maintain cube functionality. You know they could probably get a plugin for a cube feature in the future? Why you're so locked into compiz is beyond me. But, whatever.


Are you seriously asking me that, or is the objective question supposed to make you look wise and suddenly make sense of all your previous comments? Because, it doesn't.

Obviously you're talking about Compiz compatability with GNOME 2, KDE 3, KDE 4, XFCE and a whole bunch of other desktop environments. You think just because they can make use of compiz that they're somehow more advanced, is that what you're trying to say?

Like GNOME 3.0 and GNOME Shell, the unity developers probably wanted "tighter integration" between the panel and window manager than cooperating with the Compiz project would allow. From a design standpoint, it seems like a pretty sound plan to go by.

I am talking about usability as in being able to find and open an app with the least number of mouse clicks, I am talking about customizability as in being able to make the desktop looks and behaves in the way you want (that includes not being forced to change the "desktop paradigm" to what? A smart phone paradigm?)

If "tighter integration" goes against customizability and usability (these are related, because you can customize to make things more usable)then it is poor design concept. You are talking about philosophy, "tight integration" over "modality" is a philosophical preference, but I am looking at the outcomes. A bad design concept is one that leads to less desirable outcomes. Losing usability, features(that includes features that you contemptuously dismissed as "eye candies") and customizability is an undesirable outcome, which I believe everyone can agree to.

Is that not clear to you?? I am not trying to sound wise, it is just that you are trying very hard to sound dumb, now how's that?

I prefer Gnome over KDE exactly because there is less 'tight integration" and it allows more flexibility.

EDITED: BTW, you seem to have a disdain for Compiz, should I remind you that Unity is a Compiz plugin and Gnome shell is trying to implement Compiz features through Mutter, though doing it very poorly?

[Copper Bezel]

I think as time goes on we'll start to see some evidence of the benefits of that integration. So far, we have a workspace switcher that doesn't interrupt the panel - big deal - at the cost of using any other workspace switcher. If Unity can implement features that really integrate the functionality of the compositor and the dock, it'll start to justify itself as an essentially locked-down, integrated interface. Scale, for instance, is cloned from Apple's Exposé, and it's only recently that DockBarX and Unity managed to integrate it into the dock. Something that would require a higher level of integration is Exposé's drag-and-drop feature, where a file or a bit of text could be dragged to a dock icon, the windows would fan out, and the user could drop that item directly onto the running instance of the application he or she wants to drop it into. That feature requires the dock to be highly integrated with the compositor, and there are many other features that Unity could introduce using that kind of thinking.

I'm still not switching to Unity anytime soon, but I can understand why this kind of integration offers a lot of potential, and I trust Canonical to make better use of it than Gnome will with Shell and Mutter.

[Spice Weasel]

You GNOME people really like arguing over things that don't matter in the slightest, don't you?

[Philsoki]

I am talking about usability as in being able to find and open an app with the least number of mouse clicks, I am talking about customizability as in being able to make the desktop looks and behaves in the way you want (that includes not being forced to change the "desktop paradigm" to what? A smart phone paradigm?)
Weren't we talking about Unity and the compiz cube? You've gone completely off topic. Just look at all that useless nonsense I have to reply to below.


If "tighter integration" goes against customizability and usability (these are related, because you can customize to make things more usable)then it is poor design concept. You are talking about philosophy, "tight integration" over "modality" is a philosophical preference, but I am looking at the outcomes. A bad design concept is one that leads to less desirable outcomes. Losing usability, features(that includes features that you contemptuously dismissed as "eye candies") and customizability is an undesirable outcome, which I believe everyone can agree to.

EDITED: BTW, you seem to have a disdain for Compiz, should I remind you that Unity is a Compiz plugin and Gnome shell is trying to implement Compiz features through Mutter, though doing it very poorly?[/QUOTE]
I don't have a disdain for compiz. Tighter integration is not a philisophical term.


Is that not clear to you?? I am not trying to sound wise, it is just that you are trying very hard to sound dumb, now how's that?
You're doing it wrong.


I prefer Gnome over KDE exactly because there is less 'tight integration" and it allows more flexibility.
I rest my case, <snip>

[Elfy]

Please keep this civil or it'll be closed.

[Philsoki]

Please keep this civil or it'll be closed.
I didn't realize that forum etiquette was based along the vocabulary of five year olds, you silly goose.

[overdrank]

I didn't realize that forum etiquette was based along the vocabulary of five year olds, you silly goose.

If you have issue with staff actions please post in the Resolution Center (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=123).
No need to insult staff. :)

[StephanG]

While I agree that the cube itself isnt' particularly useful, its a great way to think about mulitple desktops.

But the real issue I have with this is the principle.

We, as a community, have a diverse range of interests. Some of us like the feature-rich KDE, and some prefer the lightweight XFCE. But whatever the case, we are free to easily choose, install, or setup our system the way we want it.

But now, it seems as though we are being told "We don't care what YOU want. its not useful to ME. So, I'M not going to give YOU the option to set YOUR desktop the way YOU want it."

And that, to me, flies in the face of everything the software community stands for. Sure, you might not find the cube useful, or efficient. But too prevent people from installing options that they want, seems like a good way to destroy the confidence that your users have placed in you to keep their interests at heart.

I'm not saying that it should be included by default. I'm just saying that we need to empower people to compute they way they want, rather than compute the way we want.

[Copper Bezel]

You GNOME people really like arguing over things that don't matter in the slightest, don't you?

From what I've seen, that's equally true of the Gnome devs. Maybe it's something in the libs, yes?

[cloyd]

I don't know that I "need" the cube, but it is handy . . . when I must have many files open, it really helps to move some of it to another side . . . I guess the wall will do that. However, it is a really good thing when I take my laptop to a meeting and someone sees the cube spinning, and says, "How did you do that?" Haven't used Unity yet. Will have to see it first. I do love Gnome.

[Spr0k3t]

Putting in my 2s...

I like the cube. I can live without it as it brings absolutely no functionality for the sake of workflow or productivity. Well, unless you are making a video showing off features of Linux for Youtube.

With that said, I hate the global menu. It strangles my workflow or productivity like it would if there was only a single mouse button. I'd rather keep the cube for petty sake over a global menu. The unity dock turns my productivity to a completely different degree and strangles workflow. Trying to discern which window is which that has been minimized at a single glance without using the mouse makes it tough to pull out the right window/app I'm working with. This is especially difficult when working across three monitors. The cube on the other hand, still makes no difference if it were there or not, but a fantastic bit of eye candy added in spite of evolutionary desktop change which to me hinders my productivity... I'd rather have the cube.

[mamamia88]

cube looks great and i love playing with it, but expo serves same function. i'll give unity a week trial and if it sucks trying gnoem-shell

[dh04000]

I love the cube for when I want to screw around..... but its not essential. Why isn't unity compatible with the cube? There shouldn't be a good reason for that. It'll get patched soon after unity's 1.0 release, I'm sure :)

As far as gnome 3 goes, I think that xfce, which is already basically a gnome copy and is gnome compatible, should import the last gnome 2 in wholesale. Make xfce 100 gnome 2 compatible and market it to enterprise linux makers like red hat and oracle. I doubt they are like the more "user designed" gnome 3 shell an dunity compared to the older more stable and "enterprise designed" gnome 2. That way xfce gets more attention and development and gnome 2 users can move to it and KNOW its 100% working with their software. If your job depends on something working with 100% then they might like this migration path more.

That being said, xfce adds some things gnome 2 doesn't have, so they should help adding more features and continue development and just important enough gnome 2 to be 100% compatible.

[jerenept]

I hate these kinds of threads where people argue incessantly about irrelevant things like the Compiz cube.

People like this are the main reason Linux, and Linux users, will never be taken seriously, and will stay at 1% market share. Suppose, now, the Unity devs pull out all stops to support the Cube, and the crippling (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/eglibc/+bug/450838) bugs (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/empathy/+bug/747066) people are currently suffering in Empathy and GWibber (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gwibber/+bug/631147), not to mention Unity itself (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/+bug/727041), stay, what will you say?

Man, just grow up already.

[WannabeFantasma]

I never really use the cube...
Both my ubuntu desktop + laptop have none effects...

[Simian Man]

The cube is so 2006.

[dh04000]

I hate these kinds of threads where people argue incessantly about irrelevant things like the Compiz cube.

People like this are the main reason Linux, and Linux users, will never be taken seriously, and will stay at 1% market share. Suppose, now, the Unity devs pull out all stops to support the Cube, and the crippling (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/eglibc/+bug/450838) bugs (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/empathy/+bug/747066) people are currently suffering in Empathy and GWibber (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gwibber/+bug/631147), not to mention Unity itself (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/+bug/727041), stay, what will you say?

Man, just grow up already.


I agree with you! See my post. They should get the bugs in line and get a true stable 1.0 release out there before they fix minor issues like the cube.

[Dustin2128]

If you don't like the lack of a cube, then don't use unity. If you think it's superfluous, then do. You see, "choice" is one of the basic tenets of the linux philosophy. I'm nearly 100% sure that there's going to be an effort to fork pre-shell gnome, and you'll always be able to opt-out of using unity or gnome altogether with ubuntu. I'm with spice weasel on this one... and also agree that change for the sake of change is idiotic.

[beew]

I hate these kinds of threads where people argue incessantly about irrelevant things like the Compiz cube.

People like this are the main reason Linux, and Linux users, will never be taken seriously, and will stay at 1% market share. Suppose, now, the Unity devs pull out all stops to support the Cube, and the crippling (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/eglibc/+bug/450838) bugs (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/empathy/+bug/747066) people are currently suffering in Empathy and GWibber (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gwibber/+bug/631147), not to mention Unity itself (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/+bug/727041), stay, what will you say?

Man, just grow up already.

Oh really, some evidence please? Linux is ~ 1% (if that is true) has a lot more to do with things like relatively poor hardware support. The UI is actually quite secondary considering that Linux users still have a long way to get say, graphic performance on par with Windows. The mere fact that in 2011 it is still a challenge for Linux to get decent graphic performance would be enough to deter a lot of potential users. I can see there will be further drop with Nvidia effectively pulling out support for Linux laptops with Optimus if this is not resolved in some ways soon.

It is of course not Linux's fault that hardware manufacturers refuse to cooperate but to blame it on the cube is quite ludicrous and absurd. The cube actually brings in new users according to countless testimonies.

If there are crippling bugs in Gwilbber and Empathy shouldn't that be the jobs of the Gwilbber and Empathy devs to figure that out? And why is the cube responsible for crippling bugs in other apps.

Who are you to tell others to "grow up"? If you don't care about a good looking desktop that is your choice, just don't run any special effect but don't ever try to lecture others what they should do with theirs.

A main point of Unity is indeed aesthetics ("eye candies"). If you think aesthetics itself is a frivolous consideration than there is little reason for Unity in the first place. Just slap LXDE with some bug fixes on Ubuntu you would get something functional and relatively bugs free.

[clanky]

The cube is nothing more than eye candy and / or a way for people with absolutely no knowledge of anything to convince themselves that they are somehow 1337 linux power users.

You only have to search youtube for eleventeen million videos of OMG SPINNING CUBEZ and read the comments that follow them to see that it probably does more harm than good.

The sooner it dies the better, the only thing it is actually any practical use for is a quick and easy way to test 3D graphics accelration, nothing else, nothing.

[madjr]

am sure some cube fans will get it working again and solve those few bugs.

the cube is not a critical component, but is good to have most of the compiz plugins back (and new ones), if not then compiz will be no different than mutter...

[jerenept]

Oh really, some evidence please? Linux is ~ 1% (if that is true) has a lot more to do with things like relatively poor hardware support. The UI is actually quite secondary considering that Linux users still have a long way to get say, graphic performance on par with Windows. The mere fact that in 2011 it is still a challenge for Linux to get decent graphic performance would be a major show stopper for potential users (among other things) I can see there will be further drop with Nvidia effectively pulling out support for Linux laptops with Optimus if something this is not resolved in some ways soon.

I agree... of course the kernel devs could make it a little easier by providing a driver API.

It is of course not Linux's fault that hardware manufacturers refuse to cooperate but to blame it on the cube is quite ludicrous and absurd. The cube actually brings in new users according to countless testimonies.
Ok, so you only use your computer for the Desktop Cube?
One would think that people are attracted more to things like their documents opening properly.


If there are crippling bugs in Gwilbber and Empathy shouldn't that be the jobs of the Gwilbber and Empathy devs to figure that out? And why is the cube responsible for crippling bugs in other apps.

So why are the bug reports, and fixes, on Launchpad? The point is, that these are critical bugs, and I personally have been infuriated with them.

Who are you to tell others to "grow up"?
Good point.

If you don't care about a good looking desktop that is your choice, just don't run any special effect but don't ever try to lecture others what they should do with theirs.

I do, I run Unity Compiz on my computer.

A main point of Unity is indeed aesthetics. If you think aesthetics itself is a frivolous consideration than there is little reason for Unity in the first place. Just slap LXDE with some bug fixes on Ubuntu you would get something functional and relatively bugs free.
I use Compiz Unity (11.04) on a daily basis,so I don't think aesthetics are frivolous. However, I think that "the Cube" is not a valid reason to abandon Unity.



the only thing it is actually any practical use for is a quick and easy way to test 3D graphics accelration, nothing else, nothing.
we have glxgears for that purpose :P

[beew]

The cube is nothing more than eye candy and / or a way for people with absolutely no knowledge of anything to convince themselves that they are somehow 1337 linux power users.

You only have to search youtube for eleventeen million videos of OMG SPINNING CUBEZ and read the comments that follow them to see that it probably does more harm than good.

.

Then what do you call Unity?

Funny that is exactly how some self proclaimed "power users" describe Ubuntu (and they also tend to be least willing to help newbies on forums...)

Your post is basically just elitist rant and is quite irrelevant. Peace.

[beew]

Ok, so you only use your computer for the Desktop Cube?
One would think that people are attracted more to things like their documents opening properly.


It is one of the reasons that attract people to Ubuntu based on their own testimonies, I wouldn't say it is the only reason of course, but it arouses people's interest.

Remember the logic behind Unity is that a flashy new UI would attract new users. That is the same logic. If you think one is not valid you have to dismiss the other as well.

I think it is never that simple, there are other more important factors at play (main thing being hardware compatibility) but interface is one (IMO not the main) factor to consider.



So why are the bug reports, and fixes, on Launchpad? The point is, that these are critical bugs, and I personally have been infuriated with them.

Well I don't use Gwilber and empathy works well enough for me for my minimal usage. But I would never lecture you that social networking stuffs are just for gossiping morons and we should simply get rid of them for Ubuntu to be taken seriously.



I use Compiz Unity (11.04) on a daily basis,so I don't think aesthetics are frivolous. However, I think that "the Cube" is not a valid reason to abandon Unity.

I don't know about others, I never said we should abandon Unity, it is the future face of Ubuntu. However, I do want it to be better than g2, with more features and possibilities, not less.

[el_koraco]

don't care, so long as my wobbly windows are there foreva

[RiceMonster]

If one cannot spin their cube, what can one do on a linux desktop?

[NCLI]

Then what do you call Unity?
An excellent user interface.

[Dustin2128]

If one cannot spin their cube, what can one do on a linux desktop?
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Linux#Uses

[beew]

An excellent user interface.

Don't think so, everything in Unity involves more mouse clicks and it is just awkward to use (the global menu, which I have removed, the lack of function to switch between open apps, the oversized dash, the need for several clicks to just open an apps through the dash etc) You can train yourself to use Unity proficiently, but an "excellent" UI should not require a massive retuning of your work tempo and habit to get used to. The UI is supposed to make work easy for users, not that users have to retrain themselves to suit the design logic of the UI. You can train yourself to run in high heels with enough time and effort, doesn't make the high heel an excellent design for running.

Here is a practical use of the cube, I can switch workspace with just alt+ left/right by rotating the cube, that is quite efficient. In Unity I have to click to expose the workspace first and then another click to actually switch. The switching animation in Unity is not nearly as nice.

[Copper Bezel]

The desktop wall has the same keybinding options. You can enable them in Unity. Neat thing is, only the windows move - the panels and desktop stay where they are, making things a bit less bewilidering.

Any different UI is going to take some getting used to. I'm finding that every feature of Unity I enable in my desktop, I tend to keep (but I've been getting used to them a la carte - starting from something that looked like the Elementary interface, which I'd had for over a year, I moved the window controls, then the dock, then the menu.)

[beew]

The desktop wall has the same keybinding options. You can enable them in Unity. Neat thing is, only the windows move - the panels and desktop stay where they are, making things a bit less bewilidering.

Any different UI is going to take some getting used to. I'm finding that every feature of Unity I enable in my desktop, I tend to keep (but I've been getting used to them a la carte - starting from something that looked like the Elementary interface, which I'd had for over a year, I moved the window controls, then the dock, then the menu.)


But the desktop wall is UGLY. This is the first thing I disabled/changed when I enabled desktop effects in Lucid/Maverick. I don't see why I have to be forced to use it simply because of Unity.

Everything in Unity now actually looks crude and undeveloped; its usability is dismal. Many who say they like it now don't really like it, but have forced themselves to get used to it by their own account (like having successfully trained themselves to run in high heels and then say it is not so bad after all) I have not seen one single advantage over the gnome 2 setup at this stage (based on all reasonable criteria: usability, customizability, look and feel,--which is not locked down in gnome2 so it can accommodate a lot of different tastes and preferences, it can even look like Unity).

I understand gnome2 will be phased out and some new development is necessary (or get stuck with that horrendous piece of crap called Gnome Shell) but Unity could have done much better with a less locked down desktop design (the cube is not even my main concern, but it highlights a lot of things that are wrong with Unity's design approach). I hope things will evolve towards a better direction and we get something really great by 11.10.

[zer010]

Personally, I didn't vote because neither represents my views. Although, I like the Cube and have had it for some time, I'm not using it at this time for no particular reason.

As far as UI experience, I installed 11.04B1 and played around with it for a couple hours. It was buggy as hell, but I understand that it's still just a beta. I filed what bug reports I could before Compiz crashed(filed that one too).

The desktop switcher was pretty good, but the fact that the icon doesn't give a clue as to whether there are open windows on other desktops, is a little bit of a pain.

As far as the design of Unity, it was quite awkward to say the least. Some say it's based on OSX and perhaps my inexperience with that OS might be the reason why it was alien. The negative comments about Unity do hold true, it is more inefficient in finding applications and picking out "minimized" windows. Perhaps part of the reason might be because I didn't have the "BFB"(one bug) and as such I might not have been getting the full functionality out of Unity.

Hopefully, Unity will eventually grow into a great UI, but I just don't see it happening anytime within the year.
I will definitely be sticking with my trusty 10.04LTS install for quite some time. I'll check in on Unity from time to time to experience what changes have been made and I will definitely be looking at 12.04LTS very closely. However, if I think Unity still hasn't made much progress in efficiency of workflow, I'll definitely be looking at another distro like Xubuntu (because I like the Ubuntu base).

[Copper Bezel]

Everything in Unity now actually looks crude and undeveloped; its usability is dismal. Many who say they like it now don't really like it, but have forced themselves to get used to it by their own account (like having successfully trained themselves to run in high heels and then say it is not so bad after all) I have not seen one single advantage over the gnome 2 setup at this stage (based on all reasonable criteria: usability, customizability, look and feel,--which is not locked down in gnome2 so it can accommodate a lot of different tastes and preferences, it can even look like Unity).

I'd tend to agree in the sense that Unity doesn't offer any real options that aren't available in the Classic Desktop at present (because that's what I've been using.) I think the workflow is sensible. I don't care for the aesthetics - it's cluttered to me, and I value simplicity. I think a lot of people are coming to Unity without having had explored some of the workflow options already available to them and being impressed by new features that really are available in simpler ways, but I also think that Canonical is pouring an incredible amount of development into Unity and that it's likely to exceed all expectations by Oneiric.

And I've apparently just switched to Compiz Standalone, so it's no longer my problem. = )

[quequotion]

Concession

I don't want to discourage Unity's developers. It's a useful project with good goals.

Proposal

It may be necessary to fork Gnome2 and proceed with development of Gnome3, 4, etc. (Gnome-Shell doesn't count) and repack future Ubuntu versions with these desktops.

There are some things in Gnome I'd like to fix and improve, like application-based window management in Metacity, but generally I really like how it works, especially with Compiz.

I appreciate change for the better and I think increased functionality and streamlining usability can be done without making the desktop unrecognisable. I also think it's important for change to be gradual in a community-based project.

Four types of users, four types of desktops

I know there are a lot of people out there who don't want to bother with every little setting and appreciate having every choice made for them (MacOS). Not my style. Fortunately, having all the little bits and switches somewhere off to the side where such users never need to notice them suits both of us.

There are always going to be "hard-cores" who like cold, flat, low-resource desktops without a single bell or whistle, despite lacking usability and never impressing anyone.

There are eye-candy junkies as well. Some people really want more stuff on their desktop than they know what to do with (Windows) and windows that swivel and explode and melt, even if they only really play games and surf the web.

The middle ground is probably larger than either group. Making a few customisations here and there, while neither getting lost in myriad screenlets or denying the usefulness of being able to see four workspaces at once in a completely unobtrusive manner.

Conclusions

What's important is that it's a matter of choice. GNU is about freedom of choice as much as anything else. Ubuntu is a Debian-based GNU/Linux Operating System and therefore obligated, morally as much as legally, to offer choice.

Gnome2 offers all of these choices. When it doesn't offer enough, there are alternate desktops for every sort of niche. Unity does not offer as much choice, although users will always be able to install an alternate desktop manager.

One must also consider that new users, loading the LiveCD for the first time, will not even know what a desktop manager is until after a week of using Ubuntu or how to install and configure a different one for a week or so more.

Ubuntu needs a desktop that works and makes sense so people will try it for more than a day, enjoy it for more than a week, and really use it for more than a month, and then be able to make their own choices about how to use their computer and decide to make those choices in GNU/Linux.

If the final decision is to include Unity configured to block cube, essentially driving a wedge between Compiz and Unity, then new users' ability to choose is being curtailed. As a feature that is both very popular and very useful, this also risks turning away those new users along with experienced users.

Unity can be configured to allow Compiz Cube with Rotate Cube, and users should have a choice of "Desktop Wall" or "Desktop Cube with Rotation". This is a better solution, and much easier than forking Gnome2 and repacking Ubuntu.

[clanky]

Then what do you call Unity?

Funny that is exactly how some self proclaimed "power users" describe Ubuntu (and they also tend to be least willing to help newbies on forums...)

Your post is basically just elitist rant and is quite irrelevant. Peace.

How is it elitist to point out that a spinning desktop cube serves no practical purpose? And as for Linux users having negative views of Ubuntu views of Ubuntu, it is exactly because of nonsense like spinning cubes that some people feel this way.

Yes, I know it is just a bit of fun, in itself it does no harm, but if it draws the focus of the developers away from what really matters (i.e. getting stuff done) then that is harmful, and if loads of fanboys post youtube videos of spinning cubes with ridiculous comments like "ha, try doing that in M$ ******* lolz" then it harms the community too. I would prefer it if the cube died a quiet and gentle death somewhere in Wisconsin.

[GabrielYYZ]

if the cube serves no purpose, then why not have a simple desktop switcher like the one in XFCE and call it a day? a bit bigger to allow window moving but a plain and simple switcher. IMHO, the problem with this "unity" thing is: it's going to be easy to use, but not too easy... it's going to be pretty, but not too pretty. it will also allow customization, but not too much customization.

i don't like it, i haven't found a reason to like it and i doubt i will like it and that's why i almost always refrain from posting in these type of threads. but the "cube vs wall: why one is a tool and the other a toy" argument, to me, seems silly.

i use the wall type of effect (the grid, actually, in KDE) but i see how the cube might be useful and more aesthetically pleasing to some people. plus, i don't see how you can actually build a "next generation" desktop if you keep removing features that people use, even if they seem frivolous to some.

i have something else on my mind, so sorry if my post isn't clear or if i mistyped something/got 1 or 2 facts wrong. i'll revise it later.

[Zerocool Djx]

I been living under a windows box lately,.. someone wanna get me up to speed on this unity thing? Is this a addon of sorts or is it another distro of Linux? Is it the next Ubuntu?
I have no idea what it is..

[ticopelp]

What is the functional difference between the Cube and the Wall? There is none.

It's not about cube vs. wall, it's about choice vs. no choice. Being able to customize my workspace the way I want was one of the big reasons I switched to Linux in the first place.

Granted, they haven't made it impossible, just more difficult, and I think they're going in a direction I find disappointing, i.e. trying to lock down and control the user experience like Apple does. It's not a deal-breaker, yet -- I just hope it doesn't become one for me, because I like Ubuntu a lot and don't feel like putting the time into learning another distro.


The cube is nothing more than eye candy and / or a way for people with absolutely no knowledge of anything to convince themselves that they are somehow 1337 linux power users.

This is just snobbish nonsense.

[Frogs Hair]

I been living under a windows box lately,.. someone wanna get me up to speed on this unity thing? Is this a addon of sorts or is it another distro of Linux? Is it the next Ubuntu?
I have no idea what it is..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_(desktop_environment)

[uRock]

Don't think so, everything in Unity involves more mouse clicks
How so? With one click I have my most popular apps open. With anything else I need, I just click Applications icon and type what I need and hit enter, which is much easier than skimming through the gnome 2 menus, IMO.

As for the cube, I have never had any use for such bling. I use my system for productivity. I hardly ever show off my system and when I do I want to show how easily productive it is, without using bling. If I am sitting and watching the desktop out of boredom, then I get up and do something more productive, because there is always something that needs to be done.

[ticopelp]

Also, like it or not, aesthetics matter to some people, regardless of their level of practicality. If you don't think so, just take a look at Apple. It might not be your thing, and that's fine, but I think pretending it's irrelevant to attracting new users would be a mistake.

[Frogs Hair]

I think this is a wait and see issue , I read that 11.10 won't offer the Classic Gnome option and the Gnome shell will be released in September . Unity is of course default for 11.04 , but I don't know if Unity and Gnome 3 will be options in 11.10 and how Compiz fits into the future of one or both.

[lucazade]

Also, like it or not, aesthetics matter to some people, regardless of their level of practicality. If you don't think so, just take a look at Apple. It might not be your thing, and that's fine, but I think pretending it's irrelevant to attracting new users would be a mistake.

Aesthetics matter?
If Pc was an ornament maybe but it is a tool which should help me doing a specific task and in a short time..
So how aestetics should help me?

Does a gold or silver hammer work better than a common one? :)

[beew]

How so? With one click I have my most popular apps open. With anything else I need, I just click Applications icon and type what I need and hit enter, which is much easier than skimming through the gnome 2 menus, IMO.

As for the cube, I have never had any use for such bling. I use my system for productivity. I hardly ever show off my system and when I do I want to show how easily productive it is, without using bling. If I am sitting and watching the desktop out of boredom, then I get up and do something more productive, because there is always something that needs to be done.

Yes, since I don't use it therefore it is useless. How arrogant. Do you know there is actually a whole discipline on human computer interaction? A pleasant work environment actually enhances productivity. Obviously no (and neither do the genuises who design Unity)

If you just care about functionality, that is fine for you, but then why does Mark S keep talking about desktop metaphors, designs and aesthetics whenever he raves about Unity? None of these have anything to do with "functionality" in the narrow engineering sense. Indeed the irony is Unity is often criticized for sacrificing usability for look (even though it is neither usable nor pretty at this stage IMO)

It seems that Unity is meant to be beautiful (though I don't think it is at this point) If aesthetics is just for bored people why don't they just slap LXDE on Ubuntu with some bug fixes and call it a day, functional enough for "productive purpose" and that would keep UROCK happy and clearly would involve a lot less work and money.

As for the mouse click, with one click I go to the dash, which takes up the whole screen distracting me from what I am doing , this is a rude and abrupt interruption on workflow (not a netbook by the way, it happens on my main laptop which is 15" and a few desktops I tried unity on ,actually on the netbook it doesn't do that),then another click to choose a category, another click for showing all, and then scroll down and another click to actually open the app. Yeah, I don't always feel like typing. With the current setup, you can use the keyboard if you want, but you can also do mouse and click. Now if you have to type to be efficient that is lost functionality. And even if I use the search box I still have to open the dash!

I am fascinated by the way fanboyz argue, if you don't like it it is because you haven't trained yourself properly. Hello? The UI is supposed to work for people, that means catering to different work styles and tastes, not that people have to constantly readjust to fit the design logic,--whims,--of those who come up with it.

[Copper Bezel]

I just don't see an alternative here. I mean, Unity is only a default environent. More than anything else, it's maintaining some kind of visual consistency and functionality with Ubuntu's look in the Gnome 2 interface (which Gnome Shell would not.) How can setting a different default give users more options? That just doesn't work.


Aesthetics matter?
If Pc was an ornament maybe but it is a tool which should help me doing a specific task and in a short time..
So how aestetics should help me?

Does a gold or silver hammer work better than a common one?

So you're using Fluxbox, then?

[lucazade]

So you're using Fluxbox, then?

init3.. virtual terminal is enough ;)

I'm using gnome2 and maverick like most of us, I suppose.. but if you ask me what I would like from a new DE or shell I will tell you stability, support and not a nice looking desktop. Don't you?

[ashickur.noor]

I will not try Unity until 12.4 if it exists. I will go for gnome 3. Compiz is that thing, by which I can attract people to Ubuntu. Then why I use Unity if I can not use compiz.

But every thing is changeable. Some day we have to adobe Unity as our desktop environment.

[beew]

Also, like it or not, aesthetics matter to some people, regardless of their level of practicality. If you don't think so, just take a look at Apple. It might not be your thing, and that's fine, but I think pretending it's irrelevant to attracting new users would be a mistake.

Exactly. Ironically Unity is meant exactly to be a beautiful UI to seduce new users, there are easier solutions if they just want to maintain functionality when the panels get phased out.

And now the fanboyz are arguing yeah so Unity may not be pretty but it works for me because I am a no nonsense geek . But on other threads when the real no nonsense geeks criticize Unity from the other direction,--too gimmicky with little practical substance, --these same people would argue we need a beautiful new UI to attract new users because Linux is ~ 1%.

[lucazade]

Exactly. Ironically Unity is meant exactly to be a beautiful UI to seduce new users,

Where do you read Unity is made (only and mainly) for attract new users? sources, please.
(Which in my opinion is also pretty but this doesn't add anything)

People should use you what they want, I don't want to attract no one to Linux.
I'm not an linux evangelist even if my name is Luca like the saint.

[beew]

Where do you read Unity is made (only and mainly) for attract new users? sources, please.
(Which in my opinion is also pretty but this doesn't add anything)

People should use you what they want, I don't want to attract no one to Linux.
I'm not an linux evangelist even if my name is Luca like the saint.

Read various speech by the SABDFL.

Well I never accuse you of being a fanboyz. The fanboyz have to always post things like "I love Unity" or put it in their sigs. It is a religious thing.

[Copper Bezel]

I'm using gnome2 and maverick like most of us, I suppose.. but if you ask me what I would like from a new DE or shell I will tell you stability, support and not a nice looking desktop. Don't you?

Stability and support are just preconditions; I wouldn't use a system that didn't meet those requirements. I'm also obsessed with usability and a sane, simple, attractive appearance that offers the simplest navigation of tasks possible without relying on hidden controls, unnecessary keyboard shortcuts, counter-intuitive visual shorthand, or inconsistent conventions. The default layout of the Gnome 2 desktop offers none of those things; the two panels are a disorganized wreck of applets, half of which are unnecessary. Even the Ambiance and Radiance themes (which haven't changed a jot for Unity) are tacky and cluttered to my eye.

I don't know if I count as "using Gnome 2 like the rest of us," either. I'm using Gnome services and GTK+, but not the Nautilus desktop, Metacity, or the Gnome Panel (the three "Required Session" elements of the Classic Gnome environment.)

[lucazade]

I don't know if I count as "using Gnome 2 like the rest of us," either. I'm using Gnome services and GTK+, but not the Nautilus desktop, Metacity, or the Gnome Panel (the three "Required Session" elements of the Classic Gnome environment.)

I install Ubuntu from minimal netboot cd (10mb) and I choose only the packages I need and like, so Unity or Not, gnome-shell or not, changes affects me only in part.

[Copper Bezel]

Well, no, they won't affect you at all, then. Unity's all one Compiz plugin. But do you get what I'm saying about usability? Part of having a functional desktop is having a readable one, and a desktop that looks clean and attractive really does help with productivity, as mentioned earlier in this thread. Again, if all of that weren't the case, we'd all be using Fluxbox.

[lucazade]

Well, no, they won't affect you at all, then. Unity's all one Compiz plugin. But do you get what I'm saying about usability? Part of having a functional desktop is having a readable one, and a desktop that looks clean and attractive really does help with productivity, as mentioned earlier in this thread. Again, if all of that weren't the case, we'd all be using Fluxbox.

I've read, i've read what you have said about usability.. for me Unity follows Gnome HIG guidelines, which covers all these aspect, so I don't see great problems.
It's also a young project so dark sides will be fixed, i'm confident

[Copper Bezel]

Yeah, I guess I lost track of something there. Too many damned Unity threads. But yeah, while I see the cube as falling well outside of the kinds of features that contribute to readability and such, I'd still draw a line at saying that aesthetics are unimportant. The fact that aesthetics are important is why I don't see a problem with Unity steamrolling the cube.

[Johnsie]

Unity becoming default is the worst decision Canonical have ever made. That's all.

[lucazade]

Unity becoming default is the worst decision Canonical have ever made. That's all.

Unity is shipped as default because Natty is not a LTS release, they need the wider audience possible to have it rocksolid for next LTS.

"given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" by Linus Torvalds
"Release Early, Release Often" by Eric Raymond

[ticopelp]

Aesthetics matter?
If Pc was an ornament maybe but it is a tool which should help me doing a specific task and in a short time..
So how aestetics should help me?

Does a gold or silver hammer work better than a common one? :)

I didn't say "aesthetics have practical computing value," which is the argument you seem to be trying to refute. I said that they matter to people, in that some people find a pleasant computing environment to be appealing.

Clearly you don't -- that's fine. Some people like pretty wallpaper and eye-candy. Some people like booting into the command line. But it seems to me that the Linux world is powerful and broad enough to encompass both mindsets without having to exclude one or the other and say they're "doing it wrong," or make nasty statements about their lack of knowledge based on their aesthetic preferences -- that's just absurd and counterproductive.

[clanky]

I didn't say "aesthetics have practical computing value," which is the argument you seem to be trying to refute. I said that they matter to people, in that some people find a pleasant computing environment to be appealing.

Clearly you don't -- that's fine. Some people like pretty wallpaper and eye-candy. Some people like booting into the command line. But it seems to me that the Linux world is powerful and broad enough to encompass both mindsets without having to exclude one or the other and say they're "doing it wrong," or make nasty statements about their lack of knowledge based on their aesthetic preferences -- that's just absurd and counterproductive.

The problem is that the Linux world might be big enough to encompass both but the distros which try to do both usually end up doing neither well.

It's not only OK to think about aesthetics, it's absolutely essential, of course the way the desktop looks is important to people, but of the time that your computer is switched on how much time do you spend switching desktops? (disregard the time you spend spinning the cube just for the sake of spinning the cube) Is there really any value on focusing so much time and effort on something which provides nothing but a distraction?

And if you want to talk about nasty statements than don't describe comments as snobbish nonsense just because you happen to disagree with them. kthx.

[ticopelp]

And if you want to talk about nasty statements than don't describe comments as snobbish nonsense just because you happen to disagree with them. kthx.

It was you being deliberately insulting I took issue with, not your criticism of the compiz cube:


The cube is nothing more than... a way for people with absolutely no knowledge of anything to convince themselves that they are somehow 1337 linux power users.

That's just a flat ad hominem and not worth being treated like a constructive comment, because it isn't. But, moving on.

Pointing out that focusing on visual effects might cause a distro to lose some focus is a more cogent point, although one I still disagree with.

I get a lot of use out of Compiz' features (scale, group & tab, etc.) that other people might find to be nothing more than distractions. I understand not everyone finds practical use in those features, but I think it's entirely inaccurate to say no one does.

But, these arguments are as old as Compiz itself, and no one is going to change anyone's mind. I just hope it continues to be a viable option in Ubuntu, even if it has to be hacked and kludged to remain functional.

[Legendary_Bibo]

Wait are we just talking about the cube plugin?

What drew me to Linux was Wobbly Windows, and the cube. I don't need to use those. Yes it's eyecandy, but my desktop feels natural and less like a work computer, and more like a toy I get to go on and play with. All the animations, and effects I have also add functionality. I will admit I do like all the eyecandy, but what's wrong with that? Home computers should have have the eyecandy, work computers shouldn't. Why should I focus on how productive I can make my home computer? Why can't I make if more fun to use? What's with all this focus on functionality?!

Also I hate the idea of a global menu, and I can think of one application where it's a failure. Gimp.

I use it all the time to make wallpapers and all kinds of image manipulation, but I'll be working on multiple images at a time (I make my wallpapers in parts and then assemble them together). I can already see myself applying filters to the wrong image. Also it means another click for other programs. I would have to put focus on the application which I want to use the toolbar of. I also don't want auto focus because sometimes I like having an application only partially showing while I do something on another one.

[ticopelp]

Also I hate the idea of a global menu, and I can think of one application where it's a failure. Gimp.

Oh man, don't get me started on GIMP... what a mess. :D

[Legendary_Bibo]

Oh man, don't get me started on GIMP... what a mess. :D

Hey now, just the UI is a bit messy :P

I actually can't wait for 2.8. Single window mode, and setting the images to tabs is just so much cleaner.

Having just 3 images open at a time gets really messy. So many windows!

[el_koraco]

As for the mouse click, with one click I go to the dash, which takes up the whole screen distracting me from what I am doing , this is a rude and abrupt interruption on workflow (not a netbook by the way, it happens on my main laptop which is 15" and a few desktops I tried unity on ,actually on the netbook it doesn't do that),then another click to choose a category, another click for showing all, and then scroll down and another click to actually open the app. Yeah, I don't always feel like typing. With the current setup, you can use the keyboard if you want, but you can also do mouse and click. Now if you have to type to be efficient that is lost functionality. And even if I use the search box I still have to open the dash!



right click on the applications lens, you get a context menu of searchable applications. you select it and the lens opens up with a big arsch list of said applications, which are grouped together gnome 2 style.

[uRock]

Unity becoming default is the worst decision Canonical have ever made. That's all.

I disagree.

[Copper Bezel]

I get a lot of use out of Compiz' features (scale, group & tab, etc.) that other people might find to be nothing more than distractions. I understand not everyone finds practical use in those features, but I think it's entirely inaccurate to say no one does.

Luckily, that one's not going anywhere, as it's integral to the way Unity works. (And, yes, every bit as functional as it is pretty.)

[mc4man]

It's amazing the amount of uninformed opinions - this poll/thread is just another example
What's been disabled by default is rotate in favor of wall, the cube is just a dependency of rotate, ie, you need something to rotate

While wall and rotate are similar there are differences, some may prefer the simpler rotate plugin which does have value, none of which has any thing to do with "eye candy"

Edit: and there is also some 'function' to cube - try unfold

[dh04000]

I disagree.

I agree with your disagreement.

I just tried unity today and it is rocking my socks. I LOVE IT!

I was apathetic towards it, but I really like how it works now. My only complaint is that when it click and app icon, it should minimize the app, even if its the only one open.

[nidzo732]

This whole problem might be fixed check the bug 711561 on launchpad

[nidzo732]

It's working now.:D See the attached image. Unity actually doesn't need the wall, the desktop switcher uses expo.
http://www.dodaj.rs/t/2T/bO/VHmjPYN/cube.jpg (http://www.dodaj.rs/?2T/bO/VHmjPYN/cube.png)

[Philsoki]

It's working now.:D See the attached image. Unity actually doesn't need the wall, the desktop switcher uses expo.
http://www.dodaj.rs/t/2T/bO/VHmjPYN/cube.jpg (http://www.dodaj.rs/?2T/bO/VHmjPYN/cube.png)
Hey, good news!:D

[barthus]

What a stupid question (sorry), of course we need Compiz Cube!

[dh04000]

Problem solved!

Please close thread mods.

[PhilipSchweitzer]

Definitely, I already miss it and spend a good deal of time in classic just so that I can have it work!

[wilee-nilee]

Definitely, I already miss it and spend a good deal of time in classic just so that I can have it work!

You missed the last couple of posts. it lives, here's mine.
191615
http://reformedmusings.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/howto-get-the-compiz-desktop-cube-in-ubuntu-11-04-natty-and-unity/

[powerpleb]

My personal feeling is that compiz should be completely disabled by default and Unity shouldn't need 3d acceleration to work.

[Copper Bezel]

Well, there's Unity 2D for that, but Ubuntu wants to present a polished product by default.

[Philsoki]

Well, there's Unity 2D for that, but Ubuntu wants to present a polished product by default.
Unity 3D is your idea of a polished product? I upgraded my graphics card so that I could use Unity fluidly, it was very sketchy on my 128MB Video card and runs OK on my Radeon HD 4550. Over all though, I think Unity is terrible and would rather use Gnome Shell.

And over both of those I'd prefer KDE with compositing turned down, or XFCE.

Ubuntu 11.04 is anything but a polished product. I'd put "IMO" to avoid flames, but I bet a good number of people agree with me on this.

[Bandit]

Using Cube for so long, I would really hate to see it go and rather prefer to keep the option around even if expo is the default. I really dont see how doing away with any existing features as being productive.

That being said, I dont find expo being nearly as kewl on the eyes but it does feel more productive and IMHO I feel it would be a more mature sell to the business market side of the house. Which is were funding comes from.

So IMHO default should be Expo, but for gods sake dont do away with the cube.

[HappinessNow]

Hey, good news!:D


You missed the last couple of posts. it lives, here's mine.
191615
http://reformedmusings.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/howto-get-the-compiz-desktop-cube-in-ubuntu-11-04-natty-and-unity/

Honestly these cube images you posted look pretty butt-ugly, now don't get me wrong I remember getting excited about the cube when it first came out years ago, but it hasn't aged well. It just looks like an amateur hack job with no refinement what so ever.

I would think that for most people they would see it for the first time would see it as nothing more then bad design and stay away.

With that said it doesn't mean the cube doesn't have potential, it just has not realized it's full potential yet.

[Smilax]

yip, no cube is a deal breaker for me,



cube or death!!:guitar::guitar:

[Smilax]

.nice

[graabein]

I love the cube. There, I said it.

[bowens44]

I can't say I'd be bothered. It's one of those functions which looks great, but has no practical use.

I actually find it very useful. I use four desk tops/ work spaces and I find switching work spaces with scroll wheel to be very efficient.

[rahilm]

the cube brought me to linux!!!

[Philsoki]

I actually find it very useful. I use four desk tops/ work spaces and I find switching work spaces with scroll wheel to be very efficient.
Did you know that you can do that without the cube?

[powerpleb]

Well, there's Unity 2D for that, but Ubuntu wants to present a polished product by default.

Yes, I do like Unity. I think it represents an advance over GNOME2. But I also think Ubuntu should be concentrating on presenting a polished product that doesn't need an advanced graphics card by default. I'm all for the cube and the eye-candy if people want to install it, but I think the default installation should be able to work just as well on the laptop which I own that I had the previous version installed and working fine on.

[arnav90]

I agree with powerpleb. Cube desktop is a definite crowd puller but as far as utility goes, i would have to say that I favour the wall more.... But then again, thats just me.

[duncanater]

OMG I've provided supported the doze since *******286 remember that? or 95 when MR gates didn't think the Internet would be a factor so it had no support, or what about BOB?

I support doze mostly from a VBOX session now with remote desktop in a corner of the 4th window of the cube.

While the other 3 windows are used for the pure enjoyment of creating, researching, communicating, and actually being able to compute in an efficient and enjoyable manner.

SAVE THE CUBE!!!!!!!

[pritam_par]

Compiz cube and Unity can exists together see the sloved Ubuntu forum link here

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1747045

[TheNosh]

If unity had any functionality to offer, it would be more important than the cube.

http://i.imgur.com/m3Dza.gif

[nidzo732]

The cube works in unity.
Mods, please close this thread.

[Johnnycrulez]

I just want to throw in my two cents real quick, on the subject of the Cube having no practical use:

I find that it's the fastest way to switch between desktops! It's the one example I can think of where it's faster to use a mouse than a keyboard - cntrl-alt+directional key is sort of clunky but just middle clicking on the desktop and swiveling takes hardly any time or thought. It's wonderful and makes my experience go by faster.

So for now I'm using one of those dirty fixes to get the cube up and running but it's not as nice as it was in 10.10 - and for some reason if I try to get a neat skydome image in there it crashes unity entirely. Hopefully it'll be fixed in 12.04 but if it was fixed by 11.10 I'd be ecstatic.

The cube didn't convince me to switch over to Linux (I'm a pretty recent convert, I started with ubuntu 10.04) but when I found out about it I would show it off to all my friends who were all like, "Man that looks cooler and faster than my desktop switching on windows/OS".

[Nightstrike2009]

I think it would be cool if they could get the desktop cube to work in Unity and Gnome-shell has this does impress a lot of new users to Ubuntu. :-)

[rolnics]

+1 for the cube.

As said previously, nothing quicker than mouse flicking to the next desktop. Plus and its a big plus, Unity doesn't like my machine, so I'm sticking with 10.04 for my main usage.