i think canonical's making a big mistake...

[wizard10000]

...and I crossposted this on KFN.

This isn't a "Unity sucks" thread and I'd appreciate it if we didn't turn it into one as I run KDE anyway :D

The main reason I'm into Linux is that I'm all about choices - and IM frequently less than HO Canonical's making decisions that I'd prefer to make myself.

Case in point - how difficult would it be to code some choices into ubiquity - like a choice between Unity and GNOME classic or allowing me to *not* install a netbook interface on my netbook instead of making me change it after install?

I don't want much - just the ability to opt out of some defaults if I choose. I figure offering some choices in ubiquity wouldn't take much more than adding a couple of tickboxes.

Your thoughts?

[Oxwivi]

Yeah, they should port Edubuntu's ability to choose packages during installation.

[aguafina]

>Power user
>Unity

You can ony choose one. that's the chioce.

[trinitydan]

I agree with wizard10000. Only maybe more emphatically so. Like "I think Canonical is making a HUGE mistake!" :( This is the single factor driving me away from Ubuntu.

[fatality_uk]

I am sure if you spent 30 minutes on the web, you would find a distro that would meet all your needs.

[JDShu]

Choice is overrated.

Seriously, one of the fundamentals of UI design is that regular people will use the defaults instead of worrying about various settings. So the large majority of Ubuntu users will use Unity - end of story. As mentioned numerous times, you can use a different DE if you want to, and if you really were somebody who wanted to choose between DEs then you would, however difficult it is.

[weasel fierce]

Just as an FYI, Kubuntu is including the "netbook" plasma interface in the normal install too.

[wizard10000]

Choice is overrated.

Seriously, one of the fundamentals of UI design is that regular people will use the defaults instead of worrying about various settings. So the large majority of Ubuntu users will use Unity - end of story. As mentioned numerous times, you can use a different DE if you want to, and if you really were somebody who wanted to choose between DEs then you would, however difficult it is.

And as I mentioned in OP I *do* use a different DE. I'd prefer to have the choices available during install instead of post-install.

I will say one thing, though - and maybe this is part of Canonical's logic; a lot of people (myself included) consider themselves advanced users when they have no business doing so - I do know that limiting choices also reduces support incidents. Maybe that's it ;)

[wizard10000]

Just as an FYI, Kubuntu is including the "netbook" plasma interface in the normal install too.

I retained my home directories during the Natty install so I didn't see it. Does a clean install of Kubuntu give you the netbook interface no matter what?

[weasel fierce]

I retained my home directories during the Natty install so I didn't see it. Does a clean install of Kubuntu give you the netbook interface no matter what?

I installed clean from 10.10 and its in there. Just kinda hidden away pretty good.
Go to "workspace behaviour" and then "workspace" and you can switch between desktop and netbook

Im guessing it doesn't eat up a ton of hard drive space, and they didn't want to fuss with 2 different CD's.

[toupeiro]

Choice is overrated.

Seriously, one of the fundamentals of UI design is that regular people will use the defaults instead of worrying about various settings. So the large majority of Ubuntu users will use Unity - end of story. As mentioned numerous times, you can use a different DE if you want to, and if you really were somebody who wanted to choose between DEs then you would, however difficult it is.

This is not true. Read the support forums. There are people who tried to use gnome 3/gnome shell as an option and have completely, irreversibly broken their ubuntu installation. The decision to use unity has crippled choice. If choice were overrated, you'd still be on winders, and likely not on this forum...

[weasel fierce]

Could someone verify that it is physically impossible to

A: Install another desktop such as XFCE or KDE

B: That no install CD's can be downloaded for derivatives (Xubuntu, Kubuntu etc)



Because all this wanking about "no choices" is absurd. If you have "no choice" but to use Unity now, you had "no choice" but to use Gnome 2 before.

[Hyporeal]

Make a spinoff that only uses Gnome Panel, like how kubuntu uses KDE. Problem solved. We've never had a single Ubuntu install that does everything for everybody, hence kubuntu, xubuntu, and edubuntu. I don't know why people expect a one-size-fits-all approach. Linux is about choice, not homogeneity. So choose the configuration that works for you and don't burden the rest of us with useless install options.

[toupeiro]

Could someone verify that it is physically impossible to

A: Install another desktop such as XFCE or KDE

B: That no install CD's can be downloaded for derivatives (Xubuntu, Kubuntu etc)



Because all this wanking about "no choices" is absurd. If you have "no choice" but to use Unity now, you had "no choice" but to use Gnome 2 before.

If you install gnome3/gnome shell on ubuntu, you will break your choices to use unity and gnome classic, and there is no backout plan other than rebuilding. Confirmed, multiple times by many people. Read.

[dFlyer]

Remember and OS is a personal choice. Just find what makes you happy and use it. There are many linux distro to choose from. Also windows and MACs.

[weasel fierce]

If you install gnome3/gnome shell on ubuntu, you will break your choices to use unity and gnome classic, and there is no backout plan other than rebuilding. Confirmed, multiple times by many people. Read.

What about XFCE ? What about KDE ? What about any of the billion other options out there?

I find it hard to believe that all this panic is purely because people can't use Gnome 3 for a bit

[sam-c]

...and I crossposted this on KFN.

This isn't a "Unity sucks" thread and I'd appreciate it if we didn't turn it into one as I run KDE anyway :D

The main reason I'm into Linux is that I'm all about choices - and IM frequently less than HO Canonical's making decisions that I'd prefer to make myself.

Case in point - how difficult would it be to code some choices into ubiquity - like a choice between Unity and GNOME classic or allowing me to *not* install a netbook interface on my netbook instead of making me change it after install?

I don't want much - just the ability to opt out of some defaults if I choose. I figure offering some choices in ubiquity wouldn't take much more than adding a couple of tickboxes.

Your thoughts?
No I do not agree 11.04 gives you the choice according to your Platform. I sometimes use Unity but most of the time I use Ubuntu-Classic as I am on a Desktop.
But within 6 Months with Tablets around and Touchphones and Facebook changing so often and Nokia with MS, Who knows whats Next? 11.04 seems flexible.

[Hyporeal]

If you install gnome3/gnome shell on ubuntu, you will break your choices to use unity and gnome classic, and there is no backout plan other than rebuilding. Confirmed, multiple times by many people. Read.

And this is because of Unity somehow? In any case, that a separate topic. We're talking about the need for an install option that lets you install only Gnome Panel, and not Unity.

[aguafina]

And this is because of Unity somehow? In any case, that a separate topic. We're talking about the need for an install option that lets you install only Gnome Panel, and not Unity.


No, Unity is in 11.10 and that will be gnome3 (gtk3) the gnome panel is for gtk2 and probably one of the worst pieces of software ever written.

[3Miro]

If you install gnome3/gnome shell on ubuntu, you will break your choices to use unity and gnome classic, and there is no backout plan other than rebuilding. Confirmed, multiple times by many people. Read.

This is only because 11.04 comes with Gnome2. Gnome2 and Gnome3 don't live together and this has nothing to do with Canonical. You cannot have a system that lets you pick Gnome2 or Gnome3 at login, it is one or the other. Gnome2 is dead anyway.

11.10 will come with Gnome3 and Unity 2D/3D and "sudo apt-get install gnome-shell". Then you will be able to pick between the three from the login screen.

[fjf]

After years in ubuntu, I upgraded to Natty. With Gnome 2 dying, I tried the Gnome 3 shell. Then I moved to Kubuntu. Enough said.

[Jose Catre-Vandis]

I would love to have had the choice or the opportunity to see Unity working in the flesh as none of my computers will run it by default (nvidia graphics), and no manner of proprietory driver installation seems to make it run. ( I might give unity2d a run for its money though).

Surely the fact that you can just choose to run Ubuntu Classic as your default session negates your argument?

Alternatively, just try Xubuntu 11.04 - no unity in sight :)

[Mr. Picklesworth]

The problem with adding choices to Ubiquity is we haven't given people a chance to really see what they are choosing between. A shell shouldn't be the center of attention (when was the last time you noticed Bash?), so we're just asking users to pick between two foreign sounding things for reasons that are dubious to them. It's fine for you because you know what these things are, but we don't have that luxury of making Ubuntu just for people who have used Ubuntu.

Besides, you have this option right after installing, in the form of Software Center. It would be nice if new session types were a little easier to install (maybe presented the same way as applications), and to switch between (my dream is doing it without logging out). However, if this is such a big deal that you don't want to make contact with the default configuration, checkboxes are the least of our problems.

There's also a matter of giving options to developers who make the operating system. When a product is expected to support billions of configurations for the rest of eternity, it becomes increasingly difficult for developers to improve that product without just adding more and more options until even the people who like lots of options might get a little tired of it.


>Power user
>Unity

You can ony choose one. that's the chioce.

Not everyone is focused on customizing their shells. That isn't what defines a “power user” in my book, either. Personally, I wouldn't want to use an operating system that thinks in that way. If I wanted that, I would use a felt marker. (Paper is too restrictive).

I'm happy with the idea that some people approach this differently, though. That's why it's a nice thing Unity is built as a Compiz plugin; a lot of stuff Unity does just comes from Compiz, and you can customize that quite freely. For the most part with both Gnome Shell and Unity you're able to do discrete additions instead of having fine-grained controls. So, if someone thinks “hey, it would be cool if there was a window list,” someone can make that happen and you can add that, but there isn't a way to build a window list using a configuration tool on its own.


This is not true. Read the support forums. There are people who tried to use gnome 3/gnome shell as an option and have completely, irreversibly broken their ubuntu installation. The decision to use unity has crippled choice. If choice were overrated, you'd still be on winders, and likely not on this forum...

That's because Gnome 3 isn't really an option at the moment; Ubuntu is currently built on Gnome 2. Just about every package in the repository is built against the last version of Gnome 2 with some backports and Gtk3 available to steady the transition. To get Gnome 3 / Shell in Natty, you'll be using the Gnome3 PPA, which replaces a bunch of packages and is expected to break everything. It will be properly packaged in 11.10, at which point everything should be pretty smooth since choosing between Unity and Gnome Shell (and OpenBox and Kubuntu) is like choosing a window manager.

[Paddy Landau]

Linux is about choice, not homogeneity.
I don't know who told you that. To me, Linux is about reliability. I left Windows not because Linux gave me more choice (I couldn't care less about that), but because Windows was taking too much of my time with its unreliability, and Ubuntu was giving me a system that worked.

If Ubuntu were not free, I'd buy it.

When the time comes for me to upgrade (I stick to the LTS versions), I'll use whatever I'm given. As it happens, I have experimented with Unity, and really, it's easy. All this fuss about nothing. All you need is a couple of good Unity tutorials (http://castrojo.tumblr.com/post/4795149014/the-power-users-guide-to-unity) showing you how to use it.

[satanselbow]

I find it hard to believe that all this panic is purely because people can't use Gnome 3 for a bit

Yep - and there is a lot "fear of change" amongst the legitimate complaints.

But is not Gnome3 ... it is Unity. Gnome 3 is a well designed and intuitive; proving to be increasing customisable. Unity is a "cast in stone" underdeveloped, crippleware hack.

Install Xubuntu + Gnome3 from the PPA and take it for a drive - as a vanilla install the differences are slight but significant.

[JDShu]

This is not true. Read the support forums. There are people who tried to use gnome 3/gnome shell as an option and have completely, irreversibly broken their ubuntu installation. The decision to use unity has crippled choice. If choice were overrated, you'd still be on winders, and likely not on this forum...

Users who are trying to install Shell on Ubuntu are hardly regular users. With enough hacking it is possible to make Shell work on Ubuntu, though its not easy. Point is, the average user does not care what their default DE is. Even if they found it hard, they would adapt - humans are adaptable creatures, even if its in an undesirable direction.

On Ubuntu vs Windows:There is a difference between choice presented to me by the market (different companies) and choice given in UI design. More choice in the market is good (usually), choice within the UI often serve to confuse more than anything else. Context.

[Paqman]

If you want choice in the disk images provided for you you've got both the alternate and minimal ISOs available. You're spoilt for choice there. You can build Ubuntu any way like.

Ubuntu/Canonical's job is to provide usable defaults that make sense for non-technical users. If you think that in doing so it somehow limits your ability to customise your system as a power user, then you probably aren't a power user.

[satanselbow]

If you want choice in the disk images provided for you you've got both the alternate and minimal ISOs available. You're spoilt for choice there. You can build Ubuntu any way like.

Ubuntu/Canonical's job is to provide usable defaults that make sense for non-technical users. If you think that in doing so it somehow limits your ability to customise your system as a power user, then you probably aren't a power user.

You know what; I am gonna get that tattooed on the inside of my eyelids and use as my mantra :D

... and learn to keep my big mouth shut :popcorn:

[weasel fierce]

Yep - and there is a lot "fear of change" amongst the legitimate complaints.

But is not Gnome3 ... it is Unity. Gnome 3 is a well designed and intuitive; proving to be increasing customisable. Unity is a "cast in stone" underdeveloped, crippleware hack.

Install Xubuntu + Gnome3 from the PPA and take it for a drive - as a vanilla install the differences are slight but significant.

I used gnome3 for a while, a ways back, and I rather liked it.

[neu5eeCh]

I don't want much - just the ability to opt out of some defaults if I choose. I figure offering some choices in ubiquity wouldn't take much more than adding a couple of tickboxes.

Your thoughts?

I don't like Unity at all. I "left" Ubuntu for Xubuntu and, I have to say, I'm more impressed by XFCE 4.8 than Gnome 2.

However, in fairness to Ubuntu, 11.04 really seems more like a beta release. The Unity Dock is a monstrosity and the whole feel of the DE, to me, is half-baked. I'm keenly interested to see how Unity develops with 11.10, and then Wayland. They accomplished much in a short space of time. If they eventually allow users to radically customize the dock, re-introduce drop down menus (if just from the dock and that doesn't mean the half-baked menu that's already there), I would consider trying it again. Right now, though, my praise for Xubuntu is turning into a broken record.

[wizard10000]

...Ubuntu/Canonical's job is to provide usable defaults that make sense for non-technical users. If you think that in doing so it somehow limits your ability to customise your system as a power user, then you probably aren't a power user.

Never said I was - and I generally find that people who do call themselves power users are anything but :)

What I *did* say was I'd like some way to opt out of the defaults rather than change them after install.

Yet another example - ubiquity detects I'm running an Atom processor and selects a netbook edition instead of desktop. Can't the installer just *ask* me if I'd prefer the netbook edition? I would be really interested to learn how many netbook users actually use *NR anyway. Maybe I'll start a poll :)

But - the earlier point about simplicity for the masses was a good one. I'll be the first to admit that increasing choices also increases complexity and therefore support requirements, so I get it now. Maybe *buntu and I are moving in different directions :(

Oh, well. Back to my corner now :)

[Paqman]

What I *did* say was I'd like some way to opt out of the defaults rather than change them after install.


You do, but not if you use the default install image. The default installer is designed to set up the default system. There's endless scope for customisation if you use the alternate image.



Yet another example - ubiquity detects I'm running an Atom processor and selects a netbook edition instead of desktop. Can't the installer just *ask* me if I'd prefer the netbook edition? I would be really interested to learn how many netbook users actually use *NR anyway. Maybe I'll start a poll :)


Not any more. As of Natty, the netbook edition is a thing of the past.

[wizard10000]

...Not any more. As of Natty, the netbook edition is a thing of the past.

Not if you're a Kubuntu user :D

A friend on another forum also let me know I'm missing the point here - that Canonical's trying to make things easy for the masses.

I can understand that - and it doesn't take that long for me to switch things around the way I want them. All I wanted was a few more choices in the installer so I didn't *have to* go in and change stuff around :)

Oh, well. I disagree with Canonical a heck of a lot less often than I disagree with Apple, Adobe, Oracle or Microsoft :D

[wizard10000]

...There's endless scope for customisation if you use the alternate image.

Wish I could - I haven't checked since 9.10 but back then my netbook's NIC wasn't supported by the alternate install CD - but was by the full install.

But - maybe that's the answer for me. If my NIC's supported that'd solve about my only complaint :D

Thanks for the idea - I'll take a look at the alternate install CD again.

cheers -

[Paqman]

Not if you're a Kubuntu user :D


True, although from my very vague knowledge of KDE I believe the netbook plasmas have been rolled into the main KDE suite.

[Dry Lips]

Could someone verify that it is physically impossible to

A: Install another desktop such as XFCE or KDE

B: That no install CD's can be downloaded for derivatives (Xubuntu, Kubuntu etc)



Because all this wanking about "no choices" is absurd. If you have "no choice" but to use Unity now, you had "no choice" but to use Gnome 2 before.

I've tried KDE and XFCE. I've had technical issues with both these environments that I don't get with Gnome2. (YMMV) Same OS underneath, the only difference is the desktop environment. So basically I'm left with these choices:

1. Use a desktop environment I don't like when 11.10 comes (Unity/Gnome3)
2. Going for a derivative that don't work as well as Gnome2 (YMMV)
3. Switching to another distro.

Sure, I've got choices. But I don't like these choices. Therefore, what I do now is to
4. Stick with Natty and hope that there eventually will be a fork of Gnome and a new derivative built on that fork. Natty will be supported for at least a couple of years. :)

[neu5eeCh]

I've tried KDE and XFCE. I've had technical issues with both these environments that I don't get with Gnome2.

Like what? - out of curiosity.

[wizard10000]

True, although from my very vague knowledge of KDE I believe the netbook plasmas have been rolled into the main KDE suite.

They have - hence my gripe :D

There used to be a seperate ISO for netbooks - now if ubiquity detects a netbook it defaults to the netbook UI, but nobody I know uses it ;)

Oh, well. I'm gonna give the alternate installer a spin once again and see if my NIC's been added. That'd solve everything :)

[Hyporeal]

I don't know who told you that.

Contrast with the first post in this thread.


To me, Linux is about reliability. I left Windows not because Linux gave me more choice (I couldn't care less about that), but because Windows was taking too much of my time with its unreliability, and Ubuntu was giving me a system that worked.

To the contrary, you quite obviously do value the fact that you had a choice. I do not avail myself of every option, but I appreciate the reasons why I have been able to find a system that works for my needs. Hence my skepticism at a unified installer.

[Dry Lips]

Like what? - out of curiosity.

I believe most of my problems stem from having an onboard Nvidia graphics card. Kubuntu for instance never remembers my resolution, and I have to change the resolution manually every time I reboot. And when you lower your resolution to 1024*768, that system icons that can be found in the right corner of the bottom panel, disappears. Also Kubuntu is very slow when having a Nvidia graphics card, although there is a workaround for that: http://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=90821

Xubuntu seem more solid in this respect, and I admit I was positively surprised when I tried Xubuntu, but I'm still more at home with gnome than Xfce. Gnome2/Ubuntu isn't faultless, but is by the desktop environment/OS that gives me the least trouble.

I'm not saying KDE and Xfce are bad desktop environments. If nobody makes a fork of Gnome, I'll have to head in that direction. I really like the widgets of KDE, and I like the speed of Xubuntu and it's similarity to the Gnome2. But I still think a fork of Gnome is needed. In other words, a continuation of the Gnome project, without the Gnome shell...

[NCLI]

This is not true. Read the support forums. There are people who tried to use gnome 3/gnome shell as an option and have completely, irreversibly broken their ubuntu installation. The decision to use unity has crippled choice. If choice were overrated, you'd still be on winders, and likely not on this forum...
Now, that is not fair. It's just old, and depends on a lot of old stuff. I hear that the new version of gnome-panel shipping with Gnome 3 has dropped a lot of those old dependencies.

[CraigPaleo]

...and I crossposted this on KFN.

This isn't a "Unity sucks" thread and I'd appreciate it if we didn't turn it into one as I run KDE anyway :D

The main reason I'm into Linux is that I'm all about choices - and IM frequently less than HO Canonical's making decisions that I'd prefer to make myself.

Case in point - how difficult would it be to code some choices into ubiquity - like a choice between Unity and GNOME classic or allowing me to *not* install a netbook interface on my netbook instead of making me change it after install?

I don't want much - just the ability to opt out of some defaults if I choose. I figure offering some choices in ubiquity wouldn't take much more than adding a couple of tickboxes.

Your thoughts?

I hear that quite a bit. I don't know how many people use the netbook workspace on netbooks but I probably wouldn't either.

My thoughts are: it's already there in KDE so it shouldn't be hard to offer a choice at installation. Then again, going to System Settings--> Workspace behavior to switch to the desktop workspace isn't very hard either.

Gnome classic and Unity are handled at login but if you know you're only going to use one, it doesn't make sense to have to download both on the same CD.

[wizard10000]

Well, Paqman's idea worked. After installing whizzy - which didn't like my netbook at all as udev failed to start I decided to try the Kubuntu alternate ISO just for grins.

It did support my netbook's NIC this time around so I think I have a solution :)

[Odense]

Go to "workspace behaviour" and then "workspace" and you can switch between desktop and netbook
CD's.

Where do I find "workspace behaviour" (in the Unity interface) ?

[giowuu]

My thought is I just want my OS to work virus/spyware-crash free. If I wouldn't be able to change my wallpaper I couldn't care less. Just give me access to firefox/blender/gimp/gcc/eclipse/pdf-viewer. I don't care what OS the computer is running as long as it works well. And my ubuntu works better than MacOSX and Windows. That's why I use ubuntu - because it is superior for my needs. I hope canonical continue to produce the best OS for me and refuse to morph ubuntu into yet another linux from scratch distro that you propose.

[CraigPaleo]

Where do I find "workspace behaviour" (in the Unity interface) ?

He was talking about KDE. Unity only has one workspace behavior. If you want Classic, you have to choose it at login.

[Odense]

Thanks - I just found it at login - that is fine too :)

[BrokenKingpin]

The main reason I'm into Linux is that I'm all about choices - and IM frequently less than HO Canonical's making decisions that I'd prefer to make myself.

Case in point - how difficult would it be to code some choices into ubiquity - like a choice between Unity and GNOME classic or allowing me to *not* install a netbook interface on my netbook instead of making me change it after install?

I don't want much - just the ability to opt out of some defaults if I choose. I figure offering some choices in ubiquity wouldn't take much more than adding a couple of tickboxes.

Your thoughts?
Trying to handle all configuration for all users in the installer is not the best use of time. They should just focus on the best set of configuration for all users. If you know you want something else, then you know how to change it after the installation.

Almost all distros do this for the most part as it drastically reduces the complexity of the installation. Some distro may offer what DE you want, but not specific options for the DE itself.

[wolfen69]

Case in point - how difficult would it be to code some choices into ubiquity - like a choice between Unity and GNOME classic or allowing me to *not* install a netbook interface on my netbook instead of making me change it after install?



I'm not sure how much more of this I can take. YOU DO HAVE A CHOICE! IT'S CALLED USE SOMETHING ELSE! GET IT?

Has the world gone mad, or is it just me? People act like it is being forced upon them. I don't like sweet potatoes, therefore I don't eat them. My god people, end this please.

As a matter of fact, I'm going to stay away from these forums for a while. Hopefully when I return people will grow up a bit. It's pretty sad to see linux users acting like spoiled brats. Goodbye and good luck, you people are going to need it.

I'm off to find a more mature forum where people don't demand that heads roll every time something changes. Perhaps when people criticize this forum and its members, they are correct in doing so. I've never seen this many immature responses to something that can easily fixed by just using something else. It's a damn computer, not life and death. Goodbye.

[CraigPaleo]

I'm not sure how much more of this I can take. YOU DO HAVE A CHOICE! IT'S CALLED USE SOMETHING ELSE! GET IT?

Has the world gone mad, or is it just me? People act like it is being forced upon them. I don't like sweet potatoes, therefore I don't eat them. My god people, end this please.

As a matter of fact, I'm going to stay away from these forums for a while. Hopefully when I return people will grow up a bit. It's pretty sad to see linux users acting like spoiled brats. Goodbye and good luck, you people are going to need it.

I'm off to find a more mature forum where people don't demand that heads roll every time something changes. Perhaps when people criticize this forum and its members, they are correct in doing so. I've never seen this many immature responses to something that can easily fixed by just using something else. It's a damn computer, not life and death. Goodbye.

Here. You need a hug.

http://images.clipartof.com/small/227767-Royalty-Free-RF-Clipart-Illustration-Of-Yellow-Smiley-Face-Emoticons-Hugging.jpg