PDA

View Full Version : Dynamic interface for Unity



Robotex
September 27th, 2011, 05:12 PM
Nowadays we use many devices - tablets, smartphones, net- and notebooks, desktops. And all they have different interfaces for convenient work. So, why we need different versions of OS if we can use dynamic interface.

If Ubuntu installed on Desktop, it has interface good for mouse and keyboard using (original Unity interface). If it installed on Tablet it change interface for comfort work by using fingers. But if I connect keyboard and mouse to tablet, Unity will change interface for comfort work by using these devices. If I connect big monitor, Unity will change screen resolution to bigger. If I put my smartphone into dock-station that has mouse, keyboard and big monitor, Unity change interface to original too. If Ubuntu installed on notebook, Unity activates multitouch.

What are you think about this?

coffeecat
September 27th, 2011, 05:52 PM
Not a support request.

Thread moved to The Community Cafe.

madjr
September 28th, 2011, 12:04 AM
maybe in some future version.

right now they are still figuring out how unity should be

ninjaaron
September 28th, 2011, 12:22 AM
Unity would need that if it were a multi-platform interface.

Regardless of what people are saying, the Unity interface is designed exclusively as a PC platform. Anyone who says it's a tablet OS has not tried it on a table. I have. It is not.

Ubuntu developers have reapeatedly said in interviews that they are focused on the desktop market at them moment. The most they will say is that they are "watching mobile platform with interest," but have no distinct development plans for it.

Robotex
September 28th, 2011, 05:32 PM
Yes, nowaday Unity is only PC interface. But Unity's goal - one system on all devices (you can see it in name).

So, now Unity in not comfortable on tablets and we must create ideal interface for tablets. And Unity will change interface dynamically.

grahammechanical
September 28th, 2011, 07:23 PM
@robotex

I agree with you. Why else would Canonical develop its own interface if the reason is not to have control over what can be done with it and what devices it can be put on? Why not just carry on as before and distribute the Gnome interface as provided by the Gnome organisation? Why develop a Ubuntu font?

Regards.

aaaantoine
September 28th, 2011, 07:44 PM
Unity would need that if it were a multi-platform interface.

Regardless of what people are saying, the Unity interface is designed exclusively as a PC platform. Anyone who says it's a tablet OS has not tried it on a table. I have. It is not.

Ubuntu developers have reapeatedly said in interviews that they are focused on the desktop market at them moment. The most they will say is that they are "watching mobile platform with interest," but have no distinct development plans for it.

While I can agree -- simply on the premise that there are click-targets far too small for a fat finger built into the UI -- that Unity is not currently a tablet interface, let's not forget uTouch (http://unity.ubuntu.com/projects/utouch/)

Unity, no doubt, will eventually be made into tablet-friendly interface. As for Linux applications themselves, I wonder if GTK and Qt will take a parameter to make applications more touch-screen friendly (with bigger buttons and click-targets).

Robotex
September 29th, 2011, 09:17 AM
Can somebody imagine ideal interface for tablets? How can it look?

ninjaaron
September 29th, 2011, 12:14 PM
@robotex
I agree with you. Why else would Canonical develop its own interface if the reason is not to have control over what can be done with it and what devices it can be put on? Unity is completely open source. Anyone can do whatever they like with it and put it on any device. Using their own UI layer only gives Canonical more control over what goes into their own distro, not what anybody else does with it.

Why not just carry on as before and distribute the Gnome interface as provided by the Gnome organisation? This goes back to a disagreement about indicator applet protocols. As far as tablets go, I feel that Gnome3 is easier to use on a tablet than Unity, if only slightly. Screen economy is, of course, better Unity, but that isn't only a concern for tablets.

Why develop a Ubuntu font?
This has nothing to do with a tablet. The main factor here is creating brand recognition. Every major OS has distinctive font families to make their products immediately recognizable. The same goes for logos for companies of any kind. If Canonical wants to get 200,000,000 users in the next four years, they have to build a brand-identity.

And if that weren't enough, the Ubuntu font is beautiful. It's my favorite UI font. It's so good that it's already one of Google's standard webfonts. Beauty is it's own justification.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for uTouch, Canonical claims (somewhat doubiously, in my opinion) that uTouch, while it does open possibilities for tablets, is also targetted at the desktop for the present. Dell makes several desktop machines with touchscreens, and many netbooks have them these days as well.

I don't know, but in my opinion, the name Unity has to do with the way that so many web and local services are integrated into the UI in a way previously not seen on any platform (Ubuntu One, the Software Center, the ability to post to facebook and twitter from the desktop, global menus, multifunctional dash that incorperates services from many programs and is constatly growing... many of these features had not been seen on any other platforms prior to their integration with Unity).

I agree with everyone here that Canonical seems to be posturing itself in such a way that would ease entry into the tablet market, but they aren't there yet, and so far all of their so-called "tablet-friendly" UI tweaks are actually much more functional on the desktop than the tablet. The time will probably come when Canonical tries to develop something for the mobile market, but there isn't much point talking about implementation until the company actully expresses the will to do so, which they have not yet done.

ninjaaron
September 29th, 2011, 12:39 PM
@robotex
I agree with you. Why else would Canonical develop its own interface if the reason is not to have control over what can be done with it and what devices it can be put on? Unity is completely open source. Anyone can do whatever they like with it and put it on any device. Using their own UI layer only gives Canonical more control over what goes into their own distro, not what anybody else does with it.

Why not just carry on as before and distribute the Gnome interface as provided by the Gnome organisation? This goes back to a disagreement about indicator applet protocols. As far as tablets go, I feel that Gnome3 is easier to use on a tablet than Unity, if only slightly. Screen economy is, of course, better Unity, but that isn't only a concern for tablets.

Why develop a Ubuntu font?
This has nothing to do with a tablet. The main factor here is creating brand recognition. Every major OS has distinctive font families to make their products immediately recognizable. The same goes for logos for companies of any kind. If Canonical wants to get 200,000,000 users in the next four years, they have to build a brand-identity.

And if that weren't enough, the Ubuntu font is beautiful. It's my favorite UI font. It's so good that it's already one of Google's standard webfonts. Beauty is it's own justification.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for uTouch, Canonical claims (somewhat doubiously, in my opinion) that uTouch, while it does open possibilities for tablets, is also targetted at the desktop for the present. Dell makes several desktop machines with touchscreens, and many netbooks have them these days as well.

I don't know, but in my opinion, the name Unity has to do with the way that so many web and local services are integrated into the UI in a way previously not seen on any platform (Ubuntu One, the Software Center, the ability to post to facebook and twitter from the desktop, global menus, multifunctional dash that incorperates services from many programs and is constatly growing... many of these features had not been seen on any other platforms prior to their integration with Unity).

I agree with everyone here that Canonical seems to be posturing itself in such a way that would ease entry into the tablet market, but they aren't there yet, and so far all of their so-called "tablet-friendly" UI tweaks are actually much more functional on the desktop than the tablet. The time will probably come when Canonical tries to develop something for the mobile market, but there isn't much point talking about implementation until the company actully expresses the will to do so, which they have not yet done.

Robotex
September 30th, 2011, 07:33 PM
I saw this tablets http://www.ekoore.com/web/it/prodotti/tablet.html Looks good, but I think that top panel and context menu items are too small.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhTTEg7kqAE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q25lYk75dcA

But its Atoms :( Tegra 3 better :)

Robotex
October 1st, 2011, 09:34 PM
But we can download ekoore's edition of Ubuntu for tablets. It's here: http://www.ekoore.com/web/it/supporto/download-2/et10ta-2/ubuntu/installazione-ubuntu.html (on italian).

This is comfortable, but has some difficults. Maybe we can change some difficults in interface and port it to ARM.