"Window Indicators" - Mark Shuttleworth

[pelle.k]

I think some of you are missing the point here. They are using metacity, because it's the common denominator among all of the applications on the desktop. This way, they need only patch metacity, and not every single gtk/qt/wx application in existance to have an area that isn't necessarily a part of the application, *in* the application window.
It's a plugin system, so yes, sure, they can add functionality to the application in question as well. But i'm pretty sure this is not meant to remove buttons from the application in question just to put them in the window titlebar, but adding a sort of plugin system to some applications without patching/forking them too much. Perhaps, only light modifications (probably only some type of signaling system) are needed to the apps that will make significant use of this functionality, but that woulds also mean it should be backwards comaptible (if done right) with a normal (or vanilla gnome desktop if you will). So don't cry wolf just yet.

[oedipuss]

I am not against this idea, but you have to prove it IS USEFUL.
Take gEdit. tell me how it could benefit with this idea, why using gEdit will be better using window indicators?

Just because you use one music/video player application that would benefit from volume control in there does not justify all the effort. What about the other 90% of the applications you use?
How applications like (gEdit,Terminal,Firefox,Transmission,Fspot,Brasero ,Pitivi,SimpleScan,OpenOffice) will benefit from this new invention?
Or are you only thinking about the volume control and online/offline (a feature that never used anywhere, did someone actually thought on investigating how many people use this feature before thinking of an window indicator that will be there for all people, even if used by 10-20%).

It's just that from what I saw, this idea does not improve something, it is just a new added feature along the existing ones, just to have something to talk about in the new version of application X or Y. I don't see how it can solve any problem... Convince me that this WILL in deed solve problems.

As far as indicators go, a keyboard layout indicator would make more sense on the title bar than on the panel, and perhaps some kind of keyboard status (INS, CAPS, etc) would also be useful for apps like gedit. Or some kind of root privileges indicator, with the ability to enable/disable superuser rights for a while, for that app. Something like the 'open as root' script in nautilus.
Boring stuff, but maybe that's the most useful after all.
Now that I think about it, those three are the only things I can think of that would be clearer in a windicator than on the panel or the statusbar.
Even volume controls that seem to be very logical, and the favorite example, would on second thought cause inconsistencies or duplication. How would system sounds be handled for apps that don't regularly play audio? As for the rest, I can think of only two cases where there might be audio but not a control : in the browser (rarely), and in nautilus previews.

Also, the online/offline indicator would only be somewhat useful if it allowed per application bandwidth limits and monitoring. Otherwise what's the point. It would be just a green thingy that would sometimes go red everywhere simultaneously.

What I mean is I think it _can_ be useful, just maybe not in the most spectacular ways.

[D3mon_Spawn]

looks cool

[YuiDaoren]

I've made a mock-up of another Window Indicator idea:

(See attached)

[randomizer101]

I don't understand how you can be on a "less is more" kick while simply adding more.

[PryGuy]

Ubuntu with Mark as CEO

• Most popular linux distribution
• Available with hardware retailers like Dell

Ubuntu with Mark focusing on design

• Buttons on the left
• Windicators

Dear Mark, unlike your idol Steve Jobs, you are not a designer. Please go back to contributing to Ubuntu solely financially.

Absolutely agree!!!

[NCLI]

Great! Now let's apply the same at Firefox! so place all back/forward/reload/go in the title bar. There...just for good measure. Now every time you want to use those buttons you will remember how stupid it is. Why on earth the most used buttons on a browser should be as tiny as possible and in a place that does not help at all??

So by the rhythmbox image, WHY on earth would you need play/pause/previous/next in the titlebar???
The idea of the buttons is to be able to easily use them (making them 12pixels buttons and placing in the farthest corner will not help the situation... )

And yes, I also think that the idea of those icons in titlebar was not meant to make prev/next/play/pause window indicators after all.
See, we don't have the feature yet but there are people already starting to make mock ups with all those useless indicators. Imagine some months from now when every programmer will think it looks good to have those 8 window indicators for all those functions he thinks (not the user) are handy. Then we have a mess interface! Full of small buttons everywhere...

I am not against this idea, but you have to prove it IS USEFUL.
Take gEdit. tell me how it could benefit with this idea, why using gEdit will be better using window indicators?

Just because you use one music/video player application that would benefit from volume control in there does not justify all the effort. What about the other 90% of the applications you use?
How applications like (gEdit,Terminal,Firefox,Transmission,Fspot,Brasero ,Pitivi,SimpleScan,OpenOffice) will benefit from this new invention?
Or are you only thinking about the volume control and online/offline (a feature that never used anywhere, did someone actually thought on investigating how many people use this feature before thinking of an window indicator that will be there for all people, even if used by 10-20%).

It's just that from what I saw, this idea does not improve something, it is just a new added feature along the existing ones, just to have something to talk about in the new version of application X or Y. I don't see how it can solve any problem... Convince me that this WILL in deed solve problems.

Ok, first of all, I posted that mock-up because Marks sketches had left me disgusted with the design, and I feared that it would be extremely ugly. Those were the concerns the mock-up dispelled for me. I didn't mean it to represent what they will actually do, just what they should look like.

[Shakz]

Doh...wrong thread!

[okplayer02]

Ok fine i had a chance to look at mock up of this new concept being floated but i am curious what about upstream for other distributions. I mean come on now i use Arch Linux and their concept to KISS is very good, as in they do not alter what comes from GNOME for example. So how does this fit into overall scheme of Open Source. I had to have GNOME being forked due to things like this. One version GNOME for Ubuntu and another GNOME for the other distributions.

[8Kuula]

I think, button like application volume control would be nice idea to put there. But I do not see point to have there something like bluetooth control, network control, session control or message control. Those are all general controls that do not need to be in every window. Not even to speak about any icons that pop in notification area.

Most working way (I think) would have GUI (like add to panel GUI for example) to enable users to put buttons to any order/place to their window that they like. Menu, minimize, close, etc. And just make "button" window indicators where would be controls for application level only. And use indicator applet general level controls.