If you're going to clone MacOS button layouts you should be cloning the
right version, namely <= OS9. The MacOS X button layout never made any
sense and is a clear usability regression. Color blind users have a
harder time distinguishing between the buttons. Initially the buttons
had no iconography apart from the color until mouseover, when a small
icon appeared. These points are sufficient to illustrate the fact that
MacOS does not hold some special usability knowledge and is not
automatically worth copying.

That said, cloning any Mac button layout is not ideal.

The "dangerous" close button should be isolated from other buttons, or
visually very distinct. MacOS 9 and below did this by putting it on the
left, by itself. Windows, recently, has done it by changing the size and
shape of the button.

Having any buttons on the left-hand side is a problem as long as the
menus for the application are also on the left. In classic MacOS this
was less of an issue because maximized windows were not the norm and the
menu bar was disconnected from the application. If the menus are on the
left and the menu bar is in the application window and the close button
is on the left then there is a probability that close will be clicked by
mistake. Having "less-dangerous" buttons on the left is also problematic
in this scenario, but not as catastrophic. Since Ubuntu uses in-window
menus it is not advisable to have buttons on the left at all.

Intuition is a hard thing to pin down. It is my perspective that
computer UIs are never intuitive and must always be learned; thus, there
is an advantage to not requiring unlearning and relearning but no
advantage to making the initial learning "intuitive." Once something is
learned the most intuitive type of UI will be similar to the learned UI,
regardless of what the learned UI looks like. Given that appealing to
Windows users is a stated goal of Ubuntu keeping the window control
buttons in the learned location makes sense.

Whatever goal might exist with regards to moving the default button
location it should be remembered that this is not a design decision but
a user preference. Users can, and will, change it back. When they do it
is important that the experience remain pleasant; the theme must adapt
to the button location and not appear 'ugly' as a result. Further,
whatever is eventually meant to occupy the right hand side of the title
bar must be equally able to occupy another place on the title bar, or
even be absent, depending on where the user has chosen to place his
buttons.

If a change were to be made then the ideal placement for window control
widgets would be the bottom left of the window, not the top at all. When
dragging and resizing a window the titlebar and right-hand side are the
most common places people place their pointers. By putting the buttons,
especially close, at the far opposite end of the window it becomes a
very deliberate operation to access them. In addition, typically nothing
else is "nearby" the lower left corner of a window on an Ubuntu desktop
(on Windows this would still be an issue since the Start menu is there
for maximized windows.) This is the least dangerous position for close
and a not unthinkable position for the other controls--though I would
put the Max Size toggle in the upper-left (with Sticky if present) and
the Iconify button in the upper-right. The lower-right ought to be empty
or reserved for a large surface area window resize handle.

-- 
[Master] Window Control buttons: position/order/alignment
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/532633
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to metacity in ubuntu.

-- 
desktop-bugs mailing list
desktop-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/desktop-bugs

Reply via email to