Yeh I see what you are saying, if I remember rightly you can indeed bind shortcuts (involving the windows (or "super") key to locking and other things though I have a feeling they are bound to other things by default (if at all). I wasn't necessarily suggesting not having the functionality (it is something KDE has which can be very valuable), but I don't feel that using it over having the currently well organized menu is a good idea.
On 05/02/2008, Andrew Laignel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Webmaster, Jhnet.co.uk wrote: > > "I also think the addition of the power off button on the main bar is > > also silly > > for the same reasons - your only ever going to use it max once per > > session." > > No, it is something very valuable, though only really on mobile or > > public systems: when I am using my laptop it allows me to quickly > > throw it in to suspend or lock the screen when I walk away. It is > > something that I have found many users come to love once they get used > > to it being there (for the most part the ability to lock, suspend or > > switch user is handy (especially in a school-like or family > > environment). While the user switcher is probably necessary I do feel > > the power button is a worth while addition, especially given that we > > are taking up a solid 24 odd pixels of the users screen that, lets > > face it, do very little more than provide a launcher, clock and status > > items. (I am not debating the need for the top panel, things > > definitely become crowded all squashed into the bottom, but this area > > should be utilized better.) > To be honest the hate I have for the power-off button is mainly due to > the fact it's an ugly blob. If it was a bit more elegant and discreet I > would probably have less problems with it. > > Is the Windows key not used on Ubuntu still? One of the nice things > about Windows is WIN+L locks the computer (WIN+D is minimise all). I > also generally set the power button my laptop to hibernate and just use > that. I do see how the power button may be of use to other people though. > > Maybe make it look nicer and put it in the system tray? It could also > then handle power settings and other bits and bobs. > > "As an example from Windows XP, the 'new style' Start box has on the > left > > hand side a list of your most commonly used applications. I've set it > > to display 12 at once and you can pin items to it permanently. As a > > result if you use an app more than a couple of times in future is never > > more than two clicks away with no need to scan a list for it." > > I agree this is definitely a useful function that would be nice to see > > however given how well organized a typical gnome Applications menu is > > compared to a windows all programs menu (without any user > > intervention) it becomes less important. While teaching basic > > computing skills to elderly people (I run classes for a charity called > > Age Concern) I find that many are confused as to why their programs > > sometimes appear in the frequently used list, why they move and why > > all the programs they need are not there. In this scenario, well named > > and *subject categorized* (not manufacturer or application suite > > organized) programs lists are a generally good idea. What would be > > nice is a way of making it more obvious that they can add their own > > applications to the top bar to allow single click access to them and > > to make use of the space there rather than ending up like windows' > > quick launch that many people do not realize can actually be added to. > > > > Just some thoughts > With regards to your Age Concern example - and I have tried to teach old > people computing - it's a difficult task - but it sounds like the > problem isn't due to the idea being flawed but instead the > implementation of the idea being flawed. The task is to implement the > idea in such a way as to avoid the problem you have stated. > > I am a massive proponent of usability, but I am also heavily against > dumbing down and definitely do not believe in catering for the lowest > common denominator. While all effort must be made to make a system as > intuitive and useful as possible I do not believe that you should remove > or not include useful additions simply because a minority may have > problems initially with them. > > -- > ubuntu-art mailing list > ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art >
-- ubuntu-art mailing list ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
