2008/2/9, Webmaster, Jhnet.co.uk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > "It also encourages an idea of keeping processes running even when windows > are closed, which is really the only feature necessary to be as "intutive" > as the OSX dock." > > This is a feature that I know some people find valuable (especially for > things like media players, downloads and what-not but for every day use (and > more relevantly for users who don't really understand whats going on - i.e. > they are just pressing buttons that just so happen to make their computer > print letters) and adding this particular feature will lead to confusion.
Sorry, I don't want to be offensive but... Are you from the past? I mean, keeping open apps in system tray? Ubuntu really needs to back to 90's gui's? Have you ever used Windows? Keeping open apps in the system tray (with that do you mean notification area, top panel right, really?) is one of the _worst_ desktop metaphors. Notification area is... notification area! Why mixing open apps with notification icons like clock, wifi, volume...? And then you say that we should not lead users (new users) to confusion. I think that this ideas comes from a very _very_ strong Windows culture. And Ubuntu is not an should not be a clon of Windows XP (OS X clon either). If Windows or Mac does something well, we can discuss it and if it's a good idea we can implement it. But we don't have to copy something because new users would feel familiar with Ubuntu desktop, that would be a big mistake. Taking back the discussion. 6 or 7 years ago I was a convinced Windows 98/XP user. I loved Winamp, I loved Winamp icon in the tray bar. Nowadays, a lot of Windows applications put their icon in the system tray. Nowadays I've studied computer science and gui design in my career. One of the big mistakes of user interfaces is mixing things that are completely not related. Notification is not related with open apps. What Dylan McCall was trying to say is that in OS X there is a tree structure in the gui design. Root node is the application and then each application has several childrens (windows) and each window can have another children (floating window). In my opinion this is the correct way to represent open apps. Why? because the app "pipe" is: Processes -> Windows -> Secondary windows This pipe design delivers a good design that solves several gui problems. First problem solved is that window selector like Windows bar is no longer needed. Instead, this model has app selector, wich is very useful if some apps have several windows (think in The Gimp at this moment). Second problem is that having app selector instead window selector is better if you have a lot (6 or more) windows opened. It's even easier to distinguish what do you want to select because you have to look directly for the application, not to all the windows, and you have less items to look for so you can search it quickly. Third problem solved is that now app selector and app launcher can be merged so many space can be saved. Sorry for my english and sorry if you felt attacked, that was not my intention. I just want people to break their Windows thinking and start believeing that maybe users would need a very short period of adaptation to Ubuntu's gui. And if that period is a little longer but then becomes more useful that would be the right way. This discussion is _very_ interesting, please keep posting ideas. Cheers. -- Álvaro.
-- ubuntu-art mailing list ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
