@The Fiddler Thank you. @All I personally would like to discuss the whole topic of design decisions. I know that to some I am becoming a nuisance because this is not the first bug where I start complaining about the term "design decision" but, to me, it seems to be the source of many disputes. Why shouldn't users be able to configure some options if they do not like them? It is a design decision is not the ultimative answer to all questions concerning changes to the behaviour of the system. And it must not be the only answer.
I can understand Jorgen Bodde, when he states that he does not use unity because he does not like a specific behaviour of the launcher. I myself use unity, despite the fact that I want the launcher at the bottom and not at the left side, and despite the fact that I want windows to minimize when I click a launcher icon. Still I hate these things I want to reconfigure. I stick with Ubuntu at the moment because I really hope that we will see a change in the system. I hope we will see more options to configure the system. If it won't be possible to configure more options of the system, I will search for another distribution. Perhaps in a year or so. I really want to use Ubuntu and I want to use Unity. But I will not pay any price. I hate it if an operating system dictates me my workflow. An operating system must be configurable, so that I can modify the system to meet my needs. I am the user, I am the customer, I am the client and thus I am the one to whom the system has to bow. At the moment it is the opposite: the system controls my behaviour and my workflow. This is wrong. If it is a design decision to have a launcher at the left and an icon to do nothing if it is clicked under certain circumstances then this is ok for me only under one condition: if I can change this behaviour, I really liked the idea of Jono's power user community. But, honestly, I do not want to install extra tools to do some basic modifications to the system. Heck! What next? Will Ubuntu 12.04 include the great feature of a fixed wallpaper which I cannot change, because of a design decision? Or will I be forced to never open more than five windows at once, because of a design decision, where somebody of the Ayatana team decided that more than five windows per virtual desktop are confusing the normal users? Will I need Ubuntu Tweak to change the desktop wallpaper, or to change the resolution of my screen, or to change the system sounds? I find it already restricting enough that I have to install CCSM to configure the behaviour of the launcher. Especially if CCSM is cluttered with unnecessary options, especially if it does not work correctly with unity and easily breaks the system but just clicking on the wrong option. Tell me, anybody, where is Ubuntu going? Are 91 voters enough to make obvious that something has to change? Or will this discussion be buried in silence because the official Canonical developers ignore it? Tell me, will this end like Bug 668415 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/668415) where 89 people voted for the simple possibility to configure the position of the launcher and instead gut rebuffed several times with the words "this is a design decision"? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/733349 Title: Minimize Application's Windows upon clicking it's Launcher Icon To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ayatana-design/+bug/733349/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
