Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69

Thread: Many Ubuntu Users Still Hate The Unity Desktop

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,639

    Default Many Ubuntu Users Still Hate The Unity Desktop

    Phoronix: Many Ubuntu Users Still Hate The Unity Desktop

    Two weeks ago on Phoronix it was asked what do you dislike or hate about Ubuntu? This was following a discussion on the Ubuntu development list about Ubuntu developer applicants being asked about what they like the least about Ubuntu. The overwhelming response among Phoronix readers was clear: they still really hate the Unity desktop...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTczOQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Sounds like it's not for everybody.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    118

    Default

    Unity has at least unified opposition. I don't think that was the intent but credit where credit is due.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    118

    Default

    There are a lot of Ubuntu bugs which are really upstream problems. Intel 8xx integrated graphics devices are almost unusable (FDO). Some wireless devices are broken and can cause system lockups (kernel). SCSI scanner permissions are often wrong and prevent saned and Apache from accessing them (UDEV). I've encountered several GNOME/GTK bugs.

    The desired bug reporting process is to report issues to Ubuntu first to see if it is a Ubuntu-specific problem. If not, then forward them to Debian to see if it is in their packages. If it is not a Debian-specific problem it should go upstream from there.

    The problem is that bugs reported to Ubuntu take forever to be reviewed by anyone, especially bugs related to specific hardware. Often the only response is from triage volunteers that tell you to try the latest Ubuntu version. If you don't respond then it gets marked invalid. I've given up an bugs that had that happen for four or more releases. It basically is up to the end user to install Debian and other distros to determine if the bug is an upstream problem or not. This is really time consuming.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    29

    Default Xubuntu

    Xubuntu to the rescue if you want a saner default desktop experience. At least, a lot of the people (re)discovering XFCE have found just how far its come from its CDE lookalike days.

    I still will recommend Xubuntu to linux newbies and people that just want their hardware to work. Ubuntu still has a large community which helps with polishing and bug fixes.

    I'll wait on Ubuntu to figure out what they are going to do with Unity (2D). It has potential, but it just isn't polished yet.

    Also, Mint is (more) attractive, except I don't like how they are moving away from Ubuntu base and going towards Debian rolling release. That's fine for the techie, but not somebody who depends on stable snapshots.

    You also miss out on the Ubuntu ecosystem of many prepared builds and third-party packages.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jhansonxi View Post
    There are a lot of Ubuntu bugs which are really upstream problems. Intel 8xx integrated graphics devices are almost unusable (FDO). Some wireless devices are broken and can cause system lockups (kernel). SCSI scanner permissions are often wrong and prevent saned and Apache from accessing them (UDEV). I've encountered several GNOME/GTK bugs.

    The desired bug reporting process is to report issues to Ubuntu first to see if it is a Ubuntu-specific problem. If not, then forward them to Debian to see if it is in their packages. If it is not a Debian-specific problem it should go upstream from there.

    The problem is that bugs reported to Ubuntu take forever to be reviewed by anyone, especially bugs related to specific hardware. Often the only response is from triage volunteers that tell you to try the latest Ubuntu version. If you don't respond then it gets marked invalid. I've given up an bugs that had that happen for four or more releases. It basically is up to the end user to install Debian and other distros to determine if the bug is an upstream problem or not. This is really time consuming.
    I'm glad you brought up bug submission. Too many times I had crashes trying to submit a bug only to hit the cancel button when I discovered I had to sign up to actually submit them. I don't need another account on the Internet. If you want bug reports, accept them anonymously.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bug77 View Post
    I'm glad you brought up bug submission. Too many times I had crashes trying to submit a bug only to hit the cancel button when I discovered I had to sign up to actually submit them. I don't need another account on the Internet. If you want bug reports, accept them anonymously.
    This really bothers me as well (many times I've wanted to file bugs but the extra step needed to create an account was, frankly, too much). It makes sense that they want to be able to talk to you about your problem in depth (asking detailed questions, even explaining how to run a stack trace if neccessary), but this seems like it could be done by giving them your email, or making bug reports forum style.
    Still, bug reporting the is most important thing a user can do to help improve OSS.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    48

    Default

    I've used it actively since natty betas and it isn't all bad. Bugs aren't really a problem anymore, just design choices.

    I hate that I can't customize it. Top panel takes way too much space for a netbook and won't hide. The launcher OTOH always hides, but I'd like to keep it visible on my desktop. Worst of all, nothing adapts to font size, so it's an accessibility nightmare.

    DockbarX + cardapio on maverick was a much better interface. I could install it on natty, but I've been using Unity in the hope that they'll fix it. I'll reconsider once oneiric is usable.

    Edit: In short it has better defaults than the old gnome interface, but it limits tweaking.
    Last edited by Otus; 08-02-2011 at 04:52 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Otus View Post
    I've used it actively since natty betas and it isn't all bad. Bugs aren't really a problem anymore, just design choices.

    I hate that I can't customize it. Top panel takes way too much space for a netbook and won't hide. The launcher OTOH always hides, but I'd like to keep it visible on my desktop. Worst of all, nothing adapts to font size, so it's an accessibility nightmare.

    DockbarX + cardapio on maverick was a much better interface. I could install it on natty, but I've been using Unity in the hope that they'll fix it. I'll reconsider once oneiric is usable.

    Edit: In short it has better defaults than the old gnome interface, but it limits tweaking.
    The launcher can be configured to stay visible at all times. Various options are available in the Unity plugin of the Compiz configuration manager.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    466

    Default

    Many Ubuntu Users Still Hate The Unity Desktop
    And the rest don't use it .

    Actually I think it's OK on small screens, it just sucks on laptops and desktops. Everyone seems to be pushing GUIs that are designed for phones and tablets onto systems with big screens, and that's just insane.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •