Open Ballot: do you support Ubuntu's move to Unity?

I think it's a brave move

Maxox (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 11:30am

It's a big change. But I must say I'm pretty excited at the idea.

Maybe...

Steve Ward (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 11:45am

The state it's in now, definitely not. But we've got 6 months of development, including a switch away from mutter to compiz, before it happens. There'll be more eyes on it now it's default as well.

It's an interesting move

Anon E Mouse Claymore (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 11:46am

And maybe no more than that. I personaly use KDE on Fedora so not as immediatly affected but if it helps drive the desktop enviroment forward it will be a big plus

At first I was exited, I

Bananaoomarang (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 11:48am

At first I was exited, I also heard that compiz was replacing mutter which is a good move. However, having read reviews of unity so far, I don't like the idea of making it default AT ALL, I think it's a mistake and is only intended to increace canonical's 'ownage' of ubuntu. Unity was designed for small screens and touch screen devices, not an ordinary desktop, but I'm no fan of gnome shell either so I guess I'll see how this turns out.

Maybe you could take a look at the latest ayanta build in the next LXF.

"Meh"

popey - October 26, 2010 @ 11:57am

Like window button moves, dropping GIMP and aptitude from the default install, dodgy porno calendars and spacial windows, this will be yet another decision Canonical/Ubuntu make that will be forgotten soon enough, but dredged up by people leaving comments on blogs when the next change comes around.

Like this one.

Cooperation would be more beneficial for GNOME users

Ulyssess (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:04pm

It would have been nice if Canonical contributed its time and money to GNOME (shell) instead of their own shell. Even if they do not like some of the idea's and features implemented in GNOME shell, I'm quite sure their money and manpower would have given them substantial influence in some of the decisions taken in this area. They claim competition is healthy, but I strongly believe cooperation in the world of FOSS will get you further... Alas, Canonical does not have the name to be that 'upstream friendly'...

And then there's the argument to embrace changes... Well, whether it's plain GNOME 3.0 with GNOME shell or some GNOME 3.0 libraries with Unity, change will come to the GNOME users anyway. But with change, Canonical now also introduces fragmentation, which might turn out badly for the GNOME community...

Old Gnome is gone anyway

GregE (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:08pm

The Gnome shell is coming and the Gnome we have had for so long is going to be no longer available. So, it will be Unity or the Gnome shell, but not traditional Gnome. I have Unity on my EeePC 900 and am not impressed with the speed or the rough edges. The switch to Compiz and six months more development might help.

I have just started using KDE 4.5 in preparation. I have used KDE in the past and always eneded up back with Gnome. maybe this time it will stick.

not easy

lumitoro (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:17pm

Big changes are never taken lightly.when kde 4.0 was launched everybody hated it and now not so much. well...many still hate it :D, but it's getting better every release and that's because many distros started to include kde4 as their main kde desktop. Without the help of all the courageous intrepid adventurers who tried it in the first place, kde4 would still be hated by all and not just many...lololol
I'm not saying this is the right move from Canonical® but I'm really curious and will most definably try it when it's out.

P.S.:I use kde4 ;-D, though i'm not intrepid nor courageous or even adventurer, just mad...hehehe

P.S.2: When I say "hate", I really mean, strongly dislike.

as long as i can change to

broxi (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:20pm

as long as i can change to gnome if its not to my liking, no harm done.

I really dont get why they

nai (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:35pm

I really dont get why they havent thought of changing it sooner, or at least make a new derivative. That being said Unity needs some work and if someone isnt to willing to use it I'm sure Gubuntu will work just as well as Kubuntu does today.

@miska

nai (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:40pm

I'm pretty sure they have sent most everything they have done to gnome but they(as in gnome) did not accept the patches. Same deal as with their notification. It's true that they don't "do" as much coding for the community as others but they do plenty unless you look at it in your silly point of view.

Switching to Unity is not the issue

harriseldon (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:44pm

The more I think about Unity, the more it seems like XFCE is to Gnome; XFCE uses libgnome with a new front-end. If Canonical decided to use XFCE on the desktop, people would be surprised, but not divided. The reason they are divided is that Unity is a project owned by a private company. Contributors to Unity must commit their copyright to a private company. It is forcing those who want to promote desktop Linux to choose to follow the front-runner and accept a private-owned desktop environment or abandon the distribution that has been changing the face of desktop Linux in order to promote a less popular community-run desktop environment.

Bold Step Forward

Chris Woollard (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 12:52pm

When I first heard about the move to Unity, I was somewhat skeptical. I like my Gnome desktop and don't like the idea of change. Then a little bit later I thought about it again. Is the idea of moving to Unity such a bad thing. Canonical usually spend a lot of time delivering polished desktops that are very user friendly. Why would this time be any different? I am sure that there will be a way to switch back if I really don't get on with it.

Thanks
Chris Woollard

Every distro adds to the

davmor2 (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 1:06pm

Every distro adds to the default desktop packages OpenOffice.org and Firefox are prime examples, but nobody bats an eyelid at that. This is a minor tweak on gnome shell it pretty much uses the same technology and has some really nice features.

Ubuntu's core philosophy is to pick the best application for the mass user and I believe that this is the reason for the change, unity has features that are still missing from gnome shell and currently gnome have no plans to integrate them. Other than that there is little change to the application base.

Innovation might be our only route but...

Anonymous Bloke (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 1:26pm

There's always been this tendency for linux to be playing a catching up game, reimplementing stuff that's available in other OSs. Say dockbarx, mono, etc.... It's great to see innovation in center stage, pushing us forward, but Unity is risky business.

I'm looking at it in terms of adoption. Right now the general opinion people have of Ubuntu is "It's ok but". But it doesn't run my games. But it doesn't run photoshop. But it doesn't recognize my phone.

With Unity, Ubuntu isn't just "ok" because it will be so radically different from everything else. It aims to change the way we interact with the desktop, with our computers even, and therefore has a learning curve. The question is: can we expect people to invest time in adapting to a new desktop even thought the "buts" still remain? Is Unity *that* good?

Today? No, it isn't. Could it be? Maybe. But run all the focus group test you want, I can't see my mother running it no matter what. And that says quite a bit.

@nai

miska (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 1:28pm

I like open source so I like when somebody participates in it's development ;-) If they do other things I don't mind but mostly I don't care either. I know that they send some patches to the upstream and some of them were even accepted. But I'm quite sure that patches that got rejected was rejected because of some good reason.

Before you start hacking on something, it's always a good idea to check what upstream is doing and to try to make your work part of the upstream project. Discuss your idea with them and try to work together with them. Others will help you, your contribution will have broader audience (more testing and fixes) and you wouldn't have to maintain yet another fork. You mentioned notifications that were rewritten in Canonical and at the same time they were getting rewriten in Gnome and KDE as well. Just imagine how great it could be if all of them would have talked to each other and cooperate ;-)

My point of view might look silly to you, but I prefer if people talks to each other, settle out their differences and work together to make everything better rather then trying to differenciate at all costs.

Will Unity be Freedom?

Particular Penguin (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 1:52pm

I haven't used Unity so can't comment on it directly. Also, I use (previously) derivatives like puredyne & chrunchbang rather than 'pure' Ubuntu,.

However, being a strong advocate of libre software I do promote the use of GNU/Linux and often evangelize to friends and others (often so great success!). This generally involves encouraging the use of Ubuntu and Mint as they are incredibly easy to use for people dependent on a proprietary OS.

I really want to like Ubuntu, as it appears they are doing great things to bring GNU/Linux to more people. Personally, though, the more Canonical moves away from community development the harder it is to stand behind them. It just smells like a new M$. Unity seems to be one giant step in that direction and its sad.

The only saving grace could be if there is an option at login to not have it. That would keep with the spirit of having choices and allow people to make up their own minds about their desktops... hence free as in freedom.

Unity

Palm Tree (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 1:56pm

Unity? Absolutely not! The whole exercise is a waste of creative talent. A total waste. Unity is a massive brain fart!

At the state it's in now,

Tudsworth (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 2:20pm

At the state it's in now, nope. Provided 6 months of development is enough to see the project mature a little. Right now, the whole thing feels incredibly clunky, to the point I use Ubuntu desktop edition on my netbook to avoid Unity. Then again, if it turns out that I don't like Unity even after further development, at least I can switch to another distro, eh?

Yes !

Croatian Penguin (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 2:36pm

Why not !

NO

bobthebob1234 (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 2:59pm

So many comments already!!!

Anyway, I had unity on my netbook and I hated it, it didn't feel right, and it was a bit buggy, so I installed kbuntu and switched to the netbook 'version'. SOOOOOO much nicer and friendly.

...

Anonymouse Penguine (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 3:06pm

I don't use Ubuntu, or Gnome (and most certainly not KDE- although I'm posting as Anonymouse Penguine here I still don't want anyone to think I use KDE :), so... this will not affect me personally, i.e., I don't care. But, as a Linux user it's always interesting/important to see what's going on in the Ubuntu camp. Well done Canonical for forking Gnome now instead of prolonging the agony for a long time. As for the UI- I understand it will not be identical to the currently poorly usable netbook edition. So who knows what we're actually debating?

Otherwise... Ubuntu is stagnant in the desktop market outside Linux. All the gains it says it makes are against other distros, not MS or Apple. So Ubuntu has to stand out with some feature. Therefore this move makes sense.

Of course, they could backpedal in three days and announce they're going with... who knows what. It's Canonical after all, those guys are not very serious.

Also, people who want Ubuntu, improved, and Gnome they're used to, will always have Mint. The new release looks set to be excellent in every sense of the word.

Why not?

Conor Murphy (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 3:12pm

Why not?

Ubuntu is a desktop orientated company that is failing to gain anything except other Linux distro's users.

Why not try something new. Although they are already too stretched doing multiple desktops. If they are going to do this focus they need to throw all their eggs into this baskets. Forget all the mini versions and just do this. Forget KDE, an alternate Gnome version, LXDE, XFCE.

But they need to focus on original ideas and frankly the zeitgeist integration has to be the best thing and need to focus there minds on this.

Sceptical...

Phil Raphle (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 3:19pm

Moving to Unity on desktops with more power, and big screens with high resolutions might work well for some users, while I think Unity defeats it's own purpose on netbooks (as many have already said), as it takes up more screen space, and makes Ubuntu even slower than before, which is really bad for weak netbooks.

I always install and try out the new versions of Ubuntu as they come, but mostly to be able to support it for friends and family. Don't really like it much personally. What I like about FOSS in general, is choise, and I feel Canonical is trying to make more and more choises for the user for each new release. That can be a very good thing for new users who don't know what they want yet, but myself, I'll stick with Arch + Fluxbox.

No, it's a bit clunky, it's

IPristy (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 3:52pm

No, it's a bit clunky, it's more like a tool bar that should do something. If you are planing that then...

Make that bar as pop-up on top (not top as position but more like over existing application), that will please everybody desktop, netbook and touch.

I like standard Gnome it's practical, KDE is a train, Ubuntu Remix OK and more like Jolicloud.

I'm guessing that users want empty home desktop as drop off or maybe no who knows.

Just make it simple OK, don't force to user map something that he don't want.

It's not the user interface but more like what you do with in a productive way!

Time for a final choice

Tumas (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 4:37pm

Great, now all the lazy people like me will get a chance to try it without any special effort. If its ugly, I'm back to ArchLinux with some tilling window manager in no time.

Psst. Nobody liked Gnome that much anyway..

Depends on what the goal is

Pantsless Penguin (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 5:08pm

I've had both my parents happily running UNR since it was a hacky add-on to 8.10, and, while I don't plan to take them off the LTS versions of 10.04 UNR they're running now, when 12.04 rolls out with Unity, I'm sure they'll like it.

Personally, I haven't run Ubuntu ever, and haven't used GNOME proper for years. I like XFCE, I like E16, I like the Meego demo's I've seen so far, and I plan to keep running, supporting and advocating open-source software. I plan to keep picking what I deem are the right tools for the job, and the more there are out there, the better choice I can make.

Does it really matter if they do?

uomosenzanome - October 26, 2010 @ 6:50pm

So now there will probably just be another disk for Gnubuntu installation for the default GNOME setup. Who cares? Maybe it will be more user friendly, maybe it won't. The only downside will be that there will be yet more questions from newbies with all these ubuntu variants (forget the linux variants, bsd variants, etc).

I do wish they would work on more important issues instead of desktop manager appearance (such as speed, stability . . . contributing back to Debian).

Maybe the default install page for ubuntu should just have pictures of different computers and say "Does your computer look like this?" and you click on the image of your computer for the flavor of ubuntu.

picture of server --> Ubuntu server edition
picture of netbook (links to)--> netbook remix
picture of old computer(links to) --> lubuntu
picture of Mike Saunders computer (links to) --> MikeOS
etc.

Mixed feelings

Hotelsinger (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 8:12pm

So far, I haven't been impressed with Unity, but I'm keeping an open mind. I'm interested to see how it all turns out as I'm a fan of tinkering with things, even if they're already working. Still, I won't be surprised if I end up sticking to older versions of Ubuntu.

Absolute Pure Genius

Fieldyweb (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 9:40pm

This is a brave genius move from Canonical. This will clearly define Ubuntu, the Apps will be the same, say what you want, Fedora, Suse, Gentoo they are all good distributions, but ave had plenty of time to become the default desktop. If Linux wants to move forward, its actions like these which will define the platform. While others roll out a changed gnome theme here and there, and still cannot get Wifi working, a decent package management system or patch management sorted out.

Good move.

What's an Ubuntu?

Anonymous Mike (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 10:05pm

...and why does it need to be united with gnomes?

nope, won't use it anyway.

Joakim (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 10:35pm

Personally I don't care but at the same time I can't stop the feeling of ”not another de”.
It will just make the mess messier.

Choice is good

BobTheLinuxHacker (not verified) - October 26, 2010 @ 11:24pm

I thought the Unity interface on my netbook was okay - Meego's one is better though. Presumably they'll do something to make Unity more suitable for the larger screens on a desktop - in which case I'll reserve judgement until I've seen it.

Actually, as long as they make it optional, and easy to revert to Gnome, KDE, etc, then "fine, go ahead" says I. After all, I've still got the window controls on my desktop edition of Lucid on the right-hand side. :p

Better than the alternative...

Anonymous Rhino (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 2:27am

Yes.
I don't like Unity, but I like it more than Gnome-shell.

The bigger part of the announcement, in my eyes, is Unity's switch to compiz, which will improve stability and performance greatly. Clutter, sadly, is pretty terrible from that point of view.

As a disliker of 'docks' and the 'dock-like' way of doing things, both Gnome-Shell and Unity don't appeal much to me, but of the two (and we'll almost certainly see one of them as the default in the major distros soon) Unity is far and away the winner, both in design and implementation.

Regardless, at least we can still change window managers to one that fits us better --- or just use the terminal with something like 'screen'. That's the beauty of Linux --- there's so much choice!

[Disclaimer: I had some warning that this would happen, and have therefore actually formed an opinion in advance.]

If it's broken don't fix it.

Jet Pilot Joe (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 5:45am

I've been slowly converting regular people who have no clue as to what an OS is to Ubuntu at my Real Estate office in California. I'm talking about older folks (50+) with a netbook who were not happy with how Windows was running.

A USB Stick and 10 minutes of playing with Ubuntu 9.10 or 10.04 is all it took to convince Realtors to switch to Linux.

I'm not a computer geek, I just got tired of my wife complaining that her Acer Aspire One "aspired" to be a computer running under Windows.

As long as it works and the general public, i.e, us simpletons can use it, great. It just needs to work. That's it. And for goodness sakes encourage demo's of it. How else do you expect to get word out? Osmosis?!

well done

Jake (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 8:33am

Canonical knows that that the desktop is where the battle for hearts and minds plays out.
In order to attract users away for commercial operating systems the default DE is going to be the thing that'll make peoples minds up.
Most people I know, don't want to get any more involved in customizing their desktop than changing the background or the colour scheme.
In order to attract new people It needs to look slicker, be more responsive or have better functionality than commercial rivals.
While Gnome is immediately accessible to anyone who's ever used a desktop operating system, it doesn't really excite people.
I hope they can iron out the problems and present something unique and attractive.
This one foreground task at a time thing is good.
Right now it's let down in some key areas. 3 clicks in 3 different parts of the screen to get to the file manager? Really?
I've never owned or used an Iphone or Ipad but I believe they have a common UI thats simple and intuitive to use. Canonical aim to provide a common UI across it's desktop, netbook and touch screen offerings. It's exactly what they should be doing.
I also really enjoy the comments saying "I would never use unity I prefer emacs on my gentoo build..." or similar.
This is not about you.
Relax.
Enjoy your life.

Buggy

Anonymous Matthew (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 9:23am

Seems like another ploy for PR. Bit depressing as when I tried Unity (on a fairly new machine -- 3/4 years old) it did not work, just a white screen.

Besides that, the main thing

Tobi - October 27, 2010 @ 10:03am

Besides that, the main thing I dislike about the beautiful OS X desktop is the global menu bar - good for a netbook, awful for any screen bigger than 13". Why do I have to move my mouse to the top of the screen when I want to save something?

MacOSX

Jake (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 11:37am

If they're turning Ubuntu into a free, open version of osx that'd be awesome.
Power users and people who don't want everything configured for them have a wide choice of distro's.
Canonical are trying to build a mainstream OS, so they need to be willing to make choices for those people who don't want to make their own.
Most folk just want to get on with whatever they need to do.
Unity should just be one big button that says 'do what I'm thinking of'.

If it ain't broke - don't try to fix it!

Anonymous Penguin (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 1:51pm

Looking at the demo screen of the new "ugh" Unity Desktop, it is an apparent move to dumb down the UI. Shuttleworth mentions Unity competition for the UI - when there is no competition except maybe between KDE and Gnome. What he forgets is that only the hearts and minds of the user can decide that - not an edict by Shuttleworth.

Admittedly, I am an Advanced user of the Gnome Gtk UI, so, I will proceed to immediately edit the .iso image file of the Ubuntu 11.04 Live CD upon download to suit my needs which are that I have a custom Live CD/USB environment that is more secure than any installed OS.

I do NOT support Ubuntu's move to Unity. It is a wasted effort.

Given certain effort

Morten Juhl-Johansen Zölde-Fejér (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 3:49pm

I personally think that the design of Unity - or the design used on Unity by the UNR - is appalling. I don't know the technology of Unity, I have only seen it used - and that probably goes for a lot of the commenters - and if it is going to be a success, they are going to need a considerably smoother design. Pay some people from the Mint project, for instance...

Meh!!

Anonymous Penguinsta (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 4:46pm

Im not a huge fan of GNOME but even less of the GNOME shell
or or Unity so I might not be the best guy to judge but in a 
way I am since this is done to get new users.
This hasnt succeeded in convincing me to ditch either E17 or 
LXDE and Ive installed KDE based distros for about 14 people 
this past year (I offered three desktops and EVERY ex-Windows user chose KDE). Were talking grannies and granpas and people with little kids. I think the 'its easier for kids and non-techies' is pretty weak excuse for many changes in tech.
Click here for Firefox, click here to find your pictures, 
click here to listen to music. 

I will however give it shot and offered Unity to newbies if it becomes stable enough. Too much choice is not a problem.
And if even one person decides that Unity is to their liking, then it will be worth it.
The desktop has to reflect what the user wants, NOT what we tell him he wants.
Once again, thats the beauty of choice and FLOSS.

But personally.... MEH!!

Effective Screen Area

Ray Woods (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 5:41pm

I personally don't care what system is used. The main criteria for me is how much of the screen area is used on the system. I like to do things with my computers and I don't want anything getting in the way of that. This is why the standard Gnome layout is always modified to a single bar instead of the two Gnome normally provides, (aka as in the Mint and SUSE Gnome offerings).

A slap in the face for GNOME developers

Oswald Cobblepot (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 5:48pm

Weird, after the switch to KDE 4, the interface became less usable. It has caught up in the meantime, but why try the same thing now with Unity? It was made for netbooks, right? Why boycott the development of Gnome Shell, which looked very promising? This is precisely the kind of "everyone does as they please" that we don't need anymore in Linux.

On a widescreen monitor even

Simon (not verified) - October 27, 2010 @ 7:20pm

On a widescreen monitor even a netbook, unity doesn't waste space.

Most web pages are thin slivers of content with white strips on either side.

You can afford to get rid of the white strips