Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Jan 2012 22:53 UTC, submitted by fran
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu As much as I dislike Unity, I commend the Ubuntu team and Shuttleworth for having the guts to try to innovate and bring the desktop forward (pretty much the exact same can be said of KDE4 and GNOME3). Shuttleworth has just announced yet another significant change for Ubuntu, and it's all about replacing the menu with a search interface dubbed the HUD.
Thread beginning with comment 504872
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
dagw
Member since:
2005-07-06

You better study that application, and find commands with your mouse.

That's exactly what I did, and it was annoying as all hell and took far longer than simply typing 'mosaic' (or probably just 'mos') would have taken.

But you can call your grandmamma and ask her for a determined kind of blur in GIMP

My grandma would never be able to use GIMP as it is so I fail to see what point you're trying to make. But OK, let's assume we have someone who knew nothing about GIMP, but knew that there was a way to blur images with it. How would it be quicker and easier for them to dig through the menus until they find the blur commands, rather than simply typing 'blur' and getting up a list of all available blur commands?

Out of curiosity do you use any keyboard shortcuts when using your computer?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02


Out of curiosity do you use any keyboard shortcuts when using your computer?


No, I don't. Well, usually I use CTRL-C, CTRL-V or CTRL-Z, but that's about it.

I thought the user interface was to minimize the need of typing. I agree that searching sub-menu trees is kind of boring. I just tried to find an option in Inkscape today, and it cost me 1 or 2 minutes. However, I don't see any kind of better usability. It's like switching dozen in exchange for twelve. Perhaps the RIBBONS were a better idea than this, but more typing or talking to the computer is kind of pointless.

Reply Parent Score: 2