Linked by Howard Fosdick on Tue 2nd Jul 2013 21:04 UTC
Editorial Like many of you, I've been watching the big changes in user interfaces over the past few years, trying to make sense of them all. Is there a common explanation for the controversies surrounding the Windows 8 UI and Unity? Where do GNOME 3, KDE, Cinnamon, and MATE fit in? This article offers one view.
Thread beginning with comment 566108
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Ubuntu Unity
by M.Onty on Wed 3rd Jul 2013 11:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Ubuntu Unity"
M.Onty
Member since:
2009-10-23

... It's hard for Unity to be much worse (those guys really set the bar low...)


According to the above comments, they made it impossible to set the bar low ...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Ubuntu Unity
by Morgan on Thu 4th Jul 2013 13:35 in reply to "RE[2]: Ubuntu Unity"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I get the pun, but you're right. The immobile taskbar goes against what most people have come to expect from a GNU/Linux based OS: An extremely customizable interface. Unity's "do it our way or not at all" paradigm is extremely anti-user. Even the two most popular commercial OSes, Windows 7 and Mac OS X, allow you to move and alter desktop elements to a degree. While it's not as much freedom as you get with, say, Xfce, it's far more than what Unity (and Gnome 3) offer the user.

Reply Parent Score: 2