Jim Lynch

Technology and Other Musings

Unity: Ubuntu’s descent into madness!

If you ever watched the movie “300”, then you know that one of the supporting characters proclaims at one point that “…this is madness!” shortly before being fatally kicked into a deep, dark hole by one of the main characters.

That, I’m afraid, will soon be the fate of Unity.

I’m sure you’ve heard by now that Ubuntu will change its desktop interface from GNOME to Unity in Ubuntu 11.04. Changing from GNOME to Unity is madness on Canonical’s part, I’ll tell you why in this post.

Before I go any further, I want to encourage folks that are new to Linux to check out these helpful books on Amazon. They will help you understand what Linux has to offer and will let you get the most out of it.

What the heck is wrong with GNOME?

One thing that puzzles me about this choice is the implication that GNOME is apparently not good enough to remain the default desktop interface for Ubuntu. Why not? GNOME is arguably one of the best, most comfortable desktop interfaces around. It has come a long way from where it started, and it’s gotten better and better over the years.

I confess that I prefer GNOME when using Linux. Don’t get me wrong, other interfaces are also quite good (KDE, Xfce, etc.), but I usually return to GNOME. It has always worked well for many people, including myself.

Canonical is claiming differences between their priorities and those of the GNOME developers, as noted in this article from Ars Technica:

Shuttleworth described desktop adoption of Unity as the “most significant change ever” for Ubuntu. He also acknowledged that it is a “risky step” and that much work remains to be done to prepare for the transition. The move reflects Ubuntu’s growing divergence from the standard upstream GNOME configuration and effort to differentiate itself with a distinctive user experience. During the keynote, Shuttleworth emphasized that Ubuntu is still committed to GNOME despite the fact that it will ship with Unity instead of GNOME Shell. He contends that diversity and competition between different kinds of GNOME environments will encourage innovation and benefit the GNOME ecosystem.

I also asked Shuttleworth why Canonical is building its own shell rather than customizing the GNOME Shell. He says that Canonical made an effort to participate in the GNOME Shell design process and found that Ubuntu’s vision for the future of desktop interfaces was fundamentally different from that of the upstream GNOME Shell developers. He says that GNOME’s rejection of global menus, for example, is one of the key philosophical differences that would be difficult to reconcile. Canonical has accumulated a team of professional designers with considerable expertise over the past few years. They want to set their own direction and create a user experience that meets the needs of their audience. The other major Linux vendors, who are setting the direction of GNOME Shell’s design, have different priorities and are arguably less focused than Ubuntu on serving basic desktop users.

Ugh! Talk about a bunch of self-serving malarkey! Give me a break, Shuttleworth. Seriously.

Nobody wants a netbook interface except Canonical

As you may have noticed, I write a lot of distro reviews on Desktop Linux Reviews and quick looks at distros here on Eye On Linux. I’ve never, ever gotten a comment from anybody related to replacing GNOME with a netbook interface. Ever. Nobody’s ever brought it up to me or indicated any desire to have a netbook interface on their desktop computer.

So Canonical’s decision is quite puzzling. Or is it? Perhaps there’s another agenda hidden in this decision?

I suspect, based on Canonical’s statements and various media articles, that “touch” is what this entire change is all about. Canonical wants a desktop interface that is friendly to touch-screen usage. That’s fine as far as it goes, but even Apple (the company who introduced multi-touch on its iPhones, iPads, etc.) recognizes that the desktop is a different experience.

Apple has wisely opted to use touch via the Magic Mouse rather than introduce fingerprint-laden touchscreens to its desktop computers (iMacs, Mac mini, Mac Pro). Apple knows very well that touch has its place on the desktop, but they have smartly opted to do it in a way that works for the desktop.

They have not, as Canonical seems to be doing, decided to change Mac OS X’s interface to suit multi-touch. Canonical’s switch to Unity is more an example of the tail wagging the dog, and it ought to reconsider this foolish decision.

Don’t misunderstand me here; Unity certainly has its place, and that is on netbooks, not desktops. Netbooks are handy tools for many people, and Canonical is quite right to support them with a proper interface.

It is, however, important to note that a desktop is not a netbook and vice versa. The two computing experiences are very different and require a different approach regarding interface design. What works for one may not work very well for the other.

Let me go back to Apple yet again for a moment since Canonical has indicated their admiration of Apple in the past. Apple does not use a “netbook interface” for its notebook computers. Users of Macbooks and the like offer a full-blown version of Mac OS X. Only users of iPads, iPhones, etc. get a different interface.

Apple knows quite well that a netbook interface does not fit the bill at all for desktop computing. The two things are apples (no pun intended) and oranges; a lesson that Canonical has yet to learn firsthand. How ironic that Canonical apparently chooses to emulate Apple on some things but seems unable to discern the logic behind a lot of Apple’s interface decisions related to Mac OS X and iOS.

Ubuntu 11.04: A half-ass GNOME distribution?

Despite changes to the Unity interface, Canonical has promised that Ubuntu will still be a GNOME-based distribution. Here’s what one of the Canonical folks had to say about it on their blog:

Mark just announced at the Ubuntu Developer Summit in Orlando that we will be shipping the Unity environment in the Ubuntu desktop edition. Unity is the environment we shipped on the Ubuntu Netbook Edition for the first time in Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat, and users and OEMs have been enjoying the experience. It is an environment that is inspired by great design, touch, and a strong and integrated experience.

I think this is a fantastic opportunity for Free Software, and this is going to be a busy cycle. We have a lot of work to do, and we know that quality is a firm focus for this release, and we have identified a solid set of issues we need to focus on and resolve, but I know the final product will be something that we will all be proud of. Another key focus is performance; we have already started porting Unity from mutter to Compiz and the initial work is much faster, most notably on hardware that has traditionally had the most trouble from bug reports. Quality meets design meets performance. Together as a community we can make this rock.

There is going to be some questions about this decision in relation to GNOME. I want to make something crystal clear: Ubuntu is a GNOME distribution, we ship the GNOME stack, we will continue to ship GNOME apps, and we optimize Ubuntu for GNOME. The only difference is that Unity is a different shell for GNOME, but we continue to support the latest GNOME Shell development work in the Ubuntu archives.

Um…well okay, but then why bother with Unity in the first place? It’s like saying that you’re going to serve somebody a delicious steak dinner, but instead of steak, you’ll be giving them liver instead.

What Canonical will be serving up is a part-GNOME distribution that includes GNOME apps and other elements, but that defaults to a non-GNOME interface. Sorry but that just doesn’t cut it, Canonical. The company can spin this like a mad top, but it can’t change facts.

Ubuntu 11.04 will no longer be a GNOME-based distribution.

Final Thoughts: Consequences, choices & alternatives

Canonical’s decision opens the door for Ubuntu derivatives like Linux Mint and others to gain more users, at Ubuntu’s expense. I suspect that many faithful Ubuntu users will be casting around for alternatives the minute they see what Unity looks like on their computer screens.

We are blessed with choices in Linux, and switching away from generic Ubuntu to one of its derivatives or a non-Ubuntu distro is probably going to happen once long-time Ubuntu users experience Unity.

If you are unhappy about Canonical’s foolish decision to make Unity its default interface, I recommend that you consider Linux Mint Debian Edition instead. LMDE gives you all of the advantages of Debian (and the excellent Linux Mint tools & utilities) without any of Canonical’s poor choices and silly design decisions.

You get it all with Linux Mint Debian Edition; I strongly suspect that many Ubuntu users will choose it once they are aware of the awful changes that Canonical has in store for Ubuntu users in 11.04.

Canonical has no one to blame for themselves for this mess; it will be the operating system equivalent to users switching from Digg to Reddit after Digg introduced it’s horrific site “upgrade.” Somebody at Canonical is in desperate need of a smack upside the head to wake them up to this potential disaster.

Sadly, I doubt anyone there is listening. But Canonical surely will be after Ubuntu 11.04 comes out, and the screams of horror begin in earnest. When that happens the only thing left to be said will be this:

CAN YOU HEAR US NOW, CANONICAL?

Did you enjoy this post? If so, you are welcome to buy me a coffee. Thank you in advance for your kindness and support.

Published by

Jim Lynch

16 responses to “Unity: Ubuntu’s descent into madness!”

  1. Stephen Wilson Avatar
    Stephen Wilson

    Jim, your whole “descent into madness” theme is rather extreme and hysterical. The old adage about nobody likes change is clearly evident in reactions to Canonical’s Unity desktop announcement. Remember reactions to KDE’s change to the Plasma desktop? Think about reactions to GNOME’s change to the GNOME Shell desktop. Both were significant changes that attracted tremendous negativity. This is another change… good or bad… we’ll see.

    What you really ignore is that the GNOME interface is already changing completely. It will never again look like the GNOME we are used to. Doesn’t that upset you more than the change to Unity? As a longtime user of GNOME, the change to GNOME Shell makes me nervous. Also, it has been delayed in development… perhaps a sign that there are too many issues that are yet to be resolved.

    Yes, upcoming touchscreen systems may have been one motivation to move to Unity. But, I believe a larger motivation is that GNOME Shell may not be a good change for users. Think about it… which is a more dramatic change in user experience: Unity or GNOME Shell? I think it’s GNOME Shell.

    There are several comments that the Unity desktop will NOT be the same as the Unity netbook interface. This is supported by the blueprint on Launchpad, which says the marching orders are to: “Create a desktop-oriented form factor of Unity.”

    Perhaps the most annoying subtext in your post is that, somehow, no thought has been given to this change to Unity. Come on!

    Like

    Reply
  2. Mark Avatar
    Mark

    That’s a bit hysterical, Jim. Don’t you know that one can switch over from Gnome to, say, KDE desktop (and vice versa) with one “apt-get install”? I imagine something similar will still be possible for Unity after 11.04: apt-get install gnome-desktop.

    OK, one thing that your screaming could achieve (I’ll give you that) is Canonical adding a menu entry “Install Gnome” (similar to the Install Firefox) making Gnome desktop only one click away instead of two, thereby soothing the inconsolable Gnome heads/addicts.

    The way I see it, everybody (especially you, Jim) should calm the fsck down. Nobody is stealing anything from you.

    Like

    Reply
  3. albinard Avatar
    albinard

    This article has convinced me there is no longer any valid reason to read this site for a rational evaluation of technical matters.

    Like

    Reply
  4. Anonymous Coward Avatar
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh please, Canonical could care less about your pithy opinion. You assumption that touch is an irrelevance to anything but a net-book smacks of the problem with the community as a whole. You simply think that your view is the only valid one.

    Pretending gnome doesn’t have its problems and the fact that upstream devs want to take it in a different direction than the owner (and funder) of ubuntu is not simply an irrelevance that can be casually dismissed.

    Where is your braying against the Gnome devs for sticking with the past?

    Like

    Reply
  5. Virgil Brummond Avatar
    Virgil Brummond

    Oh please. Unity is looking better by the day, and is something perhaps my grandma can use without me worrying she destroyed the Gnome Panel. Canonical focuses on consistency with a lot of things, which is excellent. Not only that, Gnome is still available for people uninterested in Unity.

    I am about as sick of hearing about Arch and Mint as Arch and Mint people are sick of hearing about Ubuntu. It R E A L L Y doesn’t matter what OS you choose. It is all free software.

    Like

    Reply
  6. Deshapria Avatar
    Deshapria

    Well, I think Unity is going to be a good DE. I tried Ubuntu 11.04, which is still in alpha, and it broke many times. Then I downloaded Unity to another Ubuntu fork and that works beautifully.

    First of all, this is free software, so you can change it if you want, and if you don’t like something, you can delete it, or the whole OS. No one stops you from hopping from one OS to another. This is NOT MS Windows or Mac Os.

    I thank Mark Shuttleworth for his involvement and giving us Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Lubuntu and array of Ubuntu forks. Mint couldn’t com ethis way, if Ubuntu was not there for them to fork it. Whatever the fork, it is Ubuntu!

    They have to change with any changes of Ubuntu, otherwise they won’t be in the scene. Or, they’d have to build a new OS all by themselves.

    So, shall we say thank you to Mark, and let him do something for the Open Source community? He too has the “freedom” to choose, as we do, am I right?

    Like

    Reply
  7. Theo Stauffe Avatar
    Theo Stauffe

    Switched over to Linux Mint yesterday, first the Gnome edition as Mint has announced it won’t be using Unity and possibly the Debian edition in future. I am a Mac user in my day job and have a big Mac tower at home, and I am tired of Canonical/Ubuntu’s attempts to ape the Mac UI, and this after years of aping the Windows UI. It has only made the UI more cluttered and less usable.

    Ubuntu’s biggest strengths are in fact not its UI but its use of social media to get many thousands of wannabe UI designers to swarm to its forums and thereby beef up the popularity stats.

    That’s fine unless you actually want to do some real work in Linux in between having to chat with the same people you avoid elsewhere on the net.

    Ubuntu is becoming a distro for people who can’t afford iPhones or Android phones.

    Like

    Reply
  8. abanglek Avatar
    abanglek

    this writer is nut. of course you have choice whatever you prefer. i’m not telling you’re crazy if you eat with fork & spoon or using bare hand or even bare foot, it’s your choice. you’re also not intended to dispute others decision.

    you can always using ubuntu & still using gnome, compiz or whatever wm you want. or simply build it from scratch.

    sometime i feel shame with the linux community, of course you all can arguing, but please behave yourself. plese make good critism.

    when me myself still using ubuntu + gnome, i feel unity give something new & modern & comparable to osx -not winxp. i know you can always mix & match every piece of tools, but in the end it’s look alike ubuntu (eg: gnome+globalmenu+whatever dock). i don’t think canonical have other agenda but they have target -new migrated (from pirated winxp maybe). even one of their focus is helping 3rd country developing computing facility. they do as easy ui as they can. of course unity are new, but just last few month, they getting quite good. of course they should give extended customization, people not always love to eat porridge, they want to chew meat.

    just like iphone, they are criticized, but if they not exist, there is no android & you’re stuck either symbian or >$1000 2.6?/2.8? wm phone. whatever you say, iphone stabilize (or dropping) smartphone price.

    just like puppy linux, ubuntu is the one who dare to create new idea, rather than stuck with traditional way. i hope later other distro will follow, creating their original ui not rather forking other distro. not being really good is okay, you’ll be better over time, but not play safe.

    whatever you say, ubuntu makes linux scene much better & alive. before ubuntu, only rebel student (dual-boot with pirate windows) & virus maker using linux (other than cheapskate company that using sun or red hat)

    Like

    Reply
  9. zahir adil Avatar
    zahir adil

    No Linux OS company by itself, is large enough to make any sort of dent in the desktop OS market. The only way that people will take Linux desktop seriously is when the various companies agree on Desktop GUI standards and adhere to them. Canonical’s decision to break from the GNOME mainstream is not wise, in my opinion.

    I have tried to like Unity, but its just too clunky an interface. While classic GNOME menu’s require 2 clicks to find an application, Unity takes 4, and makes you read while you are doing it (show 7 more..), taking more time. It just gets in the way! The GNOME menu editor no longer effects the Unity menus. Customization is gone. I liked my GNOME menu bar on the left, which, btw, gave me more vertical space than Unity does. The Mac style menus are something I have disliked, even on the Mac’s. I think that menus attached to a window, makes for lesser mouse movement, and the menus relevance is not a continually changing thing. The menu bar, the launch bar are all forced on the user in the locations and sizes that Canonical chose to make them! The better way to save vertical space would be to integrate the menus into the title bar of a window. The title is usually so small that a lot of space is available to the right…or wherever.

    Linux at this time, is used only by computer professionals for the most part. My wife uses it only because she does not know how to boot into Windows! It does not make sense for a company to try and cater to the non-computer-professional user, when the doorway into that market is essentially non-existent for desktop Linux so far.

    I continue to use Ubuntu for now, but will soon look to Linux Mint Debian Edition or Suse as a replacement if Canonical continues its divergence from the mainstream.

    Like

    Reply
  10. Ze Ferrari Avatar
    Ze Ferrari

    As an ex-Ubuntu user, I just can be grateful for the amazing job they have done so far…

    But as you described very well in your article, this change (at least for me) was a deal breaker (even though, I wish all the best for them).

    Fortunately, I didn’t have to do a big search,
    The answer for my problem was pretty simple: LMDE

    Like

    Reply
  11. prawns Avatar
    prawns

    PRO UNITY
    We all know how most of Sony’s greedy impositions ended up, so I’d like to believe that it was not the case with Canonical. Nevertheless, they had a right to develop their own GUI, even make it default to encourage users to Unity. Yes, it’s a shame that Ubuntu 11.04 is equipped with Gnome 2.x and not Gnome3, but nevertheless, in this aspect I disagree with the review.

    AGAINST UNITY
    If it’s true that the overall concept and experience of Unity is notebook-like then I fully agree with the review – that is a tactical mistake that can cost Ubuntu it’s popularity. In this respect the review sounds right to me.

    FUTURE OF CANONICAL
    The more popular an OS is, the greater chances for closed-software giants to give a damn about it’s users. And I think giant’s play fools by prettending to perceive each distro as a complately separate OS. So if Unity makes Ubuntu less popular, then I think it won’t be very good for the entire Linux community.

    Like

    Reply
  12. Dave Avatar
    Dave

    I’m a Linux user. My son in a distant town, told me I’d be proud of him. He was switching from Windows to Ubuntu. He was fed up with the hassles he had experienced. He got a repair shop to install Linux. They chose Ubuntu. I tried to ascertain which version, but he couldn’t tell me.

    I got busy, downloaded several recent versions of Ubuntu to run “live” so I could help him if he had questions. I got pretty frustrated with Ubuntu. I told my son I thought he could do better on something besides Ubuntu so I tried Kubuntu to see if I could recommend it. I’d used it before, and liked it. I tried the newest Kubuntu, but found so many bugs, I couldn’t recommend it to him. I’ve been using Mint and Zorin for the last year or more, and am very pleased with them. They’re rock solid, and provide everything I need. Zorin is my laptop choice, and Mint 9 for one desktop, and Mint 11 for my newer desktop.

    I put Mint 11 to task recently, downloaded many of my favourite programs from the repositories, and got down to work. I’ve build a web site with Mint 11, done vector graphics work, tailored images with GIMP for the web, and set up e-mail accounts in Thunderbird (with Lightning) to help maintain the web site. I’ve not found a single flaw with any program, or the OS.

    My point? I don’t want to be a guinea pig for Canonical. I want a desktop OS that works, works well, and that I can count on, day after day. I don’t need to stay on top of the latest developments, have the newest, latest and greatest devices, or be the bleeding edge techie. I just need my older (rebuilt from spare parts) machines to work. Canonical may need marketing strategies, and Unity might be their vehicle. Marketing is hype. I’m pretty well immune to so many marketing tactics. Just give me a product that works. My money is better in my pocket than in some computer manufacturer’s. I won’t be buying the equipment I might need to be able to run Unity.

    In the review on Unity, I believe the author sees right through Canonical’s reasons for believing Unity is the future, and I think his assessment is correct. Canonical is competing with MS and Apple in some ways, if only for prestige.

    And don’t ask me what I think of Google……….

    Like

    Reply
  13. Carlos Avatar
    Carlos

    Almost one year later, the author can be proud to have made one of the best forecasts of the software world.

    The last three years, I have been using and installing Ubuntu to anyone who showed cronic problems with windows. I would not do it any more, and the reason it’s Unity.

    Ubuntu was magic because it was -by far- the best and easiest install&use distro. Newcomers would be amazed at how fast and easy was to install it, and how many useful apps they could -intuitively- use. After that first “it’s easy!” moment, then the second surprise was that there was a looooot, to grow into the OS. How much fun it was to do small improvements, and get it better and better.

    Current Unity does not create an “it’s easy” moment. It creates an “It’s limited” moment. The user does not grow in the OS now, because the amount of things that you cannot do, are bigger than the ones that you can do. Unity downsizes its user and puts itself in the way at every moment. I don’t mean the bar; I mean the whole computer use. Doing actual work -any work- has become a joke. Something as simple as having two folders open, moving things from one to another, do an edition in one software, and watch the result in the other has become unmanagable. Ubuntu has downsized itself from a full Operating System to an internet-browser… For me and everyone I know, Unity has been a deal breaker. I left for Debian, and others have left for windows 7 and Mac – and LMint-. I will always be grateful to Ubuntu for opening a door to the basic user; now, I will wish them luck, but parting ways. Good luck with Unity, Ubuntu Shop, and paid account in Ubuntu One…

    Like

    Reply
  14. Xander Bilmonchuk Avatar
    Xander Bilmonchuk

    Can I just suggest that the only rational explanation for how horrible Unity and Gnome 3 are is that Microsoft or other terrified proprietary competitors have planted moles on the dev team to destroy this once awesome interface and cause the slow death and abandonment of Ubuntu. Nothing less could explain this unspeakably horrible trainwreck of an “upgrade” to such a previously awesome system. I am being completely serious here- nothing this unbelievably horrible has a benign origin- this is enemy action.

    Like

    Reply
  15. GUIMaster Avatar
    GUIMaster

    Sir, you are a prophet indeed! Had you written this article today it couldn’t be more accurate than it was in 2010 when you wrote it.

    I’m using Linux Mint right now, but it’s not the same feeling I got from Ubuntu. I used to promise myself that I was going to stick with the LTS version of Ubuntu. But I would see all the pretty upgrades to the top panel and the Software Center, that I couldn’t help but to upgrade every 6 months. I was excited about Ubuntu, believing that they cared about the end user’s experience. I was excited because every release seemed to be an improvement upon the last.

    Well, I used Unity for quite some time. I liked it at first. But I began to wonder how much time I was spending dragging my mouse cursor to the left side of the screen to click, in order to switch between applications. I began to wonder how much easier it would be to have my open applications listed on the bottom panel. I began to wonder why it had to be so dang difficult to find applications that I wanted to find, and all of the junk I had to scroll past in order to find what I wanted.

    I wonder if I will ever get excited about Linux again like I used to be with Ubuntu?

    Like

    Reply
  16. Richard Avatar
    Richard

    I have now been using Unity pretty much everyday since Oneric came out and I must admit I have started to like it much better than I first did. Is it perfect …far from it but it’s has a damn side better feel than any GNOME3 distro I have tried.

    Now I have tried using KDE and GNOME3 but I cannot stand either for more than one session here and there. GNOME3 just feels so wrong there is no rhythym to the flow of using it. You end up moving your mouse pointer 500 hundred miles top achieve something that is much simpler on Unity.

    Personally GNOME2 had the desktop nailed but all the current desktop enviroments at lack that something special feel that GNOME2 had. Maybe it will come back but all 3 Linux GUI are light years ahead of Win7 still.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment