[Ayatana] The Unity launcher and minimized windows
Hi, Currently the Unity launcher in Natty does not offer any way to restore minimized windows if another window from the same application is opened (the scale plugin is invoked instead, considering only non-minimized windows). I suppose this is because it's just an alpha, but what is the intended behavior in the final version? Making the scale plugin include minimized windows the same way it includes non-minimized windows, I think it's a bad idea. Minimized windows are in a different state and that should be visually shown. I'm attaching an ugly, made-in-five-seconds mockup with a suggestion: when an icon is clicked in the launcher and some windows of the app are minimized and some are not, the launcher shows the minimized ones as icons below. That way the user knows which windows will be restored and which ones will be just focused when selected. It also gives less trouble to compiz by not asking it to generate previews for minimized windows. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] The Unity launcher and minimized windows
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Conscious User wrote: > Hi, > > Currently the Unity launcher in Natty does not offer any way > to restore minimized windows if another window from the same > application is opened (the scale plugin is invoked instead, > considering only non-minimized windows). > I believe the intended behavior for now is to do what was happening last version and to show minimized windows on the spread initiate. The reason why this is taking so long is because I have long held a policy of *not* supporting this behavior since it is full of hacks and breaks many applications which are stupid about the way that they treat minimization. It's in 0.9.2 as a "workaround" because that's the way it should be IMO. > I suppose this is because it's just an alpha, but what is > the intended behavior in the final version? > > Making the scale plugin include minimized windows the same > way it includes non-minimized windows, I think it's a bad > idea. Minimized windows are in a different state and that > should be visually shown. > > I'm attaching an ugly, made-in-five-seconds mockup with a > suggestion: when an icon is clicked in the launcher and some > windows of the app are minimized and some are not, the > launcher shows the minimized ones as icons below. > > That way the user knows which windows will be restored and > which ones will be just focused when selected. > Sounds cool. Unfortunately you didn't attach anything :) > It also gives less trouble to compiz by not asking it to > generate previews for minimized windows. Too late ;-) > > > > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana > Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > -- Sam Spilsbury ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] The Unity launcher and minimized windows
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 17:41, Conscious User wrote: > > > Sounds cool. Unfortunately you didn't attach anything :) > the classic! liking the mockup! it shows that one can do a lot with the exposé view.. there was also talk about adding a visible "close" button, when "scale addons" are enabled, so that one could actually discover that feature better. a lot can be done to make the scale plugin in compiz really bring a new quality of experience to the desktop. now what about minimizing windows? i remember windows for workgroups, there was nothing like a window list, minimizing was synonymous to "iconifying" an application. somehow, people were also not so stuck with the "window" metaphor, we thought in "programs". so you could open a program, aka "run" it, then you could minimize aka iconify it back into its icon within the "program manger" or onto the desktop. pretty simple, isn't it? now, with the window list (instead of program list, which would make more sense imo), we minimize to window list or to notification area, but why? most of the times i minimized a program, i was secretly hoping for it to just disappear and hand all the display space and window list space back to me, so that i could just make it reappear magically when i needed it again, much later. It's a remember and forget type of thing: some applications should be there so you can use them here and now, others should continue running in the background. what i would have wished for back then is the behaviour that rhythmbox, banshee, empathy and iirc transmission exert nowadays: close window = hide window. Minimize should be deprecated, because it was a workaround for "hide" window", which would have been a non-reversible gesture without tools like docky or the unity launcher now, or the window list back then. Minimize is a synonym for "iconify", now list to me the situations in which you want a program main window to be iconified onto a certain part of the screen?! ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
[Ayatana] Deprecation of the "Window" Metaphor
After thinking back and forth for a while, i would like to start this topic finally, since nobody else seems to have started it yet. The deprecation of what we agree on calling the "window" metaphor. We spoke about Model-View-Controller and what that means to a normal human, i.e. using more natural metaphors than abstract technical ones to expose features to the user. In the thread about the "fileless paradigm", this was the predominant idea. Now the term window does in little way only reflect what a window actually is.. it is about as imprecise as a conceptual metaphor can be. I suggest the term got deprecated as from now, we need new ways of talking about content and its representation. "Window" is an inherited idea, which has been stalling progress in the Free evolution of software for some time now. What is a window? We all don't need to go to Wikipedia¹ to find out what a window actually is. Windows are openings, that allow light to pass through when they are closed, objects and sound also, when they are open. But windows stay where they are, they don't move, they don't disintegrate or turn into icons, and windows most certainly don't disappear when we close them. While all this can be disputed as "lacking abstraction", i would like to add that the greatest problem with "window" as a metaphor, is that the windows we speak of are not transparent. The next person who comes up with a concept of how "window" could be interpreted in a GUI fashion might want to consider implementing transparency before all other things, it is what defines a window before everything else. To remove something simply just like that is of no help usually, one should offer alternatives. For those who insist on clinging to the "window" metaphor much further, because they see no alternative to it, i offer thinking of what we now call "windows" as "frames", "drawing areas" or "canvases", perhaps "document" or "image" also describe what we talking about here. Especially the word "image" helps to point out, that some content is purely text, and the only reason why it needs a "window" to be displayed usefully, is because the system has no consistent way of displaying raw text to the user. Gedit e.g. is a text editor, and it needs a window, tool :P I have seen countless websites that would enjoy just "giving" their text to the DE, so that the user's own preferences would govern the fashion of their presentation. Especially scientific papers and instructional literature does not require having a "window", a "bgcolor" or a particular font. To sum it all up: I think we need to start deprecating the term "window" in favour of content itself and a more flexible representation of it. Web technology has long ago already revealed concepts such as "layer", "frame", "object" and "stream", "area" and "map", most notable throughout earlier html of course also "table", which are much more suitable terms for something that will eventually constrain content in a geometrical and/or temporal way. These should be the points of focus that i can suggest for the most of us to start considering, in my personal opinion that is ;) nnaji ¹ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] The Unity launcher and minimized windows
> Minimize should be deprecated, because it was a workaround for "hide" > window", which would have been a non-reversible gesture without tools > like docky or the unity launcher now, or the window list back then. > Minimize is a synonym for "iconify", now list to me the situations in > which you want a program main window to be iconified onto a certain > part of the screen?! Actually, I've been a supporter of killing minimization for years. My suggestions in this thread are more for legacy purposes, as I don't see the removal of such a taken-for-granted feature being seriously adopted any time soon. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] Deprecation of the "Window" Metaphor
On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 18:33 +0100, frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote: *not too short a text* With all these words, you don't define any single, concrete problem with windows as they are. You don't make much of a case for using another metaphor for the same thing, as there are no obvious candidates that don't already mean lots of things in varying contexts. You avoid any talk about their properties and behaviors. A call for transparency because of the name is silly. If windows wouldn't be called windows but frobknacks, suddenly transparency wouldn't be of value? You also do not define anything to gain. If you want to discuss things to discuss things, this is a great start. Now I fully expect a backlash because this mail might be seen as not nice, getting personal. Well, what is not nice and not OK from my point of view is seeing a list that should serve some purpose flooded with lots of talk that is not in any way actionable or on a path to get there ... with one sender of such mails sticking out of the mass by frequency and quantity. -- Thorsten Wilms thorwil's design for free software: http://thorwil.wordpress.com/ ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] The Unity launcher and minimized windows
Hi Conscious, On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 18:39, Conscious User wrote: > > > Minimize should be deprecated, because it was a workaround for "hide" > > window", which would have been a non-reversible gesture without tools > > like docky or the unity launcher now, or the window list back then. > > Minimize is a synonym for "iconify", now list to me the situations in > > which you want a program main window to be iconified onto a certain > > part of the screen?! > > > Actually, I've been a supporter of killing minimization for years. My > suggestions in this thread are more for legacy purposes, as I don't > see the removal of such a taken-for-granted feature being seriously > adopted any time soon. yop, there's a point in offering a transitional solution. OTOH Unity is so completely different from the classic GNOME Desktop, it wouldn't make much sense imo to transport such concepts for the sake of preserving their legacy, if we can avoid to. Especially the Compiz Scale feature is revolutionary, in that it stands totally against what iconification does: it scales content proportionally, while minimize abstracts the entire application into a single symbol. This is definitely not the place to reintroduce what we gracefully managed to leave behind, as far as my opinion counts in any way.. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] Deprecation of the "Window" Metaphor
I apologize ! On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 20:24, Thorsten Wilms wrote: > On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 18:33 +0100, frederik.nn...@gmail.com wrote: > > *not too short a text* > > With all these words, you don't define any single, concrete problem with > windows as they are. You don't make much of a case for using another > metaphor for the same thing, as there are no obvious candidates that > don't already mean lots of things in varying contexts. > > You avoid any talk about their properties and behaviors. > > A call for transparency because of the name is silly. If windows > wouldn't be called windows but frobknacks, suddenly transparency > wouldn't be of value? > > You also do not define anything to gain. > > If you want to discuss things to discuss things, this is a great start. > > > Now I fully expect a backlash because this mail might be seen as not > nice, getting personal. Well, what is not nice and not OK from my point > of view is seeing a list that should serve some purpose flooded with > lots of talk that is not in any way actionable or on a path to get > there ... with one sender of such mails sticking out of the mass by > frequency and quantity. My message was extremely vague in nature, i now realize! I didn't succeed in illustrating with words, what appears chrystal clear to me in my mind already.. If anybody cares yet to still show interest in this thread: the topic is the deprecation of the "window" metaphor, meaning the metaphor is a misleading term inherited from a concept that imo is claiming way too much importance in all of our design discussions at the moment. We keep talking about windows and how to stack, sort, tile, minimize and maximize them, but somehow it seems that we are forgetting about what really counts: Content, interaction, function, application, image and sound, last but not least: people. My hope was by discussing how one could imagine this ancient metaphor being less important, we would quickly discover much more important things to "fix" in the concepts we are discussing all over the community a.t.m. please feel free to tell me where else i'm out of line or too vague, i don't want to spam this list, which i cherish so much. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] Indicator-Network
Your mockup is very nice! I think it just needs some sort of "Disconnect" buttons... On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:29 PM, cmaglothin wrote: > I do not know whether this is the correct place to post this, but after a > couple weeks of using Natty I felt that the current indicator for networking > is rather messy. I do not mean that in a way that is harmful, and I feel > that this is probably due to the fact that it IS developing software. > Nonetheless, I took a little time to make a mockup of my own wishes for the > future of indicator-network. My mockup is attached below. Feel free to give > criticism and comments, I like feedback. > ___ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana > Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] Indicator-Network
By the way, do you know which colors will be the theme colors for Natty? Still Black-Orange-Purple and Gray-Orange-Purple? On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Phong Cao Viet wrote: > Your mockup is very nice! I think it just needs some sort of "Disconnect" > buttons... > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:29 PM, cmaglothin wrote: > >> I do not know whether this is the correct place to post this, but after a >> couple weeks of using Natty I felt that the current indicator for networking >> is rather messy. I do not mean that in a way that is harmful, and I feel >> that this is probably due to the fact that it IS developing software. >> Nonetheless, I took a little time to make a mockup of my own wishes for the >> future of indicator-network. My mockup is attached below. Feel free to give >> criticism and comments, I like feedback. >> ___ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana >> Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> > ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] Indicator-Network
My thought is that I would never want to disconnect from the internet unless I was actually trying to save battery. That's why you would use the enable/disable wifi item. And no I have no clue whether they will keep the current color scheme. On Dec 31, 2010 12:17 AM, "Phong Cao Viet" wrote: By the way, do you know which colors will be the theme colors for Natty? Still Black-Orange-Purple and Gray-Orange-Purple? On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Phong Cao Viet wrote: > > Your mockup is very ... ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
