An excellent overview of the perceived issues. Basically: the launcher items are fancy bookmarks which my browser already has. These are supposed to be Web *apps* not web *bookmarks*.
It is primarily the launcher behavior, yes. But you can't ignore that these apps open like any other webpage (making them just another site that I can happen to control elsewhere), and that by not being chromeless, they will never really be a first-class citizen to Ubuntu, but a first-class citizen to Firefox. WRT coding, I'm not too good at it myself. Again, don't get me wrong, I love the work being done, but the UX needs improvement. (As well Reddit always makes my messaging menu light up. As soon as I figure out why, will report a bug.) On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Yann Brelière <yannbreli...@gmail.com>wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Alex Launi <alex.la...@canonical.com>wrote: > >> >> On Jan 10, 2013, at 10:26 AM, Yann Brelière <yannbreli...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Like Jonathan said, I think Jeremy Bicha's suggestions were good: I like >> the idea of having additional integration for my mails, music, etc. But I >> don't want to clutter my launcher just because I have a tab open. >> >> >> Why not? What about the icon at the bottom of your launcher bothers you? >> Do you think that your opinion is a reflection of the general case? I'm >> curious, because never has a launcher icon caused me a second thought. >> >> > I think there are several things. > * The fact that they don't behave like other launcher icons (discussed > bellow) : they can't be pinned/unpinned, when clicked, they open something > from another launcher item, so they don't have the little 'pip' on the > right to tell me it's launched... > It's the same problem as the trash and usb drive icons that launch a new > window from the "home folder" launcher item instead of launching an > independent window, so they don't appear like running. > See also these bugs about bad launcher behavior for these: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/753938, > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/713423, > https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/692444. > * Maybe also the fact that I don't feel like I'm using an app if I visit a > page versus opening it from the dash (see bellow also). > * And I like organizing my launcher, so an icon that appears down there > catches my attention for no reason. I don't know if it's a reflection of > the general case, but Jeremy, mpt and Jonathan seem to agree that these > launcher items are perceived as clutter. > > >> Designers (hopefully) reading this thread, what has testing revealed >> here? Are people generally territorial over their launchers? >> >> >> Visiting a page shouldn't open a launcher item, but opening it from the >> launcher explicitly could launch an independent chrome-less browser window. >> There might be other suggestions for integration with the launcher, but >> currently, it's painful. >> >> >> How do you propose getting that icon on the launcher in the first place >> if it doesn't appear when you open a tab? There seems to be a bit of a >> chicken-egg problem here, or could you elaborate on how you see this >> behavior working. >> >> > I feel that installing a webapp should be like installing an app (except > that I can install it from my browser). Once installed, I should be able to > launch it from the dash, which would open a new window, so the launcher > item actually represents a real window, not a sub-part of another launcher > item. Clicking the launcher item (if it's pinned or already open) would > launch the window (or open it if it's not already), not switch to a tab of > an unrelated launcher item (my browser). > So they would be really independent. I can benefit from integration > (notifications, soundmenu, etc) by just visiting the tab, but if I want it > in my launcher, it should be an independent action that opens an > independent app. > > >> >> If I could add/remove a launcher for GMail (currently, removing the >> launcher icon closes the tab, it's very frustrating), it would be great. >> But now, it's all or nothing. I can't have GMail's dektop notifications >> without having the launcher icon always visible. I can't get notifications >> and soundmenu integration for Grooveshark without having an icon popping in >> the launcher each time I open it. >> >> >> This is a good bug, thank you. >> >> >> I pin my GMail, G+, calendar, etc as app tabs in Firefox because it >> allows me to keep them open and always visible without taking too much >> space in the tabs strip. So even though I would love better desktop >> integration for these, I don't use it, as it has the opposite effect: >> taking a lot of space somewhere else. >> >> > having items bob in and out of the Launcher just because you're >> currently on a particular Web site is asinine. >> >> About the main topic of the sound menu, I agree with everything mpt said: >> if a youtube tab is open (either by mistake or because I'm watching one), >> it should be controllable and visible in the soundmenu. >> >> >> Yann >> >> >> My conclusions of your criticisms are essentially that the launcher >> behavior is where most of your complaints wrt webapps are from. you want >> the other integration points, but you feel a territorialism over launcher >> real estate. You feel as though maybe we're invoking imminent domain on >> you. This seems like an easy fix. Do you code? >> >> > Yes, but I'm a web developer, and I code in Perl and I know a bit of > python. If it's C or C++, it's out of my area... And I would have to learn > bzr and anything else needed. > > > Thanks, > > Yann Brelière > >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Alex Launi <alex.la...@canonical.com>wrote: >> >>> Well do you have any good suggestions for how to fix the issues you've >>> encountered? Or any good design suggestions to make it a bit less of a >>> mess? What about with regard to the topic of this thread, any interesting >>> ideas for fitting into the sound menu more scalably? >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> On Jan 9, 2013, at 3:19 PM, Jonathan Meek <shrouded.cl...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> A bit late, but I would like to add my own thoughts to this: I >>> absolutely agree with Mr. Bicha about web-apps in 12.10 (having finally >>> downloaded it to test the new toolkit). They are a bit of a mess. And I, as >>> a seasoned user, find their launcher behavior almost indecipherable given >>> the context. Am I just visiting a fancy browser window or am I actually >>> using something that is supposed to be its own thing? And getting them to >>> install was a hassle and no feedback for when it didn't work... Tried to >>> install GMail three times before it worked with no feedback as to why it >>> failed the previous times. And plus one to the completely chromeless >>> argument. >>> >>> Pandora just suddenly showed in my sound menu unexpectedly as well. I >>> guess I'm mostly trying to say what Jeremy said: a good start but far from >>> perfect. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Jeremy Bicha <jbi...@ubuntu.com>wrote: >>> >>>> On 13 December 2012 09:57, Alex Launi <alex.la...@canonical.com> wrote: >>>> > Like any software, webapps will always be incomplete. The >>>> implementation >>>> > of the integration was not poor (at least I don't like to think so), >>>> but >>>> > there were features that got de-scoped for 12.10. Chromeless browsing >>>> in >>>> > Firefox was one item. There is a chromeless mode for Chromium, it >>>> exists >>>> > in 12.10. Chromeless mode does not, however, prevent you from having >>>> > multiple tabs. You could have 10 instances of Facebook, or YouTube in >>>> > one of these chromeless browser windows. Chromeless mode is accessed >>>> > when you have a launcher icon and launch a new instance of a webapp >>>> from >>>> > it. Integration should always work from the browser though, how else >>>> > would you find that a webapp exists? >>>> >>>> I think that Firefox or Chromium should prompt for installing webapps >>>> like it does. >>>> >>>> Without chromeless mode, I (as a user) see webapps as being just fancy >>>> bookmarks that may also have notification or indicator support. I >>>> think chromeless mode *should* prevent you from opening multiple tabs >>>> because a standalone webapp is not a full-featured web browser (that's >>>> just the backend, an implementation detail). Links to external domains >>>> (not white-listed in the particular webapp config) should open in your >>>> regular web browser because a webapp should act like a native app as >>>> much as possible. >>>> >>>> For me, proper chromeless mode is an essential part of webapps so >>>> that's why I was disappointed with 12.10's implementation (I don't >>>> mean to hurt the feelings of those who spent months working on the >>>> feature; I expected that that feature would instead land in 13.04). >>>> >>>> Jeremy >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-design >>>> Post to : unity-design@lists.launchpad.net >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-design >>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-design >>> Post to : unity-design@lists.launchpad.net >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-design >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-design >>> Post to : unity-design@lists.launchpad.net >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-design >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>> >>> >> >> >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-design Post to : unity-design@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-design More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
