
Ubuntu 11.04 will remove the notification area (systray) - kilian
http://design.canonical.com/2010/04/notification-area/
======
icefox
Fantastic, I am just sad that KDE didn't do this first. It has been known for
_years_ that the system tray as it is today is a POS. It is being abused every
way possible and causes a complete mess for users. The one I _really_ hate is
when I click the CLOSE WINDOW button and the application hides in the system
tray while still running. I am glad someone is trying to make things right.

~~~
viraptor
I never got that argument really. It can become messy. So can the desktop, or
your home directory. But do you prevent users from storing a file where they
want it because of that? Windows world went too far with any program and their
dog putting an updater, or status icon in the systray - but in Ubuntu you have
the choice of not putting new stuff there. For example, I've got an update
notifier, power, network, dropbox and volume in the notification area now. How
is this abuse? Why should I resign from having those icons there?

They've already done the experiment with removing update notifications from
the notification area (names point at the irony here). Instead we got a system
approved pop-under, 200+ people complaining in the bugreport and Mark saying
something like: That's how it's going to be, now be quiet. It was the same for
window button placement lately. And that's a reason I'm upgrading to Debian
this time instead of 10.04.

~~~
whatusername
"but do you prevent users from storing a file where they want it because of
that? "

There's some new "pad" thing that does exactly that.

~~~
stcredzero
_but do you prevent users from storing a file where they want it because of
that?_

Then again, if most people aren't that concerned with the file hierarchy, then
why foist it on them?

 _There's some new "pad" thing that does exactly that._

We'll see how this unfolds. I suspect that the UI of the iPhone OS has
conditioned people to think of files and items as being "in" an app. I suspect
that Apple will implement some way of sharing or transferring files between
apps.

------
orblivion
Isn't that a bit cocky? "We, _Ubuntu_ , the biggest most important distro out
there, are doing away with the Notification tray, so if you want our
_millions_ of users to use it, you'd better get with it." What about the other
distros? Are they going to have to follow suit after all the applications
rewrite their code? I can understand this coming from Gnome, perhaps, but
Ubuntu doesn't own Gnome. Why not have a wrapper for the notification area
that turns it into a menu, for a last resort?

~~~
tree_of_item
Ubuntu needs to be a bit cocky if they're serious about improving desktop
Linux. They won't get anywhere if they're too afraid of stepping on toes.

~~~
rdtsc
Agreed. Ubuntu is no less cocky than Apple. I see Ubuntu as the "Apple" of the
Linux world. And they have to be cocky if they want to make any breakthroughs
or any real innovations.

As another example, I have been running 10.04 beta for a while. At first I
disagreed with their choice of moving all the window controls to the left, but
now I am used it and actually like it better. I think it is more "efficient"
as it usually minimizes my mouse movement. What is the point of this rambling?
Ubuntu did something they thought was right, but wasn't popular initially.
Eventually many people realized it is a better design choice. Apple (and GNOME
in the Linux desktop world) have taken the same approach before. Sometimes it
backfires but often it works well.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
>I think it is more "efficient" as it usually minimizes my mouse movement.

Are you left handed? I tend to keep my cursor on the right presumably as an
extension of the desktop metaphor - reaching across to the right means a far
larger movement.

However, I can see theoretically that if you have your application launch
button ("Start", "K" or what have you) on the left that you'd want to push
other things that way. However I'd rather move the "pin" and "menu" buttons to
the R of the menu bar.

I trust if KDE ever went that way they'd make it an option.

~~~
rdtsc
> Are you left handed?

No. The reason it is more efficient is because the mouse pointer usually
hovers more around the left and upper edges of the windows. That is where all
the most frequent menus live are and most often used toolbar buttons. You can
think of it as the logical origin of the window. For example the 'File->Save
As..." menu, the "File->Close" menu, the "Back & Home" buttons on the browser
and so on.

It would be an interesting HCI project to run a background statistics gatherer
that would record mouse coordinates relative the window in focus.

The only time I usually move the mouse to right is to scroll (but I personally
use the mouse wheel for scrolling) and resize the window. But most of the time
it hovers on the left side.

Also, just because you hold the mouse in the right hand doesn't say anything
where the cursor is on the screen. You would have to consider where the cursor
already is when you want to close/minimize/maximize the window and how far you
would have to "travel" with it.

Another 2 things to consider:

1) Mouse travel might seem like a very small change, but the action of closing
a window is very frequent. So a small change multiplied many times can add to
quite a bit.

2) This ends up working even better for laptops since a trackpad already
offers a fairly small working surface compared to the surface available for a
desktop mouse. The shorter the distance the cursor moves, the less trackpad
"strokes" one has to perform.

EDIT: formatting & syntax

~~~
pbhjpbhj
>It would be an interesting HCI project to run a background statistics
gatherer that would record mouse coordinates relative the window in focus.

It would indeed.

My mouse cursor definitely lives at teh right about 2/10 in from the right
screen edge.

I do use shortcuts to access menus (as well as mouse, I'm fickle) but would
see your comments as reasons to invert the menubar menu order and arrange them
from the right rather than reason to move other stuff left.

But I'm probably an anomaly. In MS Windows (which I rarely use) my Vista
install has the taskbar [vertically] on the right.

HN's reply button often annoys me because it is left aligned whilst as I'm a
L-R text reader the proper position to me would be the right as on completion
that is where my gaze falls.

KDE dialogs usually have Cancel/OK on right and help and other auxiliaries on
the left. For example the systemsettings dialog has "apply" on the right,
which inline with my above thinking seems the correct position.

Physical mouse travel for someone with all left-aligned action buttons could
still be greater than someone using a "fast" mouse with action inputs spread
across the screen.

------
Qz
What I don't understand is why control of window behavior, including
hiding/minimizing, is up to the programmer and not the user. Goes for every
OS/shell I've seen so far.

~~~
sandGorgon
upvoted. This is a very valid question - the system tray imho is just a
moniker for a 16x16 icon. I would want the ability to either minimize any app
to a normal toolbar or dock to a system tray.

~~~
vlisivka
> I would want the ability to either minimize any app to a normal toolbar or
> dock to a system tray.

Use alltray: [quote] Dock any application in the tray

With AllTray you can dock any application without a native tray icon into the
system tray. It works well with GNOME, KDE, XFCE 4, Fluxbox, and WindowMaker.
[/quote]

PS.

I prefer to use switch-or-exec plugin in Sawfish at hot-key: I will press
hotkey, Sawfish will switch to application desktop area and then bring
application window. If application is not running, then Sawfish will run it.
Configuration is very simple: regexp for window title or window properties to
find application window and command line to execute when application window is
not found.

For example, I can press "Alt-Shift-e" to switch to editor window to enter few
notes. If editor is not found, then new editor will be run. When I will
finish, I will press "Alt-Shift-b" to switch back to browser, "A-S-m" for
mail, "A-S-i" for IDE, "A-S-t" for terminal, and so on.

~~~
Qz
"Configuration is very _simple_ : _regexp_ for..."

I did a double take right there.

------
aphyr
Coming from a long history of Debian and black/fluxbox, I've always
appreciated Ubuntu for their package selection and default hardware setup.
They've hooked up a lot of stuff I hate managing by hand (like printing and
video drivers) automatically. I still run openbox on it, though, which happily
insulates me from Shuttleworth's reinvention of the stock UI.

Watching the debate over new window control placement and removing the systray
reminds me it's nice to be a little off the beaten path. :)

------
donaq
Oy, but I _like_ being able to minimize my rhythmbox, tweetdeck and pidgin to
the notification area. :(

I'll suspend judgement till I actually use whatever they come up with though.

~~~
icefox
How about being able to minimize ANY application and dragging it to the system
tray. This way you wont have to wait for each app to implement this, reduce
code bloat, and the rest of us wont have to wonder:

    
    
      * Why isn't this app in the taskbar?
    
      * What does close window do for this app?
    
      * What does minimize do for this app?
    
      * What does file quit do?

~~~
kam
I implemented something very similar (albeit slightly less slick) for the
GNOME panel. It works nicely.

<http://blog.kevinmehall.net/2010/bringing_pin_tab_to_wnck>

~~~
iamdave
This is literally my first time hearing about pin tab in chrome. Behind the
curve entirely. Thank you.

------
usaar333
I find it interesting how Ubuntu is modifying the actual GUI, when I would
have thought such a task would fall to the GNOME developers.

As a kubuntu user, I've always hoped I'm getting a vanilla KDE with ubuntu's
packaging; I want all KDE programs to work out of the box. Is KDE similarly
altered by canonical? This move seems like it can only further fragment Linux.

~~~
bobbyi
If they weren't putting changes and policies in place to make the software
more consistent and friendly, then wouldn't Ubuntu just be Debian unstable
with a different logo and release schedule?

~~~
madair
You've got some big assumptions of agreement there with the whole consistent
and friendly thing there.

------
huhtenberg
This decision is the perfect illustration of why Ubuntu has a very long way to
go before becoming a true _user-friendly_ operating system. You just cannot
remove the feature this way. You just can't. This forces dramatically new user
experience down every user's throat. Honestly, how many people do you think
will like being treated this way?

If you want to remove the feature, deprecate it. Turn it off in all new
installs, leave it as is in all upgrades, and optionally notify the user about
the deprecation.

------
scorpioxy
I agree that we need to change the current UI paradigms. I am not a fan of "if
its not broken, don't fix it".

However, I've written a small applet that uses notifications and I don't quite
understand how things will change when what he describes happens. I have not
upgraded it because the notification mechanism in karmic sucks.(I will update
the code when I finally install Lucid)

Does anybody know? Will applets disappear completely?

------
jsz0
I can't really wrap my mind around the idea that adding more menus, probably
multiple hierarchies of menus, is a better solution here. I wish they had
included a mock-up because I can't really visualize how this would work. Are
people going to dig into menus to find stuff? It seems like both Windows & OSX
are moving towards less menu digging -- not more.

------
madair
Some many reasons have built up over the years for the educated user to _not_
use Ubuntu:

\-- The pulse audio fiasco

\-- The network manager that couldn't manage anything but vanilla networks (I
hear that's changed now, but I'm not about to sacrifice any more nights of my
life to Ubuntu for finding out)

\-- Massive and arbitrary changes to the windowing buttons without so much as
a nod to keeping the _actual_ community involved

\-- Brown, then purple

\-- Core application that deletes your whole drive if you don't supply
parameters. Now that's pretty bad...but the clincher is that when questioned
about it, the _senior Ubuntu developer_ gave us a most excellent entry to add
to the encyclopedia of bad ideas

\-- And now, no system tray, "we don't like it so we throw it out" haha

I have a feeling the revolution will _not_ be Ubuntu-ized.

~~~
daleharvey
this reeks of armchair commentary,

ubuntus network manager has been first class for ~2 years, I have less
problems on ubuntu that I do with my mac in regards to broadband dongles, its
audio has also been long fixed

the aesthetic changes (purple to brown) are a large improvement that everyone
asked for, the window buttons really dont matter that much (and they can be
moved back)

the core application was very much a niche issue for those messing around
inside a bootloader, its not like opening notepad ran rm -rf /

and as for the system tray, im not particularly fussed either way, but I am
glad that someone is worrying and doing something about ui issues instead of
sticking to the status quo

~~~
sesqu
The most annoying feature of GNOME Ubuntu for me, after the look&feel, is the
managers.

I use a LAN; I don't want a network manager. I use a desktop; I don't want a
power manager. I have speakers; I don't want a sound manager.

If there's a way to hide them, it's not simple. You can't just uninstall them,
because they've taken over the duties of actually managing the resources as
well, in addition to just showing me information I don't want.

------
rlpb
I understand the need to upset people by forcing change in order to make
improvements in the long run. However, I will still list my annoyances,
although I'm prepared to reserve final judgement for now.

I'm forever getting mixed up between the status menu and the messaging menu.
The only thing I really use them for is Empathy, which now seems to be split
between two menus. And to bring up the contact list it now takes two clicks
(or more often three because I clicked the wrong menu) instead of one.

I don't like to just minimize Empathy or Rhythmbox since that gets in the way
of my "working set". As a programmer working on distributed systems I often
have perhaps up to a dozen windows in a workspace in each of eight workspaces.
"System" stuff gets in the way of my window management. I'd like this stuff to
be somewhere distinctly different.

> No competent designer, sitting down to design an operating system from
> scratch, would say to themselves “I know, let’s have two completely
> inconsistent ways to hide windows”.

I disagree with this. I _want_ two different ways, because they have two
different purposes. One is my for the working set: stuff that I'm doing. The
other is for stuff that's always there, like a new email notification, an IM
contact list, background music and the clock. I don't see a problem here.

I think that a notification bubble worked just fine for notifications. You'd
have the icon pointed out to you, and then it would be there in the background
using minimal space until you attended to it. That's about as unobtrusive as
it gets. Grabbing clicks has never been a problem for me, but not being able
to see under it has. I'd prefer to be able to close the notification bubble
rather than being forced to wait; being able to click through is pointless if
I can't properly see through.

Instead I now have an annoying popup telling me that I should update appearing
in a separate window that I have to close only for it to pop up again. I
understand that this is intended to be improved, but at the moment it seems to
keep demanding attention and interrupting me and then it forces me to wait
while it loads.

I suppose that the problem is that as an experienced user I know what the
notification icon for "updates available" meant and I want it to stay there as
a reminder. However, I only want to be interrupted once. At the moment (on
Karmic) I get interrupted repeatedly and the only way to stop this is to
remove the notification entirely.

I agree that the UI should be consistent. I would prefer if any suitable
application had the capability to either minimize to the system tray or to the
task bar based on a user setting with a sensible default. The close button
should always close it (or if not, the behaviour should still be consistent
across all applications).

I understand that some of my complaints are intended to be addressed already,
so I look forward to my experience getting a little better, at least. I thank
Matthew for the blog post - at least I know that these things are being worked
on.

~~~
daleharvey
> No competent designer, sitting down to design an operating system from
> scratch, would say to themselves “I know, let’s have two completely
> inconsistent ways to hide windows”.

heh, this quote reminds me of one of the most fustrating things about osx,
theres like 4 ways to hide a windows

1\. minimise to dock 2\. "close" but dont quit 3\. hide 4\. quit

I think I might be missing one as well, and they all work completely
differently when you want to being the windows back.

~~~
windsurfer
You can also "roll up" a window, IIRC.

