Ubuntu needs a Directory Server. This is an important feature for enterprises.

Consider iron-cladding older distributions for longer time periods.

Version 8.04 support should be extended until 2014.

Two key points:

1. Amateurs, Hobbiest’ and students will fantasize about the latest distribution
2. Professionals, Artisans and craftsman retain the same old tools; discipline

‘explicit, concrete examples of actual corporations actually using Linux on the Corporate Desktop’:
French parliament since 2007 1000+ ubuntu desktops

Perhaps the store should also host compatible products and options that haven’t been certified. Those could be placed less prominently, and perhaps with a warning saying that they should be compatible, but have not undergone Canonical’s thorough tests and that they are more likely to develop problems in the future than certified products.

As far as placing stuff in the USC, putting physical products in a software store may be a little confusing, not to mention that they will be using different infrastructure.

“Your point about change being detrimental to large deployments is certainly valid.”

It is also true for small deployments, but small deployments are good for testing. I do couple of installations 11.04 to prepare for future support. I HAVE to know user problems when they are transitioning from different UI. I’ve already done observations from users.

“That’s one of the reasons we took the plunge on several major changes in 11.04 – it gives us two whole cycles to refine them and get them right for 12.04 LTS.”

It is probably good idea to label those six month cycle releases something like “bleeding edge”, “experimental”, “developer release” or “preview”. I’m worried about Ubuntu’s reputation because those live wildly and YES, it causes problems to those have not been told that this is very bleeding edge technology. IT professionals understands Ubuntu releases but not the rest of the world. This is the reason why Fedora is different brand than Red Hat Enterprise and why there is “Solaris Express” or “openSuse”. I understand that Ubuntu project needs feedback from new releases but people are mixing LTS and sixmonth cycles and this is very harmful.

“We are pretty focused on scientific evidence-based design, which includes hard comparisons of real experiences by real users with common task goals.”

My own experience from Unity:

* Users can’t found any help button when they use Unity first time.

* I’m poweruser and four desktops is not enough. I didn’t figure out yet how to get more.

* Focusing on search is great leap forward, but I feel that “good old” hierarchy should be found fast (=directly) too like before.. Apps, home folder and settings. Hierarchies are difficult learn but they are excellent to obtain an overall picture from system.

* Mac OS like shared menubar is great for small screen but it sucks big time on workstation with FullHD screen (It sucks Macs too on larger screens). Too long distances to move mouse, and move eyes. There should be at least switch and good default guessing based on screen resolution to use Gnome/Windows etc. like menu for big screen. Another drawback is that the menu changes on screen and unnecessary changes/animations are distraction.

Possible biggest drawback is that the open source ecosystem have many kind of user interfaces, and even own toolkits in software. This only adds to the fragmentation and this decreases usability a lot. It is practically impossible to change all software to works with shared menu, especially not all software even care about menu and menus are anyway inconvenient with touchscreen. Windows like ribbons are better. Generally speaking, it is drawback from Gnome 2.

—

So.. I REALLY like to see this as default: Keep the “dock” and search from Ubuntu logo button, change shared menu back to previous design where applications have own menus, and change top panel to traditional gnome panel (like) where you can put virtual desktops, menus hierarchies etc. Probably it’s easiest to fork old gnome panel and rip unnecessary and duplicate features of.

This gives possibility to clean up those “special buttons” from the dock to give room to apps. In future, software center may be hide to behind Ubuntu logo button search, and maybe later to use shared design or something to them. These are however bigger changes.

And yes, I do perfectly understand that there is strong focus to touchscreen and usability with smaller screens in Unity. These changes would not harm much. However, abandonment of a shared menu will use more screen space on some applications, but it is impossible to get everything. It’s best to forgot those 6″ screens for now and focus to get good UI for rest (10-60″). Maybe there can be add some switch to near similar UI like I describe which is optimized for <=11", where all apps are fullscreen with shared menu, and virtual desktops and top panel menus are removed from UI to get more room to top panel shared menu.

"The testing is relatively easy to do, take 10 people in two groups of 5, make a list of things they need to get done, and just observe how they do over an afternoon. Don’t take my word for it, try it yourself, and we’d welcome the feedback on where people get stuck and how best to smooth those blockages."

I know. I've also read thousands of pages of user interface books, US DoD UI guidelines and similar material. For usability testing, small group of people, even three users, can do a lot. It is more important to get good data out than lot of testers. It is good to have different personalities (DISC assesment) for testing, and of course user interface specialists to say what is and why and how wrong if they notice something (and interpret test results). One cheap trick to get data is set computer to record screenshot at one second intervals and replay that as video. Eye-tracking stuff requires more investment.

Of course I have not give much attention to Unity usability problems because I'm starting company and my time is limited now. However, I'm interested to know more what is behind current Unity design decisions. I'm not all-knowing oracle how things should be so it is very possible that I'm totally wrong about this shared menu and "hidden" hierarchy.

Matti

Interesting suggestion, thanks!