Ubuntu's ditching Unity's global menu, returning to in-app menus

[Tom_ZeCat]

I think this is a good move. IMO Ubuntu's Unity-based interface is awkward and difficult to use. I hated it. It's why I'm using Kubuntu instead of Ubuntu. I can certainly appreciate that some people like it and that people have different tastes and work styles. It's one of the great things about Linux. There are so many distros there's bound to be one to fit your ways.

One of the biggest things I hated about the new Ubuntu was the way LibreOffice's interface worked under it. You couldn't pull down a menu with Alt+[a letter]. I use that all the time. For example, I'll hit Alt+FS to save a document. I use that because I've reassigned Ctrl+S to something else, something that's important to me. It's great to have those Alt-based commands to help you work more quickly. In some cases, I've re-assigned the Ctrl-based command to something else. In other cases there is no Ctrl-based command. It drove me nuts having that taken away in Ubuntu. There may have been some way to turn it back on, but I was loving this Ubuntu variant named Kubuntu.

I have another laptop, an Asus netbook, with Kubuntu. At first I toyed with the idea of using a different distro on it, like Mint/KDE, but I really didn't have any compelling reason to do so. I do use Puppy Linux on a bootable USB drive, but that's just a tool for repairing Windows-based machines. I probably wouldn't use Puppy as a main OS.

Excerpt:

Ubuntu's ditching Unity's global menu, returning to in-app menus
Unity's global menu was just too darned confusing.
By Ian Paul, PC World | Operating Systems, Canonical, Ubuntu

February 21, 2014, 1:57 PM — There's a major change coming to the Unity interface this April when Canonical releases Ubuntu 14.04, Trusty Tahr: Application menus are going back into their separate windows instead of existing in a global menu at the top the screen, as shown above.

The move is a return of sorts to Ubuntu's pre-Unity existence, when the Gnome desktop was Ubuntu's primary interface. This will be the first time, however, that application menus inside the window are officially a part of Unity.
[continued]
full article: http://www.itworld.com/operating-sys...ning-app-menus

[life0riley]

It was Unity that drove me to Kubuntu. I don't like it when they try to make the desktop look like a mobile phone.

[Tom_ZeCat]

It was Unity that drove me to Kubuntu. I don't like it when they try to make the desktop look like a mobile phone.

Exactly. It would be more accurate for me to say it was Unity and Windows 8 that drove me to Kubuntu. For years Windows was my main OS, going all the way back to Windows 3.1. Then about in 2008 I used Ubuntu just to create a jukebox PC, but I still did all my main computing in Windows XP and then 7. Then they released Windows 8 and I saw an OS designed to be a tablet PC OS and I went "BLECH!" Then I looked into Ubuntu and still didn't like what I saw, so I tried Kubuntu. If I get a tablet PC, I'll want a tablet OS. I don't want one on any laptop or desktop computer.

[bweinel]

If I get a tablet PC, I'll want a tablet OS. I don't want one on any laptop or desktop computer.

Well said!

cheers,
bill

[Rod J]

Couldn't agree more, my sentiments regarding Unity exactly. Unity was also the reason I switched from Ubuntu to Kubuntu. I didn't like the compulsory panel at the top and have always preferred a bottom panel (and one only). I never liked the global menu idea too ... stupid on a large desktop monitor if you ask me.

I guess if I had to I could get used to Unity but I'm very happy with Kubuntu. It's great that we Linux people have choices!

[TWPonKubuntu]

It was Unity that drove me to Kubuntu. I don't like it when they try to make the desktop look like a mobile phone.

Same here, I'm glad Kubuntu was there, otherwise I'd have tried a series of other distros, and still would have wound up on Kubuntu...

[jlittle]

<rant mode=on>Turning off menus is a good idea, and the global menu I imagine would suit some users and use cases. Where an application can turn off the menu, I always do that, and some apps like firefox support it well. But there must be an easy and easily discoverable way to get it back, like the little m button in KDE. However, it seems user interface guys hate it when users can turn off their cool innovation, or think for themselves, or maybe they fear the users will just ignore their coolness. Unity, Gnome 3, Windows 8, MS Office ribbon, are examples that leap to mind. The original global menu on Macs made sense given the limited screen size, but is silly on a HD screen.</rant>

Hooray for the KDE attitude, giving users choices is seen as a good.

Regards, John Little

[Tom_ZeCat]

<rant mode=on>Turning off menus is a good idea, and the global menu I imagine would suit some users and use cases. Where an application can turn off the menu, I always do that, and some apps like firefox support it well. But there must be an easy and easily discoverable way to get it back, like the little m button in KDE. However, it seems user interface guys hate it when users can turn off their cool innovation, or think for themselves, or maybe they fear the users will just ignore their coolness. Unity, Gnome 3, Windows 8, MS Office ribbon, are examples that leap to mind. The original global menu on Macs made sense given the limited screen size, but is silly on a HD screen.</rant>

Hooray for the KDE attitude, giving users choices is seen as a good.

Regards, John Little

Ha ha ha, it's perfectly acceptable to rant. I could rant all day about things that companies like Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, and HP do that drive me up the wall. It's why I'm loving that Linux is truly oriented toward the needs of the end user rather than the need to make a profit. One of my biggest gripes is the lack of flexibility by prescribing a one size fits all for the users, as if we were all the same. And that one size is invariably one for a novice user. If you're a power user, expect stuff to get dumbed down in ways that hinder your ability to work efficiently. Like you, I HATE Microsoft's re-design of MS Office with the ribbon. I refused to go along with it. For years I used older versions of Office until I finally switched to LibreOffice. I don't discount the possibility that the ribbon may work well for some people, mainly novices. But it slows me down. They could have designed it as optional, but they decided to just ram the thing down everyone's throats. If you use a recent version of MS Office, you're using the ribbon, end of story.

[woodsmoke]

lol
one of the supposed raisnon's for the "ribbon" was that it would make MSOffice more "universal" for use worldwide, and then the icons...have text associated with all of them...

I'll restate again, what was the experience of my lab assistant, a perspicacious young lady, for whom I supplied a lappy with Unity on it.

Since she assumed that there would be a "learning curve" as there would be with using say... a Mac, she really did not find a "problem" with it, except in that it took several "clicks" to get at an app unless it was in frequently used or she put it in the left dock.

But, yes, I agree ...although I "could see the point" of having a "scaleable interface through different platforms...I do not like Unity at all.

And I think that Tom_Ze-cat's comment is a reflection of something that a lot of the manufacturers MAY have learned, .... that "the public" does not necessarily see a need for one interface,

different machines different GUIs.
woodsmoke