Jump to content

Unity (user interface)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ICanAlwaysChangeThisLater (talk | contribs) at 00:07, 16 June 2011 (→‎Reception: Fixing a few typos, and improving flow.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Initial releaseJune 9, 2010; 14 years ago (2010-06-09)[1]
Stable release
3.8.14 / May 26, 2011; 13 years ago (2011-05-26)[1]
Preview release
3.8.14
Repository
Written inVala, C++[2], QML
Operating systemLinux
PlatformPersonal Computer, Netbook
Available inMultilanguage
TypeShell
LicenseGNU GPL v3, GNU LGPL v3
Websiteunity.ubuntu.com

Unity is a shell interface for the GNOME desktop environment developed by Canonical Ltd for its Ubuntu operating system. Unity debuted in the netbook edition of Ubuntu 10.10. It is designed to make more efficient use of space given the limited screen size of netbooks, including, for example, a vertical application switcher[3] called the launcher.[4] Unlike GNOME, KDE Software Compilation, or Xfce, Unity is not a collection of applications but designed to be used with existing GTK+ programs.[5]

Unity is part of the Ayatana project, an initiative to improve the user experience within Ubuntu. In addition to Unity, there are Application Indicators and other projects such as MeMenu, the notification system and the application NotifyOSD gathered.

Development

Ubuntu has traditionally used the full GNOME desktop environment; founder Mark Shuttleworth cited philosophical differences with the GNOME team over the user experience to explain why Ubuntu would use Unity as the default desktop instead of GNOME Shell, beginning April 2011, with Ubuntu Natty Narwhal (11.04).[5]

In November 2010 Ubuntu Community Manager Jono Bacon explained that Ubuntu will continue to ship the GNOME stack, GNOME applications, and optimize Ubuntu for GNOME. The only difference, he wrote, would be that Unity is a different shell for GNOME.[6]

Canonical announced it had engineered Unity for desktop computers as well and is making Unity the default shell for Ubuntu in version 11.04.[7]

GNOME Shell is not included in Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal, because work on it was not completed at the time 11.04 was frozen, but it will be available from a PPA,[8] and is expected to be in Ubuntu 11.10.[9]

In November 2010, Mark Shuttleworth announced the intention to eventually run Unity on Wayland instead of the currently-used X window system.[10]

In December 2010 some users requested that the Unity launcher (or dock) be movable from the left to other sides of the screen, but Mark Shuttleworth stated in reply, “I'm afraid that won't work with our broader design goals, so we won't implement that. We want the launcher always close to the Ubuntu button.”[11]

The Unity shell interface is now written in a toolkit called Nux instead of Clutter[12] and a plugin of the Compiz window manager,[13] which Canonical states is faster than Mutter,[14] the window manager for which GNOME Shell is a plugin.

On 14 January 2011 Canonical also released a technical preview of a “2D” version of Unity based on Qt and written in QML.[15] Unity-2D was not shipped on the Ubuntu 11.04 CD, instead the classic GNOME desktop was the fall-back for hardware that could not run Unity.[16][17]

In March 2011 there were public indications of friction between Canonical and its development of Unity and the GNOME developers. As part of Unity development Ubuntu developers had submitted API coding for inclusion in Gnome as an external dependency. According to David Neary, "an external dependency is a non-GNOME module which is a dependency of a package contained in one of the GNOME module sets" and the reasons why libappindicator was not accepted as an external dependency are that "it does not fit that definition", it has "duplicate functionality with libnotify" (the current Gnome Shell default) and its CLA does not meet current GNOME policy.[18] Mark Shuttleworth responded, "This is a critical juncture for the leadership of Gnome. I’ll state plainly that I feel the long tail of good-hearted contributors to Gnome and Gnome applications are being let down by a decision-making process that has let competitive dynamics diminish the scope of Gnome itself. Ideas that are not generated 'at the core' have to fight incredibly and unnecessarily hard to get oxygen… getting room for ideas to be explored should not feel like a frontal assault on a machine gun post. This is no way to lead a project. This is a recipe for a project that loses great people to environments that are more open to different ways of seeing the world… Embracing those other ideas and allowing them to compete happily and healthily is the only way to keep the innovation they bring inside your brand. Otherwise, you’re doomed to watching them innovate and then having to “relayout” your own efforts to keep up, badmouthing them in the process. We started this with a strong, clear statement: Unity is a shell for Gnome. Now Gnome leadership have to decide if they want the fruit of that competition to be an asset to Gnome, or not."[19][20][21]

In April 2011 Mark Shuttleworth announced that Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric Ocelot would not include the classic GNOME desktop as a fall back to Unity, unlike Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal. Instead Ubuntu 11.10 will use the Qt-based Unity 2D for users whose hardware cannot support the 3D version.[22][23]

Availability

As Unity and the supporting Ayatana projects are developed primarily for Ubuntu, Ubuntu is the first to offer new versions.

Outside of Ubuntu, other Linux distributors have tried to pick up Ayatana with varying success. The Ayatana components require other applications to be modified, which increases the complexity for adoption by others.

  • Arch Linux offers many Ayatana components, including Unity and Unity 2D[24] but as of April 2011 most were outdated versions.
  • Fedora Linux contributors have announced interest in offering Unity as part of Fedora[25] but this effort is postponed until after Fedora 15.[26]
  • Frugalware has adopted Ayatana, including Unity and Unity 2D, as part of the development branch for an upcoming Frugalware release.[27]
  • openSUSE offers many Ayatana components for GNOME.[28] Bringing Unity itself to openSUSE has been put on hold, the developers citing problems with Compiz as main reason.[29]

Unity vs. Unity 2D

Unity 2D showing the ability to run alongside different window managers and desktop environments
RAM consumption of Unity 2D

Canonical maintains two discrete versions of Unity which are almost indistinguishable from a visual standpoint but very different on the technical level.

Unity is written as a plugin for Compiz[13] and is written in the programming languages C++ and Vala and is utilizing an uncommon OpenGL toolkit called Nux. Being a plugin for Compiz gives Unity GPU-accelerated performance on compatible systems.
Unity 2D is a set of individual applications.[30] They are written in the GUI building language QML from the widespread Qt framework.[15] By default Unity 2D uses the non-compositing Metacity window manager[30] but can also use accelerated window managers like Compiz or KWin.

Since Unity 2D does not talk to a composition manager for transparency effects, some views such as the application launcher are not displayed as semi-transparent window but in full screen applying fake transparency.

Unity 2D will replace the classic GNOME desktop as the fall-back for users whose hardware cannot run Unity 3D, starting with Ubuntu 11.10.[23]

Licensing

Unity is free software released under the terms of the third versions of the GNU General Public License (GPL) and GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). Despite this, Unity is subject to Canonical's contributor agreement, requiring contributors to assign copyright to Canonical, and potentially allowing Canonical to release it under a different license.[31]

Reception

The design and deployment of Unity has been very controversial from the start and, as a result, many software reviewers have written about it, finding fault with its implementation and limitations. In spite of these, some reviewers find this project is an improvement over GNOME 2 and that there is potential for Unity to improve over time.

2010

In reviewing a very early version of Unity shortly after it was unveiled in the summer of 2010, Ryan Paul of Ars Technica noted problems figuring out how to launch additional applications that are not on the dock bar. He also mentioned a number of bugs, including a lack of means to track which applications were open, along with other minor window management difficulties. He remarked that many of these were probably due to the early stage in the development process and expected it to improve over time. Paul concluded positively, "Our test of the Unity prototype leads us to believe that the project has considerable potential and could bring a lot of value to the Ubuntu Netbook Edition. Its unique visual style melds beautifully with Ubuntu's new default theme and its underlying interaction model seems compelling and well-suited for small screens."[32]

In an extensive review of Ubuntu 10.10 shortly after its release in October 2010, Ryan Paul of Ars Technica made further observations on Unity at that time. He noted, "Unity is highly ambitious and offers a substantially different computing experience than the conventional Ubuntu desktop. Its custom panel system and unique approach to window management are tailored to the netbook form factor and designed to use space more efficiently on small, landscape-oriented screens." He commented on file handling difficulties, indicating that the Unity file selector does not provide any file management capabilities, requiring the user to open the GNOME Nautilus file manager to do normal file functions, such as copy, move, rename, or delete a file. Paul indicated that because the file selector is an overlay rather than an actual program or window it requires initialization each time it is activated, using two or three seconds to open and often noticeably lagging. He concluded "Due to these limitations, the Unity file selector is not really practical to use. It would have made more sense to omit it in this release and simply supply a Nautilus launcher instead." Paul concluded on Unity, "The [application] selectors are visually appealing, but they are easily the weakest part of the Unity user experience. The poor performance significantly detracts from their value in day-to-day use and the lack of actual file management functionality largely renders the file selector useless. The underlying concepts behind their design are good, however, and they have the potential to be much more valuable in the future as unity matures."[33]

2011

In March 2011 writer Benjamin Humphrey of OMG Ubuntu criticized the development version of Unity then being tested for Ubuntu 11.04 on a number of grounds, including a development process that is divorced from user experiences, the lack of response to user feedback, "the seemingly unbelievable lack of communication the design team has" and a user interface which he described as "cluttered and inconsistent". He noted that "design decisions for Unity are seldom made in public, and they’re only announced after due effort, time and money have gone into implementing them. When there is a backlash, decisions are rarely overturned." He also cited lack of usability in right-to-left languages, lack of differentiation between applications and preferences, inability to query the Unity version number and the use of preferences for logging out and shutting down. He found the launcher hide behavior "counter-intuitive" along with moving items on the launcher, as some are movable and some are not and it is not clear which are or why and the use of "invisible application menus". He concluded "let me stress: Unity is not all bad...While a number of the concepts in Unity may be flawed from a design point of view, the actual idea itself is not, and Canonical deserve applause for trying to jump start the stagnant open source desktop with Unity when the alternatives do not evoke confidence."[34]

On 14 April 2011 Ryan Paul of Ars Technica reviewed Unity as implemented in Ubuntu 11.04 beta, just two weeks before its stable release. At that time he reported that Unity was on track for inclusion in Natty Narwhal, despite the ambitious development schedule. He indicated, "close attention to detail shines through in many aspects of Unity. The menubar is clean and highly functional. The sidebar dock is visually appealing and has excellent default behaviors for automatic hiding." He did note that the interface still has some weak points, especially difficulties browsing for applications not on the dock, as well as switching between application categories. He singled out "random packages from the repositories, which are presented as applications that are available for installation in the launcher, are distracting and largely superfluous." Paul concluded "There is still a lot of room for improvement, but Unity is arguably a strong improvement over the conventional GNOME 2.x environment for day-to-day use. The breadth of the changes may be disorienting for some users, but most will like what they see when Unity lands on their desktop at the end of the month".[35]

On 25 April 2011, the eve of the release of Ubuntu 11.04, reviewer Matt Hartley of IT Management criticized the decision to lock Ubuntu users into Unity by making it to hard install alternative desktops, such as GNOME 3 and by not providing information that other options exist. Hartley said, "I know of many people who feel strongly that Unity is the next logical step for Ubuntu. And it's entirely possible that the Unity desktop could be well received by most people. That's something we'll have to wait and see how it turns out. From my perspective, however, I think it's not only going to be a massive disaster for the existing user base, but I'm skeptical as to the value Unity will deliver in the first place. Then again, the same could be said about the default shell provided by GNOME 3 on other Linux distros. Speaking for myself, I'll almost certainly be selecting the Xfce desktop, as I've had enough of GNOME and Canonical. The dumbing down of the Linux desktop environment is bordering on insane."[36]

In reviewing Unity on 29 April 2011 after Ubuntu 11.04's release, Ryan Paul of Ars Technica criticized Unity on the basis of how difficult it is to launch applications not on the launcher and also its lack of configurability.[37] Another reviewer assessing Ubuntu 11.04 after its release, Jim Lynch of Linux Desktop Reviews was less positive about Unity, calling it "suffocating and unnecessary"[38]

Reviewer Joey Sneddon of OMG Ubuntu was more positive about Unity in his review of Ubuntu 11.04, encouraging users, "Sure it’s different – but different doesn’t mean bad; the best thing to do is to give it a chance." He concluded that Unity on the desktop makes "better use of screen space, intuitive interface layouts and, most importantly, making a desktop that works for the user and not in spite of them".[39]

Following the release of Ubuntu 11.04 Canonical Ltd founder Mark Shuttleworth indicated that while he was generally happy with the implementation of Unity, he felt that there was room for improvement. Shuttleworth said, "I recognise there are issues, and I would not be satisfied unless we fixed many of them in 11.10...Unity was the best option for the average user upgrading or installing. There are LOTS of people for whom it isn’t the best, but we had to choose a default position...It’s by no means perfect, and it would be egotistical to suggest otherwise...I think the bulk of it has worked out fantastically – both at an engineering level (Compiz, Nux) and in the user experience."[40]

In reviewing Unity in Ubuntu 11.04 on 9 May 2011, Jesse Smith of Distrowatch criticized its lack of customization, menu handling and Unity hardware requirements, saying "there's really nothing here which should demand 3D acceleration". He also noted that "the layout doesn't translate well to large screens or multiple-screen systems".[41] Jack M. Germain of Linux Insider reviewed Unity on 11 May 2011, indicating strong dislike for it, saying, "Put me in the Hate It category" and indicating that as development has proceeded he likes it less and less.[42] In a very detailed assessment of Ubuntu 11.04 and Unity published on 12 May 2011, Ryan Paul of Ars Technica concluded Unity was a positive development for Ubuntu, but that more developer needs to be invested to make it work right. Paul particularly singled out out the application lens for comment, calling it "the single worst part of the Unity environment. In fact, it's a serious contender for the worst piece of desktop shell design since Microsoft Bob. The layout and navigational structure is completely incoherent."[43] Paul concludes, "The Unity shell in Ubuntu 11.04 paves the way for delivering a more usable Linux desktop, and there are a lot of really impressive features and great design concepts on display throughout. Nonetheless, despite its significant potential and the many ways in which it already improves upon the traditional GNOME 2.x environment, the Unity shell has a lot of rough edges that detract from the general quality of the user experience. Unity is a good step in the right direction for Ubuntu, but it's going to take at least one more cycle to really get it right. They have done some incredibly impressive work so far and have delivered a desktop that is suitable for day-to-day use, but it is still very far from fulfilling its full potential."

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Canonical Ltd (2010). "Publishing history of "unity" package in Ubuntu". Retrieved 9 December 2010. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  2. ^ Jagdish Patel, Neil (2010). "~unity-team/unity/trunk : 573". Retrieved 13 December 2010. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  3. ^ Proffitt, Brian (10 May 2010). "Ubuntu Unity Interface Tailored for Netbook Screens". ITWorld. Retrieved 28 October 2010.
  4. ^ "Welcome to Ubuntu 11.04". Ubuntu Official Documentation. Ubuntu documentation team. Retrieved 13 June 2011.
  5. ^ a b Jackson, Joab (25 October 2010). "Software / Services Oct 25, 2010 1:20 pm Canonical Ubuntu Splits From GNOME Over Design Issues". PC World Business Center. Retrieved 28 October 2010.
  6. ^ Jono Bacon (25 October 2010). "UBUNTU 11.04 TO SHIP UNITY".
  7. ^ Noyes, Katherine (26 October 2010). "Is Unity the Right Interface for Desktop Ubuntu?". PC World. Retrieved 28 October 2010.
  8. ^ "Ubuntu GNOME 3 Team". Retrieved 2 March 2011.
  9. ^ "I am an Ubuntu Unity Developer, AMA". Retrieved 12 January 2011. GNOME Shell requires certain changes to the underlying GNOME system that are slated to land too late in our cycle to integrate into 11.04. GNOME Shell will therefor be installable only from a PPA until 11.10 when the underlying libraries have stabilized.
  10. ^ Mark Shuttleworth (4 November 2010). "Unity on Wayland". The next major transition for Unity will be to deliver it on Wayland....
  11. ^ Mark Shuttleworth (30 October 2010). "Movement of Unity launcher".
  12. ^ Jay Taoko (8 December 2010). "Nux and Unity".
  13. ^ a b fluteflute (13 November 2010). "Is unity just a plugin of compiz". The version of Unity that will be released in 11.04 is definitely implemented as plugin(s) in Compiz.
  14. ^ Unity To Use Compiz instead of Mutter [Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal News] ~ Web Upd8: Ubuntu / Linux blog
  15. ^ a b Canonical building Unity 2D on QML and Qt | Qt DevNet forums | Qt Developer Network
  16. ^ Canonical Says Unity 2D Not Part Of The Ubuntu 11.04 Plan
  17. ^ Comment 8 for bug 730588
  18. ^ Waugh, Jeff (2011). "Timeline: The Greatest Show on Earth - Dave Neary comment". Retrieved 1 April 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  19. ^ Graner, Amber (2011). "Has GNOME Rejected Canonical help? Shuttleworth Responds". Ubuntu User. Retrieved 19 March 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  20. ^ Shuttlewort h, Mark (2011). "Internal competition is healthy, but depends on strong and mature leadership". Retrieved 19 March 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help); line feed character in |last= at position 12 (help)
  21. ^ Shuttleworth, Mark (2011). "All the other guys are not wrong". Retrieved 19 March 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  22. ^ Sneddon, Joey (2011). "Ubuntu 11.10 will not ship with 'classic' GNOME desktop". OMG Ubuntu!. Retrieved 6 April 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  23. ^ a b Sneddon, Joey (2011). "Unity 2D lands in Oneiric daily build". OMG Ubuntu!. Retrieved 27 May 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  24. ^ "Ayatana". Arch Linux Wiki.
  25. ^ Adam Williamson. "Unity on Fedora? Possibly!".
  26. ^ Adam Williamson. "Unity, hardware failures, and F15 QA".
  27. ^ "Ayatana Project Portage". Frugalware Linux Wiki.
  28. ^ "GNOME Ayatana". openSUSE Wiki.
  29. ^ Nelson Marques. "GNOME Ayatana". openSUSE.
  30. ^ a b File:Unity-2D Natty.png
  31. ^ "Canonical's contributor agreement". Retrieved 31 December 2010.
  32. ^ Paul, Ryan (2010). "Hands-on with Ubuntu's new Unity netbook shell". Ars Technica. Retrieved 1 April 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  33. ^ Paul, Ryan (2010). "Blessed Unity: Ars reviews Ubuntu 10.10". Ars Technica. Retrieved 1 April 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  34. ^ Humphrey, Benjamin (2011). "What's wrong with Unity & how we can fix it". OMG Ubuntu. Retrieved 14 March 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  35. ^ Paul, Ryan (2011). "Unity environment in good shape, on track for Ubuntu 11.04". Ars Technica. Retrieved 19 April 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  36. ^ Hartley, Matt (2011). "Why Is Ubuntu's Unity Squeezing out GNOME 3?". IT Management. Retrieved 29 April 2011. {{cite news}}: Check |authorlink= value (help); External link in |authorlink= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  37. ^ Paul, Ryan (2011). "Ubuntu 11.04 released, a Natty Narwhal rises from the depths". Ars Technica. Retrieved 30 April 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  38. ^ Lynch, Jim (2011). "Ubuntu 11.04". Desktop Linux Reviews. Retrieved 02 May 2011. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  39. ^ Sneddon, Joey (2011). "Ubuntu 11.04 released, reviewed". OMG Ubuntu. Retrieved 3 May 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  40. ^ Sneddon, Joey (2011). "Mark Shuttleworth talks Windicators, changes for Unity in Oneiric, and whole lot more…". OMG Ubuntu. Retrieved 5 May 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  41. ^ Smith, Jesse (2011). "A look at Ubuntu 11.04". Distrowatch. Retrieved 10 May 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  42. ^ Germain, Jack M. (2011). "Natty Narwhal Offers Unity but No Clarity". Linux News. Retrieved 12 May 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  43. ^ Paul, Ryan (2011). "Riding the Narwhal: Ars reviews Unity in Ubuntu 11.04". Ars Technica. Retrieved 12 May 2011. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Unity.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unity_(user_interface)&oldid=434501226"