[ubuntu-art] Metacity Button Order Changed

[Luke Benstead]

I don't suppose we could have some clarification for this change? What
was the reasoning behind it?

I'm still trying to work out how adding an extra obstacle to Windows
users is going to help in Ubuntu adoption...

Luke.

P.S. The response I've received about the change from non-technical
family members is very much negative. I can relearn it easy enough, as
far as they are concerned the close button has disappeared and they
don't know where it's gone.

On 6 March 2010 16:17, Wes Turner <wes.ubuntu at gmail.com> wrote:
> Changing for the sake of changing is absolutely absurd. Although I am
> (hopefully) sure that there was a reasoning behind the change, it seems
> without rationale.
>
> I agree, let's pick an audience and serve them well. Everyone is impossible
> and certainly (too) ambitious.
>
> Changing sides AND order is chaotic at best and annoys even the most savvy
> people who use (Ubuntu) metacity. I guess the key is to remain backwards
> compatibility with this 'style' change and insure upgrades do not break
> previous themes, but that would seem like making extra work while going
> against the 'if it's not broke-don't fix it' rule.
>
> Wesley
>
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Richard Querin <rfquerin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Thorsten Wilms <t_w_ at freenet.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> What now feels to be an eternity ago, Mark Shuttleworth in a Community
>>> Council session, http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2008/09/02/%
>>> 23ubuntu-meeting.html:
>>>
>>> 22:09  in terms of audience, i think we have to aim for young
>>> professionals who are web-savvy
>>>
>>> 22:14  if we are ambitious, we want to serve all human beings
>>>
>>> 22:15  so, the only reason i focused on young web-savvy professionals is
>>> they will be the standard-bearers for taking ubuntu to a wider audience
>>>
>>> 22:15  and they are probably attracted to particular ideas in design
>>> like the iphone used web 2.0 ideas
>>>
>>> ----
>>
>> I think standing by the comment at 22:09 (or of course a better defined
>> version of it) would help so much in focusing Ubuntu's design work. But alas
>> 5 minutes later it's all dashed. I really think we're shooting ourselves in
>> the foot trying to aim at everybody. It's  an impossible goal. It
>> tremendously weakens the resulting design. This is a well established
>> principle of design. Audience and goal. I know many people on this list have
>> probably seen this, but it's such a wonderful and spot-on post by Havoc
>> Pennington on the
>> subject.(http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-February/msg00174.html)
>> The sad thing is it's 4 years ago that he wrote it.
>> No one is listening.. well.. that's not entirely accurate. Some people
>> apparently are:
>> http://blog.cberger.net/2010/03/02/the-difficult-choice-of-removing-features/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ubuntu-art mailing list
>> ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>>
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
>