Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Ubuntu Linux

Preview of Ubuntu's Unity Interface 382

itwbennett writes "In late October we learned that starting with the next release (11.04), Ubuntu would use Unity instead of GNOME as its default desktop interface. Now we know a bit more about what that will (and won't) mean for users. The move to Unity doesn't mean that Ubuntu is abandoning GNOME. It also doesn't mean that users will be forced to use Unity; they'll still be able to revert to the old GNOME interface. What it does mean, mainly, is that users will be presented with a simple interface — probably too simple for nuts and bolts types. The more 'radical shift' will be switching Ubuntu's base graphics system from the X Window System to Wayland. There users can expect that it will take some time before things are in working order. 'In other words,' says Steven Vaughan-Nichols who reviewed Unity for ITworld, 'Wayland will be an option, and one that only people who don't mind having their desktops blow up on a regular basis should fool with, in Ubuntu 11.04. By Ubuntu 11.10, it will be workable, and come the spring release two years from now, Ubuntu 12.04, we should, if all goes well, see a stable Wayland-based Unity desktop.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Preview of Ubuntu's Unity Interface

Comments Filter:
  • No screenshots? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02, 2010 @01:44PM (#34419822)

    Text is useless. I want screenshots!

  • by iONiUM ( 530420 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @01:47PM (#34419870) Journal

    I'm sorry, how is this possibly a "preview" when there is not one screen shot? One link goes to an older /. article, the other goes to an all text article.

    Can you please stop naming things that don't have photos like they do have photos?

  • In other words (Score:4, Insightful)

    by joeflies ( 529536 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @01:54PM (#34420010)

    They are duplicating the KDE 4.0 roll out plan?? *ducks*

  • by 0123456 ( 636235 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @02:03PM (#34420170)

    X will still run fine, even under Wayland, so relax.

    Sigh, we're not talking about running X and rendering on a Wayland desktop, we're talking about running Wayland apps and rendering on a remote desktop, the way you currently can with X. The biggest single advantage of X over Windows, which the Wayland developers seem quite happy to throw away in the quest for 'The Shiny'.

    Given a choice between fancier compositing effects and being able to run any program on any machine while rendering on any other machine, I'll take the latter any day.

  • by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @02:28PM (#34420582)

    You do realize that Windows doesn't support X11 (at least it's apps won't act as clients - there are servers) and many, many, MANY admins get by just fine with RDP right?

    X11 isn't the absolutely only way to do remote access.

  • Re:Wake up (Score:4, Insightful)

    by apoc.famine ( 621563 ) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .enimaf.copa.> on Thursday December 02, 2010 @02:56PM (#34420986) Journal
    I can't get PulseAudio working in any way shape or form. Perfect setup doesn't work, no fresh Ubuntu installs work. I'd guess that it was hardware related, but the hardware is question is an old SB Live (maybe early Audigy) card. It worked fine for years under Gentoo and pre-PA Ubuntu releases. It works fine when I boot into windows for an occasional game. It works fine once I purge PulseAudio and go back to Alsa.

    Every new Ubuntu release I try to fight with PA for a couple of days. When it's clear it's not going to work, I purge it, and all is well. (Outside of a few flash issues, of course.)

    I understand what PulseAudio is supposed to do - I've had it semi-working at times. It's a great, great idea. It's badly needed for Linux. I just wish it goddamned worked for me! Best I've done so far is have everything work, except sounds queued up in the pipeline, and trickled out tens of seconds to minutes after they were called. Before PA crashed and died. I have to agree with the AC you replied to: "Man, the hours upon hours I've lost on Pulseaudio. Insanity."
  • by spazdor ( 902907 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @02:59PM (#34421024)

    Ubuntu lets you choose too. If you want off the roller coaster and just want a stable system based on proven technology, install an LTS and wait for the next LTS. Easy.

  • by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @03:00PM (#34421036) Journal

    Just provide an X server on top of the Wayland graphics engine, and continue to use your old X apps.

    Then why ditch Xorg?

  • by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @03:48PM (#34421654) Journal

    Until you try to run them with the -display flag.

  • by jekewa ( 751500 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @04:02PM (#34421918) Homepage Journal

    That's an interesting opinion.

    Perhaps it's rooted in a confusion in the use of "Operating System," or perhaps from your misunderstanding of what an OS is in general, or how the OS and UI interact. Surely, one can roll the UI into the "OS," but particularly in this case, the underlying mechanics aren't changing (there's still a GNU kernel in there), but the discussed changes are in layers between, which can be replaced if you don't like the changes.

    The flexibility you chide is a strength not a weakness. When users are faced with Linux distros, they aren't experiencing the Linux OS, but the desktop interface atop the OS. When approaching a PC running Linux, they're faced often with Gnome or KDE or one of the others, probably tweaked with their distro's defaults or the previous user's preferences or tinkerings.

    Further, except for us nuts-and-bolts users, few users even get into the UI they're presented with (beyond changing the background or adding widgets) after they've figured out how the launching mechanism works. Most of them are familiar and concerned with the applications they run (word processor, web browser, e-mail client). Those, for the most part, don't change when the underlying desktop changes (that is, switching from Gnome to KDE) any more than they do when applying different themes (colors, borders, fonts).

    If you've ever written GUI software, you'd know that your fear-based misrepresentation (or perhaps another misunderstanding) of this is also unwarranted. Few people write application software directly to the UI (Gnome/KDE/etc), or even to the graphics layer beneath that (X/Wayland/whatever), but instead use an abstraction layer (QT, for example), for exactly the reason of removing the concern of which desktop UI it sits atop.

    Underneath all of that, the OS, in this case GNU Linux, is the same.

  • Re:Goodbye Ubuntu (Score:5, Insightful)

    by knarf ( 34928 ) on Thursday December 02, 2010 @06:42PM (#34424430) Homepage

    I hate having to wait 6+ months (or 2 years if you stick with LTS) to get app upgrades, so I switched to OS X for my laptop years ago.

    You seriously changed from free software to payware, from the open space of Ubuntu to the walled garden of Apple, from getting updates every 6 months to having to buy updates every so many years, from having full control over your machine and software to being beholden to Apple's CEO's every whim?

    Amazing... just... amazing.

    May I suggest renting a computer after that Apple machine has bitten the dust? That way you have even less control over your machine while you pay even more. It must sound like data heaven to you.

You can measure a programmer's perspective by noting his attitude on the continuing viability of FORTRAN. -- Alan Perlis