[Ubuntu-PH] POS system that can run on WINE

[rdv]

hi,

we are looking for a POS application that is compatible with ubuntu's wine

[Allan E. Registos]

At least for the 11.04 release. Here is the link:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/7e978d30/attachment.html>

[Stephen Piana]

Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos <

Post by Allan E. Registos
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

[Stephen Piana]

update

found this: http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/:D

Post by Stephen Piana
Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos <

Post by Allan E. Registos
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!

[Erick John Cuevas]

Post by Allan E. Registos
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?

The last time ive heard was, approved for further discussion. Then its
good news we can experience Unity in our desktop.

[Erick John Cuevas]

Post by Allan E. Registos
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?

Developers of Gnome attack Canonical?s Ubuntu decision
<http://www.cebuntu.com/?p=450>

[Allan E. Registos]

Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's article is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is the desktop, but from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be understood as a counterpart or another alternative of "Gnome Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Piana" <stephen.piana at gmail.com>
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" <ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"

update

found this: http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Piana < stephen.piana at gmail.com > wrote:


Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p





On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos < allan.registos at smpc.steniel.com.ph > wrote:







At least for the 11.04 release. Here is the link:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!

[hard wyrd]

I agree. It was quite misleading.

Regardless, I may be speaking for myself regarding this matter but, the UI
decision isn't a deal breaker for me. What's so hard about doing "aptitude
install your-favorite-ui-package" ?

I find the new move to be refreshing and bold. I'm on gnome-shell for a
long while now, and ive been using it on a production workstation every
friggin day. I feel like I've been working much faster on gnome-shell than
on GNOME. But that's just me I suppose.

For the Unity decision? bring it on :).

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Allan E. Registos <

Post by Allan E. Registos
Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's article
is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is the desktop, but
from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be understood as a counterpart or
another alternative of "Gnome Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.
------------------------------
*From: *"Stephen Piana" <stephen.piana at gmail.com>
*To: *"Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" <
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
*Sent: *Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
*Subject: *Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop
from GNOME to Unity"
update
http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D

Post by Stephen Piana
Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos <

Post by Allan E. Registos
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!

--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

[JC John Sese Cuneta]

I think what most are arguing against this decision is the level of
"migration" it will attract from Windows users. Our experience with
demo-ing Ubuntu with Windows users was really eye-opening - [1] they
don't care if it looks cool; [2] they don't care if it feels fast; [3]
they want something that they are already accustomed too; and [4]
something that requires less (re)-learning.

When we demoed Ubuntu, we made it look like Windows XP and Windows 7, as
in customized as much as possible, and still those 4 I mentioned above
still came up.

So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience, will
further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even try.
"Unity for desktop as default" will not break that ice. For netbook,
sure, it _is_ a netbook after all, we need space and speed. But for a
desktop as default? It's a bad decision.

This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come Windows
users try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from Jaunty onwards,
were all signs to me that they have a new vision and a new objective.
They are now treating Ubuntu as an independent "OS". A product worthy
to be called an Operating System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu.
Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.

Compare that to say Debian: Debian is the distro, Linux is the OS, hence
"Debian Linux". Canonical look to me to be aiming for something like this:

Person A: "What's your OS?"
Person B: "Linux"
Person A: "What distro?"
Person B: "Debian" or some other distro?
Person A: "How about you?"
Person C: "Me? My OS is Ubuntu"
Person B: "That's the distro, you should say Linux"
Person C: "Huh? What is Linux? My OS is Ubuntu not Linux, whatever
that is"

They're repositioning Ubuntu down that path (or up that future). It's
done being an "alternative", it's done being a "gateway to Linux".
That's why they're deciding on major changes that many people are
reacting against, like this one now.

For us geeks, again, for "us geeks", it is as easy as installing
whatever DE and DE-shell we want to use. For the average user, most of
them are not comfortable with that, doesn't have time to learn and
tinker and break their machines, and whatever reason why they are still
an "average user". There are people built for building skyscrapers and
people made to be just end-users of those skyscrapers. And there are
people with plenty of time on their hands, and people who just wants
everything familiar so they bother not with reading this and that just
to do this and that.

The phase where Canonical is now is for those with time on their hands
to learn something new. And to some extent, the people who build
buildings not the people who lives/use the end product.

Is it a good move? Only time can tell. Or maybe the question is: Is it
the right time to do this?

Right now, the popular OS are: Mac (for Unix, lolz), Windows, and
Linux. Most are mis-informed about the name/brand "Linux" but not with
"Ubuntu". I only hope that the good reputation they have built behind
the brand "Ubuntu" will bring the product to greater heights and success
with the new path and future they want to bring it to.

Maybe one day it will be like this: Mac, Windows, and Ubuntu. ^_^

Post by hard wyrd
I agree. It was quite misleading.
Regardless, I may be speaking for myself regarding this matter but,
the UI decision isn't a deal breaker for me. What's so hard about
doing "aptitude install your-favorite-ui-package" ?
I find the new move to be refreshing and bold. I'm on gnome-shell for
a long while now, and ive been using it on a production workstation
every friggin day. I feel like I've been working much faster on
gnome-shell than on GNOME. But that's just me I suppose.
For the Unity decision? bring it on :).
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Allan E. Registos
<allan.registos at smpc.steniel.com.ph
Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's
article is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is
the desktop, but from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be
understood as a counterpart or another alternative of "Gnome
Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Stephen Piana" <stephen.piana at gmail.com
<mailto:stephen.piana at gmail.com>>
*To: *"Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)"
<ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>>
*Sent: *Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
*Subject: *Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its
desktop from GNOME to Unity"
update
http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Piana
Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now
that's funny. :p
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos
<allan.registos at smpc.steniel.com.ph
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"
www.madforubuntu.com <http://www.madforubuntu.com>
baudizm.blogsome.com <http://baudizm.blogsome.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/91ac6138/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/91ac6138/attachment.pgp>

[hard wyrd]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:53 PM, JC John Sese Cuneta <

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
I think what most are arguing against this decision is the level of
"migration" it will attract from Windows users. Our experience with
demo-ing Ubuntu with Windows users was really eye-opening - [1] they don't
care if it looks cool; [2] they don't care if it feels fast; [3] they want
something that they are already accustomed too; and [4] something that
requires less (re)-learning.
When we demoed Ubuntu, we made it look like Windows XP and Windows 7, as in
customized as much as possible, and still those 4 I mentioned above still
came up.

I don't quite agree with that move. We're trying to migrate them. Not
deceive users into thinking that it's the same banana or at least behave
like the old one.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience, will
further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even try. "Unity
for desktop as default" will not break that ice. For netbook, sure, it _is_
a netbook after all, we need space and speed. But for a desktop as
default? It's a bad decision.

I don't quite think so. It requires relearning - yes. Relearning was not a
barrier to Windows users who purchased Macs. They just have to learn the ins
and outs. Sadly, a lot of users want to be spoon fed. I've been there.

If the new user interface will be a lot simpler and straight forward to use,
then why not? At least it has to be made clear to migrants that this is a
different operating system, and adjustments will need to be made.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come Windows users
try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from Jaunty onwards, were all
signs to me that they have a new vision and a new objective. They are now
treating Ubuntu as an independent "OS". A product worthy to be called an
Operating System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.

I don't think they're going to drop "Linux" because it still is a Linux
distribution. To me the recent decisions were to make it a bit more
recognizable than "just another Linux distro". How will it distinguish
itself from the rest? It's still Linux but something will need to be done as
far as risks and bold moves are concerned.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
Compare that to say Debian: Debian is the distro, Linux is the OS, hence
Person A: "What's your OS?"
Person B: "Linux"
Person A: "What distro?"
Person B: "Debian" or some other distro?
Person A: "How about you?"
Person C: "Me? My OS is Ubuntu"
Person B: "That's the distro, you should say Linux"
Person C: "Huh? What is Linux? My OS is Ubuntu not Linux, whatever that
is"
They're repositioning Ubuntu down that path (or up that future). It's done
being an "alternative", it's done being a "gateway to Linux". That's why
they're deciding on major changes that many people are reacting against,
like this one now.

This is still relatively speculation at this point in time.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
For us geeks, again, for "us geeks", it is as easy as installing whatever
DE and DE-shell we want to use. For the average user, most of them are not
comfortable with that, doesn't have time to learn and tinker and break their
machines, and whatever reason why they are still an "average user". There
are people built for building skyscrapers and people made to be just
end-users of those skyscrapers. And there are people with plenty of time on
their hands, and people who just wants everything familiar so they bother
not with reading this and that just to do this and that.

Exactly. Is Unity that complicated to use? Was the install that complicated?
Let's recall what have been the greater barrier to Linux adoption? It's not
the user's capacity to re-learn stuff.

The phase where Canonical is now is for those with time on their hands to

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
learn something new. And to some extent, the people who build buildings not
the people who lives/use the end product.

Thing is it is human nature to be cautious stepping out of comfort zones.
And a lot of users were so used to M$ products considering that they have
used them since primary, high school, and college. That in itself will prove
a challenge to letting them switch.

Is it a good move? Only time can tell. Or maybe the question is: Is it the

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
right time to do this?

Again, people can only speculate for now.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
Right now, the popular OS are: Mac (for Unix, lolz), Windows, and Linux.
Most are mis-informed about the name/brand "Linux" but not with "Ubuntu". I
only hope that the good reputation they have built behind the brand "Ubuntu"
will bring the product to greater heights and success with the new path and
future they want to bring it to.
Maybe one day it will be like this: Mac, Windows, and Ubuntu. ^_^

I hope not.

[JC John Sese Cuneta]

Post by hard wyrd
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:53 PM, JC John Sese Cuneta
<jcjohn.sesecuneta at laibcoms.com
I think what most are arguing against this decision is the level
of "migration" it will attract from Windows users. Our experience
with demo-ing Ubuntu with Windows users was really eye-opening -
[1] they don't care if it looks cool; [2] they don't care if it
feels fast; [3] they want something that they are already
accustomed too; and [4] something that requires less (re)-learning.
When we demoed Ubuntu, we made it look like Windows XP and Windows
7, as in customized as much as possible, and still those 4 I
mentioned above still came up.
I don't quite agree with that move. We're trying to migrate them. Not
deceive users into thinking that it's the same banana or at least
behave like the old one.

:: It's not really deception per se. You have to consider where they're
coming from and where they're standing at. For us geeks, it's a
no-brainer. For them, it isn't. Our brains function way differently
than the non-geeks. And most of the time, we geeks are willing to spend
more time into reading, experimenting, learning, asking questions,
finding solutions, etc. They are not and they will never be.

:: You see, if we ever want them to migrate, especially offices, we need
to see things from their eyes, from their perspective. We need to think
like them. We can not just go to them, present and demo "our superior"
product, and tell them every little and big thing that we can think of
why they need to migrate to Linux all we want. But if we can not
address their needs, not ours but theirs, then they will never bite.
They won't even bother trying it out.

:: Personally, I have more success in converting people to use Linux, or
to be exact, Ubuntu, by presenting it to them based on what they need
and what they are looking for in an OS. I first try to find out more
about them. Their habbits, what are their primary, secondary, and
tertiary purposes of using a PC, and their outlook in this matter. Then
when the time is right (or they gave the schedule), everything that
comes out of my mouth has been catered to them.

:: It isn't perfect, and it is harder in office evironments. But I have
better success in that method than presenting GNU/Linux and Ubuntu
"as-is". It is far from being a deception. We want to present
GNU/Linux as a product "for them, not for geeks".

Post by hard wyrd
So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience,
will further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even
try. "Unity for desktop as default" will not break that ice. For
netbook, sure, it _is_ a netbook after all, we need space and
speed. But for a desktop as default? It's a bad decision.
I don't quite think so. It requires relearning - yes. Relearning was
not a barrier to Windows users who purchased Macs. They just have to
learn the ins and outs. Sadly, a lot of users want to be spoon fed.
I've been there.

:: Well, Mac users are better than Windows users, they always have
been. Mac and GNU/Linux have the lowest share vs. Windows. So our side
obviously can learn Windows much easier because our thinking has been
molded different already. Windows users are not, as you have said,
"spoon fed". And to add to that, Microsoft has a strong marketing
department.

Post by hard wyrd
If the new user interface will be a lot simpler and straight forward
to use, then why not? At least it has to be made clear to migrants
that this is a different operating system, and adjustments will need
to be made.

:: If the name isn't "Windows" (or "Mac") then it is a different
operating system, there's no other way to be clearer than that. ^_^

Post by hard wyrd
This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come
Windows users try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from
Jaunty onwards, were all signs to me that they have a new vision
and a new objective. They are now treating Ubuntu as an
independent "OS". A product worthy to be called an Operating
System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.
I don't think they're going to drop "Linux" because it still is a
Linux distribution. To me the recent decisions were to make it a bit
more recognizable than "just another Linux distro". How will it
distinguish itself from the rest? It's still Linux but something will
need to be done as far as risks and bold moves are concerned.

:: No, I wasn't referring to dropping Linux, it won't run without it.
And if you meant "name", they never used "Ubuntu Linux", not that I
remember. Regardless, that's what I was talking about. They're looking
at the product to become a "household name". Instead of "Linux", it
will be "Ubuntu". It is still Linux underneath, but the non-geeks know
it by "Ubuntu".

:: For us, we care so much about correctness of terminologies, like
"GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux". To the non-geeks, they do not care and never
will. What they want is a working operating system that they has a very
low (re)-learning process - in other words, they can use with minimal
supervision and QnA's.

:: It's like this: "why fix when it is not broken?" For them, "why
migrate to Linux (or GNU/Linux) if I already have Windows?" We can't
just sell them "no viruses" if the individual or entity (office
environment) have a system in place that keeps viruses out ?'s of the
time. We can't just sell them "it is faster than Windows" if the
individual or their ITC department made enhancements to it. If we want
to sell the idea to them, then we need to cater the product to them. If
we want them to migrate, then we need to give them compelling reasons to
switch.

Post by hard wyrd
Compare that to say Debian: Debian is the distro, Linux is the OS,
hence "Debian Linux". Canonical look to me to be aiming for
Person A: "What's your OS?"
Person B: "Linux"
Person A: "What distro?"
Person B: "Debian" or some other distro?
Person A: "How about you?"
Person C: "Me? My OS is Ubuntu"
Person B: "That's the distro, you should say Linux"
Person C: "Huh? What is Linux? My OS is Ubuntu not Linux,
whatever that is"
They're repositioning Ubuntu down that path (or up that future).
It's done being an "alternative", it's done being a "gateway to
Linux". That's why they're deciding on major changes that many
people are reacting against, like this one now.
This is still relatively speculation at this point in time.

:: It is.

Post by hard wyrd
For us geeks, again, for "us geeks", it is as easy as installing
whatever DE and DE-shell we want to use. For the average user,
most of them are not comfortable with that, doesn't have time to
learn and tinker and break their machines, and whatever reason why
they are still an "average user". There are people built for
building skyscrapers and people made to be just end-users of those
skyscrapers. And there are people with plenty of time on their
hands, and people who just wants everything familiar so they
bother not with reading this and that just to do this and that.
Exactly. Is Unity that complicated to use? Was the install that
complicated? Let's recall what have been the greater barrier to Linux
adoption? It's not the user's capacity to re-learn stuff.

:: Hehe, I think I answered your questions in that same paragraph :D

Post by hard wyrd
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"
www.madforubuntu.com <http://www.madforubuntu.com>
baudizm.blogsome.com <http://baudizm.blogsome.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/55ab2ba0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/55ab2ba0/attachment.pgp>

[Stephen Piana]

as long as support for the current UI is still available then the new move
is fine with me. :D but it's weird for a desktop to act/look like the
netbook remix.

[hard wyrd]

Post by Stephen Piana
as long as support for the current UI is still available then the new move
is fine with me. :D but it's weird for a desktop to act/look like the
netbook remix.

Something that's new will always be weird :). A radical approach will
always be weird :).

[Michael Lunar]

hey...

am a newbie... just started using Ubuntu about three weeks ago. I was attempting
to install Windows7 on my laptop but for some reason I cannot. Even with a clean
install. My friend's got a 9.04 and he told me to wipe my laptop clean by
installing Ubuntu and clean install Windows7 after... didn't work!

And soooo... I got stuck with with the 9.04! BUT when the Update Manager showed
an Upgrade to 10.10, i clicked on upgrade and soon after... my laptop won't
start! Tried slipstreaming Windows... didn't work! Then I made a Pendrive
installer of Ubuntu10.04 following on-line instructions, installed it on my
laptop and have been enjoying Ubuntu since then.

I am a convert and have been showing my new OS (with the jiggling windows) to my
peers. One friend has actually installed Ubuntu using the Pendrive I created. Am
still discovering a lot of things about Ubuntu hence I joined the Mailing list.
Now... am a bit nervous about these changes you are talking about here...

Sorry... am not a full time techie (or what some call a geek), I'm an above
average Windows user and would like to be formally "doctrinized" on Ubuntu... Am
really starting to like it but am beginning to be wary...







________________________________
From: hard wyrd <hardwyrd at gmail.com>
To: Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)
<ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:09:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from
GNOME to Unity"


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Stephen Piana <stephen.piana at gmail.com> wrote:

as long as support for the current UI is still available then the new move is
fine with me. :D but it's weird for a desktop to act/look like the netbook
remix.

Something that's new will always be weird :). A radical approach will always be
weird :).
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"

www.madforubuntu.com
baudizm.blogsome.com


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/a07329bb/attachment.html>

[JC John Sese Cuneta]

Hi Michael,

First of all, welcome to the mailing list for Ubuntu Philippines!

Post by Michael Lunar
hey...
am a newbie... just started using Ubuntu about three weeks ago. I was
attempting to install Windows7 on my laptop but for some reason I
cannot. Even with a clean install. My friend's got a 9.04 and he told
me to wipe my laptop clean by installing Ubuntu and clean install
Windows7 after... didn't work!

:: If I understood you correctly, you're trying to install Windows 7
_after_ installing Ubuntu? Last time I tried that, I had a hard time as
well so went back to the easier method of installing Windows first
before installing Ubuntu.

I can't remember much of it but Windows has this habbit of wanting to be
the only OS on your machine, and be installed first. But before you
start reformatting again, partition your harddrive first (if you only
have 1 HDD).

My current setup is this:
1) My first partition is for Ubuntu (my personal rule: no less than
20gb; Ubuntu will run in a 10gb partition last I read the manuals)
2) My second partition is for Linux swap (my personal rule: no less than
1gb and no more than 3gb; I have mine set to 2gb with a 2gb RAM).
3) My third partition is for Windows7 (I dont have a personal rule to
this one because Windows is notorious with eating a lot of HDD space,
and I'm not the only user of our desktop here at home, I have to
prioritized them over myself BUT if I'm the only user, I'll give
Windows7 no more than 20gb, since I use Ubuntu as my primary work and
gaming OS)
4) My fourth partition is for my "data", NTFS formatted (so I can
transfer files between Ubuntu and Windows when the need arises). (This
one is not necessary, this is just my personal taste.)

After partitioning your HDD, then install Windows7 first.
After that, install Ubuntu.
-- When installing Ubuntu, be careful when selecting your partition lest
you delete your Windows partition ;)

Out-of-the-box, you should be okay from this point on. Ubuntu will
install grub2 which will allow you at boot to choose start Ubuntu or
Windows7.

Post by Michael Lunar
And soooo... I got stuck with with the 9.04! BUT when the Update
Manager showed an Upgrade to 10.10, i clicked on upgrade and soon
after... my laptop won't start! Tried slipstreaming Windows... didn't
work! Then I made a Pendrive installer of Ubuntu10.04 following
on-line instructions, installed it on my laptop and have been enjoying
Ubuntu since then.
I am a convert and have been showing my new OS (with the jiggling
windows) to my peers. One friend has actually installed Ubuntu using
the Pendrive I created. Am still discovering a lot of things about
Ubuntu hence I joined the Mailing list. Now... am a bit nervous about
these changes you are talking about here...
Sorry... am not a full time techie (or what some call a geek), I'm an
above average Windows user and would like to be formally "doctrinized"
on Ubuntu... Am really starting to like it but am beginning to be wary...

Ahh, don't be! There's nothing to worry about. Unity is the default
desktop that comes with UNR (Ubuntu Netbook Remix). It is only a
different layout and different way of doing things on your PC. You are
already using Ubuntu so you'll be fine and you'll like Unity ;)

What the exchange was about is marketing/selling Ubuntu to the general
population - be it individuals or especially organizations - people who
have not used Ubuntu (or any Linux distro) at all.

All good I hope?

^_^

~ JC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/c8beb3a5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/c8beb3a5/attachment.pgp>

[Erick John Cuevas]

Post by Michael Lunar
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Stephen Piana
as long as support for the current UI is still available then the
new move is fine with me. :D but it's weird for a desktop to
act/look like the netbook remix.
Something that's new will always be weird :). A radical approach will
always be weird :).
Change is inevitable.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"
www.madforubuntu.com <http://www.madforubuntu.com>
baudizm.blogsome.com <http://baudizm.blogsome.com>

--
Erick John Cuevas

The Ubuntu Counter Project - user number # 30996
<http://ubuntucounter.geekosophical.net>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/d36488aa/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ubuntu-user2.php
Type: image/png
Size: 2508 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <Loading Image...>

[hard wyrd]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:29 PM, JC John Sese Cuneta <

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
:: It's not really deception per se. You have to consider where they're
coming from and where they're standing at. For us geeks, it's a
no-brainer. For them, it isn't. Our brains function way differently than
the non-geeks. And most of the time, we geeks are willing to spend more
time into reading, experimenting, learning, asking questions, finding
solutions, etc. They are not and they will never be.

Mimicking a UI of one OS is technically deception. And instead of letting
those users get familiar with a Linux user interface, they'll continue on
with the same thing from Windows.

It is exactly this thinking - users "will never be" experimenting, learning,
and asking questions - that made a lot of people call system administrators
as BOFH in the first place. As tech people - knowledgeable in the systems -
i believe it's the tech's responsibility to educate them, show them the
hoops, guide them through the ropes a little. Yes they do experiment, yes
they do ask questions, and yes they do find solutions as long as we are not
so uptight about stuff and give them a little lee way to explore (within
bounds). Honestly, they're just so damn afraid that they'll break something
and afraid to earn the ire of the techs.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
:: You see, if we ever want them to migrate, especially offices, we need to
see things from their eyes, from their perspective. We need to think like
them. We can not just go to them, present and demo "our superior" product,
and tell them every little and big thing that we can think of why they need
to migrate to Linux all we want. But if we can not address their needs, not
ours but theirs, then they will never bite. They won't even bother trying
it out.

Exactly. Under a consultant's point of view, it's bad form to just jump in
without knowing what they want. But then again, when offering a Linux-based
solution, make sure that they know it _is_ Linux with UI that's reminiscent
of Linux and not some knock off of another OS, because that is definitely
misleading.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
:: Personally, I have more success in converting people to use Linux, or to
be exact, Ubuntu, by presenting it to them based on what they need and what
they are looking for in an OS. I first try to find out more about them.
Their habbits, what are their primary, secondary, and tertiary purposes of
using a PC, and their outlook in this matter. Then when the time is right
(or they gave the schedule), everything that comes out of my mouth has been
catered to them.

Totally different from the mimicked UI we were discussing a few paragraphs
back. But I agree on you on this part. That's what I do to clients as well.
But I make sure I let them know it's Linux, Ubuntu, whatever, and I keep the
UI as it is. But that's me. :).

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
:: It isn't perfect, and it is harder in office evironments. But I have
better success in that method than presenting GNU/Linux and Ubuntu "as-is".
It is far from being a deception. We want to present GNU/Linux as a product
"for them, not for geeks".

Ubuntu is already usable as it is. Why change the UI to look like Windows?

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience, will

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even try. "Unity
for desktop as default" will not break that ice. For netbook, sure, it _is_
a netbook after all, we need space and speed. But for a desktop as
default? It's a bad decision.

I don't quite think so. It requires relearning - yes. Relearning was not
a barrier to Windows users who purchased Macs. They just have to learn the
ins and outs. Sadly, a lot of users want to be spoon fed. I've been there.
:: Well, Mac users are better than Windows users, they always have been.

In what way were Mac users better than Windows users?

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
Mac and GNU/Linux have the lowest share vs. Windows. So our side
obviously can learn Windows much easier because our thinking has been molded
different already. Windows users are not, as you have said, "spoon fed".
And to add to that, Microsoft has a strong marketing department.

Actually we have _unlearned_ Windows easily because we took a chance at
trying another OS. Whether we want to admit or not, most users have used
Windows since they starting using the computer. Fortunately, I'm a DOS
person when I first started with the PC.

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
If the new user interface will be a lot simpler and straight forward to
use, then why not? At least it has to be made clear to migrants that this is
a different operating system, and adjustments will need to be made.
:: If the name isn't "Windows" (or "Mac") then it is a different operating
system, there's no other way to be clearer than that. ^_^

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come Windows users
try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from Jaunty onwards, were all
signs to me that they have a new vision and a new objective. They are now
treating Ubuntu as an independent "OS". A product worthy to be called an
Operating System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.

I don't think they're going to drop "Linux" because it still is a Linux
distribution. To me the recent decisions were to make it a bit more
recognizable than "just another Linux distro". How will it distinguish
itself from the rest? It's still Linux but something will need to be done as
far as risks and bold moves are concerned.
:: No, I wasn't referring to dropping Linux, it won't run without it. And
if you meant "name", they never used "Ubuntu Linux", not that I remember.
Regardless, that's what I was talking about. They're looking at the product
to become a "household name". Instead of "Linux", it will be "Ubuntu". It
is still Linux underneath, but the non-geeks know it by "Ubuntu".

Mac is Unix underneath. But do people refer to it as Unix? I think this is
semantics :)

:: For us, we care so much about correctness of terminologies, like

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
"GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux". To the non-geeks, they do not care and never
will. What they want is a working operating system that they has a very low
(re)-learning process - in other words, they can use with minimal
supervision and QnA's.
:: It's like this: "why fix when it is not broken?" For them, "why migrate
to Linux (or GNU/Linux) if I already have Windows?" We can't just sell them
"no viruses" if the individual or entity (office environment) have a system
in place that keeps viruses out ?'s of the time. We can't just sell them
"it is faster than Windows" if the individual or their ITC department made
enhancements to it. If we want to sell the idea to them, then we need to
cater the product to them. If we want them to migrate, then we need to give
them compelling reasons to switch.

And compelling is using a UI that mimicks Windows?

Anyway, going back to the original reason why this thread exists. I don't
think it will matter much if Ubuntu goes the Unity route. if people wanna
use it, I don't think it's that hard to learn how use Unity. And people will
try Ubuntu not because it uses Unity as a GUI, or GNOME, or whatever.

Regards!

[JC John Sese Cuneta]

Post by hard wyrd
Mimicking a UI of one OS is technically deception. And instead of
letting those users get familiar with a Linux user interface, they'll
continue on with the same thing from Windows.
It is exactly this thinking - users "will never be" experimenting,
learning, and asking questions - that made a lot of people call system
administrators as BOFH in the first place. As tech people -
knowledgeable in the systems - i believe it's the tech's
responsibility to educate them, show them the hoops, guide them
through the ropes a little. Yes they do experiment, yes they do ask
questions, and yes they do find solutions as long as we are not so
uptight about stuff and give them a little lee way to explore (within
bounds). Honestly, they're just so damn afraid that they'll break
something and afraid to earn the ire of the techs.
Exactly. Under a consultant's point of view, it's bad form to just
jump in without knowing what they want. But then again, when offering
a Linux-based solution, make sure that they know it _is_ Linux with UI
that's reminiscent of Linux and not some knock off of another OS,
because that is definitely misleading.

:: Of course they know it _is_ Linux, they wouldn't ask for a demo if it
is not. ;) Seriously, no kidding (I'm not being sarcastic or anything).

:: You're taking the UI as something that will kill Linux off. A UI is
just that, a UI. They can customize it all they want, make it look like
LCARS (Star Trek interface) if they want to, it's just a UI. And if a
Windows mock-up will get them interested with Linux (Ubuntu to be
exact), then why not? Secondly, when you demo Linux, you make sure you
show them at least two UIs, be it GNOME or KDE, or in our case with
other groups, GNOME and Windows mock-up.

:: So I will still disagree, it is not a deception at all, not even
technically, because they know what it is all about. That's what and
why there is a demo, a presentation. Deception is not telling them what
they need to know right there and then, no "we'll tell them next time".

Post by hard wyrd
Totally different from the mimicked UI we were discussing a few
paragraphs back. But I agree on you on this part. That's what I do to
clients as well. But I make sure I let them know it's Linux, Ubuntu,
whatever, and I keep the UI as it is. But that's me. :).
:: It isn't perfect, and it is harder in office evironments. But
I have better success in that method than presenting GNU/Linux and
Ubuntu "as-is". It is far from being a deception. We want to
present GNU/Linux as a product "for them, not for geeks".
Ubuntu is already usable as it is. Why change the UI to look like Windows?

:: So it won't be "too much" for them? Or they will have an even more
opened mind? Or because they asked to? Or because we want to give them
options or show the freedom they can have with Linux?

:: I don't know. Should there be deep and fundamental reasons to why or
why not we should include a presentation/demo of Ubuntu with a Windows
UI theme? It's catered to them, we knew the kind of people there are in
the organization beforehand (or the individual). ^_^

Post by hard wyrd
In what way were Mac users better than Windows users?

:: Most of them already have an open mind, re: other OS. But I
misunderstood you there, I switched the scenario, I thought I read "Macs
to Windows"

Post by hard wyrd

Post by JC John Sese Cuneta
This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come
Windows users try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from
Jaunty onwards, were all signs to me that they have a new
vision and a new objective. They are now treating Ubuntu as
an independent "OS". A product worthy to be called an
Operating System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Ubuntu
_is_ _the_ OS.
I don't think they're going to drop "Linux" because it still is a
Linux distribution. To me the recent decisions were to make it a
bit more recognizable than "just another Linux distro". How will
it distinguish itself from the rest? It's still Linux but
something will need to be done as far as risks and bold moves are
concerned.

:: No, I wasn't referring to dropping Linux, it won't run without
it. And if you meant "name", they never used "Ubuntu Linux", not
that I remember. Regardless, that's what I was talking about.
They're looking at the product to become a "household name".
Instead of "Linux", it will be "Ubuntu". It is still Linux
underneath, but the non-geeks know it by "Ubuntu".
Mac is Unix underneath. But do people refer to it as Unix? I think
this is semantics :)

:: Exactly my point ^_^ Positioning Ubuntu to where Mac is positioned.
And that _is_ a good strategy, I am all behind it. If my analysis is
correct and that is where they see Ubuntu is going or will be in the future.

Post by hard wyrd
:: For us, we care so much about correctness of terminologies,
like "GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux". To the non-geeks, they do not care
and never will. What they want is a working operating system that
they has a very low (re)-learning process - in other words, they
can use with minimal supervision and QnA's.
:: It's like this: "why fix when it is not broken?" For them,
"why migrate to Linux (or GNU/Linux) if I already have Windows?"
We can't just sell them "no viruses" if the individual or entity
(office environment) have a system in place that keeps viruses out
?'s of the time. We can't just sell them "it is faster than
Windows" if the individual or their ITC department made
enhancements to it. If we want to sell the idea to them, then we
need to cater the product to them. If we want them to migrate,
then we need to give them compelling reasons to switch.
And compelling is using a UI that mimicks Windows?

:: No, that they can customize the UI as much as they want. It's the
options. They have an option to have a Windows-look if they want,
"we'll set it up for them" or stick with the default or get a Mac look.
The freedom, how easy it is, the options they can have. That makes it
compelling for non-geeks, especially those without an ITC
Linux-knowledgable in-house support. ^_^

Post by hard wyrd
Anyway, going back to the original reason why this thread exists. I
don't think it will matter much if Ubuntu goes the Unity route. if
people wanna use it, I don't think it's that hard to learn how use
Unity. And people will try Ubuntu not because it uses Unity as a GUI,
or GNOME, or whatever.
Regards!
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"
www.madforubuntu.com <http://www.madforubuntu.com>
baudizm.blogsome.com <http://baudizm.blogsome.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/57fc375f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/57fc375f/attachment.pgp>

[Zak B. Elep]

That's sjvn for you. He just loves to sensationalize.
On Oct 26, 2010 12:05 PM, "Allan E. Registos" <

Post by Allan E. Registos
Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's article

is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is the desktop, but
from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be understood as a counterpart or
another alternative of "Gnome Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.

Post by Allan E. Registos
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Piana" <stephen.piana at gmail.com>
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" <

ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>

Post by Allan E. Registos
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"
update

http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D

Post by Allan E. Registos
Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos <

http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity

Post by Allan E. Registos
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/f57e3550/attachment.html>

[Ian Dexter R. Marquez]

Still, Shuttleworth's pronouncement was pretty sensational. ;)

Some would regard this decision (Unity vs GNOME Shell) as ultimately a
fork, an idea that further (IMHO) exacerbates the perception that
Canonical is not contributing enough to core GNOME functionality.
GNOME's focus right now is to revamp the desktop experience, and with
Canonical working essentially on their own on Unity, GNOME will be
losing the much-needed feedback from Ubuntu's user base, and skills
from Canonical's experienced engineers.

(I don't want this to boil down to an "us vs them" debate -- anyone
miss KDE vs GNOME vs Xfce vs whatever? Didn't think so.)

Bottom line: it was a business decision for Canonical. They want
market differentiation for the Ubuntu brand, and it's well within
their right to decide what's best for their users. In the end, the
free software community would have to decide which to support more.
Diversity is good, but not too much. :)

Post by Zak B. Elep
That's sjvn for you. He just loves to sensationalize.
On Oct 26, 2010 12:05 PM, "Allan E. Registos"

Post by Allan E. Registos
Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's article
is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is the desktop, but
from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be understood as a counterpart or
another alternative of "Gnome Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Piana" <stephen.piana at gmail.com>
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)"
<ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop
from GNOME to Unity"
update
http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D
Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos <
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

[Zak B. Elep]

Who gets to decide that there's enough diversity? :P

I think Gnome will push even without Canonical mostly behind them. It is
more likely that Unity or its design ideas will get pushed back to more
conventional desktop environments, as I heard last time that Unity is for
the Netbook Edition.
On Oct 26, 2010 10:55 PM, "Ian Dexter R. Marquez" <iandexter at gmail.com>

Post by Ian Dexter R. Marquez
Still, Shuttleworth's pronouncement was pretty sensational. ;)
Some would regard this decision (Unity vs GNOME Shell) as ultimately a
fork, an idea that further (IMHO) exacerbates the perception that
Canonical is not contributing enough to core GNOME functionality.
GNOME's focus right now is to revamp the desktop experience, and with
Canonical working essentially on their own on Unity, GNOME will be
losing the much-needed feedback from Ubuntu's user base, and skills
from Canonical's experienced engineers.
(I don't want this to boil down to an "us vs them" debate -- anyone
miss KDE vs GNOME vs Xfce vs whatever? Didn't think so.)
Bottom line: it was a business decision for Canonical. They want
market differentiation for the Ubuntu brand, and it's well within
their right to decide what's best for their users. In the end, the
free software community would have to decide which to support more.
Diversity is good, but not too much. :)

Post by Zak B. Elep
That's sjvn for you. He just loves to sensationalize.
On Oct 26, 2010 12:05 PM, "Allan E. Registos"

Post by Allan E. Registos
Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's article
is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is the desktop, but
from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be understood as a counterpart or
another alternative of "Gnome Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Piana" <stephen.piana at gmail.com>
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)"
<ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop
from GNOME to Unity"
update
http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Piana < stephen.piana at gmail.com>
Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's

funny.

Post by Ian Dexter R. Marquez

Post by Zak B. Elep

Post by Allan E. Registos
:p
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos <

http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity

Post by Ian Dexter R. Marquez

Post by Zak B. Elep

Post by Allan E. Registos
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

--
Ian Dexter R. Marquez
http://iandexter.com
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101030/91db3877/attachment.html>

[Allan E. Registos]

+1 for Unity. This is good for Gnome and to the free software at large, not only for Ubuntu.

----- Original Message -----
From: "hard wyrd" <hardwyrd at gmail.com>
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" <ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 12:09:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"

I agree. It was quite misleading.


Regardless, I may be speaking for myself regarding this matter but, the UI decision isn't a deal breaker for me. What's so hard about doing "aptitude install your-favorite-ui-package" ?


I find the new move to be refreshing and bold. I'm on gnome-shell for a long while now, and ive been using it on a production workstation every friggin day. I feel like I've been working much faster on gnome-shell than on GNOME. But that's just me I suppose.


For the Unity decision? bring it on :).


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Allan E. Registos < allan.registos at smpc.steniel.com.ph > wrote:




Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's article is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is the desktop, but from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be understood as a counterpart or another alternative of "Gnome Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.



From: "Stephen Piana" < stephen.piana at gmail.com >
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" < ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com >
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"




update

found this: http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Piana < stephen.piana at gmail.com > wrote:


Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p





On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos < allan.registos at smpc.steniel.com.ph > wrote:







At least for the 11.04 release. Here is the link:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"

www.madforubuntu.com
baudizm.blogsome.com

[Allan E. Registos]

I think what most are arguing against this decision is the level of "migration" it will attract from Windows users. Our experience with demo->ing Ubuntu with Windows users was really eye-opening - [1] they don't care if it looks cool; [2] they don't care if it feels fast; [3] they >want something that they are already accustomed too; and [4] something that requires less (re)-learning.

My experience is a bit different for introducing Ubuntu to the company where I work. First, the MS office support. If Ubuntu runs MS Office, then it will be fine, regardless of the new interface (two panels top and buttom), I know there is wine and crossover and that is not enough for the most part, something will break. Second is the printer support. Third is the interoperability with Windows shares. Nautilus is easy to learn for them, except for handling thumb drives which is quite different in Windows. (imagine using MS Office then the user will expect that the thumb drive will be available through File > Open).

When we demoed Ubuntu, we made it look like Windows XP and Windows 7, as in customized as much as possible, and still those 4 I mentioned >above still came up.

You can never expect Linux to behave like Windows, my suggestion is not to make Ubuntu Linux to be looked like Windows XP/7, its futile, Linux is not Windows. My concern for the most part, as I stated, application + printer, the rest is configurable (AD support, shares etc.)

So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience, will further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even try. >"Unity for desktop as default" will not break that ice. For netbook, sure, it _is_ a netbook after all, we need space and speed. But for a >desktop as default? It's a bad decision.

Its too early to decide, whether its bad or good, but I will go for the good one, since I voted a +1 for this move.

This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come Windows users try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from Jaunty onwards, were >all signs to me that they have a new vision and a new objective. They are now treating Ubuntu as an independent "OS". A product worthy to be >called an Operating System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.

I am hoping that the recent attack against Ubuntu as a mere packaging company does not inspire us to say that Canonical wants her OS to be apart from the Linux core. Ubuntu may not contributing more to upstream developers, but the distro is my default desktop when migrating large number of users to Linux, they have done a wonderful job of creating a user friendly desktop.

Right now, the popular OS are: Mac (for Unix, lolz), Windows, and Linux. Most are mis-informed about the name/brand "Linux" but not with >"Ubuntu". I only hope that the good reputation they have built behind the brand "Ubuntu" will bring the product to greater heights and success >with the new path and future they want to bring it to.

This is NOT Ubuntu/Canonical's fault for creating a bad name for "Linux" as an OS. Whose fault? The last time I check, this is my list: Asus, Acer and Lenovo. Lenovo's linux got pre-installed on some of their notebooks is junk and unusable (CLI). Acer's inclusion of Android as a dual-boot with Win7 (Another linux-based) is horrible. Asus' EEE line of netbooks got quickly replaced with Windows XP. At least Ubuntu offers the default Gnome(A Unix DE).

Maybe one day it will be like this: Mac, Windows, and Ubuntu. ^_^

One day, most applications are web-based, and the looks of Mac and Windows are irrelevant to the user as long as their is a "Web" browser that will run their applications.

My opinion.
The inclusion of Unity for the next release to my opinion is a welcome one. We do have a lot of DEs in Linux, but none of them even close to mainstream adoption not because the fault is on their side, but to me, it is because the "application support." Many ISVs today, as I noticed, were supporting Ubuntu in tandem with RHEL and other popular Linux distros. The more applications that will run on top of GNU/Linux, the more hardware manufacturers will support GNU/Linux.

Also, I believe we are in a "transition" period i.e., from traditional desktop to web-based apps, and at that time, Windows Desktop Environment becomes irrelevant, since the most important thing is the browser.


----- Original Message -----
From: "JC John Sese Cuneta" <jcjohn.sesecuneta at laibcoms.com>
To: ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 1:53:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"

I think what most are arguing against this decision is the level of "migration" it will attract from Windows users. Our experience with demo->ing Ubuntu with Windows users was really eye-opening - [1] they don't care if it looks cool; [2] they don't care if it feels fast; [3] they >want something that they are already accustomed too; and [4] something that requires less (re)-learning.

When we demoed Ubuntu, we made it look like Windows XP and Windows 7, as in customized as much as possible, and still those 4 I mentioned above still came up.

So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience, will further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even try. "Unity for desktop as default" will not break that ice. For netbook, sure, it _is_ a netbook after all, we need space and speed. But for a desktop as default? It's a bad decision.

This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come Windows users try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from Jaunty onwards, were all signs to me that they have a new vision and a new objective. They are now treating Ubuntu as an independent "OS". A product worthy to be called an Operating System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.

Compare that to say Debian: Debian is the distro, Linux is the OS, hence "Debian Linux". Canonical look to me to be aiming for something like this:

Person A: "What's your OS?"
Person B: "Linux"
Person A: "What distro?"
Person B: "Debian" or some other distro?
Person A: "How about you?"
Person C: "Me? My OS is Ubuntu"
Person B: "That's the distro, you should say Linux"
Person C: "Huh? What is Linux? My OS is Ubuntu not Linux, whatever that is"

They're repositioning Ubuntu down that path (or up that future). It's done being an "alternative", it's done being a "gateway to Linux". That's why they're deciding on major changes that many people are reacting against, like this one now.

For us geeks, again, for "us geeks", it is as easy as installing whatever DE and DE-shell we want to use. For the average user, most of them are not comfortable with that, doesn't have time to learn and tinker and break their machines, and whatever reason why they are still an "average user". There are people built for building skyscrapers and people made to be just end-users of those skyscrapers. And there are people with plenty of time on their hands, and people who just wants everything familiar so they bother not with reading this and that just to do this and that.

The phase where Canonical is now is for those with time on their hands to learn something new. And to some extent, the people who build buildings not the people who lives/use the end product.

Is it a good move? Only time can tell. Or maybe the question is: Is it the right time to do this?

Right now, the popular OS are: Mac (for Unix, lolz), Windows, and Linux. Most are mis-informed about the name/brand "Linux" but not with "Ubuntu". I only hope that the good reputation they have built behind the brand "Ubuntu" will bring the product to greater heights and success with the new path and future they want to bring it to.

Maybe one day it will be like this: Mac, Windows, and Ubuntu. ^_^



On Tuesday, 26 October, 2010 12:09 PM, hard wyrd wrote:

I agree. It was quite misleading.


Regardless, I may be speaking for myself regarding this matter but, the UI decision isn't a deal breaker for me. What's so hard about doing "aptitude install your-favorite-ui-package" ?


I find the new move to be refreshing and bold. I'm on gnome-shell for a long while now, and ive been using it on a production workstation every friggin day. I feel like I've been working much faster on gnome-shell than on GNOME. But that's just me I suppose.


For the Unity decision? bring it on :).


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Allan E. Registos < allan.registos at smpc.steniel.com.ph > wrote:




Actually as one commentator pointed this out, the title is SJVN's article is misleading, it is not a departure from "GNOME" which is the desktop, but from the default shell of Gnome. Unity can be understood as a counterpart or another alternative of "Gnome Shell" which runs on top of Gnome.



From: "Stephen Piana" < stephen.piana at gmail.com >
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" < ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com >
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 9:15:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"



update

found this: http://www.jonobacon.org/2010/10/25/ubuntu-11-04-to-ship-unity/ :D


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Stephen Piana < stephen.piana at gmail.com > wrote:


Hhhhmm... "users want Unity as their primary desktop."? now that's funny. :p




On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Allan E. Registos < allan.registos at smpc.steniel.com.ph > wrote:






At least for the 11.04 release. Here is the link:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17224/ubuntu_changes_its_desktop_from_gnome_to_unity
Any thoughts?
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
Don't Mess With The TeNsAi!!!
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"

www.madforubuntu.com
baudizm.blogsome.com

[JC John Sese Cuneta]

Post by Allan E. Registos

So changing the desktop to Unity default, based on our experience, will further make the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even try. >"Unity for desktop as default" will not break that ice. For netbook, sure, it _is_ a netbook after all, we need space and speed. But for a >desktop as default? It's a bad decision.

Its too early to decide, whether its bad or good, but I will go for the good one, since I voted a +1 for this move.

:: My question is, why Unity? Why not gnome3? Other than the fact that
it is not yet "released" quality? Unity is good for netbooks, that I'm
full support.

:: But regardless, I'm not against Unity-desktop as default. My concern
is coming from the marketing/sales side of it. We geeks can install
Unity easily, the non-geeks, as I've said, doesn't think the way you and
I think. And then the question, is it time? Couldn't it have waited
until 11.10 or after the next LTS?

:: Oh, and since you're a team member :p My gripe with Unity (as
out-of-the-box) is a locked panel. I'm sure it will be unlocked for the
desktop? Or not? (Again for netbooks it is understandable?)

Post by Allan E. Registos

This clearly tells me that Canonical is done with the "come Windows users try us out" phase. The recent decisions, from Jaunty onwards, were >all signs to me that they have a new vision and a new objective. They are now treating Ubuntu as an independent "OS". A product worthy to be >called an Operating System in and of itself. Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.

I am hoping that the recent attack against Ubuntu as a mere packaging company does not inspire us to say that Canonical wants her OS to be apart from the Linux core. Ubuntu may not contributing more to upstream developers, but the distro is my default desktop when migrating large number of users to Linux, they have done a wonderful job of creating a user friendly desktop.

:: Not sure about that, I didn't even know there were new ones again. I
actually care less about the attacks on Canonical. Canonical is there
and it is for the good of the Ubuntu product, so let them attack
Canonical all they want, sooner or later they will see the value of
Canonical being there at the back and at the top of Ubuntu.

:: Also, I don't quite got the idea about Canonical being a mere
"packaing" company. What was that all about?

:: My analysis is not related in any way whatsoever with those "attacks"
and "views". And I am only coming from the marketing/sales side of it.

Post by Allan E. Registos

Right now, the popular OS are: Mac (for Unix, lolz), Windows, and Linux. Most are mis-informed about the name/brand "Linux" but not with >"Ubuntu". I only hope that the good reputation they have built behind the brand "Ubuntu" will bring the product to greater heights and success >with the new path and future they want to bring it to.

This is NOT Ubuntu/Canonical's fault for creating a bad name for "Linux" as an OS. Whose fault? The last time I check, this is my list: Asus, Acer and Lenovo. Lenovo's linux got pre-installed on some of their notebooks is junk and unusable (CLI). Acer's inclusion of Android as a dual-boot with Win7 (Another linux-based) is horrible. Asus' EEE line of netbooks got quickly replaced with Windows XP. At least Ubuntu offers the default Gnome(A Unix DE).

:: Meh, I did not say it was anybody's fault, and not even talking about
whose fault it was ^_^ I was in fact in favor of Ubuntu there,
re-positioning Ubuntu from being just another distro with a Linux OS to
being "the Ubuntu" or should I say, "the OS".

Post by Allan E. Registos

Maybe one day it will be like this: Mac, Windows, and Ubuntu. ^_^

One day, most applications are web-based, and the looks of Mac and Windows are irrelevant to the user as long as their is a "Web" browser that will run their applications.

:: One day. And for that one day to arrive, our net connection quality
and reliability should be at par with our northern neighbors. :)

Post by Allan E. Registos
My opinion.
The inclusion of Unity for the next release to my opinion is a welcome one. We do have a lot of DEs in Linux, but none of them even close to mainstream adoption not because the fault is on their side, but to me, it is because the "application support." Many ISVs today, as I noticed, were supporting Ubuntu in tandem with RHEL and other popular Linux distros. The more applications that will run on top of GNU/Linux, the more hardware manufacturers will support GNU/Linux.
Also, I believe we are in a "transition" period i.e., from traditional desktop to web-based apps, and at that time, Windows Desktop Environment becomes irrelevant, since the most important thing is the browser.

:: I hope so. And that "transition" period will be a very long one.
Our own country alone is far from being ready to go web-based, and even
more far to go cloud-based.



:: I don't know. And I'm sorry. I just see things from a different
perspective. I like Ubuntu, no, I _love_ Ubuntu more than any other
distros out there, so if possible, like in this case now, I detach
myself from it and see it objectively, and from a wider perspective.
And since I don't know the bigger picture that Canonical sees in its
mind, my only option is to analyze it based on what I have and know. I
may be wrong, I may be right.

:: And since I want people to use Linux or GNU/Linux, FLOSS/FOSS in
general too, I am happy that Canonical was born so it can guide Ubuntu.
For me, Ubuntu is the gateway to Linux. Maybe what I am trying to say
is, it could have been gradual or a two-step process. We are changing
the competition here. We are changing the "desktop" layout itself, what
people see, what people are accustomed to.

:: It gets harder and longer to explain things to Ubuntu newbies and
tryouts. I already got 4 (insignificant, I know) who told me re: Unity
"I don't want that, I want my desktop". And so here I go explaining what
a "desktop" is, which of course these people doesn't understand because
their brains are not wired like yours and mine.

:: Now it is easier if I'm present, I can switch it, voila. But
online? Like today, I am talking and so far convinced two people to
download Ubuntu and test it out, just try it. And these two are doing
it not for themselves but for their parents who are much more _not_
technologically wired. I can't even bein to imagine how they would have
reacted if the desktop that they will see is something else that they
are not accustomed to.

:: Install this and that? They'll delete Ubuntu faster than I could
have teach them how to switch desktops. Sure thing, 1, 2, 10?
Insignificant numbers. But as we all know, insignificant numbers makes
the best convincer.

:: Is everyone getting what the other side of the fence is all about?
That's where I am coming from. I have nothing against Canonical or
Ubuntu, I am simply sharing my analysis, and experience. From where we
are (we, as in my friends who are with me in convincing people to
migrate, not my friends who care less convincing others), the story is
different.

:: Unity it is, it's a done deal, and as I've said, geeks know how to
find solutions so not a problem at all to me. But I am concerned for
the average user. Anyway, at least I shared something from our
perspective and from the perspective of the people we're marketing
Ubuntu to. What I shared is not even half of it. Talk about
re-convincing people to try Ubuntu again, that's a whole different story.

:: But please don't misunderstand me. I'm all for Canonical, I'm all
for Ubuntu, and this "Unity-desktop as default" decision will not stop
me from convincing people to switch to Linux via Ubuntu (I rarely offer
Kubuntu as an option). It won't even slow me down.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101026/890cddad/attachment.pgp>

[Allan E. Registos]

:: My question is, why Unity? Why not gnome3? Other than the fact that
it is not yet "released" quality? Unity is good for netbooks, that I'm
full support.

My understanding is that according to the article, "Unity" will be customized for desktop purposes, and that according to Mark Shuttleworth, he was expecting multi-touch interfaces in the future and the utouch module is deeply integrated in the Unity shell.

:: But regardless, I'm not against Unity-desktop as default. My concern
is coming from the marketing/sales side of it. We geeks can install
Unity easily, the non-geeks, as I've said, doesn't think the way you and
I think. And then the question, is it time? Couldn't it have waited
until 11.10 or after the next LTS?

11.04 is the target release version. Nobody can answer that question except from the Ubuntu folks.

:: But regardless, I'm not against Unity-desktop as default. My concern
is coming from the marketing/sales side of it. We geeks can install
Unity easily, the non-geeks, as I've said, doesn't think the way you and
I think. And then the question, is it time? Couldn't it have waited
until 11.10 or after the next LTS?
:: Oh, and since you're a team member :p My gripe with Unity (as
out-of-the-box) is a locked panel. I'm sure it will be unlocked for the
desktop? Or not? (Again for netbooks it is understandable?)

No, I am not a team member. Too early to comprehend on what should the behavior of Unity at the time of 11.04 release. Their promise is there will be another Unity for the desktop and other for the netbooks. I believe the difference is not that big.

:: Not sure about that, I didn't even know there were new ones again. I
actually care less about the attacks on Canonical. Canonical is there
and it is for the good of the Ubuntu product, so let them attack
Canonical all they want, sooner or later they will see the value of
Canonical being there at the back and at the top of Ubuntu.
:: Also, I don't quite got the idea about Canonical being a mere
"packaing" company. What was that all about?

I stand corrected, my mistake, after I read from some comments they are very good at packaging/integration arena.
The accusation is "marketing organization masquerading as an engineering organization."
http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+empire+strikes+back&hl=en&ned=us&tab=nw
Not quite new.

:: Meh, I did not say it was anybody's fault, and not even talking about
whose fault it was ^_^ I was in fact in favor of Ubuntu there,
re-positioning Ubuntu from being just another distro with a Linux OS to
being "the Ubuntu" or should I say, "the OS".

Forgive me about that. I assume that when you customize Ubuntu for Windows users, Gnome or Ubuntu's Gnome is not that good enough for Windows users. The key is to educate them the ways of Linux. As I stated and this is my experience, Windows users like what we have here doesn't care much of the top and bottom panels of Gnome as long as they can "print", "share", and "run" MS office. At least Ubuntu looks just like what it is = with a Unix-based shell. Any Windows user who once use other distro with a Gnome desktop will quickly identify Ubuntu with Linux. Try that with the distros being customized to look like Windows, and those users will expect that it will behave as Windows, and if it doesn't they will junk it and say it is broken.

:: One day. And for that one day to arrive, our net connection quality
and reliability should be at par with our northern neighbors. :)

And the price? If our quality sucks, how about the cost of paying broadband connection? Is it competitive to our neighbors paying the same speed?
Monopoly is another story to tell.

:: I hope so. And that "transition" period will be a very long one.
Our own country alone is far from being ready to go web-based, and even
more far to go cloud-based.

Except for heavy games from most Internet Cafes and open/ office works, almost 99% percent of computer activity is the web. Facebook, online games, online research, online books, online *, etc. etc. This was my experience with a few computers for an NGO with Ubuntu installed as an OS. Users are all young people. It maybe long, but I'm crossing my fingers on what the Chrome OS will bring on the table. And I think Canonical also have this vision.

:: Now it is easier if I'm present, I can switch it, voila. But
online? Like today, I am talking and so far convinced two people to
download Ubuntu and test it out, just try it. And these two are doing
it not for themselves but for their parents who are much more _not_
technologically wired. I can't even bein to imagine how they would have
reacted if the desktop that they will see is something else that they
are not accustomed to.

It is almost impossible to convert a Windows power user to use Linux but it is always easy to get people who are not use to working with computers to use Linux immediately.

[Allan E. Registos]

Welcome to the Ubuntu GNU/Linux world... : - )
If you ever need some software to get installed in your system, the "Software Center", is your helper.
Installing a software in Windows "Click Setup.exe" is quite different in Linux, and it is easier in Linux than in Windows as long as the software is present in the "Software Center."



----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Lunar" <lunar.michael at yahoo.com.ph>
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" <ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 6:01:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"



hey...

am a newbie... just started using Ubuntu about three weeks ago. I was attempting to install Windows7 on my laptop but for some reason I cannot. Even with a clean install. My friend's got a 9.04 and he told me to wipe my laptop clean by installing Ubuntu and clean install Windows7 after... didn't work!

And soooo... I got stuck with with the 9.04! BUT when the Update Manager showed an Upgrade to 10.10, i clicked on upgrade and soon after... my laptop won't start! Tried slipstreaming Windows... didn't work! Then I made a Pendrive installer of Ubuntu10.04 following on-line instructions, installed it on my laptop and have been enjoying Ubuntu since then.

I am a convert and have been showing my new OS (with the jiggling windows) to my peers. One friend has actually installed Ubuntu using the Pendrive I created. Am still discovering a lot of things about Ubuntu hence I joined the Mailing list. Now... am a bit nervous about these changes you are talking about here...

Sorry... am not a full time techie (or what some call a geek), I'm an above average Windows user and would like to be formally "doctrinized" on Ubuntu... Am really starting to like it but am beginning to be wary...







From: hard wyrd <hardwyrd at gmail.com>
To: Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines) <ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:09:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Stephen Piana < stephen.piana at gmail.com > wrote:


as long as support for the current UI is still available then the new move is fine with me. :D but it's weird for a desktop to act/look like the netbook remix.


Something that's new will always be weird :). A radical approach will always be weird :).
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"

www.madforubuntu.com
baudizm.blogsome.com

[Ron Speers]

Ah, Then why don't you call Linux an OS for geeks and Windows an OS for everybody else (who knows how to spell English)

Ron Speers

Balibago, Angeles City

--- On Tue, 10/26/10, hard wyrd <hardwyrd at gmail.com> wrote:

From: hard wyrd <hardwyrd at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] SJVN reports that "Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity"
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" <ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 26, 2010, 5:36 PM


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:29 PM, JC John Sese Cuneta <jcjohn.sesecuneta at laibcoms.com> wrote:








Marked with ::



:: It's not really deception per se.? You have to consider where
they're coming from and where they're standing at.? For us geeks,
it's a no-brainer.? For them, it isn't.? Our brains function way
differently than the non-geeks.? And most of the time, we geeks are
willing to spend more time into reading, experimenting, learning,
asking questions, finding solutions, etc.? They are not and they
will never be.

Mimicking a UI of one OS is technically deception. And instead of letting those users get familiar with a Linux user interface, they'll continue on with the same thing from Windows.?

It is exactly this thinking - users "will never be" experimenting, learning, and asking questions - that made a lot of people call system administrators as BOFH in the first place. As tech people - knowledgeable in the systems - i believe it's the tech's responsibility to educate them, show them the hoops, guide them through the ropes a little. Yes they do experiment, yes they do ask questions, and yes they do find solutions as long as we are not so uptight about stuff and give them a little lee way to explore (within bounds). ?Honestly, they're just so damn afraid that they'll break something and afraid to earn the ire of the techs.
?
:: You see, if we ever want them to migrate, especially offices, we
need to see things from their eyes, from their perspective.? We need
to think like them.? We can not just go to them, present and demo
"our superior" product, and tell them every little and big thing
that we can think of why they need to migrate to Linux all we want.?
But if we can not address their needs, not ours but theirs, then
they will never bite.? They won't even bother trying it out.

Exactly. Under a consultant's point of view, it's bad form to just jump in without knowing what they want. But then again, when offering a Linux-based solution, make sure that they know it _is_ Linux with UI that's reminiscent of Linux and not some knock off of another OS, because that is definitely misleading.?
?
:: Personally, I have more success in converting people to use
Linux, or to be exact, Ubuntu, by presenting it to them based on
what they need and what they are looking for in an OS.? I first try
to find out more about them.? Their habbits, what are their primary,
secondary, and tertiary purposes of using a PC, and their outlook in
this matter.? Then when the time is right (or they gave the
schedule), everything that comes out of my mouth has been catered to
them.

Totally different from the mimicked UI we were discussing a few paragraphs back. But I agree on you on this part. That's what I do to clients as well. But I make sure I let them know it's Linux, Ubuntu, whatever, and I keep the UI as it is. But that's me. :).

?
:: It isn't perfect, and it is harder in office evironments.? But I
have better success in that method than presenting GNU/Linux and
Ubuntu "as-is".? It is far from being a deception.? We want to
present GNU/Linux as a product "for them, not for geeks".
Ubuntu is already usable as it is. Why change the UI to look like Windows???


So changing the desktop
to Unity default, based on our experience, will further make
the Windows users to _not_ to migrate, nor even try.? "Unity
for desktop as default" will not break that ice.? For
netbook, sure, it _is_ a netbook after all, we need space
and speed.? But for a desktop as default?? It's a bad
decision.






I don't quite think so. It requires relearning - yes.
Relearning was not a barrier to Windows users who purchased
Macs. They just have to learn the ins and outs. Sadly, a lot
of users want to be spoon fed. I've been there.


:: Well, Mac users are better than Windows users, they always have
been.
In what way were Mac users better than Windows users??
? Mac and GNU/Linux have the lowest share vs. Windows.? So our
side obviously can learn Windows much easier because our thinking
has been molded different already.? Windows users are not, as you
have said, "spoon fed".? And to add to that, Microsoft has a strong
marketing department.?Actually we have _unlearned_ Windows easily because we took a chance at trying another OS. Whether we want to admit or not, most users have used Windows since they starting using the computer. Fortunately, I'm a DOS person when I first started with the PC.






If the new user interface will be a lot simpler and
straight forward to use, then why not? At least it has to be
made clear to migrants that this is a different operating
system, and adjustments will need to be made.




:: If the name isn't "Windows" (or "Mac") then it is a different
operating system, there's no other way to be clearer than that.? ^_^?
?

This clearly tells me
that Canonical is done with the "come Windows users try us
out" phase.? The recent decisions, from Jaunty onwards, were
all signs to me that they have a new vision and a new
objective.? They are now treating Ubuntu as an independent
"OS".? A product worthy to be called an Operating System in
and of itself.? Ubuntu is Ubuntu.? Ubuntu _is_ _the_ OS.






I don't think they're going to drop "Linux" because it
still is a Linux distribution. To me the recent decisions were
to make it a bit more recognizable than "just another Linux
distro". How will it distinguish itself from the rest? It's
still Linux but something will need to be done as far as risks
and bold moves are concerned.


:: No, I wasn't referring to dropping Linux, it won't run without
it.? And if you meant "name", they never used "Ubuntu Linux", not
that I remember.? Regardless, that's what I was talking about.?
They're looking at the product to become a "household name".?
Instead of "Linux", it will be "Ubuntu".? It is still Linux
underneath, but the non-geeks know it by "Ubuntu".

Mac is Unix underneath. But do people refer to it as Unix? I think this is semantics :)?


:: For us, we care so much about correctness of terminologies, like
"GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux".? To the non-geeks, they do not care and
never will.? What they want is a working operating system that they
has a very low (re)-learning process - in other words, they can use
with minimal supervision and QnA's.



:: It's like this: "why fix when it is not broken?"? For them, "why
migrate to Linux (or GNU/Linux) if I already have Windows?"? We
can't just sell them "no viruses" if the individual or entity
(office environment) have a system in place that keeps viruses out
?'s of the time.? We can't just sell them "it is faster than
Windows" if the individual or their ITC department made enhancements
to it.? If we want to sell the idea to them, then we need to cater
the product to them.? If we want them to migrate, then we need to
give them compelling reasons to switch.
And compelling is using a UI that mimicks Windows?
Anyway, going back to the original reason why this thread exists. I don't think it will matter much if Ubuntu goes the Unity route. if people wanna use it, I don't think it's that hard to learn how use Unity. And people will try Ubuntu not because it uses Unity as a GUI, or GNOME, or whatever.?

Regards!?
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Penguin, penguin, and more penguin !"

www.madforubuntu.com

baudizm.blogsome.com


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101030/8688392d/attachment.html>

[jopoy solano]

Why not use one that works natively on Linux, like openbravo?

Please bear with typos. Sent from android.

Post by rdv
hi,
we are looking for a POS application that is compatible with ubuntu's wine
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ph/attachments/20101020/d2def52d/attachment.html>

[Allan E. Registos]

You can also find a suitable POS that is web-based(i.e. cross platform), in that you don't need Wine(Additional overhead).
Open source ERP is just a google away.

----- Original Message -----
From: "jopoy solano" <jopoy.solano at gmail.com>
To: "Mailing List para sa Ubuntu Pilipinas (Philippines)" <ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 4:15:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-PH] POS system that can run on WINE



Why not use one that works natively on Linux, like openbravo?

Please bear with typos. Sent from android.

Post by rdv
hi,
we are looking for a POS application that is compatible with ubuntu's wine
--
ubuntu-ph mailing list
ubuntu-ph at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ph