Lowest common denominator
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| r_a_trip May 17, 2010 8:57 AM EDT |
It seems Mark S. was serious when he proclaimed he wanted to fix bug number one. Canonical is really gunning for the lowest ability end user. I'm not against single click, I use it myself. It is the rationale behind it. "Our user are too ignorant to know the difference between single and double click. Let's just switch to single click." Instead of coming up with ways to elevate the common knowledge level of their end users, Canonical is opting to dumb the OS down. Of course that will work short term. Long term Canonical will find it increasingly difficult to introduce new features, because their end users won't be used to and be frightened by unfamiliar and slightly more advanced things. Following this line of thought to its absurd end point, Ubuntu will become a distro with just a single button on the desktop. Microsoft should be worried, they have serious competition now. |
| jdixon May 17, 2010 9:07 AM EDT |
> Microsoft should be worried, they have serious competition now. That's the conclusion I reached a while ago. I think the button change fiasco is what finalized it in my mind. Fortunately, it's all open source, so we can change it. And someone will. |
| theboomboomcars May 17, 2010 11:48 AM EDT |
I also use the single click feature, but setting it as default doesn't seem like a good idea. Since most users are migrating from windows, and I do see several double click on hyperlinks, it seems that most users are already used to the whole double click thing. |
| azerthoth May 17, 2010 12:28 PM EDT |
click? oh right GUI's with icons ... drrr Humorously, because I can never seem to keep my systems configured the same way from one box to the next, when using the rat I default to single click anymore. When that doesn't work do I do double, so those are actually now triple click set ups. I have managed however to set up my keyboard shortcuts the same across all systems, regardless of if they have icons on the pretty screens or not. |
| JaseP May 17, 2010 1:09 PM EDT |
I single click. This is especially useful in touch screen setups. But my wife was a Windozer before I switched her over. I keep her system functioning as close to the way she was used to as I can,... as I was experiencing an annoying buzzing sound in my ears until I switched it back for her... If they want to keep traction with M$ converts, they should simply make it a question in the Ubiquity set up tool when installing... |
| Steven_Rosenber May 17, 2010 1:14 PM EDT |
I also single-click. I was probably introduced to it by Puppy Linux, and like so many things we pick up in one distro, we want to do it in another and look to implement that feature. And I have. Do you know any "real" normal users? I've seen many of them habitually double-click on Web links because that's what they're used to doing with applications. Unless they somehow are educated about the single-click feature, they'll spend a bit of time having two app windows open each time they want to start a program. As a default, it could be more annoying than useful. |
| number6x May 17, 2010 2:20 PM EDT |
Single click Every time I sit down at a Windows box and single click an icon, I feel like Scotty in Star Trek IV talking to the mouse. I sit there waiting for something to happen until I realize I have to click it twice so it knows I'm sure I wanted to do that. I just expect computers to do what I tell them, not be stuck in the 1980's. |
| hkwint May 18, 2010 7:17 PM EDT |
Mr Trip: Ubuntu is going after MacOSX, not after Windows / Microsoft. One-click mouse, discussing esthetics and purple background are 'inventions' of Apple, not Microsoft. |
| Steven_Rosenber May 18, 2010 7:59 PM EDT |
Like many things, I would have never thought that single-clicking would be useful, but once I had it in Puppy Linux, I wanted it everywhere. I have Ubuntu and Debian set up to single-click. I even have my employer-supplied XP box set up for single-click. I do use Macs on occasion, but I'm no fanboy about it. However, I can see the wisdom in Ubuntu aping OS X from a design standpoint. Windows wins in the low end, but Apple has the entire high end of the market sealed up. If Windows users see Ubuntu as a free Mac substitute that runs on non-Mac hardware and includes the customary busload of free applications. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!