News that Unity is going to be the default shell in Natty Narwhal has raised some questions about the road ahead for Ubuntu developers. On the one hand, there are some good reasons for adopting Unity as an alternative to Gnome Shell. The Unity interface which is associated with Ubuntu Netbook allows for Compiz to remain relevant, as both KDE and Gnome Shell are Compiz independent and are moving away from Compiz. On the other hand, Mark Shuttleworth has admitted that file management in Unity is not where it should be and future editions will have to rely on Nautilus.
The wisdom of deploying a single launcher for applications as Unity does, raises all sorts of issues to do with the overall look and feel of Ubuntu. While the Unity launcher is arguably an example of application neutrality, with a caresol that does not favour any one application, the design brings no immediately obvious benefits to the user. Cairo-dock for instance is a lot more attractive and there are already quite a few docks which perform better.
Is the design of Ubuntu being dictated to by the need to entertain a complex and diverse community with design objectives which are instantly realisable? Instead of focusing on difficult productivity issues, for example, drag 'n drop and ease of use (The lack of a common drag 'n drop library is a case in point)? Ubuntu may be getting sidetracked by the plethora of handheld devices -- the need to compete on cutting edge hardware, instead of servicing the vast majority of users who have desktop machines.
What happens when Gnome eventually releases its next desktop? Will we end up with parallel development or will development within Gnome suffer because of Unity? I have my reservations and can't help wondering if the focus around Unity is merely a distraction from the work which needs to be done in Gnome in order to compete with Windows 7 and OSX.
Here is what Gnome Developers had to say about the decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment