Design of the control center

nero355

@capsia said in Design of the control center:

@aarontheissueguy Hello!

I'd rather add functions to Bluetooth and location indicators instead of grouping things. Many things can be added to make them feel less empty and more functional.

https://www.figma.com/file/2n5Tn2zp3usbfeltFzY8BD/Indicators

I've done some sketches, let me know what you think

What a horrible website to view...

Please upload it to IMGur or somewhere else where the file is easier to view!

About all these options in general :

Changing the layout can wait IMHO

What really needs to change is the amount of options/settings!
More of them and more advanced options/settings should be a priority instead of the GUI at the moment!

AppLee

@nero355 said in Design of the control center:

More of them and more advanced options/settings should be a priority instead of the GUI at the moment!

Sorry but I disagree with this assessment.
More options will make it too crowdy and will render the feature useless for many users.
Ubuntu Touch is easy to use and every is well placed and accessible. This is a corner stone of the OS IMHO.

So look'n'feel (emphasis on feel) is way more important IMO

aarontheissueguy

@applee I agree that more options are not the solution here. The indicators shouldnt replace the settings app. The design @Capsia proposed looks interesting I like the Idea of hiding indicators you dont need at the moment.

Capsia

@nero355 Here you have Imgur if you prefer: https://imgur.com/a/NPM6q5R

I think that indicators should have only frequently used actions, not become a second settings app. Maybe the post title gave a wrong idea about what we are trying to reorganize here.

We can add more shortcuts and quick toggles for frequent options. On the other side less indicators means less time to search for a specific one when you need to do something, so it would be good to categorize better and reduce the number of blank indicators without actually removing functions. Hiding them only when are void might be a solution for this. Some indicators currently only have one option or two, but they have the potential to have more quick options like bluetooth, location or screen indicators, I'd keep those separate.

For a more personal organization of the indicators we could set in the settings which indicators to show and which to hide ( if someone uses rarely bluetooth, she/he might not want to have the indicator, but use the settings instead when needed )

nero355

@applee said in Design of the control center:

@nero355 said in Design of the control center:

More of them and more advanced options/settings should be a priority instead of the GUI at the moment!

Sorry but I disagree with this assessment.
More options will make it too crowdy and will render the feature useless for many users.
Ubuntu Touch is easy to use and every is well placed and accessible. This is a corner stone of the OS IMHO.

So look'n'feel (emphasis on feel) is way more important IMO

Maybe I was not clear enough :

I meant in general in Ubuntu Touch overall.

For me this OS should be a mobile PC basically that can be used as a Phone too and in that regard I am missing a lot of stuff my Laptop or PC can do and my phone can't
.
.
.
I always call Android "Fake Crippled Linux" but at the moment it has more (customization) options than Ubuntu Touch has or even had before UBports took over the project!

AppLee

@nero355 said in Design of the control center:

For me this OS should be a mobile PC basically that can be used as a Phone too

Sadly you're mistaken.
Ubuntu Touch is intended to be a modern mobile phone operating system.
So it has specific constraints and design choices.

For a mobile PC you have to look for devices based on Intel-like chipset.
Or to other distros like Mobian.

I don't want to drive you away but Ubuntu Touch is intended for regular users with basic needs regarding the smart aspect of their smartphone.
Here it might be my own interpretation but a PC with all the desktop ecosystem is not the objective. It's nice to have but not the main focus.

cliffcoggin

@nero355 said in Design of the control center:

For me this OS should be a mobile PC basically that can be used as a Phone too and in that regard I am missing a lot of stuff my Laptop or PC can do and my phone can't
.

In fact UT is, and is intended to be, just the opposite: a phone with some computing ability.

Keneda

@cliffcoggin said in Design of the control center:

a phone with some computing ability

Don't we call this.... A smartphone ?

Lakotaubp

@nero355 As @applee says ,UBports Ubuntu Touch is designed to be the best mobile OS it can be and when (where possible) connected to external monitor continues to run just as well there. It is not and is not supposed to be a pc in your pocket with a phone attached. Other projects are doing that and we wish them well. We will continue to do what we do best and develop Ubuntu Touch OS.
We welcome all users and participation in the project and community and you are more than welcome to participate in anyway you can but the pc in your pocket is not where we are going.

nero355

@lakotaubp
I am a bit sad to read that because the thing that made me like Ubuntu Touch was in fact Convergence because it's my idea of how phones should have been at that point instead of a silly toy with even sillier apps on it that were forced on us by Apple and also Google later on!

It's also the reason why I am running ZERO Android apps on my Ubuntu Touch Phone : I want to move away from that OS as far as I can!

Maybe I am way ahead of my time ?!

AppLee

@nero355
Convergence is a bit different for me.

If you want the same experience from a laptop and from a phone, you cannot.
Simply because a phone is much smaller and the interfaces are totally different (keyboard vs VKB, mouse VS touchscreen, 27" display vs 6" screen, ...)

Some laptop have a SIM port and I guess if you tinker a bit you might be able to make a phone call.
But it will be an horrible experience for a phone.

Convergence is another thing for me.
You have various devices around you, tablets, computers, smartphones, etc. and they are not compatible they have similar features but run different OSes and the experience to continue a task through those devices is not ideal.
Convergence for me is about bringing a piece of software dedicated to a task I need to do on all my devices.
I want to have access to telegram using the exact same client wether I'm on a laptop, my phone or even a smartwatch. The UI need to adapt so I can interact with only one software that I trust.

Also for many people around the world a laptop is not something they really need. Because some people just need the features offered by a smartphone but with a larger screen and a large physical keyboard and a mouse to interact with it.
An external discplay is something nice to have but the resources available on a phone are not enough for a modern usage of a computer.

Convergence is for me bringing a seamless experience through the variety of form factor computers can take.
I imagine one day a belt buckle with modem and GPS. This unit offers connectivity to other accessories and the computing power can be hosted in a cloud with the softwares.
And depending on your usage, you can bring a small 6" screen with you everywhere. But in your office, you'll have 2 big 30" screen a nice ergonomic keyboard and mouse, in your car the HUD will display relevant information while filtering distractions and in your living room a 12" touchscreen will allow you to surf while watching TV or even stream directly to your TV...
This is my vision for the future and what I would do if I were Elon Musk

nero355

@applee
Your rolemodel might not be the kind/ideal/perfect guy you think he is so watch out with that!

But you are horribly wrong about Convergence :

If Canonical did not fail so hard it would have been even better than what for example Samsung DeX is at the moment!

You say phones don't have enough power for daily PC usage but you are horribly wrong : Any ARM SoC that is the equal of the Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 or newer has a lot of processing power that is simply WASTED by putting all that power into a phone!

That's why they overheat a lot for some time now : Those things need to be in a small PC box of the size of a Intel NUC for example!

Why wouldn't you want to have the following experience :

Use GPS to get your work.
At work you dock the phone and use it with mouse+keyboard+monitor(s) to do your work.
Leaving towards a customer on the plane you dock the phone into a Laptop shell to do some work.
Use the phone as such to send the customer a short message that you have arrived and will be on your way to their location soon.
Dock the phone into the Console of a rental car to use GPS to get towards that customer.
And so on...

For me this picture was simply HEAVEN : https://i2.wp.com/9to5linux.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/pro1x.jpg?zoom=2&resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1

Not having that after 11 years of Apple & Google apps horror is simply a waste of our lifetime!

AppLee

@nero355
I pre-ordered the Pro 1 X so I totally agree.
But the power is still not enough for my daily usage of a computer :

Libre Office
Gimp / DarkTable / Inkscap / Blender
Spotify (yeah proprietary but works well enough)
Firefox with more than 20 tabs
Thunderbird

I frequently need 8 to 10 GB of RAM and CPU/GPU powerfull enough to run those apps without waiting 10 minutes for them to launch.
A phone is not yet powerfull enough to launch and run Firefox, TBird or The Gimp...

nero355

@applee
Then there is something horribly wrong with either the phone or the software...

I can imagine a shortage or RAM in some scenarios but not enough CPU power should not be the case : The SD835 has more than enough of it!

I know people who use less powerfull ARM SoC's on a daily basis without any issue at all!

AppLee

@nero355
A computer is not just CPU, RAM and ROM
The buses used have a limited bandwidth and CPU clock is not an issue since a long time ago.

A 2GHz CPU doesn't mean the hardware is able to run a fully featured software.
disk IO is a common limiter as well as virtual buses being less efficient than multiple dedicated buses...

A phone is not a regular computer. Of course the limitation depend on the usage.

nero355

@applee
I believe your phone has UFS Storage ?!

Ofcourse it's not SATA SSD or NVMe SSD but it should do the job just fine!

About the buses and bandwidth I am not sure at the moment...
It has been a while that I have seen the schemes and details of those SoC's