I wanna go home

[UniSuperBox]

@Keneda Ah, I see. I apologize, I assumed intent where there was none. Getting defensive in my stressed state.

For the record, I don't believe that a desktop where you can put things is impossible, but there are several questions that aren't easy to answer with it. For example:

1. How do you reorder the desktop when the user goes from a small screen to a large one? What about when they go back again? What if they have too many items on their desktop, and they float off the available real estate?
2. Desktops have files on them too. But we don't work with files, we work with content. How do you put content on your desktop, where content could be a file, or a database entry on someone's service. For example, you could have an odt file or you could have a document on your NextCloud server.

That's why my suggestion is to gather people to answer these questions rather than assert that they should be answered. I agree, if we think that a traditional "desktop" is the best way to present content that the user wants to come back to often, we should make that happen. But what's more interesting is how, not if.

And honestly, it's hard to answer if if we don't know how.

@Flohack and @Lakotaubp, I think everyone understands this. I directed people here if they are angry (or just slightly miffed) at the change, so expect more replies here over the next few days.

[dobey]

@Keneda said in I wanna go home:

And maybe include other devs in core project, like the Launcher Modular dev.

Anyone is welcome to contribute to the core projects, but when we suggest they do, give them hints on where to look, and they decide to go off and make their apps which abuse the system instead of helping to improve it, there isn't much more we can do about that.

But we need to actually understand needs, where things fail, etc… before we can build quality experiences and quality software. We can't simply assert some truth with absolutely zero data, such as having feature X will make everyone happy, because at the very least, such a statement will never be true. Adding every feature that gets asked for, with no understanding of the underlying issues, will only end up with a worse experience for everyone (cf. MS Office).

Furthermore, Open Source Software is built up from people scratching their own itches, for the most part. If you are unable to scratch that itch yourself, it's fine, but making denigrating comments about the state of Linux and Open Source, will not help nor change things. Developing software takes much time and energy.

[Keneda]

@dobey said in I wanna go home:

but making denigrating comments about the state of Linux and Open Source

I didn't. Read again please...
And, i love open-source.

Anyone is welcome to contribute to the core projects, but when we suggest they do, give them hints on where to look, and they decide to go off and make their apps which abuse the system instead of helping to improve it, there isn't much more we can do about that.

Are you telling that's what launcher modular dev did?

[hummlbach]

Yes we need to improve collaboration between the laucher modular guys and the unity guys...
I didn't follow all the numerous discussions closely, but have there ever been concrete advice how the launcher modular (respectively the parts of it that are not yet covered by the app drawer [launching apps]) could be integrated into the app drawer? I believe we're just bad at communication/collaboration here...(?)

[AppLee]

@hummlbach said in I wanna go home:

I believe we're just bad at communication/collaboration here...(?)

I believe that too. And I personally reached out to "launcher modular" s people to better understand their need.
I can say that they want a way to integrate special apps (launchers) into the system either to replace one of the available "sidebar launcher" or "app drawer" (not sure how to call the first one).
My understanding is that such "launcher" should have special rights and an API must be made to fulfill this requirement.

The problems I see are the confinement or rights allocated to such "launcher" apps, how to grant them special rights, how to identify them in the Open-store and how to fast access such app.
Regarding the latter a proposal was to hack the orange logo but it's something that will mess with the UX in convergence.

I hope we can put together all the good willing people and come to something doable and acceptable for most people.

[hummlbach]

Yes, okay, for me too that would be an appealing thing, but if the decision was to not implement such an API (due to complexity and so on and what not...) (for now), would jimmy and kazord agree and help to integrate the widget like stuff for example into the app drawer directly? (What would be the argument against it, as long as there are not multiple interfering launcher ideas...? Maybe because you're not entirely free to do what you'd like to, but need some people to agree on what you're doing...?)

[dobey]

@Keneda said in I wanna go home:

Are you telling that's what launcher modular dev did?

It came out of the announcement that scopes were deprecated and would be removed. It also abused the system to replace the old dash with itself. That can't be done any more with OTA-12, as all the dash related stuff was removed.

[TotalSonic]

If there was an option in System Settings for "launch app(s) on startup" the people wishing the ability to have an application launcher / "home" other than the left edge quick launchers and the App Drawer - could choose something like Launcher Modular, Sprint, QML Launcher, of Simple Dash (all currently available in the Open Store) to be opened automatically right after bootup. Maybe something to consider for inclusion for say OTA-14 or after.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Keneda]

@dobey said in I wanna go home:

It also abused the system to replace the old dash with itself.

What do you mean by "abuse"? Are there any unalllowed things he did?
Why this launcher's even on open store if it abuses system in a way UBports devs don't endorse?

In a hackers world, what right and what's wrong? What makes you a white one, or an "abusing" one?

It looks like you really don't like the man...

@AppLee said in I wanna go home:

I hope we can put together all the good willing people and come to something doable and acceptable for most people.

If it could be, would be great yes...

[UniSuperBox]

@Keneda,

To be clear, you can still use launcher-modular. It's not going away. It's still an app that can be launched on OTA-12 just as well as on OTA-11. It still has full access to your contacts, apps, and the rest of your data. So it can still do the same job. The only difference is that it doesn't launch automatically, and doesn't appear when you perform a long swipe from the left of the screen.

Yes, there is a set list of things that apps may do, and Launcher Modular goes outside of that list. It modifies system files in order to replace the unity8-dash installed on OTA-11 and earlier. unity8-dash was removed in OTA-12, so it cannot do this any more. That was never a supported method to launch an app, so it should not have been surprising when it went away. But the OpenStore does allow apps which do things like modify system files, provided they are open source and manually reviewed.

@TotalSonic, Is launching an app on startup a solution to this problem? If the app is pinned to your Launcher, that only saves one tap. I can understand the feeling of it being better, but is it really so much more efficient that we should expend the effort?

[hummlbach]

Are there any unalllowed things he did?
...
It looks like you really don't like the man...

Its really not about blaming jimmy or kazord or anyone! Of course we're all free to do with the system what we like to...

What do you mean by "abuse"?
...
What makes you a white one, and a "abusing" one?

"Abusing" means doing things in a way they're not meant to be done. Doing things that aren't supported. And they mostly aren't supported not because someone wants to restrict anyone or dictate what (app) devs should do, but to ensure the stability and security of the system. For example dekko, rockwork, telescope or ut tweak tool are also "abusing" the system. They are unconfined mostly (except uttt in this list) to run daemons in the background which may lead to substantial battery drain, which indeed reduces the "systems quality". Average Joe user might not know and yell at ubports while they aren't causing the problem <- bad situation...
That all doesn't mean someone doesn't like the devs of these apps...! Its just that it would actually make more sense to create the necessary APIs/features the OS is lacking than finding ways around it, punching security holes and creating instabilities. Thats what dobey isn't happy with... But it may not be clear (or even far from obvious) how the needed APIs should look like, and more work to create them instead of working around it abusing the system and not every app dev feels capable to contribute to such an API.

Why this launcher's even on open store if it abuses system in a way UBports devs don't endorse?

Because its known that there are functions missing and it takes time to get them in place, and if theres an app fulfilling some needs which currently could hardly serve its purpose without "abusing" the system is therefore accepted. (And if you allow such things it gets hard to decide where to draw the line...)

[Keneda]

@hummlbach

Ok i was writing a long answer and yours justed poped during that time and aswered lot of my questions or even you said what i was thinking.

So i just kept that part :
"Abusing" is a strong word i think, because it has a wicked connotation.

Anyway, i hope each one of you, core devs or not, will be able to understand each other, and work together, so we can have the best of you

[TotalSonic]

@UniSuperBox said in I wanna go home:

@TotalSonic, Is launching an app on startup a solution to this problem? If the app is pinned to your Launcher, that only saves one tap. I can understand the feeling of it being better, but is it really so much more efficient that we should expend the effort?

Dalton - you make a very good point. I was just trying to come up with some way of making those who are wanting "alternative launchers" to have this seemingly be more seamlessly integrated with the OS - but you are very correct that just launching a pinned app is really a just a minor inconvenience.

One thing I can add though, is that most Linux DE's allow one to set a list of apps that one can automatically launch on startup - and if Lomiri is going to ultimately end up as a more widely used DE, then this might be a feature that people will be requesting to be available in System Settings at some point in the future anyway. But I definitely can see where a ton of other feature additions need to be placed in priority well ahead of this, for sure.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[stan]

if you need feedback, or taking opinion .
i don't like the absence of a gesture to take to home screen which is for me
the empty background comfortable and natural.

[kugiigi]

In my opinion, at this point it's not scopes versus app drawer anymore. App drawer is already coming and nothing can be done to stop it And we shouldn't see the app drawer as is and compare and list all its missing functionalities. OTA-12 is just the first step to the transition. We should focus on how to move forward with these changes and improve what we have. Just a quick thought, perhaps we can use the new app menu from the upper left for something like a HUD where you can do quick actions system-wide instead of putting everything in the app drawer.

[dobey]

@stan said in I wanna go home:

the empty background comfortable and natural.

I still don't understand this. If you close all apps, it is empty save for top panel and launcher. What is good about wasting battery by keeping the screen on and staring at an empty background?

[dobey]

@Keneda said in I wanna go home:

"Abusing" is a strong word i think, because it has a wicked connotation.

What word would you use instead? Exploit? Subvert?

It is an accurate description of what the app does, as it circumvents and modifies system behavior.

[kugiigi]

@dobey said in I wanna go home:

@stan said in I wanna go home:

the empty background comfortable and natural.

I still don't understand this. If you close all apps, it is empty save for top panel and launcher. What is good about wasting battery by keeping the screen on and staring at an empty background?

I think this is really just a preference. But to be fair, using a keyboard shortcut, there's a way to minimize all apps and show the desktop. So I guess it's not a bad thing to have it as well via gesture/button. Actually I was thinking of adding it in the app spread

[KrishneshG]

I wana go home where it is safe and where my kingdom stands

the following are suggestions and just my two cents these suggestions and comments are directed at no party or developer, i am just a android developer adding my two cents in a attempt to help UBPorts become successful. i will break my comments down in sections that are hopefully insightful and a new perspective from a outsider.

The land on which i stand
It is important to understand when we are developing a new os which has its underpinnings solidly rooted in safety and security for the end user this does not mean we must give up on past experiences and leanings which may not be our own. Innovation is not the process of a new idea but the execution of a idea in a way that makes it better then before.

for ubports what this means is do not attempt to rebuild the wheel there is a set of navigation traditions that work well and have been accepted by the mobile community and these traditions do not effect the safety and security of the device therefor we should adopt them bellow is a outline of what this could look like.

Gesture navigation has now been formalised in the mobile world these learning can be applied to ubports for a seamless transition into the OS. I would recommend we keep the left to right swipe to open the app menu as this is a uniquely ubports take on the apps menu. however we should consider a bottom to top swipe to get back to a home screen as well as a bottom to top swipe stopping in the centre to get to the currently running applications.

meanwhile the right to left swipe currently being used for the currently running apps should serve as a back gesture. many apps have the back key all the way at the top its hard to reach at times and will continue to be this way on larger devices.

Take me to my kingdom
The home screen every os has one this space should be one that is configurable and usable for the user. we must take into account ubuntu desktop has a screen where a wallpaper can be changed as well as shortcuts can be placed. this area should be available for each user to decide what they wish to do on it and not dictated to them by the os.

ubports != desktop in your pocket
we must remember however a mobile phone is not our desktop its purpose is not the same, therefor we must also consider how we use the device. allot of what users want to do is get information quickly at a glance and lets remember parts of what makes Linux special is the ability to customise it. we must consider implementing a way to have widgets and desktop apps on the main screen this dose not make us a lesser os just because others have also done it it makes this product a viable alternative with all the benefits of a safety and privacy respecting os.

[dobey]

@KrishneshG said in I wanna go home:

we must remember however a mobile phone is not our desktop its purpose is not the same, therefor we must also consider how we use the device.

This is not quite true. Actually with Ubuntu Touch (and with Android 10+), when you connect the phone to an external display, mouse, and keyboard, either wired or with Miracast adapter, you get a more traditional windowed layout, and legacy apps can become useful through the Libertine container support.

Simply because you personally don't use something, or that you aren't aware of a capability of the OS, doesn't mean others use it or it doesn't or shouldn't exist.