Full size

The 8 items in the home screen of Ubuntu Unity’s Dash have been found to be confusing in user testing and will be replaced for the next release.

I think the initial content should be similar to the search results that will be listed once there is text input. Basically the first n matches for a search for everything.

The search should be sub-string based, maybe even fuzzy and even support the categories that can be used in the filter section, to make the most of the user’s input. Especially when searching for files, one might remember a part of a name, not necessarily the beginning. Fuzziness should help with typos or variations in either input or searched content.

Turning the top panel transparent on activating the Dash suggests a connection to the right-side indicator menus, where there is none. It necessitates a variation of the window Close, Minimize and Maximize buttons.

The lense-switching buttons at the bottom seem odd. This placement almost maximizes the distance from the Dash trigger button. It gets ridiculous, if you maximize the Dash, especially on a large display. These buttons determine the entire content, which suggests they should be at the top or maybe on the left side. But what if the layout can be simplified by using the lense buttons both as section headers and pathways to their sections?

Rough, explorative mockups:

Full size

Full size

A second click on the Dash button closes the Dash, making it have the same function as the window Close button in this state. Could this be visualized? An admittedly brutal attempt, just to illustrate the idea:

I wonder if avoiding the potentially disruptive impression of the entire screen being taken over is worth having a Maximize button for the Dash and a layout that increases the need for scrolling (or paging as alternative). The button is yet another detail on the screen and costs the user a decision, not necessarily only once. Without it, the always disabled Minimize button could go, too.

I’ve come to enjoy launching and switching between applications via the Launcher. Making the distinction between running and not running applications less important and having stable targets for the most common applications is nice. But only as long as it’s about single window applications, as having to juggle windows after using the launcher just feels like a hassle. The single top bar switching between title and menu is great with maximized windows. This is barely enough to tolerate the shortcomings.

Alt-Tab window switching works for me only as long as no application has several windows. Switching on 2 levels, first application, then between windows of that application is too much work, costs too much thinking and thus breaks the flow. At least the Super-W shortcut for exposing all windows helps here, sometimes.

I sometimes run Ardour, which relies on the JACK audio server. This involves soft realtime requirements, which normally is not a problem. However, any use of Alt-Tab beyond a quick tap that does not even bring up the menu, causes Ardour to lag, making JACK kick it out. On Unity 3D, with nvidia driver. Isn’t this supposed to be GPU accelerated, leaving the CPU alone as far as possible? In principle this machine could record and playback several tracks while compiling the Linux kernel in the background, but I can’t use the window switcher without dropout. This made me try different nvidia driver versions, so I found out Jockey is confusing and sometimes claims there’s no driver enabled, while lsmod does list nvidia. Trying to switch between nvidia versions one can easily end up with an X in minimum resolution and a Unity 2D that likes to render artifacts more than rendering windows. It’s not obvious how to switch between nvidia and nouveau.

I’m used to 6 workspaces. I had to use CompizConfig to change that number. Initially, it looked like that didn’t work, because the change did not come into effect before logging out and in again. The workspace switcher icon remains static and always pretends you have 4 workspaces with 1 window on the first, making me miss GNOME 2′s panel indicator.

Since many years I have switching to specific workspaces bound to Alt-F1 to Alt-F6. I had to mess with both CompizConfig and Keyboard settings to make that work.

After a short break, I now went to pick up development with Emacs again. I have a number of window (what elsewhere might be called a pane or panel) related commands bound to the Super, aka Windows key. So I changed Unity’s trigger button, only to find that the setting has no effect; the Super key still triggers Unity, while the new shortcut has no effect at all. I found a matching bug, with a suggested workaround involving going into unity config by hitting Alt+F2, to enter about:config. Since my Alt+F2 is bound to something else, I tried to assign a new shortcut to Show the run command prompt. Whatever I try, it is ignored. Now I can either drop Unity, or edit my .emacs and retrain against my muscle memory.

UPDATE: I now had success in changing the trigger key for Unity, but I don’t know what exactly made the difference.

I haven’t done any real work with GIMP on Unity, yet, but guess I won’t enjoy the global menu behavior there.

I suggested a number of fonts for the project and Lato was chosen. So I made my type have the same relative x-height and adjusted the kerning. Old on top, Lato in the middle:

The intention is to give it enough character to be recognizable, especially now that it stands alone, without making it busy. A little quirky, but not silly.

But Marcus as head of visual design insists on the layout that is specified on page 105 of the guidelines, only allowing the symbol to be replaced and a choice of regular or light weight for the 2nd word:

Thus:

This makes the symbol appear so weak and fragile and highlights what I think is the biggest problem of the updated visual identity: the relative size of the Circle of Friends (and any symbol taking its place for a derivative or sub-project) leaves it ending up so damn small, given the usual sizes for the text as used on the web. I doubt that a person not familiar with the CoF would be able to make out its actual geometry, given that tiny pixel-salad on the upper right of ubuntu.com.

I made it very clear that this solution is not acceptable to me and that I think going with the plain CoF would be better under this circumstances. Ara and Co respect this wish. I’m done with this, but let me close with what will be the solution, if no one else comes up with another idea (and why would anyone, given those guidelines):

Full size

I chose 2 concepts from the sketches that I think are the strongest and appropriate shapes, with what I like to think of as a tribal flair. The bottom is a little rough; it offers room for lots of variations and tweaks.

SVG file.

The project is looking for a logo. Initially I wanted to limit my contribution to guidance. That doesn’t seem to work out and now I made the mistake to pick up the pen …

It looks like Flickr and DeviantArt serve as main references. OStatus based messaging and the option to set up your own instance shall be among the benefits of this project.

While a logotype (without symbol/emblem) would be an option, there’s a desire for a symbol and that’s what I will explore now.

As this won’t be just for photos (or just for music or just for video), we are left with the highly abstract media, where a symbol would have to be about all the options or none at all. The community and sharing aspect is shared by many projects and commonly leads to circles and hand-holding little people symbols and stuff like that

The goblin in the name may serve as inspiration, but the tone shouldn’t become silly or scary. It’s meant to be somewhat lighthearted and playful, but not to the degree where it would rub against dead serious user content.

The SVG files can be found in the Launchpad branch. The sticker file has an outline on a separate layer; it should only be used for presenting on white ground, not be printed on actual stickers.

My intent was to present a fairly linear process from conception to execution. In the end it became a bit chaotic, as this wasn’t one of those cases where a design just clicks after only few rounds. I had to cut down on presenting variations along the way, in favor of actually getting things done

Thanks for the feedback along the way. especially to those who went beyond just stating a preference for one variation!

I worry that the spirographs from the previous set might lead to trouble in reproduction. The exact cutting that would be required …

The dot pattern in the left sticker repeats the relative size and distance of the 3 heads of the Circle of Friends.

The right sticker picks up geometry from the logo draft.

The last image shows the construction to determine the sticker size and logo placement. Years ago, during DTP training, I found that I would often place elements in a layout close to within certain relations. The constructive approach can save you a lot of fiddling, but also lead to solutions you wouldn’t have found otherwise. It’s easy to get tangled up, though

In a general sense, intuition is defined as knowledge or belief obtained neither by reason nor by perception, instinctive knowledge or belief or similar.

There’s hardly anything in user interfaces that you don’t have to learn. You just might have learned it long ago in a different context. Humans even have to learn to walk and talk. Some say the nipple would be the only “intuitive” interface. I’ve been told that not even breast feeding just works on first try …

If you call something that has to be learned intuitive, you render that word useless, as it now also refers to what it used to exclude. Should you just want to express easy to learn or works as expected, just do so directly. Don’t be needlessly ambiguous.

To be precise: Lacking a mind, software cannot intuit, not be intuitive, it could be intuitable (support the user’s intuition) at best.

What makes an interface seem “intuitive” is actually familiarity. It might be useful to think of familiarity coming from 3 sources:

• Physical, real world experience that can be leveraged with metaphors and pseudo-physical interface elements (or perhaps custom interface hardware).
• Experience with existing software.
• Concepts/thought-models from specific fields.

Jef Raskin wrote a great Article: Intuitive Equals Familiar. Bruce Tognazzini says similar things. Also very enlightening: What Makes a Design Seem ‘Intuitive’?.