Contributor BadChoice

Why do we always pick the crap animals for the codenames of our releases?
We have shit like "Breezy Badger", "Hoary Hedgehog", "Warty Warthog", "Gutsy Gibbon", "Hardy Heron", and "Intrepid Ibex".
These are weak shit animals that cant even hunt anything, they get preyed on by the big animals.

This while Mac OS X gets to have all the cool animals, they have Cheetah, Puma, Jaguar, Tiger, Panther, Leopard, etc. All big, strong and dangerous animals that can roar!

We should have the badass animals. The king of the jungle, the top of the food-chain!

Stop picking weak names like badger, hedgehog, rabbit, butterfly, etc.
We should have badass names like "Gruesome Godzilla", "Terrifying Tyrannosaurus", "Vicious Velociraptor", "Tireless Tigershark", "Fearless Falcon", "Crushing Crocodile", etc.

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/8439/convoqt9.png
http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/259/godzillabz0.png
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/9386/convo2al7.png

In Ubuntu the taskbar is using both text and icons to display the buttons for windows navigating. A operating system should never use text for functions thats is commonly used, and is possibly to have without text. The text does it hard for the brain to quickly search the taskbar and choose the right application, it's also makes it look messy.

A taskbar with only icons would be very good i think, also tabs is being implemented in almost every application, making taskbar text useless since there often only be one instance of every application. to not loose the text entirely. A mouse over could be used to display the text. (or using compiz effects to display a thumbnail of the window)

I have not taken the time to figure out how it would be implemented in Desktop Enviroment.

[This idea is closed...it wouldn't really benefit anyone]

i think the mouse is not accurate

sorry for my english :)

A right-click option for the applications list that allows the user to indicate that they prefer an application to minimize as a notification area icon, rather than an entry in the application list.

The original idea is below to prevent confusion, but as of hearing this:
http://practical-tech.com/operating-system/mozilla-to-remove-firefox-eula/
I am abandoning this idea; it may be closed. Good day.


It recently became apparent that Mozilla is going to let us
A. Require users to agree to a EULA or
B. Lose their brand.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NjcxOA

I say the latter is preferable-- and I think we should immediately take advantage of this newfound freedom: starting with the GUI layout-- because things shouldn't have to be so frigging complicated. As an example, my firefox window layout is such:

------------------------------------
[title bar]
[menu bar] (back) (forward) (refresh) (+tab) (stop) [Awesome Bar]
[tab bar if tabs > 1]
[content]
------------------------------------

This places the most often used part of the awesome bar right in the top-center of my screen, and because the default layout is so redundant, I lose very little convenience. The Awesome Bar performs search for me, it stores bookmarks, it shows security, and tabs show when a page is loading. To mind, the only functionality I lose with this layout is the display of link destinations in the status bar when I hover over them (I don't have a status bar, recall) -- and that's something I can easily live without, it's just a right click +p away.

[....]

It's not an option for now of course, but everyone who use it saw the real speed web surfing that we need!

1) May be as a first step - use it i Ubuntu mobile (now I see Firefox is too heavy for it)
2) Chrome in Ubuntu

Some tests: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10030888-92.html

I believe it would be a good idea to redesign the file system hierarchy in Ubuntu in a way similar to GoboLinux . Especially as a newbie migrating from Windows or Mac OS X is used to "/Applications" or "C:\Program Files" respectively, not to things like "/usr/bin" and "/usr/share". See the GoboLinux website for more reasons for this idea.

Right now in Linux there are two types of user accounts – basic user and super user (usually called admin or root). In Ubuntu these two are actually merged, you are always using low-privileges high-security basic user account, but you can always temporarily elevate your privileges to root level by using “sudo”. Basic user is very limited, while on the other hand root is de facto GOD. There is a vacuum between these two that needs to be filled.

Linux was for a long time primarily server operating system, so it was mostly operated by people who knew exactly what they are doing. This however has changed a lot and today there are more client Linux machines than there are servers. Canonical is trying to make its Ubuntu distribution easy for anybody to use and they have said that that their goal is to make Ubuntu on the desktop as easy and intuitive as Mac OS X in the next 2 years time. It is pretty clear that the plan is to attract to the Linux side even people who do not have much computer knowledge and I salute that idea.

However, that is going to cause problems because Linux was from the start designed with more technologically savvy people in mind. People that want to use Linux at home have to use root sometimes, and as I said, root’s authority on the system is god-like. If people get tricked into giving the root-level privileges to a malicious script, they have given it power to metaphorically rip out the guts of their system. And we need not to forget that as popularity of desktop Linux grows, so will the amount of threats (viruses, trojans, spyware, etc.) that are today almost non-existent.

The answer to this problem will probably have to be some sort of limited admin account, which we might call “power user” or “novice admin” or something like that. This kind of user would be allowed to do most of the things that root can, but not mess with the most sensitive files and settings of the system. The idea would be when installing the OS to advise the novice users that in case they do not have enough knowledge of Linux they should create for themselves this kind of limited root account as a security measure.

Google Code has a plugin for pidgin which allows you to connect to FB chat automatically. This should be there by default.
http://code.google.com/p/pidgin-facebookchat/

Ever since I told my friends & classmates about free Ubuntu Disks....They are on a mission. They keep making new launchpad accounts & keep requesting CD's for them. This costs canonical too much. I'm sure there must be thousands of irresponsible people like this.



Please detect duplicate addresses in launchpad accounts & send only one disk to one address.

i think Ubuntu should have his own Window Manager
i would like to see something new in this direction

Hi All!

I'm sorry, previously i exposed in an orrible way my idea.
Now I'll try to explain me better.

I hought that live cd installer can have multiple install options. Who wants can do the complete install (the actual way) and others may select which apps they wants and they need to install.

My apologize for my english. I know that it's not pretty good and I'm working on it! :D

As a shortcut layout I understand the default shortcuts used for different commands. This layout differs between Mac and PC, since e. g. on the Mac 'Command + C' and on the PC 'Ctrl + C' is for copy.
On a PC (Windows) keyboard there is mostly the Windows key, which is unused, but could be used as the Mac like Command key.
I know, that I can change this manually, but I'm missing the easy choise between both (maybe by a radio button in a preference window) currently.
But why should someone want another shortcut layout?
That's due to the more ergonomic style on the Mac. Instead of pressing the Ctrl key with your smallest finger everytime you copy or paste, you can press the Command key with your thumb. Computer manufactors (like Dell) could even provide the choice between an Ubuntu keyboard with a Mac like Command key just next to the space key (more ergonomic than Windows key), or a Windows keyboard.

I came across this thread while looking around about another problem:
https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sound-juicer/+question/2046

The pertinent quote:
I tried to follow your directions. After I entered the command in
terminal mode and pressed enter it kept asking for my password. It
would not let me enter it though. I typed it several times but nothing
appeared on the screen.

Richard

I know that it would be hard but why don't offer support several UNIX kernels in the Ubuntu OS?

It would be awesome to join Ubuntu comunity with BSD and project Nexenta (http://www.nexenta.org/os) guys.

Later, when GNU/Hurd is completed it would be great to include that kernel as an option to the users.

I'm not talking about making more versions of Ubuntu, I'm talking about allow users to have installed several kernels in their machines and choose what they want to use.

NOTE: if you downvote the idea, please tell me why. Thanks.

Why don't we try to be "The most downloaded free operating system ever" ?

This could sound good!

This Patch was released yesterday, but it's still not in the repositories.

Please fix this!

Sometimes when you have a unknown file, open it in a text editor can give you a hint. Even if the file is binary, you can found text in the header or somewhere.

Gedit should have the possibilities to open any kind of file. and if it's a binary file, display it in hex view with text view on a side column.

Plus, this is a good way to provide a hex editor by default without spreading the fear to new users with an additional program "WTF is that new sh*t in my application menu??"

Ubuntu has the human theme throughout, but no skin. Why not put some actual human being selections to go with the human theme.

My idea is that there should be desktop wallpaper available with attractive models with some actual skin showing. Not nude or so far as porn, mind you... say, beach attire or lingerie: calendar girls/guys. I think these wallpapers should be easily available with a few clicks whether or not they are on the install CD.

Lets not be prudes... probably most of our computers are used at home, and it would be fun. It would distinguish Ubuntu from uptight stuffy corporate-only alternative operating systems.

I think it would be fun for some machines (probably not for work though).

[Addendum: wow, getting some pushback from the no-sexo's. What a shock]