Written by Eldmannen the 16 Mar 08 at 16:02.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #4828 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #4828 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by mikaelstaldal the 4 Dec 08 at 09:43.

Make "Delete downloaded packages after installation" in Synaptics off by default.

Make "Delete downloaded packages after installation" in Synaptics off by default.

Written by wolterh the 11 Mar 09 at 02:40.

I propose to give every item, on it's properties, an option to gravitate to one of either extremes of the panel. This way, when you remove an item the items will maintain their organization making your panels look clean without an effort.

I propose to give every item, on it's properties, an option to gravitate to one of either extremes of the panel. This way, when you remove an item the items will maintain their organization making your panels look clean without an effort.

Written by stevemot the 11 Mar 09 at 14:26.

The main reason that re-organizing the Panel is such a pain is that the user has to unlock each of the items on the Panel individually before they can be moved. This solution proposes to add a right-click context menu item to the Panel to unlock all of the objects in the Panel, allowing them to be dragged about at will. When finished, the user just selects a corresponding "Lock all" option. The advantage with this solution is that it should not require any changes to the many objects that can be added to the Panel, only to the Panel itself (it just needs to walk through its list of objects calling "unlock" on each one).

The main reason that re-organizing the Panel is such a pain is that the user has to unlock each of the items on the Panel individually before they can be moved. This solution proposes to add a right-click context menu item to the Panel to unlock all of the objects in the Panel, allowing them to be dragged about at will. When finished, the user just selects a corresponding "Lock all" option. The advantage with this solution is that it should not require any changes to the many objects that can be added to the Panel, only to the Panel itself (it just needs to walk through its list of objects calling "unlock" on each one).

Written by kenden the 17 Mar 09 at 23:46.

What is the use of the "Lock To Panel" feature?

Locking a icon into place in the panel? To avoid it moving around?

But why would it move around?

Only because the user would move it!

And if the user wants to move it, why would she unlock it, move it and lock it back?

What's the point of having it locked?
The icons are not going to move by themselves!

What is the use of the "Lock To Panel" feature? Locking a icon into place in the panel? To avoid it moving around? But why would it move around? Only because the user would move it! And if the user wants to move it, why would she unlock it, move it and lock it back? What's the point of having it locked? The icons are not going to move by themselves!

Written by axayg the 18 Mar 09 at 02:25.

Solution#2 is definitely great. However, this is the simplest to implement and is, at the face of it, a simple copy-paste from M$ Windows. We should do something better than that. eg.
Graviate to one of the sides or make the icon panel slightly sticky. That way when you want to move icons in/out, drag/drop anywhere else on the panel, it does not come off just like that. It makes some sound like "pluck" and is clearly shows that its coming out of a sticky panel. That way, a firm lock is not necessarily needed - a firm lock could be an add-on to enable/disable moving around of icons.

Solution#2 is definitely great. However, this is the simplest to implement and is, at the face of it, a simple copy-paste from M$ Windows. We should do something better than that. eg. Graviate to one of the sides or make the icon panel slightly sticky. That way when you want to move icons in/out, drag/drop anywhere else on the panel, it does not come off just like that. It makes some sound like "pluck" and is clearly shows that its coming out of a sticky panel. That way, a firm lock is not necessarily needed - a firm lock could be an add-on to enable/disable moving around of icons.

Written by tchalvakspam the 19 Mar 09 at 16:16.

The problem is that the panel is a line, and it's hard to keep stuff organized on that line.

So: Allow the panel to be "broken" visually, whether by separators that are transparent or the converse, by allowing grouping the elements on the panel in groups and then letting the space in-between groups become transparent.

So instead of 1 long panel, you could visually split the panel into left and right, or left middle right, or other user-specified organizations.

The key here is that instead of looking like one long worm panel, it should essentially look like multiple sections, each appearing as an independent part of the user interface, even while the underlying system remains intact.

The problem is that the panel is a line, and it's hard to keep stuff organized on that line. So: Allow the panel to be "broken" visually, whether by separators that are transparent or the converse, by allowing grouping the elements on the panel in groups and then letting the space in-between groups become transparent. So instead of 1 long panel, you could visually split the panel into left and right, or left middle right, or other user-specified organizations. The key here is that instead of looking like one long worm panel, it should essentially look like multiple sections, each appearing as an independent part of the user interface, even while the underlying system remains intact.

Written by tchalvakspam the 19 Mar 09 at 16:28.

Another approach to allow better organization of the panel is to provide slide-out sections of panel that can contain multiple icons within them. Like a more robust version of the "Drawer" panel applet that integrates with the panel better. In essence, different sections of the panel could be clicked to slide out a larger section of panel space which would contain more icons, or could just slide out with a stack of the icons it contains themselves. So if you wanted to add links to a number of websites, you could add the drawer-stack and stick all the icons inside it, then when you wanted to launch one site or another, you would click the part of the drawer-stack, it would slide open to show all the icons inside it, and then you would launch the one you wanted.

One ideal implementation of this can be seen in the "stacks" of the dock in OSX Leopard and the "stack" applet of the Cairo-dock app for ubuntu.

Another approach to allow better organization of the panel is to provide slide-out sections of panel that can contain multiple icons within them. Like a more robust version of the "Drawer" panel applet that integrates with the panel better. In essence, different sections of the panel could be clicked to slide out a larger section of panel space which would contain more icons, or could just slide out with a stack of the icons it contains themselves. So if you wanted to add links to a number of websites, you could add the drawer-stack and stick all the icons inside it, then when you wanted to launch one site or another, you would click the part of the drawer-stack, it would slide open to show all the icons inside it, and then you would launch the one you wanted. One ideal implementation of this can be seen in the "stacks" of the dock in OSX Leopard and the "stack" applet of the Cairo-dock app for ubuntu.

Written by jyaan the 21 Mar 09 at 19:20.

One of the most basic elements of organization on computers is the frame. We use it in GTK+, and of course it has been used on web pages.

I propose that icons can be placed (at the user's option) in a rectangular area. This will not affect the visible appearance of the panel; it is only for organization. It should also allow empty space between icons.

This would allow groups of icons to be treated as a whole (although still movable within the frame, and able to be dragged in and out of the frame), and therefore each frame's contents will never end up mixed with each other.

Typically, I keep certain types of icons/applets together, and being able to drag several at the same time, and not losing their order (on screen resize, for example) would be great.

The user should be able to move the frame from the left edge just as we already do with the notification area and window list.

The problem with most of the solutions is that you'll still need to micro-manage your icons and move them one at a time. If I want to move my launcher icons from one side to the other, I'd like to just drag them as a group. Won't be a problem with Multi-monitor setups, either.

One of the most basic elements of organization on computers is the frame. We use it in GTK+, and of course it has been used on web pages. I propose that icons can be placed (at the user's option) in a rectangular area. This will not affect the visible appearance of the panel; it is only for organization. It should also allow empty space between icons. This would allow groups of icons to be treated as a whole (although still movable within the frame, and able to be dragged in and out of the frame), and therefore each frame's contents will never end up mixed with each other. Typically, I keep certain types of icons/applets together, and being able to drag several at the same time, and not losing their order (on screen resize, for example) would be great. The user should be able to move the frame from the left edge just as we already do with the notification area and window list. The problem with most of the solutions is that you'll still need to micro-manage your icons and move them one at a time. If I want to move my launcher icons from one side to the other, I'd like to just drag them as a group. Won't be a problem with Multi-monitor setups, either.

Written by kiersie the 31 Mar 09 at 22:10.

Just like the panels dont move without holding alt-button down since gnome 2.26 do also withe applet/icons

Just like the panels dont move without holding alt-button down since gnome 2.26 do also withe applet/icons

Written by MestreLion the 11 Jun 09 at 23:42.

This brainstorm has so many ideas because we are trying to address several issues in 1 solution: avoid icon micro-management, ordering icons, grouping icons, avoid accidental changes. A consistent, coherent way would be the "Bookshelf Approach":

- Special separators (SPLITERS) would now divide panel in SECTIONS

- Each section would have its own "gravity" or "orientation" - either left, right, center, or none (=just like today). Like Solution #1, but should be applied to a SECTION, not individual icons, so no need set individual icon properties (no micromanagement).

- Every icon within a section would automatically stack according to its section orientation. So if you delete an icon in the middle of a "left-oriented" section, all icons to the right of it would shift left. In a section with no orientation, icons wouldnt shift.

- To arrange the icons, solution #9 is perfect. No need of lock / unlock. A key combination like the proposed ALT+mouse drag would prevent accidental moving while clicking. You could drag icons to different sections as well.

- Besides ALT+drag for 1-item movement, CTRL+ALT+drag could be used to move all icons in a section (useful for re-arranging groups, as #18 suggests).*

This brainstorm has so many ideas because we are trying to address several issues in 1 solution: avoid icon micro-management, ordering icons, grouping icons, avoid accidental changes. A consistent, coherent way would be the "Bookshelf Approach": - Special separators (SPLITERS) would now divide panel in SECTIONS - Each section would have its own "gravity" or "orientation" - either left, right, center, or none (=just like today). Like Solution #1, but should be applied to a SECTION, not individual icons, so no need set individual icon properties (no micromanagement). - Every icon within a section would automatically stack according to its section orientation. So if you delete an icon in the middle of a "left-oriented" section, all icons to the right of it would shift left. In a section with no orientation, icons wouldnt shift. - To arrange the icons, solution #9 is perfect. No need of lock / unlock. A key combination like the proposed ALT+mouse drag would prevent accidental moving while clicking. You could drag icons to different sections as well. - Besides ALT+drag for 1-item movement, CTRL+ALT+drag could be used to move all icons in a section (useful for re-arranging groups, as #18 suggests).* - The Splitters could be moved this way too, to set the width of each section - Right clicking ANY icon would allow to set its panel and section settings: simply add a "Panel > " and "Section > " item to their context menus. No need to hunt down a blank area of the panel anymore, no need to increase section width just to have a blank area to set its properties. - Splitters would have 3 context menus added: "Panel >", "Left Section > ", "Right Section >". - Besides the separators we have today, we could also have "SPACERS" to create invisible spaces between icons we want (like suggested in #8). If the user presses ALT while the mouse is over the panel, the spacers become visible (otherwise would be difficult to find and move them) - If you delete a splitter, a popup would ask if the newly merged section would inherit the properties of the right or of the left section. * The ALT and CTRL+ALT is just a suggestion, actual keys would be what gnome developers find most consistent with current interface. Summing it up, no need of lock/unlock, no need to micromanage icons, no need to hunt blank areas to set up options. And, IMHO, highly friendly and intuitive while still fully customizable.

Written by panta1978 the 22 Jun 09 at 21:30.

Allow multiple icons selection, simply by clicking with the mouse's left button and selecting the desired area.

Allow multiple icons selection, simply by clicking with the mouse's left button and selecting the desired area.

Written by xubaj the 26 Aug 09 at 22:31.

just like #11 but with an [Alt] key which prevents accidental rearrangment. by right-clicking the selected icons you can apply multiple preferences (lock/unlock/remove etc.) at once.

just like #11 but with an [Alt] key which prevents accidental rearrangment. by right-clicking the selected icons you can apply multiple preferences (lock/unlock/remove etc.) at once.

Written by bliss the 20 Oct 10 at 06:54.

A new option in the (right click) panel menu to auto-arrange icons like the Mac OSX dock or the Windows quickstart.

A new option in the (right click) panel menu to auto-arrange icons like the Mac OSX dock or the Windows quickstart.

Written by James Haigh the 26 Oct 10 at 17:15.

In KDE items in panels are all next to each other, a spacer can be used to push them apart.

The spacer expands to use all space. So you can have some items on the left, spacer in the middle, and some items on the right.

In KDE items in panels are all next to each other, a spacer can be used to push them apart. The spacer expands to use all space. So you can have some items on the left, spacer in the middle, and some items on the right. <a href="http://www.notmart.org/index.php/Software/Make_some_space"> <img src="http://www.notmart.org/images/panelspacer2.png" alt="Panel spacer"> <\a>

Written by antiGatesGuy the 6 Apr 11 at 14:08.

In Window$ Vista and 7, All open windows of a certain category are grouped together and there are controls so you can do something to the whole group. (Close group, maximize all, cascade, etc.)

In Window$ Vista and 7, All open windows of a certain category are grouped together and there are controls so you can do something to the whole group. (Close group, maximize all, cascade, etc.)

Written by kramer65 the 6 Jan 09 at 16:33.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #17080 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #17080 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by marvo the 14 Jan 09 at 11:44.

A status bar is just prettyfying the symptoms of a bad design.
Nautilus ought to display the sorted file list immediately (in fractions of a second) and then start to build the thumbnails and retrieve the meta information.

A status bar is just prettyfying the symptoms of a bad design. Nautilus ought to display the sorted file list immediately (in fractions of a second) and then start to build the thumbnails and retrieve the meta information.

Written by Lex the 15 Jan 09 at 20:27.

It is important to show files that will fit on the screen quickly.
1) first files fit in the Natilus window without metadata
2) load up metadata for files
3) load rest without metadata (starting with files near "view")
4) load metadata for rest

It is important to show files that will fit on the screen quickly. 1) first files fit in the Natilus window without metadata 2) load up metadata for files 3) load rest without metadata (starting with files near "view") 4) load metadata for rest

Written by Shane Fagan the 19 Jan 09 at 22:42.

Create a small thumbnail containing a file list and sizes of the files. This would be done when a folder becomes bigger than like 100mb.

Create a small thumbnail containing a file list and sizes of the files. This would be done when a folder becomes bigger than like 100mb.

Written by grofaty the 19 Feb 09 at 13:12.

Speed up OpenOffice when starting. Probably not all features should be loaded when starting program. When some one needs some feature it could be loaded on demand.

Speed up OpenOffice when starting. Probably not all features should be loaded when starting program. When some one needs some feature it could be loaded on demand.

Written by jeypeyy the 19 Feb 09 at 20:04.

OpenOffice is written with "Native Widget Framework" (http://people.redhat.com/dcbw/ooo-nwf.html ) and that might be a reason why it is so slow*. Also it integrates badly with gnome. If we helped an alternative written in c/c++ and with gtk+ it could be faster.

The developers could help developing alternatives like AbiWord and Gnumeric. There should also be an integration between those applications before Ubuntu decides to change.

*Note that I'm not sure if this really is the reason. If it's not, please leave a comment and vote this down.

OpenOffice is written with "Native Widget Framework" (http://people.redhat.com/dcbw/ooo-nwf.html ) and that might be a reason why it is so slow*. Also it integrates badly with gnome. If we helped an alternative written in c/c++ and with gtk+ it could be faster. The developers could help developing alternatives like AbiWord and Gnumeric. There should also be an integration between those applications before Ubuntu decides to change. *Note that I'm not sure if this really is the reason. If it's not, please leave a comment and vote this down.

Written by OpenNingia the 5 Mar 09 at 11:20.

For those people who needs faster openoffice, Ubuntu should provide a task that preloads some OOO's libraries or modules on system start, that will increase booting time but decrease OOO start time.

This behaviour should be optional.

For those people who needs faster openoffice, Ubuntu should provide a task that preloads some OOO's libraries or modules on system start, that will increase booting time but decrease OOO start time. This behaviour should be optional.

Written by Mishtal the 17 Mar 09 at 20:14.

There are ways to use C and C++ functions from interpreted languages like Java. The parts of OpenOffice that are the major bottlenecks could be transitioned to C/C++, or other compiled languages.
This gives us the benefit of keeping all the current features of OpenOffice, in addition to allowing new features to be added without significant changes in the implementation of these new features compared with the implementation of them on a non-transitioning OpenOffice

There are ways to use C and C++ functions from interpreted languages like Java. The parts of OpenOffice that are the major bottlenecks could be transitioned to C/C++, or other compiled languages. This gives us the benefit of keeping all the current features of OpenOffice, in addition to allowing new features to be added without significant changes in the implementation of these new features compared with the implementation of them on a non-transitioning OpenOffice

Written by Basem the 23 Mar 09 at 08:14.

Open Office is great, but i cant stop feeling its starting to lag behind in terms of features...ubuntu should start giving Sun some support.

Open Office is great, but i cant stop feeling its starting to lag behind in terms of features...ubuntu should start giving Sun some support.

Written by broomfighter the 27 Jul 09 at 22:34.

Abiword, while less featureful than OO, is light and fast. Plus, it's written natively in gtk, so it supports theming.

Abiword, while less featureful than OO, is light and fast. Plus, it's written natively in gtk, so it supports theming.

Written by mikko.rantalainen the 7 Oct 10 at 08:15.

Starting the Open Office Writer 3.2 needs OS to load 1575 files. You can try this yourself:

strace -f -e trace=open oowriter 2>&1 | perl -npe 's/^[[]pid \d+[]] *//' | grep ^open | sort -u | wc -l

(Some of the files on that list are "file not found" but it still asks OS to try to load all those files.) A reasonable way to improve start up time would be to get it to load less files during startup. Whether this is implemented as Solution #1 (load files ondemand) or as some another solution (e.g. reimplement some functionality to have simpler implementation and not tons of code in a thousand separate files).

Starting the Open Office Writer 3.2 needs OS to load 1575 files. You can try this yourself: strace -f -e trace=open oowriter 2>&1 | perl -npe 's/^[[]pid \d+[]] *//' | grep ^open | sort -u | wc -l (Some of the files on that list are "file not found" but it still asks OS to try to load all those files.) A reasonable way to improve start up time would be to get it to load less files during startup. Whether this is implemented as Solution #1 (load files ondemand) or as some another solution (e.g. reimplement some functionality to have simpler implementation and not tons of code in a thousand separate files).

Written by diegoj the 22 Nov 08 at 22:10.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #15880 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #15880 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Emacs23 the 23 Nov 08 at 09:06.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #15889 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #15889 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by amoalsale the 25 Sep 08 at 05:23.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #13675 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #13675 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by sparky11 the 3 Jun 08 at 15:45.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #9431 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #9431 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!