Contributor tioum

Canonical should build laptops and desktop computers, and sell them online (like Dell does). What do you think?

An idea should be judged only by its merit, not by the person who came up with it.

It also discourages vote vengeance.

On my openSuSE System the Emerald Settings Manager changes the Theme instantly, but on Ubuntu it requires an restart of X to apply the Theme.

It will be nice if Nautilus or dolphin to prefetch the image thumbnails for you before you have the need to browse your pictures.

This is especially helpful when you need to browse a large amount of pictures. Because the application starts loading the thumbnails only after you select the folder.

If you liked this idea, check out my other ideas.

It is likely that the situation will occur that you vote an idea up or down, only to then take part in the discussion and change your mind about it. After all, there is bound to be someone with more expertise with a different view on the subject that you hadn't considered. Currently, you cannot see, remove or reverse your vote. I think you should be able to, on the basis that it would give a more accurate and up-to-date representation of user opinion.

The counter-argument to this would be that it could cause an element of uncertainty, but I do not feel that avoiding this should come at the expense of being able to change your mind.

Would be great to have a feature like in Mac OS where the user can press i think its the F9 button and a thumbnail preview of all the open files or applications is shown on the desktop. You can then choose which one you were looking for.

saves time when you have multiple documents or applications open

linux desktop should be reconsidered and rebuild around a fast light gui environment such as xfce.
- we need speed and simpleness
- good , standard comprehensive tools
- not a separate configuration tool for every aspect of the system
- get rid of unneeded services
- get a good -standard in every linux distro - search tool
- the menu of linux daryna is nice but still buggy
- better hardware driver support especially for laptops wi-fi ,printers ,scanners
- one small sure step forward is better than a large step forward and several steps backward.I 've seen many times linux distros loosing what they already got. Hardware supported in previous releases is not in later ones.
- let's not be so protective with our beloved child. lets start wanting more out of it . as linux is becoming more popular more people more and more will say it sucks and this is good - it means they use it and they want more out of it.

[No description]

make it look like IE

MAKING A SUGGESTION BOX PART OF UBUNTU OS!

Unlike Epiphnay, Firefox is not a real GNOME application, even with the enhanced native look which has been introduced by Firefox 3.0.

Epiphany is a very simple browser, more conforming to the spirit of GNOME, which lacks a lot of the features of Firefox. However, I think most people will probably not need Firefox' extra features and plugins. Those who do need Firefox could easily download it when Epiphany becomes the default webbrowser included out-of-the-box in Ubuntu. Ubuntu should aim for consistency, and Epiphany certainly is a better candidate than Firefox if consistency is the goal.

Epiphany currently uses the Gecko-engine for rendering, but will probably feature WebKit - http://live.gnome.org/Epiphany/WebKit - soon. WebKit would probably do a better job than Gecko.

Because somehow Ubuntu brainstorm says the Blueprint URL I gave isn't valid, I give it here in the text: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/epiphany-default-browser

I believe that a "standard installer package" as in Windows platform which does all the job for you to install any application will appeal more people and make it easy to move from other OS's to Ubuntu. It is really difficult and complicated for a newbie to install application in Ubuntu. For instance, when I first moved to Ubuntu from XP, I wanted to download and use my favorite programs like VLC player, i really didn't know what to do after I downloaded the file. If it was a single "installer" file, all I needed to do was to click it twice and there you go! My friends also complained that "compiling" to install applications is hard to prefer while they have an opportunity to install any file with a couple of clicks.

In my opinion, that would be more appealing for non-Ubuntu users.

And before you exclaim "but it is!" please take some time to read my thoughts.

Firstly, I have been trying Ubuntu on a MacBook Pro running Parallels. This is a virtualisation app, and it lets e run Windows, Linux or any OS which can run on an Intel platform. I was looking at Ubuntu out f interest, but also as I have a couple of friends who are less than keen on Windows but who don;t want to buy into Apple's world.

When I started, I was using Ubuntu 7.6 - it installed well in Parallels, and I was able to get to the GUI pretty quick. However, at this point things started to go wrong:

• It didn’t recognise the keyboard layout I had. I'm using a UK keyboard, but Ubuntu was seeing it as a US board. Parallels was set to use a UK layout, which made typing interesting. The preferences available to me didn;t let me make the change that I needed, so I was forced to enter the Terminal, locate some instructions on the net and manually enter key mapping and other bits and pieces.

• It was also limiting its display to 800x600, and no matter what I did in Ubuntu or the host Parallels app, I could not get any resolution other than that. Again, a trip to the terminal to manually enter desired resolutions was needed.

Other set up tasks required Terminal work as opposed to using options in the system set up. It was dawning on me that Ubuntu was on the surface very promising, but it required in depth technical knowledge to get it running correctly. Any instructions I found were clearly written by those in the know for those in the know.

If you want the man in the street to use Ubuntu, and get the most out of it, then the user needs to be thought of. The user you need to attract is not some kind of über geek, or even a passing expert, but the kind of user who would blunder into his local PCWorld (CompUSA or whatever box shifter store is nearby) and buy the first machine that the salesman shows him because "it's good" and he knows no better. This kind of person won't be interested in fiddly terminal stuff, nor will he want to know either.


[....]

Ubuntu is the name chosen for a global project and a distro based on Gnome. Kubuntu is another distro based on kde from the very same project.
I believe they deserve the same support from the project since Gnome and Kde are the most popular desktop manager out there.
It seems quite obvious to me, the project is very much focused on one and only distro, its first baby : ubuntu.
And it shows. Kubuntu web site looks quite poor and unprofessional compared to ubuntu. Most graphic choices like the kdm default theme (even if it's supposed to be a matter of taste) look, again, unprofessional. And finally the whole distro doesn't seem to have the same amount of attention when it comes to details (one example among others: the little thing on ubuntu warning the user about the existence of proprietary drivers for display which does not exist on kubuntu).
I've been told once, like a year ago, by an ubuntu dev that the situation is such because the project doesn't feel like fragmenting its market share.
Whatever is the official position of the project, I don't think you should do things half way.
The Kde project is itself in full evolution with Kde 4. It does deserve full support from ubuntu.

Thank you for reading.

As it stands, getting compiz to work on a new Gutsy install is hit and miss. The entire process is highly dependent on video card drivers and compiz is enabled by default.

Linux and opensource has a long history of giving names to applications that make no sense to new users and are difficult to remember. Examples range from Synaptic whose name bares little to no connection to how is functions as an application downloader". Grub, compiz fusion, K"whatever", Gimp, etc. are all examples of poorly named and branded programs that do more to confuse humans than inform them.

Similarly Linux uses terms such as "Root" (compared to "Admin") represent a new vocabulary that users must learn in order to feel comfortable with the system. Similarly the folder structure uses abbreviated forms of words that while make it faster to type when in the command prompt confuse users who can't understand their meaning. Examples are plentiful here: /bin, /sbin, /etc, /root, /dev, /mnt, /lib, /boot, /tmp

Obviously this is a "hard" problem with the structure of the OS, Renaming folders isn't an easy thing to do. But the fact that these folders and many programs don't use "natural language" makes the OS and experience inhumane and provides another learning curve.

My proposal would be to give natural language names to all parts of the OS and to also support abbreviated forms when in the command line.

I would also propose changing application names that are ambiguous and confusing in favor of sexier natural language versions (preferably single words). Applications that have their names changed could have a footnote stating the original name in an About/Info dialogue box.