http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/21953/


[496 votes] Solution #1: Make restart network a GUI option


[-142 votes] Solution #2: Restart automatically--No GUI


]]> en-us Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:34:37 +0000 Sat, 09 Jul 2011 16:38:01 +0000 QAPoll module http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/21953/ Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:53:03 +0000 Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:08:23 +0000
If detection is possible, then the solution would be to restart automatically, making user interface redundant and unnecessary.]]> Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:48:05 +0000
Windows has a "diagnose and repair" button, which I have seen sone "average users" try to use before. Unfortunately, in many of their cases it was not such a simple problem; however, the fact is that they did try it.

While this may be anecdotal, there is certainly something to be said for just putting the option there for those who may find and make use of it. Also, when said average user comes to the forum for help, they will probably be far less "scared" and "overwhelmed" with having to click this option when there other computer's networking isn't working rather than having to go into the terminal and copy-paste a bunch of "text" that they don't understand.

On the other hand, actively monitoring for problems could take up valuable resources on a PC, and there is always the possibility for failure of the monitoring system (the average user won't like it when there networking would otherwise work fine but instead keeps restarting because of some falsely-detected problem, not that they would realize the root cause in this situation).

Network manager doesn't have that many options as it is; one more won't hurt.]]> Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:13:58 +0000
I realize Windows has "Diagnose and Repair" and I definitely don't want to copy it without understanding what problem it solves; it has never helped me on Windows, so I don't see the use, just cruft. I understand that users might be willing to push such a button, but if it never helps them, is it justified?

Should either solution fail, then cutting and pasting may be required, so I'm not sure you are making a meaningful distinction in mentioning this. Besides, would a user be less scared doing nothing (automatic detection), or pressing a button?

Your concerns about resources are fair, but I fail to see how a fix simple enough to be cut and pasted would be a resource hog if implemented correctly. I see no reason why false-positives are inherent to the problem, either. Am I missing something here?

And, just as a monitoring system can fail, so can a UI. One big way in which UIs fail is in providing meaningless choices to most users. From my perspective, adding UI for this is already a design failure, whether there is "room" for it or not.

Thank for your comments, but I remain unconvinced. I might feel differently if I understood what situations lead to this kind recoverable failure, though.]]> Mon, 02 Nov 2009 03:04:12 +0000 Sat, 09 Jul 2011 16:38:01 +0000