The logout dialog problem, not only for Ubuntu
Posted by Jorge Bernal November 22, 2006
Joel points this problem in Windows Vista too, at Choice = Headaches.
I love the ideas provided, so maybe we should try this for Ubuntu. At least, it will be easier than trying to get that from Windows developers.
My vote for the one button logout system.
Loading ...
I don’t wholeheartly agree with Joel… sometimes, it is important to have the options of logoff (think machines with low RAM. User-switching is not a good option) and reboot (think kernel update, dual-boot switching).
Of course, it is necessary to simplify the shutdown dialog and get it better. But I wonder if the solution is so simplist as the one that Joel suggested.
Why is it necessary at all ? it’s not like it’s rocket science to tell someone how to use the basics of the computer like.. the shutdown?
I totally agree with Joel, I think Suspend and hibernate shouldn’t be two different buttons. We should at least lower Ubuntu to four buttons when I press the power button on my laptop. Lock, Sleep, Turn off. Except when I think about it I’ve never pressed that Suspend button, I always just close my laptop lid. So lets Try for just Lock and Turn Off.
IMHO choice = freedom. I think it’s good to have choice. I hate when Operating System developers are closing the possibility of choice from users, in the name of fake “use friendlyness”. I hate when System thinks that it’s smarter than it’s user. Linux = Choice = Freedom don’t forget about that
It’s better to have it configurable in control panel. Like
* simple logoff
* custom logoff
I, for one, can only guess what is the difference between suspend and hibernate, so I’d remove those options for me. But leave reboot. Another person might want something else – hence – customizable!
My initial reaction was WTF, but I forced myself to think about it, and it makes perfect sense. I made up a lot of scenarios, including that I’d really want a “Boot into X” restart option and so on, but really, I don’t need it often enough. Only “lock” is left apart from “shutdown”, and I probably could just fix that with a timeout or closing the lid or something instead.
By all means, do this! If needed, implement it as an optional shutdown management first and let people try it – but I think it will be a raving success and perfectly in line with GNOME design.
Only, please, no enforced 30 second delays to transition from “locked” to “sleeping” when I’m about to chuck my laptop into my backpack. I’m also not sure I like the idea of my laptop waking up in my backpack and grinding the disk for 90 seconds to hibernate while I’m walking around town.
This is the worst idea I’ve ever heard in my life. Its going to just alienate users and force them to switch back to Windows.
I agree the system should be smart, so what should be done? Pretty close to whats currently done in upstream gnome. There are two options in the system menu. When you choose one of them, it will do that action in 60 seconds unless you choose another action to perform. That way, no choice is required, but its still available. As for the choices… they simpily cannot be merged.
Shutdown – That one is obviously important, as it causes the computer to stop using all power so it can safely be unplugged.
Restart – This causes the computer to completely shutdown and start again, without requiring the user to bend down to go under their desk to their computer and find a small little button on it. Whether we like it or not, if a computer is slowing down, people are going to restart it.
Hibernate – This causes a computer to save its current state and completely stop using power. Merging this with the sleep option will cause users to unplug their computers while its still using a little bit of power and cause massive data loss. If there is a delay to transition from sleeping to hibernating, users probably won’t be able to figure this out and will just lose the data and realize this is a huge linux bug, and just install Windows again.
Suspend – this causes a computer to go into a lower power state mode where it can still be quickly revived. If this option is merged with hibernate, people will not use this option anymore as it will no longer be quick to revive from this state.
Lock/Switch User – these two are essentially the same and can and should be merged, yes. I’ll agree with that. But its very different then shutdown, sleep, and suspend.
Log out – this allows the user to exit his session so its not using the computers resources anymore. Whether we like it or not, computers do not have unlimited resources. The day that they have an infinite amount of memory and CPU power, we can merge this option with switch user, but until it reaches that amount, it cannot be considered.
I know that I use each and every one of these options on a daily basis on my laptop, and most people I know use at least 3 of them as well (although they vary on which ones, some won’t use suspend and hibernate all the time, lots of people never really use logout, especially on single user computers, and so on), although some still do to deal with programs not responding.
Maybe if we are 100% sure that it is a single user computer, then we can get rid of logout. If we always choose convience first, we might as well get rid of the whole user management system and just have everyone be root all the time.
I’ve been saying this for a while now.
“2006-03-30″:https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2006-March/000553.html: “…if I discovered that any other device I’d bought had a power switch this complicated, I’d return it to the shop for a refund.â€?
“2006-04-05″:https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2006-April/000601.html: “Either make “Sleep” suspend to disk and then to RAM, so that waking up resumes from RAM if possible and from disk if not (Mac OS X does this); or make “Shut Down” suspend to disk (with “Restart” still being available for kernel updates and the like), so that computers behave more like real desktops; or both.â€?
Funniest Comment Award for this thread goes to *gzukka*, who proposes solving the problem of too many options by … adding another option.
As for Mr/Ms *NO!*, he/she is a beautiful example of the last two paragraphs of Joel’s article. Perhaps we can hire him/her to travel around the world giving his/her explanation of each option to every new Ubuntu user. I’m not sure how well that would scale, though.
Joel has an amazing idea. Make it configurable, of course, but here’s another vote for the one-button paradigm!
Honestly, it confounds me that someone actually doesn’t know the difference between the buttons. It would be nice if we could CHOOSE which buttons were available, but Windows != choice, so it’s pointless to try to point at Windows.
As for linux having fewer buttons, I’d bet anything that most good DEs and WMs allow you to choose which buttons do what, already. XFCE4 and KDE do, I’m sure. GNOME is stupid and forces users to use their defaults, similar to how Windows works, so I wouldn’t expect them to give you that choice.
Seriously, I use every option – shutdown because it’s not always good to keep running off of the same session, suspend ’cause you sometimes want to just decrease power consumption for a half hour or so, hibernate ’cause it boots up faster, restart ’cause it’s annoying to have to hit the power button if you’re just trying to fix a problem or activate a newly compiled kernel, switch user ’cause I sometimes have torrents or downloads running but don’t want to keep the computer locked up, log off ’cause you simply cannot play games when multiple people are logged on (takes up way too many system resources), and lock screen ’cause I sometimes want to leave but don’t want other people taking over the computer.
You wanna take away some of those options? I won’t be using your interface.