I saw one reaction to this on omgubuntu.co.uk that dismissed the numbers and the comments were, I think, unfair. The author rightly notes that all these ‘news’ stories are based on Distrowatch visitors. And not based on the their platform as reported by the browser, but the pages on the Distrowatch site that people visit. In other words it’s useless. Before you rip me apart, follow my logic here.

Gus uses Windows but keeps hearing that the wise and powerful think Linux is where it’s at- but he’s confused about the idea of ‘distributions’. A friend suggests he look at Distrowatch to help him decide on a distribution to try.

Gus visits Distrowatch. He clicks around, looking at Fedora, openSUSE, and Ubuntu. He decides he doesn’t know enough and doesn’t install anything.

Distrowatch tallies his visit- 1 new visit each for Fedora, openSUSE, and Ubuntu!

Gus sees in the news that Linux Mint is actually the best. He checks back at Distrowatch and looks at Linux Mint. He decides he’s still not ready.

Distrowatch tallies a new visit for Linux Mint.

Gus sees more and more articles about Linux Mint and returns to Distrowatch, trying to muster his courage to install.

Distrowatch tallies a new visit for Linux Mint.

At this point, Fedora, openSUSE, and Ubuntu all picked up a visit, and Linux Mint picked up 2 and he still hasn’t installed! News people somehow equate those visits with distribution usage. The irony behind this whole conversation is that the resources at Distrowatch are geared to people wanting a new or different distribution. A real user isn’t going to visit the page when he’s happily using his chosen distribution of Linux every day.

‘News’ writers: you’re ridiculous and you are the problem here. Distrowatch doesn’t pretend that their stats have anything to do with users. Write some real news articles please.

All Linux distributions: can you please settle on a centralized way to track actual usage? Managed by someone else. Maybe it just counts via your update mechanism. I don’t know.

Until they do, can everyone stop whining about who is best and get back to making great apps for Linux?

Related Posts

• Ubuntu 11.04 and Why I’m an Ubuntu Fan
• Why The openSUSE Build Service Matters
• Enter… the Build Service


$ sudo add-apt-repository ppa:teatime/ppa
$ sudo apt-get update
$ sudo apt-get install teatime-unity


Related Posts

• Tweaking my Suspension in Ubuntu
• LibreOffice Thumbnails
• Usplash Got Ubuntu Down?

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:flimm/ooo-thumbnailer
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install ooo-thumbnailer

Once installed, restart Nautilus:

nautilus -q

Nice and simple!

Related Posts

• I Fixed My Broken Nautilus Thumbnails
• Nautilus Thumbnails Not Showing on Desktop
• Time Yourself

Install via Ubuntu Software CenterStorage Device Manager

After installing, open the tool.

One big design flaw, is that you either have to already know everything about the drive to find it in the Partition List, or else, like me, you hunt around for it. When you select the drive in question you’ll be asked if you want to configure the drive now. Click OK.

If you’re just starting with a drive, here’s a tip I found earlier- if you want the drive to show up in the Devices list in Nautilus, mount it at /media, otherwise use /mnt. I chose /mnt/Backup and clicked Apply. All set! I’m hopeful that this type of functionality will eventually be built into the stock Disk Utility app that ships with Ubuntu, but this works for now.

Related Posts

• Mount that Windows Share
• The Triple Boot
• Trouble Getting KNetworkManger to Start Automatically?

But I just came across this answer on askubuntu where nitsoft explains that /mnt is used for internal drives while /media is intended for removable media. Drives mounted at /media will show up in the launcher and on the desktop. That makes a lot more sense- thanks for the top nitsoft.

Related Posts

• Mount that Windows Share
• Wobbly Windows with a Difference
• Mount a Drive Automatically

Recently I read that Richard Stallman’s comment about Steve Jobs garnered some harsh reactions. This is not surprising- he is Richard Stallman. But there’s one thing even ardent Apple fans would admit: Apple products work best with other Apple products.

Apple has always made it clear that it is a hardware company and that they make the software that runs on that hardware to create the smoothest user experience possible. And it is smooth. But throw something else in there and it’s not optimal. Interesting example- the Safari browser is available for Windows but in the most recent browser benchmarks, Safari on Windows isn’t even a contender. But on Mac OS X? It rules the roost.

Over time, and as its brand popularity has soared, Apple has tightened the noose a bit. The latest version of the Mac OS X operating system (Lion) can only be purchased in the Mac App Store. This means that if you’re running Leopard you first have to buy Snow Leopard to get the Mac App Store, then upgrade to Lion.

I do not question the brilliance of Steve Jobs at all. But he was the magician of closed systems- he produced things that were insanely great when he controlled the whole package. But he didn’t care about openness or existing in a shared ecosystem (except where he set the rules). I would even predict that on its current trajectory, in 5 years you won’t be able to install non-Mac App Store apps on a Mac desktop or laptop without an Developer License from Apple. (Update: We’re already on the way)

That closed system is great as long as you like it, but once you need or want to include something else in your workflow, or heaven forbid, want to move to a different platform, you’re in for it. It turns out the money you’ve invested over the years on that closed system paid for a wall with you on the inside.

Complaints aside, Steve Jobs was a genius. I will always remember his keynotes and enthusiasm with fondness. But I hope in your genius you’ll embrace open systems.

Related Posts

• Are We Open or Fragmented?
• Well-written Article on Switching from Mac to Linux
• Monopoly Power

1. Absolutely Nothing. Don’t even tell the user something happened. After all, if there’s nothing they can do, why worry them about it? Please don’t do this.
2. Hidden Error Console. This makes sense in a web browser for all the messy JavaScript or browser specific code out there that won’t validate. But in just about every other case a hidden console that the user can discover and activate is the coward’s way out.
3. Dialog Window. Pop up a little window that says ‘Sorry, had some trouble.’ This is unhelpful, although at least the user knows not to trust your app anymore.
4. Suggest an Action. In addition to mentioning the error, your app suggests a specific course of action. An example might be that your app expects an image but can only accept one up to a certain size. Someday you plan to add a way to do that within the app, but this is 1.0! So your dialog says ‘Can you try that again with an image that’s only 32 x 32 pixels?’ It’s not perfect but the user knows exactly how to get around the problem.
5. Launch their Next Action. You can see that the Gimp is installed on their computer. Ask them if they want to launch it to resize their image. Even better, give them instructions on resizing it in the Gimp.
6. Ask If You Can Help. You ask them in the dialog if they want you to attempt to resize it for them. If they click yes, use ImageMagick or similar to resize and show them the results to see if they accept the changes. Now obviously them not ever knowing there was a problem because you handled it so smoothly is ideal most of the time. But in some cases, you may be stepping on the user’s creative toes if you assume too much. The other benefit to asking them if you can help is that the user recognizes you’ve helped. So they pay attention to how you do and if it’s done well, they’ll be grateful and trust your app a bit more. If they don’t know you helped, you just don’t get credit.

I recently experienced a few of these in Ubuntu. I had gotten used to MySQL Workbench’s specific error messages without realizing I had. Since installing the Oneiric Ocelot release candidate, Workbench loads so slowly that I fired up the aging (yet generally more usable) MySQL Query Browser. I noticed right away that about the only feedback it gave was that I had run a query. It didn’t mention that it failed and ideas about why, which Workbench does.

An even better example: a few weeks ago, after downloading a compressed file I tried to extract the files and got a little warning dialog. But instead of jut saying ‘Invalid’ or ‘Unsupported File Type’ it asked if I’d like to install the needed files in the Ubuntu Software Center. Yes please! Problem solved.

Where are the problem points in your app? Anything you can do to make it a little kinder?

Related Posts

• Build Things to Solve a User’s Problem
• Get in the User’s Head
• Ready for One User

Every operating system has good and bad, some having in general more bad than good- I try to avoid that. Despite liking to fiddle around, I do need to actually work on the computer, so I’m pretty careful.

So with that in mind, when I say I’m back to Ubuntu as of about two months ago, you’re probably not surprised. But this time it might stick.

Maybe I’m just getting older, or maybe I see the bar getting raised by available operating systems out there, but I’m unwilling to settle for a set of workarounds or a poorly thought out interface. At the same time, in terms of applications, more than any time in the past, your OS itself doesn’t have to do much- you’ve got the cloud to fill in any gaps.

78 of the 313 active Linux distributions on distrowatch.com right now are Ubuntu derivatives. That’s 25%! It’s hard to tell how much of the Linux user base that is, but Ubuntu has been considered the most popular Linux distribution for some time, with many of the runner-ups being based on Ubuntu. It’s certainly the easiest for which to find software. In some instances when you go to download the ‘Linux’ version, it’s a .deb package meant for Ubuntu. Yes it leaves some distros out in the cold. But for the most part, there’s nothing stopping those distros from packaging the software for their own platform.

So it’s easy to find software in packaged form, so what? Well, it’s one less thing I have to worry about. The same is true for other users that just want to use their system. As a minimum, a Linux software developer needs to provide a DEB package.

But add to that Canonical’s drive to make Ubuntu better. I don’t think they necessarily intended it, but some of the painful choices and stances they’ve taken also mean that they’ve differentiated themselves from other distros in significant ways. Aside from several lesser known desktop environments for Linux, you’ve basically got Gnome and KDE. They’re both great with tons of talented people behind them. Ubuntu wanted to do something different and made Unity. Everyone else jeered or got angry, but Ubuntu stuck to it. I love that.

Not just how Unity works or looks, but that Canonical is doing it. If I install Fedora with Gnome or openSUSE with Gnome, the differences in daily use will be fairly minor. Same thing goes if you install the KDE desktop on them. Yes, some things are tweaked differently, but Gnome and KDE both seem to be out to provide the entire desktop environment (meaning all needed apps) for their users. Which means that more and more, distros are coating their base system with one of those desktop environments and they’re done. I know I’m simplifying.

Ubuntu on the other hand is it’s own creature. Just like an app developer needs something to make his app special, Ubuntu has made choices that make it special. Yes you can put other desktop environments onto it, but by default you get a system and a desktop environment that was made to work together. I think there are a couple of distros you can say that about, but it’s rare. For the most part you have to qualify things. Fedora 15 with KDE or openSUSE 11 with Gnome 3. It’s such a mishmash. I’m using Ubuntu.

Related Posts

• Tweak Your UI- The Ubuntu Calculator
• Ubuntu 10.10 Is Here
• Gestures for my MacBook Pro in Ubuntu

 If you’re not aware, Nottingham is the town/area in which Robin Hood lived and ‘worked’ in English history. The name Nottingham has a form of Note in it- Nottingham (I don’t know if the developer wants it to be pronounced Note-ingham). I’m pretty sure Nottingham, the location, has nothing to do with taking notes- that’s OK! And the icon features a stack of sticky notes topped with a tower crenellation that takes it’s cue from medieval England’s architecture. It’s a very nice, distinctive icon. Very cool brand integration. Well done!

When it comes to your app’s name, be original. Don’t slap a G on it just because it’s in Gnome or a K just because it’s for KDE! Use some imagination. Jason Fried from 37Signals often talks about working with constraints. Instead of spending lots of time trying to overcome constraints, embrace them! Figure out your constraints and quickly move to work within them.

For an app name, here are some constraints:

1. The name should have at least a tangential relationship with what your app does.
2. If you’re going to intentionally mis-spell a word for your app name, you should have a reason for doing so.
3. A large part of your users should recognize what the word(s) you’re using as a name mean- if you pick an ancient Inca name, you may not have too many users who understand what it’s for.
4. The name should differentiate your app. No one but an OEM would ship an app named ‘Clock’. If you’re making a clock app there had better be something that sets it apart- use that feature in the name!

And for your icon, here are a few:

1. Design your icon with both what the app name is and what the app does in mind.
2. Don’t just use the first letter of the app name as an icon- that would qualify as an icon but so would a math equation.
3. The icon will have to fit in certain sizes on the desktop- have a super-detailed version for the biggest and simpler designs as you get smaller.
4. Use some different colors and contrast to make the icon interesting.

Related Posts

• A Quality Website: Great Typography

At the top of the Appearance tab, you’ll see the GUI Style section. Select the GTK+ style, then go up to File > Save, then File > Exit. Now QT4 apps will default to look like the rest of Ubuntu!