How Unity Gets It Right

I have been a user of the Linux-based Ubuntu operating system for about five years, and until very recently its default graphical user interface has been GNOME. I have been a GNOME user even longer, having been a Fedora user previous to Ubuntu. The latest version of Ubuntu (11.04) introduced Unity, a new graphical user interface which is now the default UI (GNOME is still available as an alternative). I haven't seen Unity very well received, based on the reviews I've read. I use it on my laptop, and I think it has a lot of promise. It's different from GNOME and KDE (another popular UI on Linux-based systems), and I suppose that users of those UI's are resisting the change. I find Unity to be a bit buggy, and there are a number of issues I have, as a software developer, that I think just work better for me in GNOME. But I don't want to just dismiss the new user interface; I want to give it a fair chance. I do, however, see one major area where Unity really hits the mark. That area is vertical screen real estate.

A few years back, computer monitors have evolved from a 4:3 screen ratio to a 16:9 screen ratio; a.k.a. "widescreen". As a result, the monitors of the same advertised size have become a bit wider and a bit shorter. This is good for multimedia applications, particular video entertainment. And in some cases, the wider screen area is more useful for work. But nonetheless, the vertical area with which one has for work has decreased.

When Microsoft released Office 2007, it introduced the "ribbon interface". This was a significant change, and it came under heavy fire. Users tend to hate change. Personally, I disliked the new Office interface because I couldn't find the functions I used most often. But I hesitate to dismiss the new interface based solely on the fact that it's different. My primary complaint with the ribbon is that it's big; a good bit bigger than the old, traditional menu and toolbar interface. The bigger interface consumes more of the vertical space on the screen, which leave less room for the document being edited. Word processing documents and spreadsheets tend to expand in the vertical direction, and as such, I find vertical area to be valuable.

The Microsoft argument in favor of the new interface was that it had better usability, and that new users who were unfamiliar with the old interface found the ribbon to be much easier to use. Furthermore, bigger and more colorful buttons are easier to find. But there is a cost; they take up more room, and that room takes away from work area.

Now, what has happened when Windows 7 came along? The interface sports a larger task bar at the bottom of the screen; about double the size of predecessor versions of Windows. This results in yet another loss of vertical screen real estate.

Over the last few years, users of the world's most popular office suite on the world's most popular desktop operating system have had the screen available for editing documents and working with spreadsheets being whittled away. Word processing and spreadsheets are among the two most common business applications used on desktop computers, and the loss of screen real estate, in my opinion, reduces productivity.

Now, consider the evolutionary step taken in Ubuntu with the introduction of Unity. The GNOME interface two small panels on the desktop; one across the top for the system application menus, application icons, and applets, and another across the bottom to serve as a task bar. Application windows had the typical menus and toolbars beneath the window title bar. This is similar to the Windows model, but with two slightly smaller panels instead the single Windows taskbar.

Unity has re-worked this model. Unity has only one panel across the top of the screen. This panel includes a main system menu as well as common applets, and it doubles as an application menu for the currently active window (an idea borrowed from Apple). This latter change frees up area in the application window, leaving more vertical area for work. Also, application launcher icons have been moved to the left side of the screen, consuming horizontal area, and essentially out of the way.

This interface adds to the available vertical screen real estate with an area the size formerly occupied by the application menu and the lower panel. The result, more room for editing documents.

For me, Unity gets it. I use the computer primarily for software development, e-mail communication, and document editing; all applications which involve vertically-oriented information. This new interface gives me more room for that purpose. And although I really don't care much about larger more colorful buttons (a feature about which Microsoft boasts when it comes to its ribbon interface), I get those on the left side of the screen without taking away from my work area.

Unity is young, and I see much room for improvement. The critics are harsh, and there is a good bit of merit in their criticisms. But I think Unity has promise, and I look forward to seeing how it evolves.