Comment 276 for bug 668415

>If you want to prove your point, the best way to do this is to do usability tests, and not with the Gnome-2 power users, but with >the simple people that Ubuntu is aiming for. Get two Ubuntu computers, one with the default left-launcher and another with >the bottom-launcher from Unity plugin rotated, and, with a similar approach to the design team, invite users to use them and >share their impressions.
>
I did so twice. I posted what I found here. I tested the usability with basically more people that Canonical did in their usability test with a huge and vast number of 20 test subjects. I did not even get an answer to those posts.

Oh and by the way have a look at this blog posting:
http://marcoceppi.com/2011/12/ask-ubuntu-32k-mile-marker/

Quite interesting that seemingly the most asked question about Unity is simply and straightforward: "How can I configure Unity?" Interesting, isn't it?
As I said before. I could be content with a launcher which is not movable if some people here told me that they can CURRENTLY not implement many options to configure Unity but will do so in the near future (after 12.04). Instead you get the answer "we will not offer such options". This whole bug report is about your freedom to decide how to configure your desktop or at least to offer developers an API to modify Unity. Instead you can write scopes and lenses....

>The previous reason for the lack of movement of the launcher was the BFB, but now that reason is gone, there is a lack of >humanpower.
May I say "we told you so" ? The BFB was the reason to make the launcher not movable and now the reason is gone but the problem stays. The problem here is that some people, me for instance, feel mucked around for being given a reason which in its core was not really true. The "human-power" aspect is to me absolutely invalid because it points out that there are design errors (as some here have pointed out). And many people spoke about the design problems in Unity way before the discussion about this bug here exploded and way before they decided to put the BFB in the launcher.

>As to left-handed people, this is an important usability issue, and there already exists a (accidental) work in progress for fixing >that: bug #654988 is about mirroring the interface. The fix for Unity 2D was released, and a fix for Unity 3D will be released >when it is possible
So only people using RTL languages can be left handed?

>an effort to help Pavel Golikov to test and to iron out the plugin would make its possibility of a future acceptance into the >Unity main code smoother. Focus should be turned to this.
Some said they would like to help Pavel but only if somebody among the development crew said that the improved code (patch) had a chance to be accepted. Currently all they say it is a design decision, we will never accept anything which is not in the scope of our design plans. Among those people is Mark Shuttleworth who said the launcher will NEVER be movable. To me a really prescient notion.
There was already a patch for the minimize/maximize issue with the launcher (bug 733349). The patch was rejected because there were no design plans for a launcher with a configurable behaviour of the icons clicked.

>If you want to prove your point, the best way to do this is to do usability tests, and not with the Gnome-2 power users, but with >the simple people that Ubuntu is aiming for
>
So the old Gnome-2 power users do not count? Shall we throw them over board? Are they not of importance anymore? Have they done their job of bringing Ubuntu forward and advertising it among other users?

>Until then, there's a Compiz plugin that anyone can install, and it should really get more technical support from the community
>
Heard of quid pro quo? They want more community (power) users to help. So give them something to identify with Unity. We want some more options and possibilities to configure it. There is more than a porn, a youtube, a calendar scope/lens system and all those other strange new scopes and lenses.