I've used the Unity interface for a couple years now. Initially I wasn't a fan, though I did see potential. It's very forward-thinking, and geared for a time when people may have thousands of software applications installed. And, half of these applications might not be installed locally at all, but instead reside in "the cloud" (which is where a lot of data and software is going). In this light, the interface makes a lot of sense.
At the same time, Unity is a fairly experimental (and somewhat unpopular) interface. Just from a marketing perspective, I think the Canonical should present the xubuntu version of Ubuntu as the "flagship" workhorse desktop, with Unity presented as the touch-friendly and futuristic/experimental interface.
Xubuntu uses XFCE and the Whisker menu (which is simple and extremely usable). Also, xubuntu runs well on older machines with a nice blend of features, design, and speed. The Whisker menu looks like:
(courtesy of http://gottcode.org)
In comparison, Unity's menu by default looks like:
My first impression is "that looks polished." In using it, however, there are several usability issues.
Instead of text or small icons, Unity uses large icons with large spaces. That is fine, but not a lot of data can be shown in this small pop-up window. Notice that very little data is shown, and most of the screen is now wasted space:
Instead, with such large icons, this screen really should be maximized by default:
However, the second problem here is that Unity uses transparency -- by default -- for the background of the menu.The problem here, there is so much information bleeding through the background that I can't even tell what I'm looking at, and I can barely read the words on the right. To me, transparency doesn't look visually appealing. It looks like the video card has a problem and it is now rendering random junk to the screen.
Transparency is not eye candy... it's really just clutter and bombards the user with millions of points of data that they have no need to see. It honestly looks quite terrible and is not useful. :)
The third problem is the interface violates the concept of "put commonly used items close together." An interface should be like a super market... you put the toothbrushes and tooth paste next to each other. But instead, suppose I open Dash, and I just want to see all my multimedia applications. Look at the path my mouse (or touch) will travel:
These buttons couldn't be placed in a worse location, relative to each other. One of the goals of Unity, I thought, was to reduce mouse/touch travel. However here it objectively fails. Granted you can use keyboard shortcuts on a desktop, though (a) it's still visually disorganized, (b) as things move towards tablets, there might not be an external keyboard, and (c) not everyone knows or wants to use keyboard shortcuts.
Here are a couple ideas of how some of these UX issues can be fixed.
For starters, the menu screen should be on a solid background color by default, and it should be maximized by default.
Of course, if someone wants transparency, they should have the option...
But, it's not even obvious how to change the background to a solid color. You need to install Compiz's settings manager -- CCSM. The user will expect a right click or long touch either way.
Compare how much simpler this looks:
By comparison, the default transparent interface makes me feel like pulling the power cable out of the wall to reset the video card :)
As for the location of the buttons (bottom) and category filters (right), these should be grouped together.
An interface should have a primary and secondary flow. For English speakers, the page can read like a page of text, from top to bottom, left to right, mirroring the order of actions someone will perform while using the interface.
So, the bottom buttons would make more sense at top, with the filters on the left, for example:
Here's a mockup with the filters expanded:
And for side-by-side comparison :)
For types of controls "what is performing actions vs what the target of action" should be separated visually. For example, in the updated interface, search controls are on the left, search results are on the right. Information that is not needed can be hidden by default. The whole interface has flow: top-left to bottom-right.
Though I think, once you do the work to filter down to a set of applications or files, there should be a way to save this set for later use. Since usually I have groups of applications that I use. For example: a group of applications for creating audio, developing software, creating video, network tools, etc.
Overall, there needs to be some easy way to save a set of applications as a new lens, and to assign an icon to it.
Otherwise, I actually have never used several of the lenses that are installed by default, and I've had Unity installed for a couple years.
I tried using the global menus in Unity for a year or so, though ultimately they don't really save space. What it does to is force a lot of extra mouse travel from the application and top of the screen. I'm glad that Unity allows the menus in the window again.
Though I also see a lot of wasted space. For example, the title bars are wasting the majority of the space:
Generally I don't look at a title bar to tell the difference between a terminal and Open Office, or a browser. Amazing as it sounds, I think most people can actually tell the difference between apps by just looking at the application :)
So, it makes little sense to show the title by default, only to reveal the menu options on mouse over. If I want to open the Edit menu, the current interface forces me to guess where "Edit" might be, I wait for the real location to reveal itself, then I have to visually re-process that the interface has changed, and I finally move to the correct location. In other words, it's designed like a "Whack-a-mole" game.
What might make much more sense would be to always show the title in the giant area of wasted space -- on the right. The menu can then always be visible and functional:
That, or allow an option to show menu by default. I'm not really interested in seeing the titles.
Also, one other feature that I think would improve user experience would be a launch button in the Software Center. If someone installs a piece of software, there's a 90% chance they are going to immediately run it after it installs. Again, minimize the mouse travel by adding a launch button:
Also, if you place the menu options in the the title bar, the top bar is largely just wasted space.
Really it would make more sense if the lenses (the horizontal row of buttons in Dash) were always visible on the desktop. That way, the left column of buttons would show a list of favorite applications, whereas the top row would show groups of applications/files by type.
Overall, the Unity interface is usable, though the user-experience is a bit rough-around-the-edges in spots. It violates numerous interface design principles:
* an interface should have a primary and secondary flow that mirrors order of operations. For example, top to bottom, left to right.
* group commonly used items together closely
* don't waste space
* hide information that is not needed.
* only show information needed when it is needed. don't show information after it is needed.
* important items should be larger
* allow a user to save their work