Comment 122 for bug 332945

The pop-up update notifier is a very bad idea for two simple reasons, both of which have to do with how the majority of people have learned to use computers:

1. On the web, a pop-up is often, very often, something obnoxious to be dismissed as quickly as possible: An ad, an invitation to swat a monkey, etc. "Firefox has prevented this site from opening a new window" is one of my favourite English-language phrases. Because of this behavior, many people have learned to dismiss without reading.

Ironic aside: When firefox prevents a window from opening, it notifies me of this. In a notification area. And gives me a choice. Exactly what Jaunty does not do anymore, but what previous Ubuntu releases did. Exactly the behavior I prefer, as it happens, but that's just me.

2. Web browsers and computer operating systems often pop up windows about error conditions, status, etc., and people are confused; "I didn't put that there! Why is it there?" Confusing a user does not encourage them to read or learn, it encourages them to feel that they understand their computer even less than they thought they did. It makes them feel small. Slighted.

Mark, as someone with a background in the CA business, you *must* be aware of this: Browsers pop up "helpful" messages about certificate status and users dismiss them quickly. Often, this results in the user not getting what they wanted - the web page - because the default behavior is to not proceed.

Which confuses the user. Slights them. Makes them resentful because it reminds them they did something they did not understand.

Popups get in the way. When something gets in the way, it is pushed aside or worked around. Often, that's the wrong thing to do.

The Vista "pop it up again" approach was discussed and derided. Rightly. But the proposed system is a step on the same path.

Was the notification system broken? In some ways. The Jaunty notification systems works great, absolutely great, for ephemeral events: You are now connected, you are disconnected, you have a message. That box in the upper right hand corner appears and informs, but does not distract.

Most importantly, it does not take me away from what I am doing: My attention stays where it I want it to be, be that an editor, email, a web browser, or an IDE.

But for persistent events, events that need my attention, that nice transient box is wrong. So what is right? I'm not sure, though I have an idea, which I'll get to in a moment. But I know that popups are wrong.

Ultimately, they are wrong not for the reasons cited above - as important as those are - but wrong because they are an intrusive violation of user space. They look like something we initiated, but they are not. They trespass.

Why? Because the display area consists of three separate zones:

1. The "how I start things" zone: The menu bars, etc. The interface elements people use to initiate action or make inquiries. Menus.

2. The "My computer has something to tell me" zone: The time, battery status, network status, update status, reboot required. What we have been calling a notification area.

3. The "what I am doing, things under my control" zone: The great bulk of the display area, where I am working. I - *I*, *ME* - am the only one who should ever put anything in this area. Nothing should ever happen here that I did not specifically initiate myself. THIS IS MY PART OF THE COMPUTER.

(We sort of have a 4th zone, "things I started but am not doing right now", but really this is part of "what I am doing".)

Sure, this is "Peter's grand UI theory that no one has ever heard of before" (PGUITTNOHEHOB, or PGUIT for short), but think about it: This is how we use our computers.

We go to one place - or one type of place - to initiate activities. Those activities take place in another place, the great big place in the middle of the screen. That is where we work, where we spend our computer time.

The only things that enter this space are things we initiate. This space is under our control.

Any intrusion in this space is unwelcome and likely confusing. Hence the real problem with popups: They enter our space uninvited and they intrude.

The notification area is broken not because it is a bad idea but because it overloads one or both of the "get started" and "get it done" zones: Most of the time, notifications appear at the far end of the main "get started" menu bar.

They may get ignored there, but at least they don't intrude.

But now we are proposing to move notifications from "get started" to "get it done". And if you buy into PGUIT then you know this is 100% wrong. Nothing enters "get it done" unless the user invited it. Explicitly.

The solution? A slightly more explicit separation between the zones. I'm not proposing that we dedicate an area of the display space to "my computer has something to tell me", because most of the time, that space will be empty and the user will wonder why there is a waste of space and try to fill it. And they will be frustrated if they cannot fill it.

In fact, I suggest that the Jaunty systems gets it partly right: It changes the nature of the "my computer has something to tell me zone". Which is at is should be.

The Jaunty ephemeral notification appears where it should - near the "my computer has something to tell me" zone, and looks like it should, that is, it doesn't look like something I initiated - it does not look like other windows.

It's as simple as making that indicator appear persistently. But NEVER on top of what I am doing. It should appear below the current window and above other windows. When I minimize or close the current window, focus should to go where it would have if the notifier were absent, but the notifier should appear above the corner of that window, semi-transparent. If I click on the notifer, it should have focus and be active.

But if I ignore it, that is, if I start interacting with the focused window, it should drop beneath it. Repeat as necessary. When I minimize all windows or show desktop, it should be there, semi-transparent, without focus.

Why will users accept this? Because a) It is different - it does not resemble something they initiated, so they will recognize it as being a different thing, and they will learn that it means their computer needs their assistance, and b) it does not get in the way and can be ignored for as long as they want to.

Sure, it breaks PGUIT, by extending slightly into the "get it done" zone but all great ideas break a few rules. And it does so unobtrusively, which is the most important part, while staying there until acted upon, which is what is needed.