Poll: Pantheon to become the default layout in 17.10?

I haven’t tried any version of Ubuntu MATE beyond the current LTS, but is the Redmond theme still based on a Windows 2000-ish layout?

If so, we should have another “Redmond” variant for users more familiar with Windows 7 or later, with the dock applet and the advanced menu or Brisk.


I would rather like to see a complete redesign of the themes
@antechdesigns suggestion is way to go I think. I want to see such a default layout

The redmond design is quite ugly. The pantheon isn't much different from cupertino.
Fedora and Gnome - whats even the difference to mate theme?

The mate layout is good, you should keep it but you should definitely rework the others
My suggestion:
instead of redmond use this one https://ubuntu-mate.community/uploads/default/original/2X/4/42daab1d94ced84d6d512b68709248ca0becbb06.jpg
Pantheon needs to be more unique from Cupertino
Fedora and Gnome - don't see any use for that
Instead I would rather want to have more than one user customizable layout that can be saved and named

Also the panel/taskbar could be better.
There are many issues with vanishing taskicons after startup.

It would be nice to have an option for a grid layout. What I mean is if you put icons on the panel
they have inconsistent spacing - which some users may want intentionally.
But there should be an option for a fixed spacing

Another issue is with "indicators" activated.
The trayicons take far too much space. If you have like 5 programms open with tryicons
nearly your whole panel is filled.

Generally it should feel more like f.e. Cinnamon
That's what I would change


The default 3 column menu is one of my favorite features of MATE. It’s intuitive, responsive, and aesthetically pleasing IMHO. Having used several menu types across various DE’s, I haven’t found one that I prefer over it. While it may lack some of the features of it’s modern day counterparts, such as an integrated search, I find that I can generally find and launch programs just as fast if not faster with it. It wouldn’t trouble me too much if it were relegated to backup status but I do hope that it continues to be offered moving forward as it is very distinctly MATE, something the Brisk menu cannot claim.


I’m not behind the rationale for this proposed change. Very much not behind it.

It might be time to take another look at what “Ubuntu-MATE” represents, as a reminder if nothing else. There are two parts to it, the Ubuntu part and the MATE part. The MATE part is mostly about the desktop. And the desktop is mostly about paradigm.

The reason for MATE was the mainstream’s (ie, Canonical’s) adoption of Unity, right? The mainstream went in a direction some folks didn’t like, and some folks decided to build MATE as an extension of the gnome-2 panel manager. Or am i mistaken in the whys and wherefores? I could be entirely wrong about that.

Anyway, at the present time, that same mainstream is going in another direction that maybe some folks don’t like. Canonical recently announced some changes in Ubuntu.

I guess what i’m saying is, where’s the commitment? How tied is Ubuntu-MATE to what the Canonical decides to do with Ubuntu? It took a while when Unity was shoved in our faces for the community to get sufficiently fed up to come up with MATE. Are we able to learn from that experience, and relate it to the new direction Ubuntu is taking, or are we going to experience the same thing after a while?

Aside from that, some people know how computers work, and some people know how to work computers. One of the things i like about the MATE paradigm is that it assumes i know how computers work and lets me do work. One of the things i dislike about other paradigms (like Unity) is that it assumes you know little or nothing, and makes you figure out how to work it before you get half a chance to do any work with it.

Now, you said the rational was to create a compelling OOTB experience. I’ve been writing code since the winter of 1969 and for me, the most compelling experience possible OOTB is for the OS to isntall gracefully on whatever hardware is available, and display something that speeds me on my way to getting work done by editing files and running programs.

You also said the rationale would allow UM to more effectively “compete with the other Ubuntu flavours”. I’m absolutely against competing and other forms of one-upmanship. Look at what competing has done to Microsoft and Apple in the past, their proprietary competition has made each of them a group of former users that despises them, and guess where that group is migrating to.

I’ve always had the understanding that linux and FOSS in general was not about becoming better than the (mostly-lame) competition, by inventing a wigglier paper-clip (showing you can play their game better diverts you from your own game), but about producing the most perfect computing tools possible.

JMO, apologies for anything that might sound negative and thus unfashionable. I’m of the opinion that once you know who you are, you know what to do. Thus when what to do becomes an issue, looking at who you are might be useful.


I know what I want MATE to be: a replica of Gnome 2. Introducing CSD apps is just plain wrong I think. Introducing a dock as the default setup is also plain wrong. Those are my sentiments.

However, I’m detached at this point. I don’t have a problem with the people doing the heavy lifting in MATE/Ubuntu MATE deciding what MATE should be or become.

There are changes and there are changes. If I don’t like CSD apps I can uninstall them. If I don’t like the default setup I can change that.

It was the base system that made me experiment with other distros. This is probably very boring and unfulfilling work, but this is where UM needs to shine if it’s going to be a strong alternative to Windows/Mac/other distros.

Changing default setup is chasing users that don’t exist in my opinion. Some people use Unity because they think it’s the best DE. Many people (business) use Unity because it’s the default Canonical backed DE. Those users are going nowhere when Canonical moves to Gnome 3.


I like the brisk menu but I also want a bottom panel as in the default layout. Can it be an option in the future @Wimpy, please?

It is already possible. You can make your own panels with your own menus. Try right-click on an existing panel and choose “Add to panel”.

What about an indroducing menu, perhaps in the welcome window. Here the menus would be explained and there could also be an screenshot with the various layouts.
My inspiration came from vivaldi browser. When you first install it there is an dialog with an selection of the tab panel and background layouts.

Ubuntu MATE Welcome is already starting at system start. Why not show here some possibilities?
This is my idea.
My personal layout is one panel at the top with the MATE Advanced Menu (similar the brisk menu, but more configurable), some icons i often use, window list… ending with the notification area and the clock.


Wow, didn’t honestly know about that. Silly me! :blush:

Thanks mate ! :grin:


Why not let the user decide during the install process? Show a screen with an image of all the choices and make a selection. I prefer distros that give choices during the install to choose their preferred browser or even kernel. I think that would be well received.


I believe these suggestions are heading in the right direction. Given a choice of two or three desktop layouts, and possibly even setting a default web browser during the installation could make Ubuntu Mate a more appealing distribution to someone searching for a new OS.

As far as deciding which default desktop layout would be the most compelling “out of the box” experience, would be nothing more than guess work and personal opinion. The more I think about it, the more sense it makes to present the end user a set of choices, and allow them to decide which of the given choices they prefer.

Something else to consider is the live DVD and/or USB. If the the developers decide to adopt the idea of making the defaults in question a option, would they also not need to present these options during the “Try before you install” part of the live session? After all, this is where most of potential users will decide if they like Ubuntu Mate enough to install it.

Just my resent thought on the subject :slight_smile:


I use Cairo-dock or plank with a single panel on top most of the time, but i voted NO because it seems like the success of Ubuntu MATE is due of MATE and classic Gnome/Desktop paradigms. As we keep very easy to adapt UM as we like it, simple way, classic way, Redmond or Cupertino ways even use advanced windows manager instead of lightweight windows manager, l like to think that UM is able to be installed on any computers by default.
I voted to keep the good way, as universal as possible, being able to help and attract people who comes from “non free computing”" and offering easy ways to tweak their system the way they like !


This is exactly my view also Tristan

I would have to say that the reason I started to use UM is the good old familiar MATE DE. I think that is the reason for using MATE. To make it look like something else would take away from the overall feel. I think its great to have the options for different layouts available but keep the original look and feel by default.

I also think that there doesn’t need to be any feelings that UM isn’t compelling to use. Sure, people will give that flavor or this flavor a try but in the end its about what feels like home that will keep them around. I know after years of using UM, I still go on my taste tests but always come back home.

So I vote No, keep original layout.


There needs to be a third option to the poll – Yes, change the layout to… .

Consequently, I saw no option but to vote ‘No’. Anyhow, on the change itself – it’d be a pretty decent change. Pantheon does look and behave quite well.

1 Like

Thanks Steevecook172001, some people share this opinion too. But, we’ll see how the community is gonna vote and how developers will consider those feedback.
Have a nice day


I call bullocks to that rationale. People are going to use mate-tweak and modify until their heart is content no matter what you specify as default, because the default you’re proposing right now will only be familiar to Xfce users, and even then a lot of those users change the default layout for that DE anyway.


Maybe, let’s call it a “middle way” or kind of compromise, could be a layout with Brisk menu and “Redmond” layout ?
And, get clearly showing the advanced possibility that the MATE Tweak is offering to users. Welcome could do such feature. Just a thought … :slight_smile:

1 Like

Okay, I have had a good think about this since the poll was opened. I voted “no” and that vote still stands. But, I would like to expand a bit more on why I voted no.

The first thing is the question of why Mate desktop was developed in the first place. The answer to that question is that it was developed as an antidote to Gnome 3 and Unity. In other words, Gnome 2 was a DE that was not “broken”. It was, in much the same way as the classic MS DE, a fully evolved response to the needs of desktop users. Hence, the reason why, apart from having 2 panels instead of one, Gnome 2 DE is functionally very similar to Windows Classic DE - especially the cascading menu structure. This is because they both evolved to meet a fairly universal set of user environmental demands. Hardly surprising, then, that they independently co-evolved to end up as quite similar “organisms”. Everything else, since MS Windows classic and Gnome 2, has been little more than reinventing the wheel. Often on the back of no-one in particular having requested that it be reinvented.

So, Mate DE, then, was and continues to be a quite deliberately designed antidote to the endless and often pointless search for novelty for often nothing other than its own sake. To that end, there is no good argument whatsoever for changing the menu that I can see, To do so is to fly directly in the face of Mate’s raisin-detre.

Having said all of that, I am quite prepared to hear someone’s argument for how a Pantheon menu provides more functionality than the Mate standard menu. But, I am bound to say, I will not be impressed with vague arguments that takes the form of it being more “modern”.

I should make it absolutely clear, here, that I have no problem whatsoever with endless options being available and built in to the desktop such that users can, via various tweaks, end up with an environment that differs widely from the one that comes out of the box. In fact, I welcome such options. But, the one that comes out of the box should remain the classic MATE/Gnome 2 DE.


I prefer the new Brisk menu for one main reason: it has search!

1 Like

I voted no to the new desktop and still feel that way but I now have a question. How can you call it ubuntu MATE if the default desktop is not MATE?