[03:12] <mhall119> tgm4883: the whole purpose of Unity was to create a common interface for use on multiple devices
[03:13] <mhall119> which is why my mockups at least have been focused on how Unity would look and work on a 10' UI
[03:13] <tgm4883> mhall119, which means we should force something that doesn't work because of policy?
[03:13] <mhall119> tgm4883: no, it means we should figure out what doesn't work, and fix it
[03:14] <tgm4883> Which is what I thought this whole discussion was about
[03:14] <mhall119> Unity's goal is to work on multiple form factors, including 10' displays.  So if it doesn't do that, that's a bug
[03:14] <tgm4883> then it's a bug
[03:14] <mhall119> it is, and the mockups are to help us discover those bugs
[03:15] <tgm4883> not if nobody looks at the usefulness of mockups
[03:15] <mhall119> so that the design and functionality of Unity can be changed
[03:15] <tgm4883> or doesn't think about how a mockup on a 4 in screen at a distance of 30 inches translates to a 47 in screen at 10-12 feet
[03:16] <mhall119> tgm4883: I'm thinking about that, AlanBell is too, I think we're mostly all on the same page with that
[03:16] <tgm4883> I don't know if we are. Every mockup I've seen has small icons taking 5% of the width of the screen
[03:17] <mhall119> tgm4883: did you see mine?
[03:17] <tgm4883> IDK, link?
[03:17] <mhall119> http://people.ubuntu.com/~mhall119/utv/index.html#
[03:18] <mhall119> if we use the remote control buttons as keyboard input, then we don't need to worry so much about the target size for clicking, we just need to worry about being able to identify items and the current highlighted ones from a distance
[03:18] <tgm4883> mhall119, your's and mine are kinda similar. I don't like screen 3 (launcher) though
[03:18] <mhall119> what don't you like about it?
[03:18] <tgm4883> mhall119, I'm not worried about clicking, I am worried about identification
[03:18] <tgm4883> identification beyond "that one is blue, that one is red"
[03:19] <tgm4883> I don't think it translates to a 10' UI
[03:19] <mhall119> tgm4883: I have a Wii, which has like a 5x4 grid if icons, and I can identify them all fine on my less than 42in display
[03:19] <tgm4883> I don't think you can tell what those icons will be from 10 feet away
[03:19] <tgm4883> how large are the icons
[03:19] <mhall119> on the wii?
[03:19] <tgm4883> yes
[03:20] <mhall119> the grid covers probably 90% of my screen
[03:20] <tgm4883> IIRC, they were like 5 inch squares on my 32-in TV
[03:20] <mhall119> sounds about right
[03:20] <tgm4883> right, but your screen 3 doesn't cover 90% of the screen
[03:20] <tgm4883> it covers 10%
[03:20] <mhall119> no, that's kind of big, I think they're about 2 inches on the side
[03:20] <mhall119> right, but it's only 1 column
[03:21] <tgm4883> i think your column is too small
[03:21] <tgm4883> I like the rest though
[03:21] <mhall119> possibly
[03:21] <tgm4883> I think we could combine ours for something really nice
[03:21] <mhall119> ditching the colored backlight might help the identification of the icons as well
[03:21] <mhall119> where is yours?
[03:22] <tgm4883> http://people.ubuntu.com/~alanbell/unitytelly/tgm4883/#
[03:22] <mhall119> tgm4883: my goal in these mockups was more to imagine how the remote would be used to navigate Unity as it is today, so I didn't give much through about sizes and colors
[03:22] <tgm4883> mhall119, I'd also like to add a small icon to each of the menu entries (eg. a music note for music, video reel for movies, etc)
[03:23] <mhall119> tgm4883: but that would seem over-bearing on a desktop or tablet
[03:23] <tgm4883> mhall119, this isn't for a desktop or a tablet though
[03:23] <tgm4883> this is for a TV
[03:23] <mhall119> it's for all of them, that's the goal of Unity
[03:24] <mhall119> so the question is, can we make a single UI that, with the least amount of changes, will work on all of them?
[03:24] <mhall119> I think we can
[03:24] <tgm4883> mhall119, no
[03:24] <mhall119> I hope we can
[03:24] <tgm4883> they are fundamentally different
[03:25] <mhall119> I'm not sure Canonical has the resources to devote to another UI development
[03:25] <tgm4883> mhall119, so there is two issues with that statement
[03:25] <tgm4883> 1) You assume that making unity work on a TV would require a complete rewrite
[03:26] <mhall119> of the code, no.  But of the design and testing, yes
[03:26] <tgm4883> 2) If it did require a complete rewrite, you assume that there isn't anything already done that would work
[03:26] <mhall119> let me clarify, I didn't mean specifically programmer resources
[03:26] <tgm4883> mhall119, again, i disagree. AFAIK, There has been zero testing of the design for UbuntuTV
[03:26] <mhall119> as you point out, the extra programming would probably be managable
[03:26] <tgm4883> mostly because it doesn't exist
[03:27] <mhall119> right, but there was been significant testing for Unity itself
[03:27] <tgm4883> On the other hand, there has been loads of testing of media center design
[03:27] <mhall119> I'm not sure that a media center is the target Mark had for Unity on TVs
[03:27] <tgm4883> I'm about to say something that is probably going to be widely unpopular
[03:28] <mhall119> moving to Mint?
[03:28] <tgm4883> I sure hope it is
[03:28] <tgm4883> Thats what we discussed in the UDS session
[03:28] <tgm4883> there was zero discussion of writing documents on a TV
[03:29] <tgm4883> anyway, back to my widely unpopular statement
[03:29] <mhall119> I don't think anybody would want to
[03:29] <tgm4883> There is a reason that almost every media center out there follows the same design principles.
[03:30] <tgm4883> it works
[03:30] <tgm4883> I think we should be similar to those
[03:30] <mhall119> a fair statement
[03:31] <mhall119> but then again, if Apple followed that, we'd all still have crappy portable music players
[03:31] <mhall119> not that I don't still have a crappy portable music player, but that's beside the point
[03:32] <tgm4883> mhall119, would you say that apple made that change because it worked better?
[03:32] <mhall119> yes
[03:32] <dmj726> We don't want to make a clone of stuff that's already out there
[03:33] <tgm4883> Then we agree
[03:33] <dmj726> That's not how you make a leading technology
[03:33] <tgm4883> dmj726, I have no issue with change
[03:33] <tgm4883> I have an issue with changing things for the sake of change
[03:34] <mhall119> tgm4883: we seem to have fundamentally different desires for the end product
[03:34] <mhall119> I don't want a media center
[03:34] <mhall119> I already have one, almost every cable and satelite operator ships some kind of media center
[03:34] <tgm4883> If we are going to change something, it needs to be because A) something wasn't working right, and B) this change was to fix that
[03:34] <tgm4883> mhall119, what do you want then?
[03:34] <mhall119> I can use boxee or xbmc or myth or whatever
[03:34] <dmj726> I want a device that *is* good for recording and consuming media
[03:34] <dmj726> but it should also do new things
[03:35] <dmj726> like collaboration and social interaction
[03:36] <tgm4883> dmj726, boxee already does that
[03:36] <dmj726> Not like I want.
[03:36] <tgm4883> how do you want it?
[03:37] <dmj726> Well, if I'm right about boxee it's basically twitter apps and such on the Boxee, right?
[03:38] <dmj726> and you control the app via the remote with a built-in keyboard
[03:38] <tgm4883> dmj726, I believe it has that, but you can also recommend shows to friends and such
[03:38] <tgm4883> I honestly haven't used it in quite a while
[03:38] <dmj726> yeah, that's not really what I'm thinking of
[03:39] <dmj726> So all built-in functionality should be remote friendly.  I'm making this clear.
[03:39] <tgm4883> ok
[03:40] <dmj726> However, Ubuntu TV should allow applications to take advantage of different input devices, like tablets, smartphones, and PCs as appropriate for the app.
[03:41] <tgm4883> Are you talking about having your tablet act as a mouse/keyboard?
[03:41] <dmj726> Additionally, I want apps that can be seamlessly transparent over the network and use the TVs strengths when used combined with other devices
[03:41] <dmj726> tgm4883: That's part of it, yes.  But not the whole story
[03:42] <tgm4883> that would be an OS function it seems, but whats the rest of the story
[03:42] <dmj726> So, I'm editing an image, animation, video, whatever.  Me and my group are all working on our pieces
[03:42] <dmj726> The TV is our shared screen.
[03:42] <tgm4883> oh, your that guy
[03:43] <dmj726> So I work individually on my task, but we can easily collaborate
[03:43] <dmj726> THis would also be really nice for games
[03:43] <tgm4883> I have zero idea how you are going to do that as a function of the OS and not a function of the application
[03:44] <tgm4883> if you have any insights into that, please share
[03:44] <dmj726> Well, you need a Shell, and a couple of basic pieces in place in the OS to make this work well.
[03:44] <dmj726> If your device is just a media center, there's no infrastructure for that, short of hacking the media center out of it
[03:45] <tgm4883> dmj726, IMHO, you are still going to need the application to support multiple people working on a single project at the same time
[03:45] <tgm4883> dmj726, and you are thinking media center 1.0, not 2.0
[03:45] <dmj726> Also, some network friendly hooks into the interface system for pointing devices, basic things like that will be good for tablet control
[03:46] <tgm4883> that would all be at the OS level though, not part of a 10' UI (other than the portion that would display the image)
[03:46] <dmj726> tgm4883: I know you do need application support.  I'm developing one such application.
[03:47] <tgm4883> dmj726, ok, so for future clarification. Don't call that social. Call it collaborative
[03:47] <imnichol> The thing I see with dropping unity is that there really isn't a point for Canonical to be involved in this project then.  We might as well just be using xbmc
[03:47] <dmj726> well, social referred more to social gaming and the like
[03:48] <tgm4883> dmj726, all of which you can do with current media centers
[03:48] <dmj726> which is social engagement rather than collaboration, but point taken
[03:48] <tgm4883> imnichol, if we use Unity and that is Canonical's only connection, they shouldn't be included anyway
[03:48] <tgm4883> That is a weak reason for them to be involved
[03:48] <imnichol> tgm4883, if we drop unity, then canonical has to spend time/money investing in a new gui
[03:49] <imnichol> That will only be used for one thing
[03:49] <dmj726> Yeah, I think we should keep unity, make the window manager maximized/full screen only, tweak unity for 10 foot UI niceness, add proper input/output APIs and call it a day
[03:49] <dmj726> tgm4883: Who else will push this to OEMs if not Canonical?
[03:50] <tgm4883> imnichol, I'm not saying drop unity (ok, I am, but only because there is other stuff out there more developered). I'm saying it needs to work for a 10' UI
[03:50] <imnichol> Adding a new UI will necessitate a bunch of new code
[03:50] <tgm4883> dmj726, 1) why does this need to be pushed to OEMs 2) Why couldn't Canonical be involved for other reasons that Unity
[03:51] <tgm4883> imnichol, no it wouldn't
[03:51] <dmj726> tgm4883: You think this will become popular if it isn't?
[03:51] <tgm4883> imnichol, well, define "a bunch"
[03:51] <tgm4883> dmj726, yes
[03:52] <tgm4883> dmj726, but you're missing my point anyway. I still think Canonical would be involved without Unity
[03:52] <dmj726> So your mom will install Ubuntu TV on her PC and hook that up to her TV?
[03:52]  * tgm4883 rolls eyes
[03:52] <tgm4883> dmj726, no, but my mom isn't going to buy a Ubuntu TV either
[03:52] <imnichol> Well hold on, it's a valid question
[03:52] <imnichol> Why wouldn't she if it was in stores as a set top box?
[03:52] <dmj726> tgm4883: I'm not saying they would take their ball and go home, though they might not let that decision happen with their distro
[03:53] <dmj726> tgm4883: My mom would if it could record her shows and do other cool things.
[03:53] <imnichol> I want it on the record that I don't speak for Canonical or the Ubuntu community in any sense
[03:53] <tgm4883> imnichol, dmj726 so here's the thing. Canonical isn't taking their ball and going home. They said they were doing Ubuntu on TV's, so that is happening. Whether we (you and I and the community) actually have any say in what the UI is remains to be seen
[03:54] <dmj726> tgm4883: true
[03:54] <tgm4883> honestly I think popey, willcooke, and the other canonical employees need to take charge of this room a little more and at least give us a little bit of direction
[03:54] <dmj726> BTW, I like the idea of Unity for consistency's sake across Ubuntu
[03:54] <imnichol> tgm4883, agreed
[03:55] <tgm4883> dmj726, I can take a PC, install Unity, and hook that up to my TV. Sit on my couch with my keyboard and mouse (since there is no remote support yet) and wouldn't be able to make Unity functional for a TV
[03:56] <imnichol> tgm4883, only because there aren't any apps that do TV stuff (afaik, I've never tried)
[03:56] <dmj726> I really don't see how Unity *wouldn't* be really easy to make functional for a TV
[03:56] <dmj726> It's just the shell
[03:56] <dmj726> Now apps is another story
[03:56] <imnichol> The entire point of unity is that it gets out of your way, which is exactly what you want when you're watching tv
[03:56] <dmj726> Unity would be really nice for a TV interface
[03:56] <tgm4883> imnichol, thats a strawman argument
[03:57] <tgm4883> there isn't a media center in the world that doesn't get out of your way when watching TV
[03:57] <dmj726> The issue you're talking about is the TV app
[03:57] <dmj726> granted it's the main app, and it would be started the moment you boot your TV
[03:57] <tgm4883> You do full screen video, you have an OSD available for info and your done
[03:57] <imnichol> Well, no, since a strawman requires intent to deceve, I apprently just don't understand the why Unity doesn't work for TVs except for the remote issue, which we've all agreed is going to need to be fixed
[03:58] <tgm4883> imnichol, I think I've stated multiple times that it's a vision issue in that you have to be able to know what each item on the screen is
[03:58] <dmj726> so design a great set of core TV, video, music, etc apps, heck use existing media center software for the time being
[03:58] <imnichol> tgm4883, I guess I haven't been here for that
[03:59] <tgm4883> imnichol, guess not
[03:59] <tgm4883> dmj726, and that is my second complaint about what everyone is suggesting
[03:59] <imnichol> So is it icon size then?  Icon clarity?
[03:59] <tgm4883> the "lets use unity and have it launch rhythmbox for music"
[03:59] <imnichol> Oh ok, continue
[03:59] <tgm4883> imnichol, yes, the wasted space issue
[03:59] <dmj726> said applications should be designed for TV
[04:00] <dmj726> Maemo didn't throw rhythmbox on the phone and call it a day
[04:00] <dmj726> they designed a front end that was very usable on a tiny screen with fat fingers
[04:00] <tgm4883> dmj726, I disagree a bit (I agree, but with clarification). the music app should be explicitly written to work with the 10' UI
[04:00] <dmj726> tgm4883: I agree
[04:01] <dmj726> the use existing meant maybe do use a media center as your media app
[04:01] <imnichol> dmj726, tgm4883 The issue with interface was discussed on the mailling list
[04:01] <tgm4883> because A) You don't want a strange transition to a different UI just for music, and B) you will still need a 10' UI for the music
[04:01] <imnichol> We can use repos in order to resolve that problem
[04:01] <dmj726> in the long run, writing apps to be consistent and easy to use with the overall scheme should be done
[04:02] <tgm4883> dmj726, yes
[04:02] <dmj726> and default apps should fit with the TV setting perfectly
[04:02] <tgm4883> dmj726, so let me get a little clarification from you then. Are you saying use Unity, then if you want to watch media launch a media center app?
[04:03] <dmj726> that said, maybe using existing backends and just writing a nice webkit UI (or something) for the front end is a good idea
[04:03] <dmj726> yes, Unity is just the shell
[04:03] <tgm4883> hmm
[04:03] <tgm4883> not sure I really like that either, let me ask this
[04:04] <dmj726> it lets you find your apps, get to them easily, and it launches any app to either a full screen or maximized view
[04:04] <tgm4883> The point of Unity is to launch your applications?
[04:04] <dmj726> Also, important apps would be right in the launcher
[04:04] <dmj726> tgm4883: also find media
[04:04] <dmj726> and provide whatever notifications
[04:04] <dmj726> like new messages or system time
[04:04] <tgm4883> ok, but all of those things can be done in current media centers
[04:05] <dmj726> So in a current media center, how do I launch the video editing app that I installed through the software center?
[04:06] <dmj726> and how would I switch back and forth between the video editor and the TV?
[04:06] <tgm4883> In a current media center, you would launch it from the menu item that said "video editing app" (or whatever)
[04:06] <mhall119> hmmm, I wonder if a scrollwheel on a remote would be useable
[04:07] <dmj726> tgm4883: So current media centers have a window manager?
[04:07] <tgm4883> mhall119, for what?
[04:07] <mhall119> tgm4883: for scrolling
[04:07] <dmj726> Clarification I do not have a media center
[04:07] <tgm4883> dmj726, what you are asking, can already be done with XBMC
[04:07] <mhall119> well, for *faster* scrolling than hitting the arrow buttons repeatedly
[04:07] <dmj726> The hold the mouse like a remote says scroll wheel could work
[04:08] <dmj726> tgm4883: okay
[04:08] <imnichol> tgm4883, but it would require some coding, just like if we go with Unity
[04:08] <mhall119> that method has never felt natural to me
[04:08] <tgm4883> mhall119, you can hold down on a remote button
[04:08] <mhall119> I always way over or under shoot
[04:08] <tgm4883> imnichol, what would require coding? It already does it
[04:08] <mhall119> it might make for an overall better remote UX
[04:08] <tgm4883> 'already' implies that the coding part is done
[04:09] <dmj726> Can I open say Firefox inside XBMC?
[04:09] <mhall119> anyway, added a Shotwell mockup to http://people.ubuntu.com/~mhall119/utv/index.html#
[04:09] <tgm4883> dmj726, yes
[04:09] <tgm4883> dmj726, it will launch applications
[04:09] <tgm4883> AFAIK anything you say it will launch, providing you can launch it on the underlying OS
[04:10] <imnichol> tgm4883, If we go with one of the existing media centers, it will require that we modify the code, and if we use unity, we'll have to modify code as well...(continued)
[04:10] <dmj726> tgm4883: Can you switch between open ones?
[04:10]  * mhall119 is contemplating a tiling window manager
[04:10] <tgm4883> dmj726, I would have to check. I'm assuming you can via alt-tab, which you would need with any frontend
[04:10] <imnichol> tgm4883, the only difference between using an existing media center or unity is which code we have to modify
[04:11] <dmj726> mhall119: I wouldn't mind a tiling manager being included (might be good for PiP or PoP) but full screen should be the most obvious and default case
[04:11] <tgm4883> imnichol, not true, there is way more you have to modify for Unity
[04:11] <mhall119> dmj726: yeah, I'm thinking for multi-windowed apps
[04:12] <dmj726> tgm4883: So I don't disapprove of XBMC if what you say is true and the firefox window is usable and accessible within XBMC on that ground
[04:12] <imnichol> tgm4883, I'm not sure that would be true...
[04:12] <dmj726> However, I still thing Unity might be a good idea for other reasons
[04:13] <tgm4883> Unity coding: Change unity to accept remote control input, change sizing/layout for inclusion on a TV, create (or modify existing) each type of media app (music, video, picture, etc) so it will work in a 10' and look decent during transitions
[04:13] <tgm4883> XBMC coding: Theme it to look like unity
[04:13] <dmj726> mhall119: Might be good if GIMP could use that, though I bet GIMP will be single window friendly by then (note I'm not saying GIMP is a key app on TV)
[04:13] <tgm4883> Seems like there is less coding on the XBMC side ;)
[04:14] <imnichol> tgm4883, can XBMC keep a movie/tv playing while you browse the internet?  Also using xbmc means that the codebase gets a lot bigger.
[04:14] <dmj726> mhall119: nice mockup
[04:14] <tgm4883> imnichol, yes I believe it can
[04:14] <dmj726> reminds me of the dmedia browser prototype
[04:15] <imnichol> tgm4883, how does allowing remote control input require a huge code change?
[04:15] <tgm4883> imnichol, did you not read the rest of that line?
[04:15] <tgm4883> imnichol, I'm starting to wonder about your motives here, do you really love Unity this much?
[04:16] <imnichol> Hm
[04:17] <imnichol> I'm a secret microsoft plant here to destroy ubuntu by pushing unity ;)
[04:17] <tgm4883> sweet, are you a Ficus?
[04:17] <imnichol> Lemme guess, Steve Jobs paid you to do the same thing on belalf of apple?
[04:17] <imnichol> lol
[04:18] <dmj726> I'm a secret Novacut plant here to ensure Ubuntu TV is awesome.
[04:18] <imnichol> My god, how deep does the conspiracy go?
[04:18] <dmj726> hehe
[04:21] <imnichol> tgm4883, What's that a reference to?  I feel like it's a book I've read.
[04:21] <tgm4883> imnichol, IDK, a Ficus is an office plant. I thought it was funny :)
[04:22] <tgm4883> probably exists in some book though
[04:22] <imnichol> Oh ok.  I could have sworn that there was some story about people being a ficus.  I think it was Douglas Adams.
[04:22] <tgm4883> could be
[04:57] <imnichol> tgm4883, tell you what, put up a unity screenshot with arrows that point out what sizing/layout issues you think there are in unity that won't work for a tv, and you'll convince me that we should use xbmc/whatever
[05:23] <dmj726> mhall119: you around?
[05:23] <dmj726> http://imagebin.org/186588
[07:59] <popey> 03:54:24 < tgm4883> honestly I think popey, willcooke, and the other canonical employees need to take charge of this room a little more and at least give us a little bit of direction
[07:59] <popey> noted
[09:03]  * AlanBell agrees
[09:03] <AlanBell> would be good to get clarity over whether this is an Ubuntu TV or Unity TV project
[09:04] <AlanBell> what I find interesting about mhall119's mockups is that the thinks like shotwell and the unity launcher look about right on the 1/4 scale screen when they are regular sized
[09:05] <AlanBell> so desktop things scaled up by a factor of 4 seem to fit the full HD 10 foot UI
[09:06] <AlanBell> factor of 4 in terms of pixels
[09:12] <dmj726> AlanBell: I would tend to agree
[09:12] <dmj726> One might actually argue what the exact scale factor is
[09:12] <dmj726> Might turn out say 3x or 2x or 6x is really the right size.
[09:13] <dmj726> but I think it does need scaling up
[09:13] <dmj726> AlanBell: Unity will need this anyway for tablets and smartphones
[09:17] <dmj726> AlanBell: hmm...they're not *too* far off, but I do feel the launcher icons are a bit too big
[09:17] <dmj726> My guess is 2-3x is probably right
[10:40] <daker> who want to see my mockup ?
[10:46] <AlanBell> me!, where are they daker?
[10:46] <daker> i have only one at the moment ツ
[10:47] <AlanBell> dmj726: interestingly 1920x1080 divides by 3 to 640x360
[10:48] <daker> AlanBell, http://ubuntuone.com/0tZlYZ2bf5WqFyuS6nAcEC
[10:49] <dmj726> AlanBell: intestestong
[10:49] <AlanBell> nice looking bottom bar thing
[10:50] <dmj726> I'd say we should allow enough space for at least 8 icons vertically in the launcher
[10:50] <AlanBell> dmj726: I think I will add a second slide to the base design frame with the screen at 640x360
[10:51] <dmj726> gut feeling says that's a good number
[10:51] <dmj726> 5 seems to limited
[10:57] <daker> AlanBell, what do you think ?
[11:00] <AlanBell> daker: the playback controls are nice
[11:01] <daker> ツ
[12:36] <mhall119> dmj726: were you wanting me to use that image in a mockup?
[12:44] <daker> mhall119, have you seen my 1st mockup ?
[12:54] <mhall119> daker: no, the U1 link you posted earlier wasn't working
[13:06] <daker> mhall119, yes look here http://people.ubuntu.com/~daker/ubuntu-tv/
[13:07] <mhall119> daker: nice, except I think the text is too small for people to read from a distance
[13:08] <daker> mhall119, click on the image to see it
[13:10] <mhall119> daker: I meant that, at 10 feet (3-4 meters) away, that'll be hard to read
[13:11] <mhall119> even on a large screen tv
[13:11] <daker> i see
[13:14] <AlanBell> that isn't 16:9 ratio
[13:18] <daker> AlanBell, i think you are right
[14:49] <sladen> http://www.youtube.com/leanback  is quite an interesting, simple TV interface
[14:49] <sladen> handy to run full-screen on a monitor/TV
[14:51] <sladen> navigation appears to be all left/right/up/down/enter
[15:00] <dmj726> mhall119: just noticing some similarities between your shotwell bit and our dmedia browser prototype
[15:01] <dmj726> if you'd like to use the screenshot, that would be kinda cool though
[15:04] <tgm4883> dmj726, (off to work), but might be better to have a second info screen with that smaller text a bit larger. eg. hit info once, it pulls up the controls and volume, hit it again pulls up a larger overlay (maybe the bottom half of the screen) for you to tweet, see video info, etc
[15:47] <mhall119> sladen: nice one
[15:48] <mhall119> I think once we have a platform like Ubuntu on the TV, there will be more TV-layout webapps like that
[15:48] <mhall119> just like we have phone-layout webapps now
[15:56] <mhall119> sladen: I added a screenshot of leanback to my mockups: http://people.ubuntu.com/~mhall119/utv/index.html#
[16:03] <mhall119> I'm beginning to question the need for number buttons on the TV remote.  Besides picking a channel by number for broadcast television, is there any use for them?
[16:03] <mhall119> none of my mockups have used them so far
[16:14] <dmj726> mhall119: perhaps picking items from a list?
[16:15] <dmj726> I'd say we should keep them if we want to interact with TV at all, just so we don't make people with lots of channels surf back and forth all the time
[16:20] <mhall119> dmj726: ok, maybe they can be smaller and less in the way though, if we're not going to use them much
[16:29] <dmj726> mhall119: that makes sense, though I'm not sure the remote design is really up to Canonical other than saying what buttons are absolutely necessary
[16:29] <dmj726> I would think OEMs would design that, perhaps with a little guidance from Canonical.
[16:52] <popey> sladen: bbc have a similar thing... http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/bigscreen/
[16:52] <popey> you can click into the browser content and then navigate with arrow keys
[21:36] <mhall119> I get the feeling webapps like these may be a prime use of UbuntuTV
[21:37] <mhall119> we should see if anyone is working on a browser optimized for TV use
[21:38] <MrChrisDruif> mhall119; webapps? Did I miss something?
[21:38] <mhall119> MrChrisDruif: like the BBC's iplayer, or youtube's 'leanback'
[21:39] <mhall119> MrChrisDruif: in much the same way people make mobile phone apps using HTML5, they could make TV apps too
[23:41] <MrChrisDruif> How did I get this link? http://imagebin.org/185405