Am Mittwoch 23 September 2009 01:25:22 schrieb Sebastian Kügler:
> You don't want to disturb the user, because you tell him "save your stuff
>  NOW". The last thing you want in that situation is a dialog smacked onto
>  the center of the screen.
Actually, given disk-caches etc. on linux, saving his stuff won't necessarily 
save the users data anyway (in case of power-loss). That means that the main 
sense of that notification is asking the user as fast as possible, and without 
a chance of missing it, whether the computer should _really_ be suspended (or 
shut down).

If the notification is ignored by the user or he doesn't notice it, then he 
will be disturbed 20 seconds later in a much more fatal way. So this 
notification actually _must_ disturb the user, to possibly prevent a more 
significant disturbance.

For sure, the user feels less confused when he's disturbed by a dialog, then 
when he's disturbed by the shutdown of his computer.

> That needs to be fixed, regardless. Introducing another way of notifying
>  the user of important system events is not a solution but creates
>  inconsistency and makes this problem even worse.
> 
> I'm not saying that this piece of user interaction (critical suspend) can't
>  be improved. Replacing it with a dialog is just the wrong direction.
> 
I agree that it would probably be better if this was handled somehow 
consistently. But the result would be something similar to a modal dialog 
anyway, as it _must_ disturb the users workflow. Maybe a very prominent 
colored, flashing and non-disappearing popup somewhere near the panel would 
work as well. But dialogs have their advantages too: Everyone notices them, 
and everyone knows how to use them.