Qt control panel says kilobits per second, means kibibytes per second

I reported bug #848529 because we should use binary prefixes everywhere.
---
Ubuntu Bug Squad volunteer triager
http://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad

I have done a branch to get rid of those labels, and provide units inside the spinboxes. I think this:

1) Looks better
2) Is much more compact, which helps with our bugs about translated strings being overly long

However, it's a change in copy, so I want some feedback from design.

Attached are before/after pictures.

Looks much nicer!

+1 on the proposed change, looks much nicer and will definitely be better for localisation.

Could we also make the increments more meaningful? For example:

* No limit / Automatic (default option)
* 1024 kbps (fast connections)
* 512 kbps (medium fast connections)
* 256 kbps (slow connections)
* 128 kbps (dial up connection)

Not sure about the actual numbers, but if we at least could avoid having -1 in there?

Agreed about the -1 being weird. Any suggestions on what to replace it with? A 0?

So 0 + unchecked means unlimited?

A ∞ ? Too nerdy? ;-)

ralsina -- my suggestion might be mac-ish, I'm still getting used to the ubuntu aesthetic, but FWIW here's what I'd do:

There shouldn't be a need for a number that means unlimited -- just unchecked means unlimited.
If the box is unchecked, the selection box should be disabled, and the number in the box replaced with something like "unlimited" or "no limit". again, I don't know qt well, but in osx cocoa, that'd be grey text so you know you can't edit it, and the buttons of the text box would also be disabled.

I like lisette's suggestion of giving people context for what limit they might want - but why do people usually limit this?
Do they actually want a choice like 'leave me enough bandwidth to watch youtube', or 'leave me enough bandwidth to browse the web quickly'? That means we'd need some idea of what bandwidth they have, and how much of it we need to leave them so they can do what they want...

This is getting a little complex, but I wonder how many people have a good idea what number they want in there, and what that'd mean. If we can give them a way to say what their goal is and figure it out for them, that'd be a big improvement IMO.
(It'd also be a big improvement over DB).

FINALLY, the holy grail is just to always do the right thing and not need a preference. Can we 'nice' our network traffic so it uses max bw unless some other app with higher priority is using it? That'll take some research but doesn't that sound like something that ought to be possible?

This bug was fixed in the package ubuntuone-control-panel - 3.99.0-0ubuntu1

---------------
ubuntuone-control-panel (3.99.0-0ubuntu1) quantal; urgency=low

  * New upstream release.
    - Improve upload/download limit UI. (LP: #847227, #985484)
    - Fix sorting of shares and folders. (LP: #1006385)
    - Use suggested path for server path comparisons. (LP: #1005574)
  * debian/control:
    - Update build dependencies in preparation for running tests during builds.
  * debian/watch:
    - Update to use stable-4-0 series for Quantal.
 -- Rodney Dawes <email address hidden> Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:42:13 -0400