IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Re: I really haven't paid much attention here

You simply have no idea what HCI models entail and why it is so important to get it right...which Gnome (as many have pointed out) was close to and then moved away from as a paradigm.

\r\n\r\n

Then pray enlighten me, because UI design is a fair chunk of what I do for a living, and while I don't consider myself an expert by any stretch of the imagination, most everything I've ever read on good UI design indicates that, the simpler you can keep an application in terms of providing sane defaults and avoiding the need for much end-user configuration, the better, and that "everything should be configurable in every imaginable way" as some models, KDE's in particular, advocate, is the sort of thing which leads to overly-complicated and unusable systems.

\r\n\r\n

So please, do let me know how I can correct my woeful ignorance.

\r\n\r\n

GConf is not a settings manager that "joe user" will use.

\r\n\r\n

I never said it was. And yet I'm the one being flamed in another thread right now for an apparent lack of English comprehension.

\r\n\r\n

And contrary to what you believe..."joe user" wants to be able to personalize the experience.

\r\n\r\n

I have never stated otherwise. I have merely stated that there are a huge number of options which "geeks" and "power users" tend to want and use, which "Joe User" neither knows about, cares nor understands. "Joe User" doesn't know what a mouse focus model is, for example, so why should he have to sift through that in his desktop environment's configuration? For all but an extremely tiny minority of users, "focus follows click" is both expected and desired, so why does this need to be exposed in an environment's primary configuration system?

\r\n\r\n

You are also completely off the mark about KDE...and before you confuse me with someone who has a stake in this dispute...I use xfce4 as my default window manager. It does what I need and doesn't do much else...which makes it less of a pig than Gnome and KDE.

\r\n\r\n

And for the most part, I use Enlightenment. My comments about experience with KDE are based on distributions which do not provide it by default and thus with getting a "sotck" install with little to nothing pre-configured (as opposed to KDE-centric distributions which would obviously take some steps to alleviate this). However, the required set of "sensible defaults" seems to me to be a bit large to have to configure if one is using just a "stock" KDE install. The initial setup wizard is some help, but I tend ot feel that if a desktop environment requires a setup wizard at all, something is likely wrong with it from a usability standpoint.

\r\n\r\n

Simply put, to me if a TeakUI tool is necessary, the application is broken. If it was correct, there would be no need to develop >work-around< tools that (alas) turn into "killer apps".

\r\n\r\n

I've said now, several times, that the GNOME tweakui has, as far as I can tell, led to changes in which options are exposed by default in GNOME's primary preferences system. This is an example of developers learning to improve through user feedback. However, the existence of a tweakui for GNOME has been used in this thread as an argument for the position all every conceivable configuration option should be exposed to all types of users at all times, a conclusion which does not follow logically from its stated premise and which, as I have been trying to say since the beginning, almost inevitably creates a worse user experience than GNOME currently offers.

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
New Hmm
Correct in the first quote. Too drastic of a statement and likley uncalled for. Apologies.

However, my experience with Gnome, which is actually fairly substantial from a user perspective (I used to really like it), is that its adoption of "sane defaults" has actually been at the expense of users like myself (and others here). You dismiss this by accusing the group of being techno-geeks and not understanding that to make it usable you must oversimplify...and us geeks will just have to use our geek-fu to (now understand this statement carefully) reclaim lost functionality that has been removed to (in your words) improve the experience.

Perhaps you picked a bad example here

"Joe User" doesn't know what a mouse focus model is, for example, so why should he have to sift through that in his desktop environment's configuration? For all but an extremely tiny minority of users, "focus follows click" is both expected and desired, so why does this need to be exposed in an environment's primary configuration system?


because mouse behavior is something that every system has a gui config utility for...and adding a click behavior option is a line and a couple of radio buttons in a screen that is already there. This is not "sifting through" anything. Its using existing and expected UI toolsets effectively for not only the majority of users...but with that option...almost the entire community. Not a bad result.

I get your point, however...but you need to understand something else. Dumbing down the interface for everyday users isn't going to win many friends and influence many people that use Linux...and desktop Linux isn't something that is forseen as a "real soon now". So the end result is you have a user community with a set of expectations and developers programming away from these expectations.

Thats not a good combination.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New A couple things

You dismiss this by accusing the group of being techno-geeks and not understanding that to make it usable you must oversimplify...and us geeks will just have to use our geek-fu to (now understand this statement carefully) reclaim lost functionality that has been removed to (in your words) improve the experience.

\r\n\r\n

Not quite. I've been pointing out that the functionality is still accessible, yes, but one of my earliest posts in this thread was "nobody's forcing you to use GNOME". If you want something which exposes tons of configuration all the time, then use something which does. But don't go to a project whose aim is a simple, usable desktop for a broad userbase and ask for that, because it's not really compatible with that aim.

\r\n\r\n

and adding a click behavior option is a line and a couple of radio buttons in a screen that is already there

\r\n\r\n

Every UI change, even when it's "just a couple radio buttons", has an impact on usability. Every such change must, therefore, be rigorously determined to be necessary. As I've said before, many people here seem to have the attitude "how can you justify removing this?" while my attitude is "can you justify keeping it?" Applications should have as many configuration options as are absolutely necessary, and no more, because when you start throwing in edge cases like "well, maybe one or two people would want this to be configurable like that, so let's just go ahead and add it", you start down the road to feature creep and poor usability.

\r\n\r\n

Dumbing down the interface for everyday users isn't going to win many friends and influence many people that use Linux.

\r\n\r\n

I really, really, really hate the phrase "dumbing down". That's how most "geeks" perceive it, unfortunately, but it's very sad that they do because it implies "those average people are too stupid to use our l33t system!" In reality, usability has nothing to do with "smart" and "stupid" people, and the best interfaces are those which are intelligent, not those which are "dumbed down". But any attempt to simplify the use of Linux applications, or remove unnecessary hurdles to learning to used Linux, is immediately set upon as "dumbing down", even if it results in interfaces which are more intelligently designed.

\r\n\r\n

Case in point: I'm helping to develop an application which will profile certain types of information about web sites. As part of its configuration, it needs to know things like whether a site has a search function and what URL and URL parameters it uses in searches. Comparable applications tend to have an input box for "search URL" and another for "search query delimiter", along with explanations (sometimes lengthy explanations) of what these mean. My proposal for interface to implement this is somewhat different: since a large part of our target audience is bloggers, I proposed that it instead ask "what blogging software do you use", and offer a list of Movable Type, Wordpress, etc. Since those packages each have their own standard search URLs and parameters, that information can be inferred from the blogging software without needing to mess about with asking a user for it. Of course, an additional "I don't see my software listed here" option would pop up a traditional search URL/query parameters input, but for the vast majority of cases we've just avoided the need for that.

\r\n\r\n

This would be called "dumbing down" by many, but what it really involves is making the interface more intelligent; it doesn't need to ask potentially-confusing technical questions because it can usually infer the answers it needs from a simpler question.

\r\n\r\n

(It also, you'll note, removes at least one item of configuration. I'm a fan of that.)

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
New Nits
But don't go to a project whose aim is a simple, usable desktop for a broad userbase


Point I made before, define your userbase. For Linux, that userbase is a fairly well educated and fairly technical bunch. And possibly, the alienation of the userbase may have come from a change in project goals...which will generally make enemies of the current userbase if they feel like the changes aren't necessary/warranted (which brings you back to the curse of having smart people as users)

I understand the feature creep issue. However, we're back to an understanding of the usersbase, which for Linux (be definition) is a broader group that those used to a "click to focus" model. And again, I understand your overall point, but this was not a really good example to prove it.

That's how most "geeks" perceive it, unfortunately, but it's very sad that they do because it implies "those average people are too stupid to use our l33t system!"
.

And my point to you is that "those average people" are already l337 and are likely to remain that way. Ignore your audience at your own peril.

the best interfaces are those which are intelligent


I disagree, the best interfaces are those which are intuitive and consistent from the outset. The great interfaces are those which, from the humble beginnings of consistency, give the user the ability to adapt the interface to his/her specific situation (ie-disability configurations, personalizations, etc.)

And I will remain with judgement that Apple has the edge on all current competitors but the simple most elegant and consistent desktop experience came with Warp 4 (and it was also incredibly configurable). And, unfortunately or fortunately for the Linux community, Microsoft is 3rd. Hopefully this will change (or Microsoft will finally break backward compatibility in a gracioius gesture to implement a better security model..or hell will freeze over ;-))
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New I never got it with Warp.
I thought it sucked. Fiddly, ugly, corporate horribleness. Like Windows 3, but uglier.


Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
New It wasn't pretty, granted
But it was consistent and built to handle common tasks (at the time) quickly and with minimal fuss.

If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New And, it could be made quite pretty
Though nowadays without the AA it's harder to make it look good in comparison to other interfaces.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
New I thought its font handling was spectacularly awful.
And as I was trying to do document work at the time, that didn't help any at all.


Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
New The early iterations of the TT handling _were_ awful
it improved over time, and nowadays if you go and get the OS truetype implementation, it's actually pretty damned good (what's it called, opentype IIRC?), but when it came out TT fonts did look bloody awful... on the screen. It worked fine for print output, but I still prefer using ATM fonts on Warp, despite the fact that TT works very well now. Not least because they work sooooo much better in PDFs.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
New Re: Nits

Point I made before, define your userbase. For Linux, that userbase is a fairly well educated and fairly technical bunch. And possibly, the alienation of the userbase may have come from a change in project goals...which will generally make enemies of the current userbase if they feel like the changes aren't necessary/warranted (which brings you back to the curse of having smart people as users)

\r\n\r\n

GNOME has defined its target userbase. Its target userbase, however, is not necessarily the sort of person who's already using Linux, and a lot of its moves toward simplicity and usability have been undertaken with an eye toward bringing users to Linux who never would have considered the switch before (and who mostly would not have considered the switch because Linux represented a bewilderingly complex and frightening system with an obscene learning curve). Also, there's rally no way to aim for this target userbase without forsaking the "absolutely everything must be configurable in absolutely every conceivable way" crowd.

\r\n\r\n

I disagree, the best interfaces are those which are intuitive and consistent from the outset. The great interfaces are those which, from the humble beginnings of consistency, give the user the ability to adapt the interface to his/her specific situation (ie-disability configurations, personalizations, etc.)

\r\n\r\n

That really is a nit you're picking there. For sake of technical precision, I would have been better off saying "A characteristic of many of the best interfaces is that they are intelligent", but felt no need for such cumbersome language.

\r\n\r\n

As for alienating the userbase, I don't think it's too much of a problem. The people who were going to switch away from GNOME over this have already done so. The remaining noise is from people who wouldn't use GNOME even if it implemented everything they say they want, and can be safely ignored.

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
New OT: Please don't put things in quotes unless you're quoting
In this thread especially, some of the arguments have been over what people said. Putting thing in quotation marks that aren't quotations, especially in a thread like this, can add to increased confusion and misunderstanding.

For example, you wrote:

Also, there's rally no way to aim for this target userbase without forsaking the "absolutely everything must be configurable in absolutely every conceivable way" crowd.


I think you're putting words in the mouths of a [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/board/search/?field_searchUser=-1&field_searchSubject=&field_searchContent=absolutely+everything+must+be+configurable+in+absolutely+every+conceivable+way&field_searchSignature=&field_searchForum=-1&field_boardid=1&submit_ok%3Amethod=Search|crowd] that isn't participating in this thread. ;-)

If you want to give your impression of an argument put forward by others, but it's not a quotation, maybe use italics or something.

Thank you.

Cheers,
Scott.
New When I quote

I use the blockquote tag.

\r\n\r\n

And at this point, honestly, there's so much straw lying around I might as well use it to build some men of my own.

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
New He seems to be listening to you.
Perhaps you could add that the direction the GNOME developers are taking are "we want to you use it thus" instead of "how do you currently use it and what is difficult". This was, IIRC, the nucleus of the disagreement about GNOME's configuration.

Wade.
"Insert crowbar. Apply force."
New Well.

He was being fairly polite.

\r\n\r\n

Why not go over [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=235846|here], and let's see if we can't have a civilized discussion about configurability?

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
New Do you blame me for losing my temper? (new thread)
Created as new thread #235928 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=235928|Do you blame me for losing my temper?]
"Insert crowbar. Apply force."
     Novell/SuSE moving to GNOME as default enterprise desktop - (pwhysall) - (128)
         Something tells me the KDE folks forgot to . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
         OTOH, SuSE founder and kernel hacker quits. - (Another Scott) - (3)
             Heh. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                 OT - any luck - (imric) - (1)
                     Oh! - (mmoffitt)
         Never! - (ubernostrum) - (112)
             Sombody want to whack him with The Sign? -NT - (drewk)
             Heh, Gnome. It's still crap. - (imric) - (109)
                 I lasted a while this time. - (static)
                 It's the apps, stupid. - (pwhysall) - (15)
                     That's brilliant! - (cwbrenn) - (4)
                         The criticism stands, and is as follows: - (pwhysall) - (3)
                             I'm not screaming "freedom..." - (cwbrenn) - (1)
                                 I know. - (pwhysall)
                             My recollection is similar to BDR's. - (Another Scott)
                     That's one of the reasons I keep checking it out. - (imric) - (9)
                         Forget usability for a moment. - (pwhysall) - (2)
                             EXACT opposite on Mepis - (imric)
                             That is my biggest irritation about Linux distros - (ben_tilly)
                         Spatial == ass, IMO - (admin) - (5)
                             What is "spatial"? - (cwbrenn) - (4)
                                 Spatial: each folder gets its own window - (admin) - (3)
                                     Spring-loaded folders roxxor. - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                         They're patented by Apple. -NT - (altmann)
                                     That's one of the reasons why I prefer File Commander. - (Another Scott)
                 Nobody's making you use GNOME. - (ubernostrum) - (91)
                     ROFL - I know. - (imric) - (2)
                         You undermine your own argument. - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                             More stuff and nonsense. - (imric)
                     Just to let you all know... - (folkert) - (87)
                         Damn, I gotta meet somebody like that... - (inthane-chan)
                         Greg? - (imric) - (85)
                             Really? - (ubernostrum) - (82)
                                 Except that KDE actually works. - (imric) - (81)
                                     Works so well, in fact... - (pwhysall) - (4)
                                         Skip uses Mepis. Mepis isn't dropping KDE. - (Another Scott)
                                         Yeah and did you see the uproar from the users at Novell - (imric) - (2)
                                             s/users/KDE developers/ -NT - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                                                 According to YOU. - (imric)
                                     Re: Except that KDE actually works. - (ubernostrum) - (75)
                                         Waiting for the ad hominem when you ran out of logic. - (imric) - (74)
                                             And yet you don't seem to have any responses. - (ubernostrum) - (73)
                                                 ROFL. - (imric) - (72)
                                                     Configurability. - (ubernostrum) - (71)
                                                         Re: Configurability. - (admin) - (70)
                                                             Re: Configurability. - (pwhysall)
                                                             Removing options - (ubernostrum) - (68)
                                                                 Simpler to use, keeps use focused, reduces errors - (admin) - (67)
                                                                     Simple/Complex - (altmann) - (2)
                                                                         Re: Simple/Complex - (admin) - (1)
                                                                             hey! thats what I do for a living :-) - (boxley)
                                                                     When's the last time you looked at Nautilus? - (ubernostrum) - (59)
                                                                         And this invalidates my point somehow? - (admin) - (58)
                                                                             So which do you want? - (ubernostrum) - (57)
                                                                                 That isn't his point. - (folkert) - (56)
                                                                                     Re: That isn't his point. - (ubernostrum) - (55)
                                                                                         So have we finally come back to GNOME usability? - (static) - (5)
                                                                                             ObLRPD. - (Another Scott)
                                                                                             You know, it's funny. - (ubernostrum) - (3)
                                                                                                 Re: You know, it's funny. - (altmann) - (1)
                                                                                                     I find it pretty handy. - (ubernostrum)
                                                                                                 I now see why you've been upsetting people in here. - (static)
                                                                                         Please... - (folkert) - (48)
                                                                                             Please... - (ubernostrum) - (47)
                                                                                                 Try at least reading your own posts - (drewk) - (46)
                                                                                                     That I did. - (ubernostrum) - (45)
                                                                                                         No you're not. You're not wondering at all. - (cwbrenn) - (44)
                                                                                                             Whoa, there, cowboy! - (ubernostrum) - (43)
                                                                                                                 Points you missed. - (folkert) - (42)
                                                                                                                     Re: Points you missed. - (ubernostrum) - (41)
                                                                                                                         Last word I will speak to you. - (imric) - (6)
                                                                                                                             Re: Last word I will speak to you. - (ubernostrum) - (5)
                                                                                                                                 There's this thing called "history". - (admin) - (4)
                                                                                                                                     And we know where calumniation leads. - (pwhysall)
                                                                                                                                     Ooh, I know this game! - (ubernostrum) - (2)
                                                                                                                                         Since you asked. - (admin) - (1)
                                                                                                                                             Let's try it again then. (new thread) - (ubernostrum)
                                                                                                                         Actually, dung-for-brains, you didn't. (new thread) - (static)
                                                                                                                         I really haven't paid much attention here - (bepatient) - (15)
                                                                                                                             Re: I really haven't paid much attention here - (ubernostrum) - (14)
                                                                                                                                 Hmm - (bepatient) - (13)
                                                                                                                                     A couple things - (ubernostrum) - (12)
                                                                                                                                         Nits - (bepatient) - (11)
                                                                                                                                             I never got it with Warp. - (pwhysall) - (4)
                                                                                                                                                 It wasn't pretty, granted - (bepatient) - (3)
                                                                                                                                                     And, it could be made quite pretty - (jake123) - (2)
                                                                                                                                                         I thought its font handling was spectacularly awful. - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                                                                                                                                             The early iterations of the TT handling _were_ awful - (jake123)
                                                                                                                                             Re: Nits - (ubernostrum) - (2)
                                                                                                                                                 OT: Please don't put things in quotes unless you're quoting - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                                                                                                                                     When I quote - (ubernostrum)
                                                                                                                                             He seems to be listening to you. - (static) - (2)
                                                                                                                                                 Well. - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                                                                                                                                                     Do you blame me for losing my temper? (new thread) - (static)
                                                                                                                         Perhaps I see the problem. - (Another Scott) - (15)
                                                                                                                             It feels like this essay might be appropriate here - (broomberg) - (2)
                                                                                                                                 That's good. +5 Informative. -NT - (static)
                                                                                                                                 Actually. - (ubernostrum)
                                                                                                                             I agree with on this one, - (Moriarty)
                                                                                                                             Actually. - (ubernostrum) - (10)
                                                                                                                                 The parent to this post summarizes the stymie perfectly. - (folkert)
                                                                                                                                 "Enlightenment by choice" - (broomberg) - (2)
                                                                                                                                     The WM is only one aspect of the environment, Barry. -NT - (pwhysall)
                                                                                                                                     To me, it's a simple dichotomy. - (ubernostrum)
                                                                                                                                 WEEEEEE! (Great gallopin' goshes) - (folkert) - (5)
                                                                                                                                     What hardware are you running that on? - (Another Scott) - (4)
                                                                                                                                         Re: What hardware are you running that on? - (pwhysall)
                                                                                                                                         Very Lean, comparatively - (folkert) - (2)
                                                                                                                                             OT: X's reported memory usage means nowt - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                                                                                                                                 Yes, I understand that is the case. - (folkert)
                                                                                                                         Points mangled too, though? - (Ashton)
                                                                     And regarding "focus" - (ubernostrum) - (3)
                                                                         Then explain how configurability causes lack of focus. - (admin) - (2)
                                                                             Again. - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                                                                                 You sure about the JFK bit? I got doubts... -NT - (hnick)
                             Yeah... I know. - (folkert) - (1)
                                 *smile* - (imric)
             Thats why I choose "none of the above" - (bepatient)
         Gnomes are so cute! I love that Travelocity guy! :0) -NT - (imqwerky) - (2)
             IFS -NT - (Silverlock) - (1)
                 And you flushed me for saying Gnomes are cute. :-P -NT - (imqwerky)
         Well, wasn't that fun? - (pwhysall) - (6)
             Go away, this is good clean fun. - (admin) - (5)
                 Mind where you're waving that thing. - (pwhysall) - (4)
                     Well... - (admin) - (3)
                         That wasn't my sister... - (pwhysall) - (2)
                             I wouldn't have made that mistake - (admin) - (1)
                                 With *your* eyes? Puleeze. -NT - (pwhysall)

The Elvis Presley Dambusters Clock-Plate Of Tutankhamen
362 ms