> seth vidal <skvidal phy duke edu> writes: > > 1. evolution does "odd" things when you setup an imap server for your > > mail via their mail setup druid. You get this error about evo not being > > able to make a shortcut b/c you haven't typed in your password, of > > course you have never been given the option to type in a password so.. > > Then once in evo the only way to see the imap server in your list of > > folders is to exit and reload it. - this is TERRIBLY counterintuitive to > > a user who has just setup that server. > > Let's get this one in bugzilla.ximian.com against evo, unless Jeremy > thinks it's something we broke in our package. its there. (last I checked at least - it had already been reported) > > Another one for bugzilla (this time probably Red Hat bugzilla, since > I'm assuming upstream doesn't see this). no reports of this upstream. and its now in rh bugzilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57665 > > 3. It might be friendlier to have the default icon size for the menus be > > larger. As well the default font in the terminal should probably be 1. > > bigger 2. bolder - its almost painfully hard to read at times. > > Bigger font results in something that won't fit in 800x600 and people > complain about it - I've tried putting in that change before. Bolder > isn't really possible without just using the bold variant - we don't > have much flexibility in the fonts that come with X. The bold variants > are too bold (and then bold text isn't visible). is 800x600 the standard? if so then why are the default panels so big? > Anyway, maybe we can figure out a better default font; last time I > tried though I couldn't get something attractive that worked > reasonably on all resolutions. Feel free to suggest fonts. I like a fixed bold - but I see what you mean about not showing bolded text. Are there any free font projects that could be included? I'll play with some font options in gnome-terminal. one more thing is the new gnome-terminal going to include a "I just want to have THIS terminal in THIS font RIGHT now, not for all the new terminals, forever" option? That has been a complaint of users (and of my own). > > 4. The default theme of sawfish in red hat linux is, umm, cool clean. > > And it is umm, well completely horrible. I've been pushing for a better > > less sucky theme for AT LEAST 3 versions of red hat linux and I think it > > is finally here in the crux theme for sawfish. Please make it the new > > default. > > I don't like putting in haphazard fancy graphics, because they all > have to go together (icons, splash screen, Nautilus, background, > fonts, GTK theme, etc.). > > If you just put in the coolest theme for GTK, for Sawfish, for > Nautilus, snazziest background image, etc. - then it looks like a > crappy mish-mash of incompetence. Believe me I've tried and I was > incompetent. ;-) I was just hoping for something where the upper corners had resize handles. cool-clean lacks that feature. > Secondly, I really hate the idea of frequently changing the default > look in radical ways, because it confuses people. frequently changing? cool-clean has been the same since 6.1 iirc - thats hardly "Frequently". > > Fourthly, I don't think the window manager borders should be the thing > on the screen that draws your eye; the apps should be the interesting > bit. Same for background and so on. Thus the stripped-down look of > 7.2. I agree up to a point. The point where cool-clean's borders draw your eye to how old and crusty it looks. I've had MANY people comment that the rhl default desktop looks 1996ish b/c of cool-clean. I agree that the borders are unimportant, until they are a detractor. They are of course comparing them to Windows but that is unfortunately where the comparison is frequently made. > > 5. Galeon should DEFINITELY supplant mozilla as the default web browser > > on the panel. - the widget set is consistent and makes sense. > > I think native widgets just aren't a key thing for average users > trying to get work done. It's more important to power users. > Galeon also has some power user features highly visible in the menus, > such as stuff about cookies and image animation and JavaScript. > And I think the tabs are a power user feature. > mozilla has tabs now(since 0.9.5 iirc). its no different in that regard. > I don't think there's anything wrong with that - power users know how > to find Galeon. But it's not the right default. > > Oh, another problem is that people expect browsers to handle mail and > news and composer and all that. Yeah, I know. No, you can't fight the > system. ;-) not really. Only on unixes or people using netscape on windows do they look for this. In windows you'll note that the default web browser and mailer are two separate apps but they have a strikingly identical widget set. I don't think its common to think of the mailer and the web browser as a single program. It might be a skosh more common in the unix world but from a desktop standpoint the people who are already used to the unix world are not the most difficult user base to deal with. Kde has done the same thing viz kmail and konqueror - separate apps - but they look the same and act the same. IIRC the inconsistency of widget sets was routinely cited as a source of confusion in usability reports that have been done over the years (I might be misremembering though.) > > 6. if there is a way - and currently I do not know of one - of providing > > some "Default config sets" so that you can choose some "global themes" > > like the wizard in kde2's startup lets you do it would dramatically > > improve the functionality for new users. > > I believe the "metatheme" module Richard is working on in CVS allows > theme bundles. However, I don't like the KDE startup wizard; it > markets the desktop at the expense of what the user is trying to > do. It only makes sense if the reason you bought the operating system > is to pick a cool theme. no - but its nice to have something acclimate you to the desktop when you first encounter it. A theme editor can be a dumb thing, yes, but it eases the user into their preferences and can get them used to configuring things to help them work better - its not just about the colors of things - its about the amount of clutter on the panel and the location of common items on the screen. > Presumably you bought the OS to do something useful. So a sensible > startup wizard would have things like: > > Is this machine a: > [ ] web server > [ ] developer workstation > [ ] mail server > woah woah woah. I'm not talking about people who want to set up a server. I'm talking about USERS. I'm a sysadmin. I manage a bunch of machines for people who don't know the os from a hole in the ground. They will NEVER be setting up web servers or mail servers. They want to use the machine to get work done. They will never have root. They will only ever use the desktop for misc work - mostly email, web, a good editor (for source code) and a word processor/spread sheet combo. I like linux for this b/c it does that job stably. My users require linux for a lot of their programs (we're a physics dept - so its kinda weird) but I want to make sure they like what they are using - so I don't get a lot of requests for windows on desktops :( I want to make the work for the user to try out new programs the smallest amount possible w/o writing a bunch of silly scripts to glue them all together - madness lies there. I've found that setup druids help users get their settings the way they want them. Once they are comfortable in their desktop they normally want to stay there. -sv
Attachment:
pgpVIXMZDD7Bj.pgp
Description: PGP signature