Re: GNOME Menu (was: Re: [Usability]Re: UI Review Suggestions - Panel)

I also agree with Havoc's view that the GNOME Menu has lost meaning. There was 
some justification at 1.4, when everything in the desktop was GNOME This or 
GNOME That, but the trend is clearly towards a more subtle desktop, a more 
understated, more refined desktop. A desktop that you could introduce to your 
mother, rather than some hairy old GNOME. 

I can't think of many alternatives that would better "Main Menu" as a 
replacement. Havoc's brave suggestions of "Menu Button" and "Applications Menu" 
have obvious drawbacks that I won't go into right now. Unless Eugene has a 
blinding flash of inspiration, I reckon we should stick with "Main Menu". In 
favor of "Main Menu" is that the term is already familar to desktop users, from 
earlier incarnations. 


P.S. One wee timorous suggestion: "Desktop Menu" perhaps? A bit too close to 
"Desktop Background Menu". 

> Delivered-To: usability gnome org
> To: "Havoc Pennington" <hp redhat com>
> Cc: <desktop-devel-list gnome org>, <usability gnome org>
> Subject: Re: GNOME Menu (was: Re: [Usability]Re: UI Review Suggestions - 
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-BeenThere: usability gnome org
> X-Loop: usability gnome org
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
> List-Help: <mailto:usability-request gnome org?subject=help>
> List-Post: <mailto:usability gnome org>
> List-Subscribe: <>, 
<mailto:usability-request gnome org?subject=subscribe>
> List-Id: This list is devoted to discussing and improving GNOME's usability 
> List-Unsubscribe: <>, 
<mailto:usability-request gnome org?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive: <>
> Fair enough, it looks like there is a good case to change the name 
> of the GNOME Menu. Main Menu seems the obvious contender, but I'd like 
> to think about this for a couple of days to see if I can come up with 
> anything better.
> Eugene
> "Havoc Pennington" <hp redhat com> wrote:
> >Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 14:32:07 -0500
> >On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 05:26:18PM +0000, Eugene O'Connor wrote:
> >> 
> >> Is there a problem with the name GNOME Menu?
> >
> >It doesn't mean anything. Red Hat Linux 8.0 doesn't say GNOME anywhere
> >outside of About dialogs really, and IMHO that is appropriate from a
> >UI standpoint. It doesn't say Red Hat all over the place either. It
> >says what things are. The title of the terminal is "Terminal" not
> >"GNOME Terminal" or "Red Hat Terminal" (and this is what the HIG
> >recommends for titles and menu items).  GNOME has consistently removed
> >"GNOME" from most of the UI in favor of more informative labels.
> >
> >"Main Menu", "Menu Button", "Applications Menu" would all tell you
> >something more useful and less acronym-and-computery than "GNOME
> >Menu", just as "CD Player" is a better title than "GNOME-CD"
> >
> >> This menu is unique to GNOME (afaik), it's represented by the GNOME
> >> icon
> >
> >It's not represented by the GNOME icon in Red Hat Linux, and won't be
> >with upstream GNOME if you change icon theme.
> >
> >Also, the menu contains many non-GNOME features and applications.
> >
> >We use an icon of a little red hat, which at least is more directly
> >connected to the name of the software the user just purchased, and
> >spans all the apps that were included; but honestly I'd prefer
> >something that wasn't a red hat if I could think of something decent.
> >
> >> ... GNOME Menu seems
> >> the best to me. I also think this name is useful from a branding point
> >> of view.
> >
> >
> >
> >Branding flows naturally from a nice, distinctive product. Then your
> >explicit branding just needs to be a little label saying who made it.
> >
> >Havoc
> >_______________________________________________
> >Usability mailing list
> >Usability gnome org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Usability mailing list
> Usability gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]