Re: [Usability] Re: [Epiphany] epiphany toolbar/bookmarks

sön 2003-06-01 klockan 07.34 skrev Robert A. Thompson:
> I shouldn't have
> to install extra stuff to get what I want or _need_.   I often feel that
> many people try to take the keep it simple (masked under the saying "it
> should just work") to far though.  I prefer to use whatever the default
> is in gnome, mind you I don't mind tweaking settings b/c I like a dark
> background as opposed to a light background, but I shouldn't have to
> install a windows manager, a terminal, and 16 other applications just to
> get things the way I like them.  If I do that then the _distribution_
> doesn't "just work".    

The goals of most distributions probably isn't to please everyone.
That's just not possible, especially with some long-time users that have
gone accustomed to many kinds of different more or less exotic behaviors
that have appeared in some pieces of software that have ever existed.

The goals of most distributions is probably more in line of providing
what makes most sense to most of their users or customers. Making
everyone happy is unrealistic. So sorry, but you will probably never
ever have a distribution that "just works" for you if you have that many
special requirements, unless you roll your own.

> A more close to home example may be the middle click debate... To me it
> should open a new window/tab when you middle click a _link_ and should
> auto when you are over a standars (non link) portion of the page.  It
> shouldn't be an option in a preference(really shouldn't be an option in
> gconf).  It should just work... doing what is natural depending on the
> situation at that given instant (e.g. over a link or not).

The problem with this is that clicking with a mouse, for many users,
isn't exactly a precise enough action. There are all kinds of reasons
for this, ranging from bad motoric skills, being untrained or at unease
with the pointing device, to actually crappy hardware (think a crappy
mouse at the workplace, or a touchpad you'd rather throw out the window
but can't since it's built-in on the laptop you have to use). Sometimes
even a combination of those. 

That doesn't have to be a problem, for example with buttons. They are
often big enough to allow for some pointing inaccuracy. In addition,
they usually have some inactive spacing inbetween, so that the effects
of a tiny miss need not be that severe.
Links are worse, they are small pieces of text, usually far more thin
than a typical button, and easier to miss. Having the mouse click doing
entirely different actions depending on whether the user clicked one
pixel away from the link (on the page background) or on the link isn't
exactly the kind of fault tolerance that we typically require from user

So no, doing "what is right depending on the context" isn't trivially
doable, and in some times maybe not even possible given that they may be
in direct conflict with other goals, be that usability goals or
accessibility goals or whatever.


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