[Glade-devel] Integrated ui patch

[muntyan at tamu.edu (Yevgen Muntyan)]

Vincent Geddes wrote:

> On Thu, 2006-10-26 at 08:18 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
>  
>
> > It's not a good design, it's monkying gazpacho. Anyway,
> > I just wanted to make sure that you know about those "10%".
> > If majority loves single window, then you of course go single
> > window.
> >    
> Yes, it is "monkeying" gazpacho (if you say so) and /all/ the other gui
> designers that have a single window design. I don't know if you have
> noticed, but there aren't exactly many gui designers that have a
> multiple window design. 
This is irrelevant because:
1) So what?
2) Glade is there and works fine;
3) Adobe Photoshop is the best graphics ever, and uses single
window design. Its single window thing is still horror (this is about
"others do this");
4) etc.

I am saying that glade is hard to use with single window; you are
saying that this hard-to-use property is everywhere, so glade should
be hard to use too.

> I can't think of any myself (besides glade).
> KDesigner, Visual Studio, Netbeans, Gazpacho, and Gideon are just
> prominent examples of gui designers that use the single window design. I
> think that says something about the popularity (and hence usability) of
> the single-window design. 
>  
Netbeans, Gazpacho, and Gideon are not "prominent" examples
of anything. And no, it doesn't say anything about popularity.
Something can be popular or not popular if there is a choice.
If there's a choice between two things equivalent in all but one detail,
then you can talk about popularity of that one detail. But come on,
how can you say that single-window is popular because KDesigner
is used a lot? Of course KDesigner is used by all KDE folks, it's
the only kde ui designer. And of course no one would rewrite
a thing written by *QT* just because he wants fancier windows.
And, let me guess, QT uses single-window because it's how it
should be on Windows. Not because of some usability studies
or some "popularity".

> Right now that 10% is you alone. No one else has come to us to voice
> dissatisfaction with the new design. Hopefully, this thread will
> encourage others to come forward to voice their concerns.
>  
*Users* do not read this list. *Developers* are likely to like any
fancy stuff they see.

> > But I wonder, have someone actually tried to work with such
> > UI? I did, in gazpacho, and it sucked. You can't use glade
> > right now because of fancy bugs with click-does-nothing.
> > So people "commented" on how it looks, not on the actual
> > interface.
> >
> >    
> Yes, thats right, we are now in unstable development. If you want to use
> glade3 for production use, please use the glade3 3.0.2 stable
> release :).
>  
You didn't address the point here - no one commented on
*usability* of single window layout. I questioned "10%" percents
thing (not that I think majority likes multiple windows, I also
heard many people have resolution bigger than 1024x768).

> > Heh, "excellent". Well, let's call gdl excellent or even usable. Still,
> > it has nothing to with glade, right? So, we can snip last two
> > paragraphs, and stick to 10% thing.
> >
> >    
> I was mentioning it as a possible solution to your valid concerns about
> the shortcomings of the new ui (namely the inflexibility of the tree and
> props editor).
>  
It is not a possible solution, because glade will not depend on gdl,
or will it?

Regards,
Yevgen