Re: Reprise of the panel layout proposal

[Jonas De Vuyst <jonas devuyst advalvas be>]

I'm not sure why you didn't cc your mail to gnome-gui-list...

On 20 Jun 2001 20:01:48 -0700, James Ramsey wrote:
<snip>
> The advantage I see to having "Programs" and
> "Settings" as separate entries on the root menu is
> that it is easier to scan the main menu. If you are
> looking for an application to run, go to the
> "Programs" menu; if you are looking for a setting to
> configure, go to the "Settings" menu. It's only one
> extra menu level.

I've always considered the seperation betweeen programs and settings to
be awkward, users will probably consider the settings dialogs to be
normal programs.

Also, one extra menu level shouldn't be taken lightly. Beginners have a
lot of problems with navigating through menus. That will certainly go
for GNOME where the menu disappears if you don't either move very
quickly to the sub menu or move your mouse pointer first horizontally
and then vertically.

Then there's also the fact that programs will be the main reason people
will open that menu. I feel this is more important than a bit of
convinience they'd have on the first time they start GNOME.

<snip>
> Hide the "Running Tasks" entry menu in the menu bar
> altogether?

Only if there are no running tasks.

<snip>
> > "Main menu" is indeed better than a logo. What I
> > don't understand is why
> > a user should be able to easily reach settings, a
> > beginner would
> > probably not want to mess with his/her settings.
> > Rather finding programs
> > is much more important to the overall user I think.
> 
> Depends on the settings. A left-handed user may want
> to change the settings so the functions of the left
> and right buttons are swapped. Alternatively, the user
> may very well want to change font, theme, or
> background.

This should be handled by GNOME doorman IMHO.

> 
> > If the menu bar is only going to contain two menus 
> > then that's a lot of
> > wasted screen estate. I'd much rather see a task
> list
> > merged in the menu.
> 
> Good point. I was wondering where to put a tasklist.
> If there is a tasklist in the menu panel though, then
> I think we can do away with the "Running Tasks" menu,
> since they are pretty much redundant.
> 
> One concern about a menu panel like that is it might
> infringe on Microsoft's patents on "Taskbar with start
> menu".

I didn't really think (or know) about that :-(.

> 
> > > Aligned Panel with Pager
> > > ========================
> > > Aligned Panel with Buttons and/or applets
> > > =========================================
> 
> > It would be much better to merge these two panels
> and
> > making this a bottom-alligned panel I think. Also
> the
> > task list could easily fit on it (which would make 
> > the top menu rather empty though).
> 
> My main objections to that is that means the panel
> with the pager can't be made larger than the panel
> with the buttons, and that the panel with the buttons
> might also end up nonremovable. Neither of these
> objections are particularly strong, though.

With larger you mean higher? I personally use one big panel despite that
downside.

- Jonas.