Re: UI Rantings [was: Re: gmc and file-selection mockups]

["Jesse D. Sightler" <jsight pair com>]

>Justin Ross wrote:
>>
>> There's a discussion going on now in the gnome gui list.  I'd appreciate
>> it if some of the developers looked at the mockups and proposal at
>>
>>   http://www.olywa.net/opiskin/gnomeui
>>
>> My impression is that most of us on the gui list are non-coders, so we
>> could use coder feedback.  Thanks,
>>
>> Justin
>
>IMO, the open/save dialogs are only lacking an icon for filetype, an
>easy sort method, and perhaps a carryover of the gnome dialog icons.
>Period. It works cleanly and efficiently *right now*. Making Gnome do
>all the useless interface crap that Microsoft has seen fit to bloat
>their programs with should never be a goal. Ever. And unfortunately for
>Microsoft, most of that interface crap comes from Windows' reuse of that
>godawful Explorer object.

I agree.  The explorer object is pretty weak.  That's why we should reuse
the much more powerful GMC object in our file dialogs.  :)
And "all the useless interface crap that Microsoft has seen fit to bloat
their programs with" are things that I use everyday, and find to be quite
convenient timesavers.  Why make simplicity limit your choices?  If
anything, I am constantly annoyed by their lack of more choices.  For
example, why can I only send files to a few places, why not include an
option on the context menu to send files anywhere I want?  There are other
features that would be nice on context menus there as well.  Never limit
users options in terms of "simplicity".

>     Looking over some of the other suggestions, I came accross Double
>Right Clicking. Double Right Clicking?!?!?!? New users have a hard
>enough time dealing with double left clicking, why complicate the
>procedure needlessly.

Fine, new users would never HAVE to double-right click anything.  It is a
convenience for people like me who like the idea.

> Keyboard shortcuts are the Right Way to do this
>     As for the consistency problem, why not store all the keyboard
>shortcuts in *one* place. That way, all the Open commands have the same
>shortcut, all the New commands have the same shortcut, all the
>Properties commands have the same shortcut, etc., etc., etc.

Good idea.  I wish things were done this way.

>     Helping Windows users use Linux shouldn't ever be a goal. The goal
>should be to create the best and easiest to use User Interface. Windows
>users can and will unlearn the tricks they have learned if whatever they
>are attempting to switch to is good enough. IMHO, Gnome must be good
>enough.

Agreed 100%.

>     And on a somewhat lower level, I think that many gnome
>suggestion-makers fail to think abstractly about UI problems. One
>example was the earlier "Gmc should have an "F5" shortcut to refresh the
>window, because you can refresh the Explorer window with that"
>suggestion. This is wrong! Gmc should have the ability to refresh a
>window, yes, but arbitrarily deciding what keyboard shortcut to use
>because Windows happens to use it is dumb, IMO. Think Abstractly! If Gmc
>should have the ability to refresh itself, why not with CTRL+R? That
>makes sense, and even the menu mnemonic works ok. Who cares if Windows
>doesn't use it? In this case, Windows is no more right that Gnome, so
>why should Gnome be hamstrung by Windows?

There's no reason not to use CTRL+R for refreshes.  In fact (shocking as
this may be to you) that is the same shortcut used by Windows both in
Netscape Navigator and Explorer.  Try it, it works.  :)

And, F5 comes from another browser, as I recall (perhaps Mosaic?), although
it is also supported by Explorer.  I can't remember what the logic was
behind that, though.

-------------
Jesse D. Sightler
http://www3.pair.com/jsight/