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

["James M. Cape" <jcape jcinteractive com>]

"Jesse D. Sightler" wrote:
> 
> >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".

I don't have a problem with features in general. What I do have a
problem with are poorly implemented features, and I personally haven't
heard an idea for a well implemented file selection dialog. As for using
the Gmc object, I completely disagree. Gmc should use the Gnome object,
not the other way around. I don't want to have to load Gnome and Gmc
when Gnome alone would be sufficent -- and since Gnome is loaded with
Gmc when it starts anyways... You get the idea.

> >     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.

IMO, there shouldn't be things like that, because they confuse new
users. All the functionality should be available all the time, and it
should be set up a manner such than even the most inexperienced of users
can deal with it. Double Right Clicking doesn't fall into that category.
Not even close. (Of course, I'm not even going to go into the carpal
tunnel issues...)

> > 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.  :)

What? Reboot to Windows? Perish the thought! :-)

And to be the BOFH, CTRL+R reloads, not refreshes. :-)

> 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.

    Jim Cape
    http://www.jcinteractive.com

    "All animals are equal, some animals
     are more equal than others."
         -- George Orwell, Animal Farm