RE: Ease of use (was Call for constructive user criticism.)

["Fox, Kevin M" <KMFox mail bhi-erc com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Iain [mailto:nodatadj@webtribe.net]
> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 1999 3:25 AM
> To: Fox, Kevin M; mawarkus@t-online.de; gnome-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: Ease of use (was Call for constructive user criticism.)
> 
> 
> 
> > You have a point. Well, for gnome 2.0 programs, we can say 
> "use libglade"
> > and do the 2 interfaces. Then whoever wants their program 
> to be gnome 2.0
> > complient can use the new method. Older gnome 1.0 programs 
> will still
> work,
> > but just wont be able to switch modes.
> 
> Please don't. As
> a) It's a new dependancy that we need for gnome (And people 
> are complaining
> that there's already enough libraries needed).
> b) I have to use Glade to design my interfaces. I don't want 
> to use Glade to
> design my interfaces. It's a nice program and everything, but 
> I don't like
> using GUI builders. I like designing interfaces by hand. I 
> don't think it's
> fair to say "That program is not Gnome 2 complient because 
> you took the hard
> way and didn't use glade".

Ok, maby a requirement is not the correct word. Maby requireing that the
program has 2 interfaces. The programmer can then code the interfaces
him/herself or use glade if he/she wants.

> c) I've still to think of an advantage for being able to 
> change how the gui
> looks. I think one of the worst features about ICQ on windows 
> is the "Simple
> mode" and "Advanced Mode" that sounds very like what this is 
> about, possibly
> because it seems slightly insulting.

Yes, but, it would help out the computer people who dont know much about
computers. And the "slightly insulting" part will help people want to learn
the advanced stuff. No one wants to look stupid. :)

> 
> Iain
> 
> 
> -- 
>         FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at 
> http://www.gnome.org/gnomefaq
>          To unsubscribe: mail 
> gnome-list-request@gnome.org with 
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
>