I'm not sure if i love the shot or hate it, but i modified it to add songs and albums and stuff to make it easier to muse over: http://evolvedoo.sf.net/crackhack.png On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 19:15, Jorn Baayen wrote: > Hey, > > The code in the old rb indeed causes a *lot* of code dup, and it is a > mess - and very hard to change and fix bugs. So starting with code base > reasons I'd not want to continue with it, and also I installed walters' > tarball today and.. I am quite shocked really how crappy the old UI is. > Buttons that change between pause/play and stop, same buttons behaves > very differently depending on the situations, playing view unclarity, > etc. > > At least I will not work on that any longer, sorry.. I really feel it a > waste of time. > > I had a new ui idea though, based on the glade file Luca sent.. I guess > I'm on crack, but I'm posting it anyway: > http://nl.linux.org/~jorn/Files/crackhack.png > The idea is that you have the main window with a playlist (playlist > loading/saving happens via the menus), and you can add whole albums to > it via the '+' button. I added an arrow next to it, so that you can also > chose an 'add song' button to add single songs. As you can see, it's > pretty much entirely different from what we have now. I haven't thought > to iradio yet, though... > I guess this design would work very well for me, since I mostly play > whole albums, and occasionally I want to listen to a single song. Now I > can just click '+', type the name of the album i want, hit return and > i'm playing it. But I'm not so sure this design will work very well for > single-song people.. > > This design is also, in a sense, similar to xmms: in xmms, at least that > is what i did, i have all of my music loaded. When i want to play > something i press 'j', gives me the jump to dialog, and i type the name > of the album or song I want. So very much like this one, except that > instead of jumping you add stuff to the playlist here: which gives us > the queuing we want. > > Cheers > Jorn > > On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 12:01, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: > > On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 20:41, Colin Walters wrote: > > > On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 06:41, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: > > > > > > First, thanks for working on this. > > > > > > > SIDEBAR > > > > > > > > The sidebar acts like a source selector and no more like a view > > > > switcher. No more menu merging, the only piece of ui that could change a > > > > bit when changing source are filters. > > > > This is mostly a code change, since the views was pretty consistent (or > > > > was planned to be), but I think it will have positive effects in the > > > > future, forcing us to not evolve in one of these terrible all in one, > > > > viewed applications. > > > > > > The toplevel information display will have to change too. For example, > > > internet radio stations don't have artist/album information, and they do > > > have web links (which local files generally don't). > > > > > > But in general I think I agree with you. > > > > > > One other issue; not only will what filters are active have to change > > > when switching sources, but their layout will too. For iradio there is > > > really only one filter which makes sense, in particular genre. And > > > putting one enormous filter on the top takes up too much room. I have > > > it laid out on the side: > > > > > > http://web.verbum.org/~walters/files/shots/39.html > > > > These was changes that was necessary also with the new design I think. > > > > >From a user interface design perspective I'm trying to make the point > > that changes should be kept minimal, and that we should have a source > > switcher (the way how you get the songs changes but the way you interact > > with them is kept more similar is possible), instead of a view switcher > > (everything change, more like different applications embedded in one, > > see evolution). > > > > Also, but I dont care that much about this, I was under the impression > > that the views separation was giving some problems of code duplication. > > But I'm sure jorn knows a lot more than me about this ;) > > > > Jorn, what do you think finally ? ;) Can we start making incremental > > improvements over the old design or should we wait you find the perfect > > design ? > > Personally I respect any decision you take, and I hope everyone will do > > the same. It's silly to fork, since we have all the same targets. > > > > Marco > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > rhythmbox-devel mailing list > > rhythmbox-devel@gnome.org > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/rhythmbox-devel > > _______________________________________________ > rhythmbox-devel mailing list > rhythmbox-devel@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/rhythmbox-devel -- .--= [ MArk Finlay - sisob ] =--. [ Gnome User's Board : www.gnomesupport.org/forums ] [ Public Key: http://evolvedoo.sf.net/sisobatericomdotnet.asc ]
This is a digitally signed message part
