Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] yet another new mockup (meta)

sön 2003-05-11 klockan 21.42 skrev MArk Finlay:
> On Sun, 2003-05-11 at 20:19, Jorn Baayen wrote:
> > Yet another new mockup:
> > 
> >
> > 
> > New:
> > - no more action button (which even was outside of the source area,
> > which just occured to me was a pretty bad thing - burn to cd - burn what
> > to cd? the currently playing song? (thats what it was next to))
> Burn makes no sense in the library source, but does in the playlist
> source. I think the idea of a meta-button as I described in 
> my writeup is really useful. It's either toggle browser or new smart
> playlist in library, burn in playlist, and rip in cd.

Hrm, I think burn makes sense in the library because, why would burning
a playlist work and not burning an album? To the user they should be
more or less the same thing, a different view of your music collection.
(Especially true with vfolders and such)

But it doesnt matter to me much whether we have it or not, just.. well.

Since we cannot use a text label (no space) on the meta button I think
it might get pretty confusing. (Whats this button with its everchanging
icon?). It's even in the player area which makes it extra confusing.

> One thing I never said about Daniel;s mockup is that the 
> meta button cannot have text in it because when the button changes
> the text would have to change, changing the size of the button, and 
> that is just horrible ui.
> > - instead there is a 'show browser' checkbox, purpose immediately clear
> > in the source area (probably useful for playlists too, especially
> > 'vplaylists')
> I really don't like the idea of a browser for playlists. Playlist are
> ment to be chronological...

Playlists, yes - but not these vfolder thingies.. like 'all rock with a
rating higher than 4'. You probably want to be able to browse that.

> > - since we might want to be able to burn albums to cd too, a burn to cd
> > button only in playlist sources wouldnt make sense
> I think it's acceptable to have to make a playlist containing an album
> before you can burn it. I think it would be more confusing to introduce
> burning into the library too..

Sure, it's acceptable.

> > - shuffle button with label to make it clearer
> I could be wrong but to me this looks very like an action button and
> would expect it to actually shuffle the current song list as apposed to
> playing in a shuffled manner.

Hrm, maybe.. I'm not sure. Fat chance that is because we have all seen
iTunes and the previous mockups. 

> > - no repeat button (not necessary I think..)
> I think it's important and useful...

Why? (Useful, sure, but not often toggled so is it worth being given
such as prominent place?)

> Personally I much prefer Daniel's mockup, if we remove the text from the
> meta button, and change it to toggling the browser. That is the only
> think i can find fault with and that is a lot better than anything else
> anyone has come up with. I think he's earned the pint.
> The big search box may be fairly useless but IMHO it looks a lot better,
> and the checkboxes for repeat and shuffle are a lot clearer than
> buttons.

I think the huge search box looks pretty bad, but it's not a big deal..

IMHO a checkbox is just as clear as a togglebutton with a label.... :)


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]