Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] Interface ideas

On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 14:06 +0200, Michi wrote:
> On 4/16/05, James Livingston <jrl ids org au> wrote:
> > Queue-related comments:
> > Originally I though that having the queue show up as another source
> > would be good, but after using for a while I'd have to say that having
> > it show up as a part of the main interface is much better (at least for
> > how I use the queue).
> Having the queue always in the main interface would be better, yes...
> but I don't see a way it yould fit there without cluttering the
> interface.

That is the problem in a nutshell - too much UI, not enough screen
space. With all of the other things that potentially want space in the
main UI, I'm not sure what the best way to sort this out is. I think we
should try to keep it as uncluttered as possible, but there are some
things that don't really work if they are visibly present.

<lots of songs (e.g. party) vs a couple of songs usage of the queue>

I think that there are two main ways the queue gets used

1) a big playlist that automatically removes played songs, and can keep
playing once empty (e.g. from the library/selected playlist).

This is what you want for a party, or similar situations, and how I used
to do this pre-queue (i.e. before we got the queue in rhythmbox) was to
create a playlist and simply have it run through. For this use case
having the queue show up in the sources is the best way to have it;
because that's what it is: a [slightly magical] playlist.

2) Using the playlist to have a couple of songs marked "play now"
The only way to do this pre-queue was basically double-click on the next
song just as the previous one was ending. This is basically what recent
WinAmps do when you press 'q' (I think it's 'q', anyway).

After about a week of using Rhythmbox with the queue I started to use
this a lot; whenever I sit down at my computer I can choose a couple of
songs that fit my mood, and random can take over after that.

I'm not sure on the best way to deal with these two uses: having the
queue in the main UI doesn't work well for case 1, but having it as a
source makes case 2 *much* less efficient/discoverable. I agree with
whoever it was (I can't find the post for some reason) that said having
both would be bad - very confusing for new (and not-new) users. I don't
really know if making the queue disappear from the sources list when
it's enabled in the main UI would be a good idea; having it disappear
for no good reason is dodgy.

I personally don't think that we should make things pop up in windows, I
think an application should either be completely in one window (as
Rhythmbox is atm) or completely in separate windows (e.g. WinAmp).
Having RB being one window, except when it's not, isn't very good design

yet another 2c,

James "Doc" Livingston 
If you treat the people around you with respect, they will never guess
that you're trying to stab them in the back

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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