Re: [Usability] SM UI plan

["Sergio A. Kessler" <sergio perio unlp edu ar>]

> > +----------------------------------------------+
> > |                                              |
> > |            What do you want Gnome to do?     |
> > |  GNOME                                       |
> > |  LOGOUT         +--------------------+       |
> > |  LOGO OR        | CURRENT OPTION  \/ |       |
> > |  IMAGES         +--------------------+       |
> > |  OR WHAT                                     |
> > |  EVER       In nice, clear wording put a     |
> > |  OVER       pleasant little description      |
> > |  HERE!      about each login option as       |
> > |             it is selected above.            |
> > |                                              |
> > |                       <OK> <CANCEL> <HELP> |
> > |                                              |
> > +----------------------------------------------+

this is /exactly/ what MS is doing nowdays with the logout box...
(Paul should have mentioned this)

but intead of the confusing "What do you want Gnome to do?",
they put "Confirm what you want"
(remember they come here from clicking on "turn off..." )

> Using a pull-down menu with deferred application to perform an action is
> a blatant mis-application of controls. Controls that may reasonably be
> used to perform actions are toolbars, menus (in menubars!), and command
> buttons. That is probably the most serious problem with the interface.

hmmm, whatever...
seth, no offense to you, but I think the guys at redmond /at this times/ 
know a little more about interfaces than you...

[snip screaming]

> > This is my preference. A big benefit of this I see is that it allows
> > for logout options to be easily added or taken away without having to
> > change the basic user interface at all. They just have to be added to
> > the drop down list.

true.

> > This is useful for when users do and do not have permission to reboot
> > or shutdown a machine.

> So you are suggesting that if I don't have permission to do something it
> should be mysteriously absent from the menus?

seth, I'm pretty sure my mom doesn't want to see an "stand by" option
there, that for all intentions and purposes, simply do NOT work...

and she will ask me why... (again... and again)...

> At least have the decency
> to inform me that the option exists but I may not excercise it. Even
> better (much better!) is to provide a mechanism for me to easily
> discover why it is that I can't access this option, and perhaps provide
> a mechanism for me to fix it.

that's /maybe/ good for a geeky, not for my mom...
she does not want to fix nor discover things (leave alone easily) 
with the computer, she simply want to _use_ it.

/sergio