Re: Epiphany (was: Re: [Usability] Re: on gconf-edit)

[Leonardo Santagada <santagada gmail com>]

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:49:50 +0200 (CEST), Reinout van Schouwen
<reinout cs vu nl> wrote:
> 
> Hi Leonardo,
> 
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Leonardo Santagada wrote:
> 
> > I really think ephy is a better browser for gnome than firefox, but it
> > still have a lot of room for improuvement, here is my take on it:
> 
> am I correct in thinking that you sent this to me personally? In that
> case I will reply off list too.

I am sorry, I meant to send to the list but I never know if it is the
kind that you have to reply all or not
> 
> >        * Noticeably slower than firefox: You can search the web for
> >          benchmarks
> 
> You are making the assertion, why don't you search for benchmarks? :-)
> Anyhow, Ephy is based on the exact same codebase as Mozilla/Firefox so
> I wonder what part of it would be slow and why.
> 
I saw some benchmarks and couldn't believe, then I used and it is
noticeably slower.

> >        * Tab system that hides tabs(when you have more than 10): I
> > think it is against some holy UI rule that you shouldn't make tabs
> > invisible.
> 
> If you have more than 10 tabs, you should open a new window instead. :-)
> In any case it's a tradeoff. Showing infinite tabs in one window makes
> overview just as hard if not harder than when hiding tabs, since you
> can't see their titles. Also tab switching with Alt+number wouldn't be
> possible any more.
> 
This one I don't agree with you, I use much more than 10 tabs in
firefox and it is usable, for one to read a lot of pages you can load
then all and then go one by one, navigating image galleries (it is not
a coincidence mozilla image libraries are named pornzilla :) But the
usability problem I see is hidding tabs, If I shouldn't have more than
10 tabs (wich I think is something every one that uses tabs has) it
should open another window or something, but not just hide the new
ones. It is not just anoing but the first time it happened I thought
it had freezed the program. The way Firefox does it is the good, if
not right, way to do it, just resize the tabs. In the title it should
use hig title naming convention, putting '...' in the midle of the
name. Also I don't know if javascript bookmarks works, but I can't
live anymore without then.

> >        * They are a litle dictatorial with so litle opitions. I think
> > it has less options than almost any other software and it is a full
> > browser.
> 
> The fact that it is a full browser, yet doesn't need as much options as
> other software is exactly what makes Epiphany so great!
> 
> The way you state it, you make it sound like more options is always
> better. The opposite is true. Why add an option when you can go with
> sensible defaults, and have it just work instead?

True, but every rule have a limit, you can't do this too much. But my
problems is with tabs, if they think firefox way to do it is a
sensible default, then I don't need any stinking option :)
> 
> > Half-hearted? you are being kind to FF.
> 
> lol!
> 
> > No thank god, but a good download manager for gnome would be a great thing.
> 
> I know someone was writing a GNOME wget frontend. Perhaps it will turn
> into an epiphany extension someday. Until then, what's wrong with the
> current downloads window?
> 
> > If you are sending you wish list to santa please ask for a faster OO.o :)
> 
> It's fast enough for me... Then again I've been using OO.o since it was
> called StarOffice 4.0 on OS/2, so for me it's become pretty fast
> already. ;-)
> 
Just like java programers that think that swing is fast because they
use netbeans all day :) (no, really, nothing is slower than netbeans)
> 
> 
> regards,
> 
> --
> Reinout van Schouwen                    student of Artifical Intelligence
> email: reinout cs vu nl                 mobile phone: +31-6-44360778
> 


-- 
Leonardo Santagada

"But hey, the fact that I have better taste than anybody else in the
universe is just something I have to live with. It's not easy being
me."
-- Linus Torvalds.