Re: [Usability] Re: on gconf-edit

[Sean Middleditch <elanthis awesomeplay com>]

Kirk Bridger wrote:

> Nerds used to joke about how people are unable to set the time on their 
>  
>
> > VCR, so that it would keep blinking 00:00. Modern VCRs just fetch the 
> > current time from the teletext signal. Is this voodoo (from the users 
> > POV)? Certainly. But the point is, it *just works* and that's what 
> > counts. When the user isn't intimidated with all the technical fluff of 
> > a device, but instead feels that he masters it, perhaps he'll be 
> > encouraged to learn more about it? Wouldn't that be better than forcing 
> > him to deal with all these scary small buttons that might as well cause 
> > the apparatus to explode?
> >    
>
> Reinout, this is an excellent example of when things actually get too magical.
>
> I'm a fairly adept computer/technology user.  I recently bought a new
> VCR with this ability, and was charmed to see it work.  it was pretty
> cool, and made the cheap VCR suddenly seem like a good buy.
>
> However, several months later we had a power outage.  After the power
> came back up, the flashing began, and the time was never set.  Because
> the thing's inner working were so hidden from me and there was no way to
> access things to set manually, I was really frustrated.  Was something
> wrong with the VCR?  Maybe the cable feed?  I had no way to even look
> into this problem - the VCR no longer had buttons or menu options to
> manually set things and there wasn't much I could do with the other part
> of the equation - the cable line.  I unplugged it etc, but it didn't fix
> the problem.
>  
And here the angology breaks, because that problem doesn't exist with 
GNOME.  You *have* gconf to poke around with innards, and you *have* the 
source code to poke around at.  Sure, that information isn't very 
useful, but then, neither is the ability to tinker around with the 
innards of a VCR to the average owner.  My VCR hasn't had the time set 
in ages because I can't for the life of me figure out how to set it.  
Yet at the same time, I'm capable of writing modifications for the 
kernel that operates my computer.  If my VCR had the magic to set its 
time automatically (like one of the clicks on the wall here does) I'd be 
ecstatic.  And if it broke, I'd look up the help guide or call the 
manufacturer for a solution.

> The problem ended up being with the cable provider's feed.  But as an
> end user I found the entire thing very frustrating, and I looked at the
> VCR differently from then on.  It was something I couldn't trust,
> because I had no way of dealing with it if it malfunctioned.
>
> I think this is the general argument people are making against too much
> "simplification".  Forget about user groups - advanced, beginner etc. 
> When something breaks, people want it fixed.  If we don't provide them
> the means of understanding what is broken, and how to obtain help with
> it, then I think we've taken the magic too far.
>  
Like I said, gconf is always there for hidden options and control, and 
the source is there for anything gconf isn't responsible for.  GNOME 
isn't and never, ever will be a black box like your VCR.

> Even an entry in the VCR manual describing the auto-setting feature, and
> how to troubleshoot it, would have been helpful.  But ideally I would
> want an interface with the clock, so I could set it manually.  Then when
> the cable feed came back on it could automatically correct the time, and
> re-sync.  Call it an advanced feature if you want, but the bare minimum
> is to inform the user as to what is going on (display the word 'syncing'
> instead of 12:00 over and over) rather than keep them in the dark. 
> "Ignore the man behind the curtain" is no way to make software or
> hardware.
>  
And that is poor interface design.  If GNOME had an auto-time sync 
capability (as in something it controlled, not NCP done by a system 
daemon) it would very likely do just as your describe - document how to 
get around it (gconf key) or provide accurate, useful information 
(syncing vs 12:00 flashing).

If it doesn't, you need to file a bug.  Not whine and complain about how 
GNOME makes life easier for most people that don't have your special, 
rare situation.  You have a symptom (something doesn't work right), and 
you are trying to provide a solution that doesn't correct the problem 
(it doesn't work) but instead just tries to make it not work in a 
different way.

> > By default, Epiphany will launch whatever application is specified as 
> > the default handler for the mime type of the downloaded file. If one 
> > isn't specified, indeed the file "disappears" into the Downloads folder 
> > (or whatever other folder you specified in the Epiphany preferences). 
> > I've filed bug #155833 to make this a bit more obvious and open the 
> > download folder upon completing the download.
> >
> >    

> I have a few comments when reading about Epiphany's download system:
> the user tries to download a file.  Poof it disappears and another
> application tries to open it.  First of all - who said I wanted to open
> it?  I download files for later perusal all the time.  Second of all, if
>  
Right click, Save As.  If you download for later more often than not, 
just uncheck the Download and Open Files checkbox in Epiphany 
preferences dialog.  Most users download something they want to 
use/access *now*.

> we're automatically guessing what application to use then we better make
> sure there is a very clear way for users to set these settings, and
This would be the MIME system.  Admittedly, it sucked until 2.8, and 
still (IMO) is incredibly poorly thought out in 2.8.  But it provides 
the necessary means for assigning which apps can handle which types and 
selecting a default.

Epiphany very well *should* display an Open With menu option if it 
doesn't already.  If it doesn't, instead of making huge long rants on 
voodoo usability myths, just log a bug so it can be fixed.