Re: [Usability] Can the GNOME desktop survive an encounter with my parents?

[Vidar Braut Haarr <vhaarr gmail com>]

On 8/26/05, Ross Burton <ross burtonini com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 21:21 -0400, Jason Hoover wrote:
> > I don't see the trash applet used in Fedora by default, so I'm guessing
> > this is an Ubuntu bug/Icon theme bug. Having the icon "land" where it
> > looks would probably be annoying to someone expecting it to 'land' where
> > his mouse is (especially on a tablet screen). Visual feedback may be a
> > good idea, but I'm not sure what exactly the trash should do to indicate
> > it's gonna get dropped there.
> 
> I'm about to file a bug that Nautilus should, if possible, drag files
> with a semi-transparent effect.  This way you'd be able to see the
> destination, and the destination can actually do something useful (like
> the folder "opening" icon, which you generally can't see as there is the
> drag icon over it.

I think that might help this particular issue, but as I noted, the
problem is that he did not realise that the actual mouse pointer was
the "drag point" - instead he thought the whole icon would be the a
drag point, so that if the edge of the icon touched the trash applet,
it would be deleted.

> > > 6. Wants to change the Font. Goes to System->User Settings->Fonts,
> > > sees the 4 boxes (does not recognize them as buttons) with "Sans" in
> > > them, clicks the "Details" button, "Go to Font folder", browses the
> > > fonts, finds one he likes, tries to drag it to the "boxes" without
> > > success.
> 
> It would use useful if those buttons accepted drags from font files, but
> ideally those need to be more obvious as buttons.  Do you have any idea
> why, as they look identical to buttons as far as I am concerned.

I like Alan Horkans idea, to use the standard [Browse ...] concept here.

> > That image selector, and subsequent file chooser are terrible. On top of
> > being confusing, it doesn't remember the path like you said. Someone
> > else here might be aware of a related bug, since it's so annoying.
> 
> There is a plan to replace it with a stock icon chooser, which would be
> far easier to use.

Any screenshots/plans of this stock icon chooser we could take a look at ?
 
> > > 10. Wants to get a slideshow of his images as screensaver. Goes to
...
> > One of the good and bad things about xscreensaver is that it can use any
> > image source for almost any of the screen savers. It may be worth filing
> > an enhancement bug requesting some kind of category/type sorting. I
> > don't know exactly what to suggest, but it'd make peeling through that
> > painfully long list more pleasant. Maybe 3d/2d/images/text or something
> > like that.
> 
> gnome-screensaver is doing this.

Will gnome-screensaver be a part of 2.12 ? Will it have a slideshow
screensaver ?

> > > 12. I watch him trying to change the background image on his desktop.
> > > When he wants to close it, he suddenly stops and asks me "This X in
> > > the corner and this button with X on it that says 'Close', they do the
> > > same thing, right?"
> > > Then why are there 2 ?
> >
> > This is kind of backwards. It might be more appropriate to have "OK" and
> > "Cancel" here, why it commits changes permanently and right away is
> > something of a bug. I can't find anything in bugzilla for it, so an
> > enhancement bug may be a good idea.
> 
> Erm, no.  Instant Apply is good.  I picked an image, so it's likely that
> I'd like to see what it's like as a wallpaper.  Going back to the
> previous wallpaper isn't difficult, so instant apply is a good choice.

I agree that Instant Apply is good, and that was not the issue here.
The issue was simply that there were two methods of closing a dialog
that yields the same results, when there only really needs to be 1.

Thanks for taking the time to comment on this monster e-mail, Ross :-)

-- 
Vidar Braut Haarr
"Programmers don't die, they
just GOSUB without RETURN."