[Usability] Re: GDM

[michael chang <thenewme91 gmail com>]

> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 22:50:05 -0400
> From: Dave Ahlswede <mightyquinn letterboxes org>
> Subject: Re: [Usability] GDM
> To: usability gnome org
> Message-ID: <1128048605 7933 4 camel localhost localdomain>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 16:47 -0700, Rob Adams wrote:
> > The reasons for the way gdm is aren't usability ones, but technical
> > ones.  It is possible that the way the user authenticates isn't through
> > a password.  It could be a fingerprint, or pretty much anything, and
> > this is all decided by PAM based on the username.
> >
> > I don't know the exact details, but that's the core reason it is the way
> > it is.

IIRC, there are various 'skins' for GDM that show a username list and
then a password box, similar to the Windows XP (and similar) Welcome
Screen.  I haven't explored the techincal tidbits, but it would seem
logical that if one skin that can display the username list and a
password box, and another skin and display one box for both, it would
seem possible to have a skin with both username and password boxes. 
That said, I use a reasonably older GDM, (i think) the one in Debian
Unstable.

>
> I'm willing to bet that over 9 times out of 10, it's going to need a
> password, though.
>
> Perhaps it might be reasonable to show both entry fields, but after the
> user name is entered and sent to pam, if something besides a password is
> needed, insensitize the password field and display a brief message
> saying what is required? (I have no idea if pam provides any sort of
> human readable messages)

That said, IIRC on new systems there is a brief pause after the
username is sent, and in older systems (e.g. Celeron 400 or similar
class) that pause may take a while.  You don't want the user thinking
the system froze.  That said, if you have the password field grayed
out by default, then gray out the username field and then make the
password field active, that might work.

Because I'm not using GDM/Linux at the moment (answering from Windows
XP ATM), I don't have a "accurate" mockup, but the idea I'm thinking
of looks like this:  (apologies for the poor image quality and
draftiness of the idea, but I believe it gets the gist of my concept
across; I just spent about a minute and a half in MS Paint to draw it
up quickly...)

[1) Username active, password greyed]
http://webhome.idirect.com/~rgh/gdm-pass-mockup/gdm-pass-alt1.png

[2) Username greyed, password greyed (while GDM goes to PAM to figure
out authentication type for the user)]
http://webhome.idirect.com/~rgh/gdm-pass-mockup/gdm-pass-alt2.png

[3a) Username greyed (already entered), password active]
http://webhome.idirect.com/~rgh/gdm-pass-mockup/gdm-pass-alt3a.png

[3b) Username greyed, prompt for alternate entry method]
http://webhome.idirect.com/~rgh/gdm-pass-mockup/gdm-pass-alt3b.png

Obviously, when/if this would be actually done, it would look much
nicer than what I have...

> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:57:36 +0100 (BST)
> From: Joachim Noreiko <jnoreiko yahoo com>
> Subject: Re: [Usability] GDM
> To: Andrew Z <andrewz springsrescuemission org>, usability gnome org
> Message-ID: <20050930075737 71730 qmail web32408 mail mud yahoo com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
> --- Andrew Z <andrewz springsrescuemission org> wrote:
> > We've been using Gnome in our office for a little
> > while, and I've
> > noticed new users consistently struggle with the
> > login manager.
> > Sometimes they will type TAB ENTER directly after
> > their user name.
>
> I often hit TAB after my username because it's what a
> number of other systems use (Windows, OS X), as well
> as most web page logins.
>
> Would it be possible for TAB to function as ENTER does
> in the username field?

I'm thinking it should work, although I haven't looked at GDM's
codebase -- and I believe it sounds like a great idea unless someone
has a super-great reason why not.

In WinXP, though, with the welcome screen, users click on their
username, and then type their password in a password box (if any).  I
have no clue whether or not this makes sense, but this is only a
feisable idea in a home system with no more than e.g. 3 to 5 users or
so. In an office... there is probably a different way of doing things.

--
~Mike
 - Just my two cents
 - No man is an island, and no man is unable.