Re: [Usability] "Finish" vs. "Close" in gnome-control-center dialogs

[Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie>]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Elijah Newren wrote:

> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 20:09:17 -0700
> From: Elijah Newren <newren gmail com>
> To: Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie>
> Cc: Raphael Bosshard <whistler fnord ch>, usability gnome org
> Subject: Re: [Usability] "Finish" vs. "Close" in gnome-control-center
>     dialogs
>
> On 3/23/06, Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie> wrote:
> > Since Dobey says the button label was changed to 'Finish' after user
> > testing I'm not inclined to disagree with the nice people at Novell (but
> > if you really wanted to nit-pick you could ask about how the testing was
> > conducted, if the sample of users and test case was really representative,
> > ask if an instant apply dialog is absolutely necessary and as has already

err, I got it back ass wards, s/instant apply/not instant apply/

> Did you not follow the massive (though fairly heavily one-sided)
> flamewars on d-d-l, p.g.o. and who knows where else expressing that
> the original change (to make it not be instant apply) was felt

> extremely strongly to be the wrong solution (by Fedora, Ubuntu, JDS,
> tons of developers, all authors of the HIG who commented on the issue,
> etc., etc.).  ;-)

Yes, mostly.  Didn't notice how exactly it ended until you pointed it out
now.

I dont recall the earlier versions including a Finish button either.

> Asking if an instant apply dialog is necessary is not a useful
> question at this point.  :)

I added that little comment as an after thought, wasn't sure it was the
same dialog.

Generally, as someone with crap hardware for many years I did feel instant
apply wasn't always ideal for setting backgrounds and was pretty awful for
slower tasks like changing themes but the time for those questions is long
since gone.  I dont think anyone wanted this change, and I say want as
opposed to feeling it was a necessary solution to a current problem.  I
had thought that Gnome would roll things back rather than make changes
which might only last a release or two and cause interface churn.  If I
recall correctly the desire to push on with Cairo developement meant Gnome
2.14 couldn't just ship the same backgrounds tool as 2.12 not without
holding back a lot of other things but I wasn't entirely clear on it.

> > been done in the bug report point out the inconsistency of doing it for
> > only one applet ;)
>
> When dobey mentioned the user testing and its results, it rang a
> strong bell with me--I had felt the exact same way about that dialog
> (and a few others) when I first used them.  Personally, I strongly
> feel that "close" sucks for that dialog and that "finish" is much
> better.

The button label is a much smaller issue compared to changing the dialog
to an instant apply dialog, which puts "better" and the results of
usability testing in a bigger context.

> (Which is why I gave one approval to the UI change despite
> the inconsistency we knew it would introduce; others objected strongly
> on the consistency basis, but that's all water under the bridge now.)

I'm a little suprised or should I say disappointed you deliberately broke
consistency.  (Well tough shit boo hoo, I should get over it, yeah I
know.)

How consistent can Gnome ever be if it is not something developers
consider important?

(You can take that as a rhetorical question, all the previous comments on
the issue discussing it further wont get us anywhere.)

> > It is a pity this inconsistency

In this case I was referring to only to the label Finish specifically, not
the whole change away from instant apply.

> > wasn't caught before Gnome 2.14 or changed
> > in all applets at the same time but but there just aren't enough hours in
> > the day :(
>
> It was caught (see e.g.
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2006-February/msg00107.html);
> however, there was insufficient time to fix everything, especially
> given that we were already past UI freeze.

I think I've answered the question for myself already because if you
didn't really have the option of just shipping the Gnome 2.12 version the
problem is not as simple as it first seems.

> Part of the problem was that another fix was attempted (making the
> dialog not be instant apply), but there was overwhelming backlash and
> complaints due to that change; by the time that first change was
> reverted, though, there wasn't much time to properly fix it and all
> other capplets.

Always come down to not enough time.

> Just my $0.02,
> Elijah

Thanks for trying to clarify things.

-- 
Alan H.