On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 18:39, Steffen Barszus wrote:
> Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 21:36 schrieb Buchan Milne:
> >
> > IMHO, the fact that you need 17 screenshots says enough about it's
> > complexity, and although there seem to be some nice features
> > (disk-free-space meter and it seems to be able to show details from
> > different versions of packages side-by-side) and it looks professional
> > in some respects, is IMHO a bit complex. But I guess I should actually
> > try it (but I don't think I will have time ..).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Buchan
>
>
> I'm following the thread since a while and I'm not sure yet what to think
> about it. I'm under the impression that it seems not clear who is the
> targeted person that tool is designed for. If it is for newbies the interface
> how it currently is can be fine, although I would not separate that hard
> between software installation and deinstallation. Software management is one
> task and can not be split. What I dislike is to list installed packages in
> the softwareinstaller. This is in total contrast to the actual design
> decision. It obsoletes the complete idea behind it. I'm against such a half
> made step. Either there is one interface for both and the separation idea is
> not working or they are separated.
> From the discussion I read it seems clear to me that the simplified interface
> does not work for people that have just a bit of knowledge. So having it that
> simplified would require a full featured software management tool for the more
> advanced users. This is what I read out of the wish of having the old
> rpmdrake back and the discussion in this thread.
This is absolutely correct.
>
> Looking to the "outside world" only to interfaces are somewhat comparable to
> rpmdrake-1.4-alike.
Correct again. Look at Windows 98SR2 at the software "Add/Remove
Programs" applet in the control panel and you will see this is true. It
is a kindergarten version of standard rpmdrake.
The purpose behind beginner rpmdrake seems to have been to out-simplify
XP rather than seeking a unique application match to the users
(utilizing user input). I personally believe this was a decision handed
down from management ("ergonomics team") and not a developer's decision;
which I stand ready to be corrected on this from Buchan, GC, or whomever
else may have better historic info.
>
> 1) synaptic
> -------------
> ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 :
> http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg)
>
> It is for software management , includes as far as I can see source management
> and looks very powerful to me.
>
> 2) yast2-softwareinstaller
> ------------------------------
>
> I guess the screenshots are saying enough.
>
> What in both is the same: They don't try to hide complexity. The only
> alternative currently for power-user is to use urpmi. And this is what people
> complain about.
>
> I can only say don't make half decisions. The screenshot of synaptic shows
> exactly how a power-user tool could looks like. It looks clean but powerful.
> Adding complexity to a newbie-tool is awkward and breaking own made design
> decisions is bad.
>
> Steffen
--LX
--
������������������������������������������������
Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1
Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk
Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/
������������������������������������������������
