Hello Calum, I've read through your specification. I'm happy to see this spec and have an oportunity to comment on it. I think it is generally very nice.
My comments are going to be written in the order of the content of the document. Question: I've often heard in usability studies people basically asking for basically a basic layout of information in the UI to be like Windows... not that they want a clone of Windows, but just that this is what their muscle memory and mental familiarity expect. With this in mind, I wonder why we aren't doing something more like Windows XP's Start menu, which is dual columned and separates recently frequently used apps from links to common places in the filesystems/dataspace, and so on. I'd think that would be better for the familiarity/usability of this environment. >From a purely "appearance" standpoint, I'm also a bit concerned that our >Launch menu looks basically like the Windows one did in 2000. Wouldn't that >give folks somewhat familiar with the Microsoft UI transitions to have a >gut-level feeling that we're very dated and old fashioned? For the rest of my comments, I'm assuming an audience for this of "end users" and "developers/programmers" who are mostly familiar with Windows and some who are familiar with GNOME and/or JDS. TOP LEVEL; - I don't think there's a need to distinguish the quick launch things differently. Given how little most users customize environments, I think that kind of information would just be unnecessary visual "noise" no matter how it is distinguished. - I don't agree with the notion that app names should only appear on the quick launch (and star office) items. My reason for this is are twofold: 1) I feel the menus full of "generic" names makes the whole environment feel a little "cheap" 2) I think it's a bit confusing to launch "Image Editor" and be presented with a big dialog proclaiming "GIMP" and subsequent UI naming "GIMP" rather than "Image Editor". In some cases my first reaction is "Oh, there's a bug here. I chose "Archive Manager" and got something called "File Roller". I do really like the pairing of the product name with a little description of it (Firefox Web Browser) rather than "Firefox"... that provides both bits of info in what seems a generally unobtrusive manner. - I wouldn't put the checkbox for quick launch apps in the caplet. It solves the one case you mention of someone changing the preferred app and not understanding that the things in the quick launch area are references to existing apps. On the other hand, it does strongly imply that we've reserved those exclusively for these apps. (on the other hand, I can't figure out how one changes what is in the quick launch area. Maybe if that were more obviously presented it would help this concern?) APPLICATIONS MENU - I understand the importance of accessibility. Yet, it always bothers me that it is the first thing on the list. I'm routinely ending up in it when I wanted to be in Accessories. I don't know if this is Windows muscle memory, or just that both start with "Access" and so it takes me a moment to notice I'm going to the wrong one. (given that these are more 'how do I get my system working' kinds of things, I'd expect them more in the system tools area). - Personally I like programming, but I don't have a good sense which word would seem more like "stay away" to non-programmers/developers. ACCESSORIES - IMO, shipping an app which doesn't work in many cases seems undesirable. - To me, archive manager, pda synchronization and maybe even character map seem like utilities, not lightweight quick apps. See my comment about admin tools, below. INTERNET - Personally, I've never been comfortable with the "internet" category. Personally, I don't think of apps as "internet apps" or not. But, like developer/programmer, I don't know at this level of detail whether users will understand this or even care. OFFICE - I'm overjoyed to find Acrobat Reader and Evince stuff in some office/productivity apps section! SOUND AND VIDEO - Alluding to the point above in the Accessories menu, many of the things here seem like they're system configuration/management/preferences kinds of things. Audio control, maybe CD Database Server, volume control, recording level monitor, volume monitor all don't seem like "applications" to me. - I share a bit of your concern about video stuff... but that may be just because the names are so generic... Though, I suppose someone will assume "Java Media Player" is just for playing Java-related media, whatever that is. :-) SYSTEM TOOLS - I don't quite understand the distinction between System Tools and Administration (and, given some of the things in this list, Preferences). When I've got my administrator hat on, the Windows division of some sys admin tools into Control Panels -> Performance -> Admin Tools (or whatever it is called) and some in the Accessories menu drives me batty. I'm sure if I were a professional admin I'd have memorized which is which, but as I'm not it seems random which goes where. I'm concerned you'll be doing the same thing here. USERNAME - I'm a bit surprised to see Computer in here. Same with the Network servers. How is this "Computer" different than the one in the main menu? Also, Maybe it is because the rest of this menu is shared by all users but each user gets their own set of network servers? - Not sure what to make of CD/DVD Creator... Not sure what the overall interaction is once I've chosen it. ADMINISTRATION - See system tools, above PREFERENCES - Why is "About me" not "About (username)"? OTHER - Is there a dire need to have network status on the panel? It's blinking bothers me and some other folks I've talked to. :-( So, there are my comments. To summarize my main points: - I think a different organization of system tools and administration and other "utilities" (and possibly preferences?) would be beneficial. - The stuff in the "user" menu surprised me. - I'd like to see real app names rather than generic names more often. - A more Windows XP-ish launch menu would probably be beneficial for user muscle memory and our seeming more modern. Overall, despite my seeming to have many comments, I think it's a great spec! Thanks for posting! david -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
