Well - I'd like to add my 2 cents:
I agree strongly that we need to clearly articulate the type of JDS
experience we are trying to deliver on the desktop. My own impression
was that we wanted to deliver a rock solid, clean crisp experience for
our users, where things are where I'd expect them to be, in particular
if I'm a developer already familiar with current Linux distors.
From a menu standpoint that means that we avoid clutter, let the brand
of specific well known apps be exposed where they already have strong
brand presence and where they don't or we think the underlying app may
change then go with the generic name or [generic - brand]. The presence
of the icons really helps here with brand presence regardless of
ordering or if generic names are used. It also means that where there is
general consensus in the various Linux distros we should at least
consider doing the same to leverage the "muscle memory" of developers
who will no doubt be using these distros as well as Solaris.
So I'#d vote for 1 with a sprinkling of 2 & 3 where it makes sense :)
Function: no brand, just a generic tool
Function - Brand: no strong brand for general user, tool you may want to
use and would like to know what will be launched (maybe changed in JDS
at some stage in the future, so brand would change but Function would
not. Leverages "mucle memory".
Brand Function: strong brand association, icon and name.
Archive Manager
Calculator
Character Map
On-Screen Keyboard
PDA Synchronization
Predictive Text Entry
Screen Reader/Magnifier
Terminal
Text Editor <- Note I see this as just a generic Text editor for me,
much like notepad, if I want some other text eidtor then I'll install it
and would expect to see it appear under accessories or office for me.
Evolution Mail and Calendar
Firefox Web Browser
Instant Messenger - GAIM
Java Web Start
Thunderbird Mail
Video Conferencing - Ekiga
Web Page Editor - Nvu
JR
David-John Burrowes wrote:
>I've suddenly grown concerned that we'll talk about this and make a
>decision, and said decision will be done for the "wrong" reason.
>
>I think we have somewhat different ideas of what kinds of experience JDS
>is delivering to our users. I think it would be better to try to
>articulate those, and perhaps the menu item naming would then be easier?
>
>For instance, I don't just like "Firefox Web Browser" beause I think it
>reads better. I like it because I like what it appears to reflect about
>Sun's commitment to the app and the experience it is delivering. David
>Powell's point about investing time and energy into a nameless app is
>speaks to the same concern, I think.
>
>Just as corporations buy from companies that seem stable and can provide
>long term support etc. as an individual I tend to invest time and energy
>into something that looks like it has some substance. It suggests
>(perhaps wrongly) that Sun has made some commitment to delivering that
>experience.
>
>So, I suppose that in some ways I'm saying here "Show me some commitment
>to what you are delivering so I feel safe in committing to learning your
>environment".
>
>To me, the world of "Spreadsheet" or "Spreadsheet - StarCalc8" suggest a
>lack of commitment.
>
>
>Yet, Calum (and perhaps Frank?) have at least implied that there's been
>a different model underlying some of this design in the past.
>Perhaps this was a model of absolute non-commitment "We reserve the
>right to change the apps under these names at any time. We promise some
>kind of web browser functionality, but not exactly what".
>Alternately, maybe the model was "You only need one web browser on your
>computer, and this is the pointer to whatever it is."
>Or maybe it's an assumption "No one can learn the various names of our
>apps, so we won't even bother to ask them to". :-)
>
>
>david
>
>
>
>On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 16:43, Glynn Foster wrote:
>
>
>>Hey,
>>
>>On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 14:10 -0800, Frank Ludolph wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Calum,
>>>
>>>Like Sharon I also hate not knowing what web browser, mail app, word
>>>processor, pdf viewer, etc. will be run from the launch menu. But then I
>>>don't care to know the name of the on-screen keyboard app or other such
>>>utilities. Given in that one case I want to know and that in the other
>>>case I don't, and that I would learn most of the ones I care about
>>>within a few uses, I wouldn't want choice 1.
>>>
>>>
>>FWIW, and I'm not qualified to speak other than my personal preference,
>>I quite like this approach. Identify the applications with major brand
>>awareness, and promote those to 'Name Function' eg. Firefox Web Browser,
>>Adobe Reader. All the rest get generic names.
>>
>>
>>Glynn
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>desktop-discuss mailing list
>>desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>desktop-discuss mailing list
>desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/desktop-discuss/attachments/20060314/20fbe41a/attachment.html>
