As I said: you never get a second chance at a first impression :-) EdB
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Maurice Amsellem <maurice.amsel...@systar.com> wrote: >> A big +1 on the keeping of the nice UI, it is one of the reasons the current >> Installer is such a big success. > > How do you know it's one of the reasons of the success? > > From my own end-user experience, I would say that the nice installer UI was > appealing the first time (wow effect), and engaged me to download and run it. > But the next times, I would be more concerned about *efficiency*, rather than > the UI: > - fast download and install > - does not break when a resource is not available > - well thought and efficient UI. > > That's only my personal view. > > Maurice > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Erik de Bruin [mailto:e...@ixsoftware.nl] > Envoyé : jeudi 12 décembre 2013 10:08 > À : dev@flex.apache.org > Objet : Re: Installer Revisited > > The FlexJS SDK build is a little more involved than a 'regular' Flex SDK > build, from an Installer point of view. Instead of adding yet another > monolithic code path to the Installer, Alex's idea boils down to building a > 'can handle all builds' installer by using existing ant build files. > > A big +1 on the keeping of the nice UI, it is one of the reasons the current > Installer is such a big success. I'd even go so far as to -1 a new Installer > release that didn't offer the same (or better!) user experience. > > EdB > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> A few questions: >> The installer can also run locally ie not download anything but copy local >> files. Can we do this with ant for air? >> With ant for air how would be be able to select the AIR and FP version and >> only download the correct version? Can we default to current latest versions? >> Would all the licence acceptances be in one step? Can we disable the next >> button until all required licences have been accepted? >> Can we keep the same nice UI the installer has? Just about all UIs I've seen >> that use config files for layout/steps end up looking like they been >> designed by developers not designers. >> >> I'm sure none of this is unsolvable, but should we throw away the nice >> installer we have and replaces it with something else when it works quite >> well? Wouldn't the time be better spent elsewhere eg fixing outstanding >> bugs/JIRA issues? The users don't care if the installer uses ant for air >> under the hood or not but they do care about bugs being fixed. Currently >> modifying the AS code in the installer isn't that hard. >> >> Thanks, >> Justin > > > > -- > Ix Multimedia Software > > Jan Luykenstraat 27 > 3521 VB Utrecht > > T. 06-51952295 > I. www.ixsoftware.nl -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
