Don't we already have that w/ the "advance" prefs pane? How is this different?
-Colin On Jul 28, 2011, at 4:04 PM, Mike Houben wrote: > The cleanup. Did someone already propose the "Simple" / "Advanced" Mode? So > we can still have nearly all Preferences the Hardcore User wants? But still > maintain Simplicity for the average user? > > Mike > > Am 29.07.2011 um 01:01 schrieb Jordan: > >> Are there plans for any sort of fall-back or more 'advanced' toggling for >> these preferences? In other words, some of the items that can be removed >> from the UI could still be optional toggles that are configured purely with >> hidden prefs. I'll use the Sparkle Update option as an example: >> >> remove "Automatically check for updates", in my opinion users should always >> get informed about new versions (pks) >> I'm unsure. Pretty much every app I know that uses Sparkle has this >> setting... -Robbie >> I feel the same as Robbie, although I must agree - I can't think of a >> situation where anyone would actually disable this? (paulwilde) >> What about adding a checkbox "Do not remind me again" to the >> update-information-window? (pks) >> Disagree. We always need an opt out for auto updating because it involves >> phoning home. Also, IT people want to do manual updates of software. It must >> stay. -Colin >> Disagree. Opting out of options that phone home is important. -Steve >> The suggested solution (by pks) to use a "Do not prompt me for updates" >> option in the update window does provide an opt-out to prevent the >> application from phoning home. Colin brought up the point that IT personnel >> would always toggle this off, so removing it would annoy those folks. Why >> not also have a hidden pref for this. Hidden prefs are exactly the kind of >> thing IT personnel are accustomed to making use of. They're likely scripting >> their installs anyway, so using a command-line toggled hidden preference is >> perfect. >> >> We have transitioned certain options to hidden preferences in the past and I >> don't recall there being any major problems resulting from it. I think some >> people suggested at the time that continuing to use a hidden preference >> still provides complexity to troubleshooting that wouldn't be there if the >> preference were removed altogether. This is true in theory, but I don't >> think we have run into that problem in practice all that often (I can't >> think of a single occurrence from when I was more actively involved). >> >> While I think that where possible a complete removal of any given preference >> would be great, there will always be cases where someone comes up with a >> good reason not to remove it; this can be seen at this very time by skimming >> through the comments on the PreferenceReduction2011 page. Hidden preferences >> may provide exactly the happy-medium required to allow for UI simplification >> while still appeasing power users. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jordan >> >> ---- >> Sent with Sparrow >> >> On Thursday, 28 July, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Colin Barrett wrote: >> >>> I've updated it with my feedback. Would be great to get input from more >>> people. >>> >>> http://trac.adium.im/wiki/PreferenceReduction2011 >>> >>> -Colin >> >
