-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Giles Robertson schrieb:
> 1) Fgrun/fgfs.
> For the average windows user, this is *highly* counterintuitive. In so
> far as Windows has an overarching user interface and tool design
> philosophy, it's integration. The concept of a GUI that launches the
> program doesn't make sense to them; they expect to be able to run
> flightgear, and for it to present a menu that reads something like "New
> flight"/"Saved Flight"/"Options"/"Exit". I'm not saying this is the way
> we should go, but I'd like to note that many users, when presented with
> the current method, get *very* confused, especially by the absence of a
> flight planner. Many also find restarting FlightGear in order to change
> aircraft counterintuitive
The first point is argueable. But that we need a restart just to change
planes is a big show stopper!
Your other points are valid. But none are thus counterintuitive than the
need to restart FGFS.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Flightgear-devel mailing list