> Bamm, you are wrong. What you have wrote is a lie... you are
improvisating.
> And i have to tell you this, because you seem to be totaly ignorant on
> about this topic.
>
> I will give you the perfect example, Photoshop:
>
> Photoshop is in the top has its prestige not for be an easy to use
> application, for have a shortcut where the most of the end users need,
> or for its features.
> The Photoshop User Interface is catalogated like one of the most careful
> designs made for an aplication. And this is not because it has a
> shortcut where the most end user need. It hasnt.
> PHOTOSHOP'S UI USE A "'COHERENT LANGUAGE'" FOR THE COMUNICATION WITH THE
> USER. THIS IS WHAT MAKES TO PHOTOSHOP A GRAPHIC DESIGN APLICATION AND
> NOT ANOTHER KID TOY FOR DRAW AND PAINT IN A COMPUTER.
>
> That is in deep what a user interface is: The language used for the
> comunication between the aplication and the user.
>
> You philosophy, "a shortcut where most of the end users need", ends
> when the application has turned into a thing totally unreadable for who
> doesnt know the application and is just starting to use it.
>
> If you want a HOME button besides of navigations buttons into the
> Navigation Toolbar, may be you are in the wrong place.
> The user interface of Mocosof Internet Explorer has a language which
> allow you to have a HOME button besides the STOP, BACK, REFRESH... etc.
> buttons. So i recomend you to use Internet Explorer and leave Mozilla.
Hi Lance,
I'm glad you cooled down. It was kind of difficult talking to you
when you were shouting.
I hope you didn't read me wrong. I didn't say that a UI should
have a shortcut for everything. It shouldn't. It should only expose
what is necessary - other functions must be buried in menus or
in other toolbars.
I was just pointing out that your analogy about a cookie manager
button was inappropriate because not many people will find
a cookie manager button useful. It is just another stupid button
that nobody will use. The same cannot be said of Home.
If you read my piece correctly you would have seen that I agree
with you that an app that exposes everthing in the toolbar becomes
unreadable, and that only those that are necessary should be
included.
We differ however, in the opinion whether a Home button is
necessary or not. I believe it is. But I respect your opinion that
it is not. I am not asking for a permanent Home button, but
an option to show it.
A UI is a language of communication between the app and
the user. It should not be overwhelming, but it should not
make it unnecessarily difficult to do a simple thing. Users
should feel comfortable in the language otherwise he will
not use it.
Instead of telling users to use IE if they are not comfortable
with the way Moz communicates to them, a better approach
would be to improve Moz.
I don't know why adding a Home button is such a big deal
to Moz developers. Why do you have to be so defensive since
you already have Go, Search and Print in the navigation bar.
I understand that you do not want a Home button, but you
should not deny it to users who do. I would say I do not
want a Go, Search and Print button but it was still given
to me because others want them.
Yes, I do know what I'm talking about. A good UI should
not be improvising ("improvisating" as you would say). Adding
a Home button is not improvising. Removing it is.
Don't get me wrong improvisation per se is not wrong.
Go and Search are examples of improvisation. Search has
proven to be useful but Go hasn't. Removing the Home
is an improvisation that has proven to be bad - it has
an ugly consequence that users had to sacrifice browser
real estate to the personal toolbar just to have a Home.
I don't see (please convince me) why Go, Search and Print
deserve an option but Home doesn't.
Regards,
Bamm
