Jason Craig wrote:
> Now I finally feel like participating in this thread...
> 
> Stefan Hundhammer wrote:
>> We identified a number of problems with that old control center:
>>
>> (1) There are too many icons in there - way more that can easily be 
>> navigated.
>>
>> (2) The groups don't always match users' expectations.
>>     (E.g., is firewall more related to security or to network?)
>>   
> I think that the best solution to these three problems are a tree
> structure.  People (here and in the card sort study) have expressed
> confusion over why a network device is not hardware.  Easy fix, you can
> keep network devices as a node, just move it under hardware.

It's not a tree. It's people's fixation on trees that makes large menu
systems difficult to use. A better solution is a *lattice*. There can be
more than one route to a particular action.

To illustrate with the network card example, if they follow your
suggestion and move it under hardware in a tree, there will immediately
be objections - "why isn't a network device listed under networking?" -
and those objections are perfectly reasonable in my view. A networking
device is *both* a hardware device and a networking component. A
keyboard is a hardware device, part of the locale, and part of the X
window system. It should be possible to reach actions that affect it via
any route.

It's easy to reduce icon clutter - don't display them! Apart from some
things like keyboards and mice where a pictorial representation is
natural, icons add little value. What's the natural picture of a web
server or a dns server? How do you clearly differentiate all the
components of the graphical display system? Answer - text.

Just my 2p worth.

Cheers, Dave
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to