Thomas Martitz wrote: > Am 31.03.2010 14:00, schrieb Mike Holden: >> Forcing me to press "No" isn't keeping current behaviour, it's >> adding an extra buttonpress. > > And this is really so bad? Quickly selecting no is *way* faster than > waiting 2s (yes, this is its timeout) for the splash to end. And a > lot > of users would benefit from the choice even if you don't
Well let me turn that round - is waiting 2s so bad? Not looked in detail at the code recently, but the splash code used to have 2 variants - one was a fixed period wait, the other was interruptable, and I believe this is still the case. Could the splash be set as interruptable so those that want it can get straight in and not have to wait 2 seconds? Can you quantify the "a lot of users" that would benefit? Or do you just mean you? >> Doesn't interest me though, and I don't have a flash based player, >> it's HDD. > > But we want to try to make everyone happy not only the HDD guys. Sorry, but your arguments so far all amount to "this change is better for me, so I don't care if it's worse for you". I feel we need better justification for an increase in code size, complexity and possibly extra settings before this can be considered. -- Mike Holden http://www.by-ang.com - the place to shop for all manner of hand crafted items, including Jewellery, Greetings Cards and Gifts
