Am 31.03.2010 14:45, schrieb Mike Holden:
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?
Because I got the point of the message after 0.5s.
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?
It didn't, and it still doesn't, have 2 variants with 1 being interruptable.
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".
Except you completely ignore the fact that I proposed the confirmation
screen so that HDD people can live good with it.
I feel we need better justification for an increase in code size,
complexity and possibly extra settings before this can be
considered.
Haha good one, did you copy&paste that sentence from one of various
other mails or did you actually experiment with it to see how much
"complexity" and "code size" it adds?
Best regards.
