On 2015-06-23 14:59, Len Ovens wrote: > It would seem that if these go into utility, there is no longer any need > for a photography cataegory as it would have less applications than > utility. > The first three I would not call utility in the same way I would not > call Audacity a utility. Entangle, for someone who is doing stop motion > video, becomes their major recording application. I have seen similar apps > used > by portrait photographers. The word utility can be far reaching to the > point the computer itself is a utility and everything on it. > > The idea is to bring order to the menu and to application searches by > presenting the user with a smaller more focused group of applications. > This can go too far to the point where the application the user is > looking for is effectively hidden. This is one of the reasons I > personally do not like Unity and other search based application > starters. My search terms rarely put the application I am looking for on > the screen. > > I think it is important to look at these from a workflow POV too. If a > utility/accessory gets constant use as part of the workflow, maybe > sub-catagorizing it no longer makes sense. > Yes, taxonomy is a mindstretching task :)
"In a computer, Home is not a place. It's a dynamic." - unknown gnu I also have an issue with search-term menus. But the strange thing about it, is that in the terminal i don't mind just that: typing words...? In the context of a software selection-menu like the current one, i'm thinking it's an issue of threshold: on what level of implications/complications is a category-subdivision necessary? When do the testing menu .. ehm.. sessions.?. begins? :) TL;DR i agree with Len. X-GraphicsUtility is an option, but it's probably superfluous as of now. Also: How is the schedule looking? -- Set Hallstrom AKA Sakrecoer http://sakrecoer.com -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
