Richmond Mathewson wrote:
On 01/03/2010 20:40, Richard Gaskin wrote:
...
I took a minute this morning to take some screen shots of Rev and OS
controls on Ubuntu/Gnome, Win XP, and OS X:
<http://fourthworldlabs.com/revfonts/>
Frankly, Richard, it looks as though you took quite some time and gave
quite a lot of thought to that,
and "took a minute" is somewhat of an understatement.
It is a really good comparison: Thanks.
My pleasure. It really only took a couple minutes, well worth the
investment to have the side-by-side comparison to review when making
layout decisions, and if nothing else to help clarify the mystery of
Gnome's control sizes. Glad you found it useful too.
My closing observation there sums up the more significant problem:
Even with the disparity of reported rendered textSize, it's
possible to make layouts that substantially conform to OS
standards rather easily for Mac and Win, and the text and
control sizes of each are close enough that a single layout
will work well on both platforms.
Ubuntu/Gnome, however, uses control and text size so far out
of proportion to other OS standards that they require either
delivering layouts sized smaller than the user sees in other
apps on that OS, or making a separate set of layouts specifically
for that OS.
...
It is not the job of the Linux people to make their OS GUIs conform to
some real or imaginary standard
established by either Apple or Microsoft, any ore than the other way around.
But it may well be in their interest to do so, on two counts:
1. The greatest opportunity for adoption of Linux will come from those
who've used another OS before (very few who don't have a computer will
be installing Linux on the thing they don't have <g>). Sure, there's a
vast untapped pool of new users in the developing world who will
inevitably come to use Linux as their first computing experience, but
that's long-term and along the way most new Linux users will have had
prior experience with Windows.
Given this, the degree to which Linux conforms to their expectations in
ways that carry no adverse risk to usability will benefit from one of
the strongest usability drivers, consistency.
2. For many, Linux adoption will be driven by the number of apps
available for the platform. While good FOSS apps will always enjoy a
price advantage over commercial offerings, there's plenty of opportunity
for proprietary software to be ported to the new forthcoming Linux
audience. And even among FOSS apps, not all are developed solely for Linux.
So just as we want to see things made easier for transitioning
end-users, here we're also conscious of the benefits of making
multi-platform deployments easier for developers.
More apps simply means more users for the platform.
But requiring specialized layouts for one platform slows down deployment
to that platform, and may even be prohibitive for some, thereby reducing
the pool of potential new users.
I'll run this control size issue by the folks on the Gnome usability
list, and will report back anything interesting.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
Rev training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com
revJournal blog: http://revjournal.com/blog.irv
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
