Harold Fuchs wrote:
"Mathias Bauer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Harold Fuchs wrote:
We can only comment on what we are shown. What I saw was terrible and I
said so. If what was shown does not represent the intentions then show
us what is intended. Philosophical arguments about UIs and context
sensitive menus are a waste of time and effort. The only thing that
counts is the *implemented* ergonomics. Show us what you plan to do,
with proper examples.
Again the misunderstanding about what a prototype is.
If you created a petition that the new UI for OOo must not look like the
prototype, I would be the first to sign it. But that's not the point.
IMHO the prototype created so much resistance because it was not
explained enough.
BTW: I didn't present philosophical arguments about UI, I explained
considerations about an operating philosophy, that's something
completely different. It is essential to have an operating philosophy
for your user interface. If you don't have one, you can only copy
something from elsewhere, exactly what some people allege what is
happening in Renaissance. Without outlining that we indeed have such
operating philosophy was the only way I could think of that could
explain that in fact we are *not* just copying.
My main objections are:
1. The UI shown in the example took far too much screen space.
Now this is exactly the way how we should talk about that. Indeed this
is something I also don't like in what the prototype shows. IMHO we have
to optimize that.
2. The UI is far less important than many other things in OOo. If there
are resources available they should be deployed fixing major bugs and/or
implementing popularly requested enhancements. How many requests are
there for an improved UI compared to the number of requests for better
interoperability with MS Office for example? Or compared to the number
of requests for the properly implemented ability to allow multiple users
to work on the same document. Or for a cleaner mail-merge that doesn't,
for example, produce blank pages all over the place with no *obvious*
way to turn them off?
This is the recurrent discussion about priorities. Ask 5 people, get 6
opinions. It won't help to discuss that further, and it will distract us
from the matter we are discussing here. I hope you don't mind if I stay
with the "Renaissance" topic.
Too many people commented the blog entries that neither
understood what a prototype is nor what the particular prototype in
question wants to show.
What *did* the prototype want to show? Why does it *need* an
explanation? I thought a picture is as good as a thousand words. You
seem to be saying we need a thousand words to explain a picture.
Yes, sometimes this is true. Pictures can mislead, they often can be
interpreted in different ways. If you think a few seconds I'm sure you
will remember a lot of pictures that you would have misunderstood if
nobody had given you some background information. But once you have this
information, the picture indeed is better than thousand words.
Regards,
Mathias
If you really want to enhance the UI, implement the facility where
***every*** possible option is available from the keyboard so that real
typists don't have to keep switching between it and the mouse. There's an
ancient organisation in Japan responsible for inventing and improving the
"algorithms" used on a Japanese abacus (which is different from either a
Chinese one or a Russian one). Years and years ago they discovered that the
most time consuming activity when using an abacus is the *attention* switch
(not the finger switch) required to move from one column of beads to
another. Minimising the number of such moves can drastically improve
performance. Similar thinking applies to the switch from the mouse to the
keyboard and back, although in this case it's the finger switch that takes
the time. That's why WordPerfect was so loved by professional typists - they
could do everything from the keyboard.
If done properly you could even make the same key combination mean different
things in different contexts so you wouldn't run out of keys.
Do you use professional "usability labs"? These are organisations that get
people in off the street to try to use a piece of software. Typically the
people don't have any training. They are observed & interviewed to find what
comes easily and what doesn't. The results are used to improve the
software's UI. I have usually found them very useful.
Harold Fuchs
London, England
Please reply *only* to [email protected]
I have not read even more than 5-6 of these pieces
of this thread. Here it the problem I have.
The Ribbon UI was not treated fairly, but it was
not thought out either. There are, as I have read about,
add ons to MS Word (etc.) that adds a toolbar that gives
you back the old style of UI that MS replaced with the
Ribbon style. I do not like the Ribbon and since OOo
does not have it, many of the old users of MS Office may
decide to use OOo since it "feels" like what MS office
was like before it changed to the Ribbon format.
SO here is what I think. If some group want to place
the Ribbon style of UI in OOo, then make it an add on
first. It may be harder to make it as an add on toolbar,
but you will make both groups happy. Keep the UI the
way the OOo users like and are use to, then have the
Ribbon there as an add on so the users of the newest
MS Office can relate as well. Remember, we do not know
what MS has in mind for its UI in the next year or two.
They may change the Ribbon to some other format that
will be just as bad or make it more like what Office 2003
was like.
All this stuff about going to some web site other than
OOo's and fill out forms we do not have control over.
This is like washing our dirty laundry in a mud puddle.
If we, as users, do not like something that the "developers"
are doing, there are ways to let them know on one of
the boards, or should be.
We are not like MS. We have "volunteer" programmers
that are doing their best to make OOo the best they
feel that they can. In the end, if we do not solve
this "problem" we may have to have two build streams;
one with our current UI, and one with the Ribbon style.
But hopefully that will be the only difference.
So let us not fight each other. That is what MS would
want to see.
So can you think of a way we can help the developers
with their work, not cry out for blood if it is not
to your liking?
Could there be an add on to try out the ribbon style of UI?
Could there be an option to choose which UI style you want
to use?
I like the current UI and will need to spend too much time
relearning the ribbon style if we have it. That is one
reason many businesses are not upgrading to 2007 or above,
too much time needed to retrain their people to the new UI.
OOo is enough like the old style of UI that the training
will be less and the "TOTAL Cost" of switching to OOo may
be less than it would be to upgrade to MS's new stuff.
Well that is what I have to say.
I do not like the way MS went and I do not
want OOo to go that way either.
Tim L.
retired and tired of MS, and switching to Linux as fast
as I can learn it and find a version that will work for my
HP laptop.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
