Adam's last post got me thinking about the use of Eye Candy in software.
What do the group think are good and bad examples of effects or eye candy.
For example ( this is going to be a popular one I feel )
I absolutely hate the dog that appears when searching for a file in Windows XP (Spot I think it's called), it adds nothing to the search functionality and just wastes some screen estate.
On the same OS I quite like the transparent mail notification that appears when Outlook 2003 receives a new mail (if you haven't seen it, it pops up above the system tray with a brief summary of the incoming mail over the active windows but transparent enough to still see the active window through it) It's pretty handy as it usually catches my eye and appears for long enough and with enough information for me to make a judgement as to whether it's a mail I need to deal with now or leave for later.
On Sat, Sep 18, 2004 at 12:40:12AM +0100, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
I absolutely hate the dog that appears when searching for a file in Windows XP (Spot I think it's called), it adds nothing to the search functionality and just wastes some screen estate.
That dog (and friends like "clippy") make me want to have some kind of Quake mode built into the OS, but then I don't use the dark side very often nowadays, a few games (most of the commercial games I play have a linux native versions) and testing that webpages/documents etc. look ok on the "other" OS....
Adam
On 18-Sep-04 adam@thebowery.co.uk wrote:
On Sat, Sep 18, 2004 at 12:40:12AM +0100, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
I absolutely hate the dog that appears when searching for a file in Windows XP (Spot I think it's called), it adds nothing to the search functionality and just wastes some screen estate.
That dog (and friends like "clippy") make me want to have some kind of Quake mode built into the OS, but then I don't use the dark side very often nowadays, a few games (most of the commercial games I play have a linux native versions) and testing that webpages/documents etc. look ok on the "other" OS....
Anyone had the same impression as me, the "clippie" bears some resemblance to BG himself (AND looks is though he's "on" something, when the jiving starts ... )?
Ted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 [NB: New number!] Date: 18-Sep-04 Time: 18:09:31 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
On Saturday 18 September 2004 6:09 pm, Ted Harding wrote:
Anyone had the same impression as me, the "clippie" bears some resemblance to BG himself (AND looks is though he's "on" something, when the jiving starts ... )?
Clippy has some even more annoying firends in the shape of Microsoft agents http://www.microsoft.com/msagent/default.asp
(warning I don't think you can easily uninstall these)
This was a (now failed I hope) attempt to bring clippy style help (but with text to speech and speech to text) to third party applications (you can even script agent actions from a web page)
Once interesting thing I have just found on that site is that Bonzi Buddy is listed as an agent enabled application........I am sure I remember Bonzi Buddy being pretty closely tied to Spyware/Malware in the past.
On 18 Sep 2004, at 00:40, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
For example ( this is going to be a popular one I feel )
I absolutely hate the dog that appears when searching for a file in Windows XP (Spot I think it's called), it adds nothing to the search functionality and just wastes some screen estate.
So turn it off. Simple as that you know...
Craig
Wayne Stallwood wrote:
On Saturday 18 September 2004 7:54 pm, Craig wrote:
So turn it off. Simple as that you know...
I have done on my own machines, however I spend 80% of my time working on clients machines.
Anyway my complaint is that it is a worthless piece of eye candy that is on by default.
That pretty much describes Windoze as a whole IMHO.
On Saturday 18 September 2004 21:45, Ian bell wrote:
Wayne Stallwood wrote:
On Saturday 18 September 2004 7:54 pm, Craig wrote:
So turn it off. Simple as that you know...
I have done on my own machines, however I spend 80% of my time working on clients machines.
Anyway my complaint is that it is a worthless piece of eye candy that is on by default.
That pretty much describes Windoze as a whole IMHO.
I guess you won't be approving of the general tendency for KDE and Gnome to ape the Windows GUI, then. I think it's good; the command line is great when you want to get complete control, but inexperienced users would rather eat rat pie than have to remember thousands of arcane and illogical commands. After all, the modern GUI was largely popularised by Apple under the slogan "The computer for the rest of us".
-- GT
On 2004-09-19 09:43:08 +0100 Graham gt@pobox.com wrote:
I guess you won't be approving of the general tendency for KDE and Gnome to ape the Windows GUI, then. I think it's good; [...] After all, the modern GUI was largely popularised by Apple under the slogan "The computer for the rest of us".
I think it's terrible. I prefer the system which inherits from the same system as Apple's current offering: GNUstep. For now, more developers and documentors are needed, but it's already quite a pleasant user interface. http://www.gnustep.org/
MJ Ray wrote:
I think it's terrible. I prefer the system which inherits from the same system as Apple's current offering: GNUstep. For now, more developers and documentors are needed, but it's already quite a pleasant user interface. http://www.gnustep.org/
I know you're really involved in GNUStep and that was a carefully placed plug :P But could you explain why it is you personally like this user interface? There are lot around. What makes this one different, in your opinion? Do you like GNUstep because it is easy to *use* or because it is easy to *develop* (for)? Is it because it is cross platform?
User Interfaces are a particular interest of mine, I went to a couple of lectures about human centered design and human-computer interaction yesterday so I'm all fired up about it at the moment! Personally I've been using Mac OS X a lot recently and have been enjoying the experience. In *nux I prefer Gnome to KDE and Gnome seems similar to the OS X user interface in some ways. I also use Fluxbox a lot because I like the fact that it is highly configurable, is easy to configure and has a minimalistc appearance. I like interfaces which are both attractive and functional.
On 2004-09-19 17:41:59 +0100 Ben Francis lists@hippygeek.co.uk wrote:
MJ Ray wrote:
I know you're really involved in GNUStep and that was a carefully placed plug :P But could you explain why it is you personally like this user interface?
It has enough of the applications that I use every day to form a complete user interface and they integrate reasonably well. Some releases are better than others and the integration isn't brilliant right now. The interfaces do behave in a fairly consistent way still, though.
Two applications I use a lot that it hasn't got: an industrial strength code editor and a web browser. Both of those are sufficiently odd interfaces that it doesn't matter too much.
There are lot around. What makes this one different, in your opinion?
The slow evolution of the interface, which still builds from the description in the NeXTstep 3.3 book. It makes it easier to use because I'm not having to relearn all the time. I've been using it off- and on- for a few years. The last return to GNUstep was provoked by a design change in the Gnome interface, where a common keyboard shortcut combination changed from its previous function into something that destroyed data with no way to recover it. (ctrl-A changed from "start of buffer" into "select all" so trying to add something to the start of the buffer overwrites the lot)
Do you like GNUstep because it is easy to *use* or because it is easy to *develop* (for)?
A bit of both, really. The biggest problem at the moment in doing either is the patchy documentation of current releases, which is why I said documentors are needed as much as developers.
Is it because it is cross platform?
That doesn't really bother me for a desktop.
I like functional user interfaces which give feedback, behave themselves and do what you expect after a while. I should start work hacking my own interface again, but that's waiting for some 30-hour days. :-/
Graham wrote:
On Saturday 18 September 2004 21:45, Ian bell wrote:
Wayne Stallwood wrote:
On Saturday 18 September 2004 7:54 pm, Craig wrote:
So turn it off. Simple as that you know...
I have done on my own machines, however I spend 80% of my time working on clients machines.
Anyway my complaint is that it is a worthless piece of eye candy that is on by default.
That pretty much describes Windoze as a whole IMHO.
I guess you won't be approving of the general tendency for KDE and Gnome to ape the Windows GUI, then.
I am fine with that for two reasons. First because I am not against eye candy per se, just worthless eye candy, and secondly because linux is about choice which means you can use the command line of any number of X windows managers, some of which could be said to ape M$ Windoze and many which do not.
I think it's good; the command line is great when
you want to get complete control, but inexperienced users would rather eat rat pie than have to remember thousands of arcane and illogical commands.
I agree. I cannot stand Emacs.
On 2004-09-19 16:10:46 +0100 Ian bell ianbell@ukfsn.org wrote:
Graham wrote:
you want to get complete control, but inexperienced users would rather eat rat pie than have to remember thousands of arcane and illogical commands.
I agree. I cannot stand Emacs.
Emacs? You really mean one of the few text editors to have nearly everything accessible from mouse and menus by default on a graphics-capable display? ;-)
(load "my_editor_is_better_than_yours")
On 19 Sep 2004, at 22:34, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-09-19 16:10:46 +0100 Ian bell ianbell@ukfsn.org wrote:
Graham wrote:
you want to get complete control, but inexperienced users would rather eat rat pie than have to remember thousands of arcane and illogical commands.
I agree. I cannot stand Emacs.
Emacs? You really mean one of the few text editors to have nearly everything accessible from mouse and menus by default on a graphics-capable display? ;-)
(load "my_editor_is_better_than_yours")
Vim! :D
Craig
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 08:00:19AM +0100, Craig wrote:
On 19 Sep 2004, at 22:34, MJ Ray wrote:
Emacs? You really mean one of the few text editors to have nearly everything accessible from mouse and menus by default on a graphics-capable display? ;-)
(load "my_editor_is_better_than_yours")
Vim! :D
[x]vile! :-)
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 08:00:19 +0100, Craig c@macloco.net wrote:
On 19 Sep 2004, at 22:34, MJ Ray wrote:
(load "my_editor_is_better_than_yours")
Vim! :D
I was going to say gvim, but "apt-cache search" digs up vim-gnome, vim-gtk. vim-lesstif, and vim-tcl instead.
Hmmm ....
On 20 Sep 2004, at 09:56, Tim Green wrote:
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 08:00:19 +0100, Craig c@macloco.net wrote:
On 19 Sep 2004, at 22:34, MJ Ray wrote:
(load "my_editor_is_better_than_yours")
Vim! :D
I was going to say gvim, but "apt-cache search" digs up vim-gnome, vim-gtk. vim-lesstif, and vim-tcl instead.
Hmmm ....
Welcome to the confusing world of vim! :D
Craig
MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-09-19 16:10:46 +0100 Ian bell ianbell@ukfsn.org wrote:
Graham wrote:
you want to get complete control, but inexperienced users would rather eat rat pie than have to remember thousands of arcane and illogical commands.
I agree. I cannot stand Emacs.
Emacs? You really mean one of the few text editors to have nearly everything accessible from mouse and menus by default on a graphics-capable display? ;-)
(load "my_editor_is_better_than_yours")
I once commented that I thought Emacs has a counter intuitive GUI on a linux newsgroup and unleashed a huge stream of invective. I have no intention of repeating that :-)
Ian
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 09:43:08AM +0100, Graham wrote:
I guess you won't be approving of the general tendency for KDE and Gnome to ape the Windows GUI, then. I think it's good; the command line is great when
My opinion is that KDE and Gnome are nothing like the Windows GUI, they are far more advanced and much easier to use and navigate. Indeed my experience is that many Windows users when migrated to KDE found that simple operations involving files became much easier for them and the level of integration was much better than with Windows, (although many of the Mac users were much less at home). When I have the misfortune to find myself using Windows nowadays I lament at how difficult it is to get simple tasks done, and what makes it even worse is that there is no decent command line to fall back on.
The only real major downsides to Linux desktop environments is the handling of hardware which is really a separate problem and nothing to do with Gnome/KDE and far more to do with individual distros and the kernel versions they have and the way hotplug/udev etc. work out the box. My current pet hate is the handling of removable media like compact flash cards...
Adam
On Sunday 19 September 2004 16:28, adam@thebowery.co.uk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 09:43:08AM +0100, Graham wrote:
I guess you won't be approving of the general tendency for KDE and Gnome to ape the Windows GUI, then. I think it's good; the command line is great when
My opinion is that KDE and Gnome are nothing like the Windows GUI, they are far more advanced and much easier to use and navigate. Indeed my experience is that many Windows users when migrated to KDE found that simple operations involving files became much easier for them and the level of integration was much better than with Windows, (although many of the Mac users were much less at home). When I have the misfortune to find myself using Windows nowadays I lament at how difficult it is to get simple tasks done, and what makes it even worse is that there is no decent command line to fall back on.
The only real major downsides to Linux desktop environments is the handling of hardware which is really a separate problem and nothing to do with Gnome/KDE and far more to do with individual distros and the kernel versions they have and the way hotplug/udev etc. work out the box. My current pet hate is the handling of removable media like compact flash cards...
Adam
On second thoughts I agree. I was being much too kind to Windows.
-- GT
-
adam＠thebowery.co.uk -
Ben Francis -
Chris Green -
Craig -
Craig -
Graham -
Ian bell -
MJ Ray -
Ted.Harding＠nessie.mcc.ac.uk -
Tim Green -
Wayne Stallwood