[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-bugs-dist
Subject:    [Bug 109581] [USABILITY] Control center module is unintuitative
From:       ieure () debian ! org
Date:       2005-07-31 21:38:52
Message-ID: 20050731213852.28410.qmail () ktown ! kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
         
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109581         




------- Additional Comments From ieure debian org  2005-07-31 23:38 -------
"[Problems] 
 > Network configs in tabs are unintuitative: 
 >  - For users who only need 1-2 networks, there's extra, useless stuff shown. 
 >  - Doesn't cope with users who need >4 networks (#102193) 
 
These two are already solved in the current SVN: the user can set how many configs he would like to see \
in a range of 1-10. (See comment #5 of the bug report you mentioned... that's why I marked it \
RESOLVED/FIXED)"

I haven't checked this out, but if it's just a spinbox with 'number of configs,' that's not sufficient or \
intuitative.


" >  - There's no clear seperation between the global and network-specific 
 > configuration. 
 
 I used to think the separation is that the network-specific ones are in the tab widget with a big border \
around it and the global ones aren't. They are below. Of course, binding the interface to theglobal part \
is wrong (see below)."

Right - but that's not enough. Generally, when you select a tab, the entire visible area changes, and \
borders are often used to group related elements in a single pane. Even as an experienced user, I had to \
fill in some values and switch tabs to see what changed. The average user will be hopelessly confused by \
this interface.


" >  - 'Config N' conveys no information about the network to the user, making 
 > the tabs very confusing. 
 
 This is true, but I don't know what to do against it. There are situations where the SSID is identical, \
but settings below are different (PM, or a different set of keys). If I'd call the configs after the \
SSID, they might not be unique any more."

Read my suggestions below - I provided suggested solutions for every problem I identified.

In this case, it was a list of network configs with icons for speed/crypto, which should be enough to \
identify which config is what.  

" >  - Tabs are very hard to use once the number of tabs exceeds the horizontal 
 > space available. 
 
 True. But what to do about it?"

Dump tabs in favor of showing configs in a listbox, like I suggested.
 

" > - Inconsistent use of checkboxes in network config: 
 >   - For 'Execute script on connect,' the control is enabled; for all others, 
 > a button which leads to the actual controls. 
 
 Yes, this is not good. I might change that so that the same mechanism as for PM and WEP is used."

That's fine. I'd prefer to see everything on the same page, but the lack of consistency is the main \
problem.  

" > - Bad prioritization of options in network config: 
 >   - Very few users will need 'Execute script on connect,' but many will need 
 > PM/WEP configuration. 
 
 Really? I _never_ used PM myself. And execute scrip on connect is a _very_ handy thing if you want to \
call "dhcpcd wlan0" or similar."

Right - but think of the Average User. They are much more likely to want to set up PM (with a nice GUI) \
than trigger scripts.

I'm not saying that scripts on connect isn't handy, just that Average User won't know what to do with it, \
and they will be more likely to understand and want power management.  

" > - WEP config dialog defaults to hex key entry: 
 >   - Most users will want string entry. 
 
 Then most users are stup^Z not very aware of security problems. The key space for brute forcing a \
network gets so much bigger if you use hex keys... Of course, there are cases where you need to use \
strings, namely when you use Win XP SP2, which (stupidly) doesn't allow hex key entry. But even then you \
can use multiple keys on your AP. I'd be cautious about qualifying statements like "most people will want \
that"."

WEP is flawed in many more important ways than string keyspace. But the fact of the matter is, most users \
are going to use string keys, because most people can't memorize hex digits. I don't think a GUI for \
network configuration is the place to mitigate the risks of WEP.

Show me an average user who can memorize a single string of hex digits, much less four, and I'll be glad \
to retract my statement.  

" >   - No clear format for the hex; are colons used? How many digits are needed? > Also, you can enter \
non-hex values in the field.   
 3.5 has an updated documentation that tells you the format. How many digits are needed depends on the \
encryption strength in your network. I tried to validate if the input is valid hex, but there were \
problems with doing this properly (see if it can be converted into a unsigned long long) and I had to \
postpone it. It is on my agenda though.   BTW: current SVN detects automatically if you are using hey or \
string, and warns about unknown entries."

You shouldn't need documentation to learn the format - the whole point of a GUI is that stuff like that \
should be obvious.  

" > - Power Mgmt. settings are only applied on a per-network basis. If you want 
 > to use PM for all configurations, you have to set up each one, which is 
 > repetitative and unnecessary. 
 
 When I look at your suggestions below, they describe a very complicated way of either doing this \
per-network or global. I think this confuses people quite a bit. And using different profiles on a \
per-network basis seems to make sense for me, say if you are at work and have your laptop plugged in but \
when visiting a customer you don't."

That's fine. This is clearly a wishlist item, but there are definite scenarios where I want PM or no PM \
on a per-network basis. E.g. home, no PM, coffee shop network, I want PM.  


 [Suggestions] 
 > - Split the config into two sections; network-specific, and global config. 
 
 This is the case (see above), just the interface selector is in the global section, which is not good. I \
will correct that for KDE 4."

You didn't read the rest of my suggestions. They're meant to be taken as a whole.
 
" > Network config should have a list, which displays the network name (ESSID), 
 > with an icon/color to represent if the network is open or encrypted. Just the 
 > open/closed lock, with a green background for WEP networks would do, similar 
 > to how Konqueror represents SSL sites. 
 
 Well, in order to detect whether a network is encrypted or not, a network scan needs to be done. This in \
turn interrupts connectivity to the current network. And there are cards that can't even scan."

No - this is for the list of configured networks, not detected networks. If you select crypto for a \
specific config, it appears in the list with a locked lock icon, otherwise you get an unlocked lock.


" > An indicator for the current 
 > network(s) is also essential. Perhaps also an icon to represent the speed of 
 > the network. To the right, 'New,' 'Properties,' and 'Delete' buttons. 
 > Selecting a network and clicking 'Properties,' or double-clicking an entry in 
 > the list would bring up a properties dialog for that network. Also, an 
 > up/down control to prioritize networks would be handy (I'm about to file a 
 > bug on that, but it's clearly a wishlist item.) 
 
 Why only does this remind me of the Win XP style? Prioritization is a very good idea, but it needs to be \
done properly (Win XP is _not_ proper, and fails under certain circumstances). I will try to get this \
into KDE 4 as well."

No idea. If you're suggesting that I'm trying to make KDE/KWifiManager more like Windows, you're wrong. \
I've been a Linux-exclusive user since '97 or so, and I've been running KDE for most of that time. \
Consequently, I haven't the slightest idea how Windows XP (or any other version) configures it's \
networks. This is just common-sense stuff, and things I've gleaned from designing UIs myself.

 
" > - Global settings should include power management settings. 
 > - 'Power management' in network props. should also be a pulldown. It should 
 > default to 'Global settings,' but have a 'Custom' option for per-network PM 
 > settings. As with the WEP config, the controls should be present on the 
 > network props dialog, but disabled until 'Custom' is selected. 
 
 Huh? As said above, this seems very confusing to me. I don't think John Doe would intuitively know how \
to use this, and I think that's bloat."

That's fine. I want this functionality, but it's not essential.

" >- 'Channel' control should be added, and moved to the advanced controls tab. 
 
 I can't think of a single use case where the user would need to maually control the channel. Give me \
one, and I will consider putting that in. Otherwise, I again think that's bloat."

Fine.
 

" >- 'Auto' in 'Speed' pulldown should, perhaps, be changed to 'Fastest 
 > available' or 'Best Available.' It seems like a good idea to me, but may not 
 > be. 
 
 Hm, I like Auto. Sounds appealing to users who don't know what this is all about. And yours are both too \
long, IMO."

Fair enough. Like I said, it seems like it could be a good idea.

 
" > - 'Encryption' should be a pull-down, with 'None,' 'WEP' etc. The correct 
 > controls should be visible but disabled until the correct option is selected. 
 
 It was like that very long ago, but it made the widget look incredibly cluttered. KDE core develoeprs \
already thought about dumping the whole thing for usability reasons. The current version is completely \
redesigned (not by me, but someone who probably has more knowledge over UI design). So I don't think this \
is a very good idea.  
 > Or perhaps there should be separate tabs for WEP, WPA, WPA2 etc, which are 
 > disabled until the right option is selected. WEP key entry should default to 
 > strings, with an advanced dialog for hex key entry. Hex entry should have an 
 > appropriate number of 2-character input boxes, which only accept hex digits. 
 
 Well, this sounds sensible as soon as WPA and WPA2 are actually possible with KWiFiManager. Up to now, \
only None and WEP are supported, and so the layout as it is now is sufficient and easy to use."

Ok.
 

" > - 'Settings apply to interface' should be moved from the global settings to 
 > the per-network settings. Otherwise, it's impossible to set up two networks 
 > on the same machine. If the input is empty, it should act as if the user 
 > clicked 'Autodetect,' i.e. default to something reasonable instead of 
 > remaining empty. 
 
 As said above, you are completely right here. I will move it for KDE 4. You of course mean "two \
interfaces" instead of "two networks"."

Correct.
 

Thanks for


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]