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

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    RE: "Over configurability" - please don't listen to bashers!
From:       Poletti Don <Don.Poletti () comverse ! com>
Date:       2002-06-28 17:59:57
[Download RAW message or body]

Ronald,

>Have you ever heard about users complaining about it being 
>"over-configurable"? I haven't. Instead it is very often used as *the* 
>example of how to design a user-friendly package.
>

I would have to disagree with you. I have complained about it and
I am a KDE user. Please do not espouse your view as the only view. I 
am not a basher I want KDE to be better. The day we stop listen to
what people are complaining about is the day KDE stops improving.

Most reviews of KDE complain that the control center is way too
complicated and I agree. It would be great if the usability team
could simplify the dialogs without losing configurability. In fact
most of the maintainers won't except the usability team removing
some functionality. However I think it is still worthwhile for
the usability team to try to removed unneeded configurablity and
it is the maintainers job to justify why to keep it. This is 
healthy arrangement that hopefully results in the best design.

For instance we had a discussion about removing the pixmap cache
setting on the background dialog. Most people felt this is never
touched by 99% of users. Or this is something that the software should
be able to figure out the optimal setting. The discussion went on to 
mention that the software doesn't know about other programs that
will be run so it can't determine the optimal setting.

>But lately, I see more and more the "If it's not in Windows or 
>MacOS it's 
>unfriendly and worthless" - attitude against everything that is new or 
>different, which makes me very sad. Windows has some good 
>elements, sure, but 

I have never heard this argument on this list and I doubt it
would be listened too if it was brought up. 


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Roland Seuhs [mailto:roland@hasos.com]
>Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 1:41 PM
>To: kde-usability@mail.kde.org
>Subject: "Over configurability" - please don't listen to bashers!
>
>
>Hi!
>
>On this and on other lists, there have been a push to reduce 
>configurability, 
>because it would "confuse" users or because some KDE-haters 
>complain about 
>it.
>
>I've never heard a user of ANY software product complain about 
>over-configurability, only from people who don't like said 
>software product.
>
>There is no such thing as over-configurability, only stupid 
>defaults and badly 
>reachable configuration options (but removing those options 
>will make it 
>worse, not better!). Novices will just use the defaults and 
>won't be affected 
>by any configuration options at all.
>
>The problem about KDE-haters is that:
>- They don't want KDE to become better.
>- They don't want KDE to succeed.
>- The whining/complaining won't stop when you do what they want.
>
>For example look at the product that has probably more 
>configuration options 
>than any other: MS Office.
>Have you ever heard about users complaining about it being 
>"over-configurable"? I haven't. Instead it is very often used as *the* 
>example of how to design a user-friendly package.
>
>As an example, the suggestion to add more window-placement 
>strategies was 
>smacked down of this, even though a patch exists:
>
>http://lists.kde.org/?l=kwin&m=102168612625109&w=2
>
>"And yes, adding many features rarely used _do_ hurt other 
>users. In the 
>specific case of window placement, adding the new policies to 
>the combo-box 
>would be required (in kcontrol) and this will add more to the already 
>confusing over-configurability of KDE, a thing that is very 
>often criticized."
>
>Criticized by whom? Buy KDE-users? I doubt that.
>
>Let's face it:
>
>It doesn't matter what you do, the bashing and whining will 
>never stop. There 
>are thousands of MSFT-shareholders out there and even more 
>MCSEs and other 
>people who will hate anything non-Windows no matter what you 
>do. If you do 
>things differently than in Windows, bashers will complain 
>about it not being 
>"user friendly" (and the fact that it's not in Windows is 
>enough to claim 
>it's not user friendly, unfortunately) or "over-configured", 
>if you do things 
>like in Windows, the very same people will claim KDE is just a 
>rip-off. 
>Trying to please bashers is fighting a losing battle.
>
>I always liked KDE because it combined useful features of all 
>three DEs (Win, 
>Mac, classical Unix) and threw in intelligent and useful additions. 
>Especially the latter are in danger. For example I still 
>wonder why the 
>TearOffHandles were removed in the quickbrowsers in kicker. It 
>was a very 
>useful feature and made quickbrowsers really useful.
>
>But lately, I see more and more the "If it's not in Windows or 
>MacOS it's 
>unfriendly and worthless" - attitude against everything that is new or 
>different, which makes me very sad. Windows has some good 
>elements, sure, but 
>it is certainly not the best interface imaginable. For example 
>think of all 
>the registry-hacks that exist because of lack of 
>GUI-configurability. Is it 
>really worth to introduce the same horror to KDE "just because 
>it's like that 
>in Windows, therefore it must be right"?
>
>Thanks for listening,
>
>Roland
>
>-- 
>Always remember that you are unique.  Just like everyone else.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>kde-usability mailing list
>kde-usability@mail.kde.org
>http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
>
_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]