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

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: Thoughts on applications and windows
From:       Maurizio Colucci <seguso.forever () tin ! it>
Date:       2004-08-30 20:30:28
Message-ID: 200408302230.28490.seguso.forever () tin ! it
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 30 August 2004 21:36, Sébastien Laoût [temporar] wrote:
> Le lun 30/08/2004 à 18:52, Maurizio Colucci a écrit :
> > Why must the user scan a list of _applications_ when the app is closed,
> > but a list of _windows_ when it's open? Wouldn't it be better to have a
> > list of open _applications_ instead of the taskbar?
> >
> > The problem is apparent with applications that span more than one window
> > (e.g. gimp).
>
> The "problem" is already solved: activate the task grouping and you will
> have a list of openned applications (and a "sub-list" of windows).

Touche'. I had forgotten! :-)))
Silly me.

> But I'm not sure it's a great idea, I hate that feature.
> And GIMP problem can easily be fixed by making the additional windows
> toolboxes.
> As inkscape do really good (but with bugs).
>
> And if we take the KDE paradigm: one window = one document, it's better
> to have a list of documents. Applications are just "tools" to achieve
> things. If everything would be in one application the user doesn't care.
> In fact it, it's what LogicalDesktop does.

:-)

> The problem (if there is one), is that nowaday more and more
> applications come with tabs (what I love), so that paradigm should be
> revised.

So you love seeing one document at a time, maximized. That's how I like it, 
too.

> > 2.
> >
> > Suppose we do the change, i.e. implement a "list of open apps".
> > So, the user has a list of closed apps (the k-menu) and a list of open
> > apps.
> >
> > This paradigm forces the user to be aware of which apps are open and
> > which ones are closed. Could the user be spared this? Why can't we give a
> > single list of apps (i.e. only the k-menu)?
>
> Only the KMenu ?
>
> :-D
>
> You have a lot of ideas. Some goods (LogicalDesktop), and some others
> less, IMHO!

Better than no idea at all ^_^

> I wouldn't imagine to browse the windows in the hierarchy of the KMenu.

Yes, that would be crazy. :-) But I didn't mean that. My bad, I wasn't clear. 

"Putting only the K-menu" does NOT mean that you must use the hierarchy for 
everything. The K-menu does not contain only a hierarchy: also a cache 
(recently used applications).

To resume: MAYBE we could remove the taskbar completely, remove the concept of 
"open application" (argh!!), and only supply two lists: "all applications" 
and "recently used applications".

Of course KDE should continue to close the apps under the hood, according to 
some caching algorithms. 

So what's the problem? IMHO, the problem is to give KDE such intelligence.

> Even if it remove me the opened/closed applictions.
> Taskbar entries just need one click.

Here I have to disagree: the complexity of selecting an app cannot be measured 
in clicks. This is completely wrong: the heavy part is the search you have to 
do with your eyes, not the constant time required to click.

Take my alternative taskbar for example: even if you only use the dropdown 
list, it is less expensive (on average) than the kde taskbar, because of the 
sorting.

> Or perhapse I misunderstood that point.

My bad. 

> About the LogicalDesktop's taskbar replacement:
> Than can be a cool idea.
> Perhapse the two tasks buttons could be bigger and have texts (in fact,
> act identically to the current taskbar).

Sorry, I can't put text there. Actually, I could remove the icon as well! 
Sounds crazy? See below.

> Is the number or windows configurable?

No, I can't put more than two buttons.

Ok, let me explain the reason for these two negative answers.
The two buttons are not meant to be looked at! :-)
Instead, they are meant to be used like this:

"I want to go to the application I was using two seconds ago"

Then you click on the first button. WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING AT IT.

"I want to go to the application I was using just before that"

Then you click on the second button, repeatedly, until you see the right 
window pop up. Once again, YOU HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE BUTTON.

So, the text is not important. And the icon isn't either!

to answer your second question: there is no need for more than two buttons, 
because your brain cannot remember the THIRD last app you were using. (unless 
you are a goddamn genius! :-)

> I would put 3 or 4 windows... but I'm used to work with a lot of
> windows.

Me too, that's why I created the app. It's optimized to keep 20 windows open 
at a time.

bye!
-- 
Maurizio Colucci
http://logicaldesktop.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability

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