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

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: My opinions about KDE-menu usability
From:       "Claes Andersson" <claes2001 () hotmail ! com>
Date:       2001-08-05 10:42:42
[Download RAW message or body]

> > On Saturday August 04, 2001  6:02 am, Claes Andersson wrote:
> > > Redmond Linux KMenu was interesting to see. I am quite sure a menu 
>like
> > > that is easier for new Linux/KDE users. The question is of course who 
>is
> > > the target audience for usability - nontechnical or technical users?
> > > Perhaps it would be a good idea to be able to switch between a simple
> > > menu and a complete one. ICQ has something similar for example, even 
>if
> > > it in my opinion is much to cluttered in its advanced mode.
> > >
> > > Claes
>
>I think this is a mistake.  If a user starts in one mode - they will never
>graduate to the next.  That's just usability common sense.

Ok - lets skip the concept of advanced vs simple mode. Let us instead think 
of the KMenu as made up of different fragments, where some fragments can be 
turned off. Look at it as of today (2.1.2). On the top you have most 
recently use programs. Then a divider, then a whole bunch of menus leading 
to different applications. Below that you have a divider, then 
Bookmarks/Recent Documents/QuickBrowser, divider, then Run Command, divider, 
then Configure Panel/LockScreen/Log Out. Some of these can be turned off in 
the "configure panel" menu.In my opinion Bookmarks/Recent 
Documents/QuickBrowser should not be enabled by default, because it makes 
the menu more complex and confusing for beginners. And for other reasons, I 
think that (almost) all items should be configurable. (For example I read at 
dot.kde.org that one sysadmin wanted to disable the Run item, because he did 
not want to allow people to run other programs than he made available.)

>We (as KDE developers) will always be using the advanced mode.  Our
>users will be using a different mode (and hence, a different layout).
>Now - imagine trying to help a newbie out with a certain task in the
>KMenu.  There are two ways to get to the program.  Which one do you
>tell them?  Telling them both will get very annoying very quickly.

>This is just BAD usability. All of the books I've read on the subject say
>that dual-mode interfaces should be avoided at all cost.

This is very true. From support point of view, the less things are 
customizable, the better. KDE is in this respect very bad - but I don't 
think that the majority of today KDE developers want to compromise on this.

But I think that for example settings for different things should only be 
found at one place by default. Then it is easy to tell people to go there. 
If then some poweruser works a little faster by using the Bookmarks menu 
instead of starting Konqueror and selecting a bookmark there - then he is 
free to go ahead and enable this!


>The Redmond Linux menu setup is not very usable.  In a menu, you have
>items, not sentences.  I don't want to read a book.  I just want to
>launch a web-browser.  What's so complicated with going to "Internet"
>and then "Konqueror Web Browser".

I don't find it very complicated. But if the Konqueror Web Browser is there 
together with 10 other much less used items, it will be harder to find for a 
beginner.

Lets look at it this way: what are the killer apps of KDE? One is Konqueror 
of course.

Also: what are the most common uses of a computer? Today, web browsing is 
surely near or on the top.

If the target audience is less experienced/advance users I think the KDE 
menu should recognize that some uses are much more common and promote them 
more.

Claes


_________________________________________________________________
Hämta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt på http://explorer.msn.se

_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability

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