Active Topics
-
Full linux distros on Sailfish OS (254)
to SailfishOS by qoh - 6 hrs, 26 mins ago -
Porting apps to Leste (29)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 6 days, 5 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2016-09-08
, 08:35
|
|
Posts: 764 |
Thanked: 2,888 times |
Joined on Jun 2014
|
#32
|
Originally Posted by juiceme
No, it isn't. If you need a million different options for every person that says not having that option would break their workflow, there is something fundamentally wrong with both your software and most of those people. You will always break someone's workflow, like the defective by design paid delivery reports.
(remember, this is about choice, different users have differnt workflows!)
What's needed is not more options, but sane defaults so these options are not necessary. I don't mean to say 'you're doing it wrong', only 'there are other ways to do it, if not better'. It's never possible to please everyone, and any project which tries to do so will eventually fail.
|
|
2016-09-08
, 10:45
|
|
Posts: 281 |
Thanked: 679 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#33
|
Originally Posted by nthn
+1, but...
What's needed is not more options, but sane defaults so these options are not necessary. I don't mean to say 'you're doing it wrong', only 'there are other ways to do it, if not better'. It's never possible to please everyone, and any project which tries to do so will eventually fail.
Does this really work? Looks like the Gnome-KDE dilemma. Gnome: some parameters (too less) - KDE full parameters (too much?). I use gnome but with tweak tool, some gnome extensions, and additional dconf stuff. Less parameters but not good defined.
With KDE you have the problems from the other side: here the user does not know what to do with all the parameters.
What about the "reference" Apple. They had the grandmother-theorem in the early days. Did/does it work?
| The Following User Says Thank You to cy8aer For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2016-09-08
, 17:16
|
|
Posts: 943 |
Thanked: 3,228 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ Zagreb
|
#34
|
but with all this in gnome you are changing system setting/appearance. You dont have to go into gnome settings to change default webpage on default brovser.
Camera resolution settings outside of camera app. Brilliant.
Email.....one place to setup account, another one to download images automatically (or not) and the app itself.
Units for weather outside of weather app.
Do I have to go on? Like I said, I'll never change those settings after initial setup but still think that they are in the wrong place.
Camera resolution settings outside of camera app. Brilliant.
Email.....one place to setup account, another one to download images automatically (or not) and the app itself.
Units for weather outside of weather app.
Do I have to go on? Like I said, I'll never change those settings after initial setup but still think that they are in the wrong place.
|
|
2016-09-08
, 19:17
|
|
Posts: 764 |
Thanked: 2,888 times |
Joined on Jun 2014
|
#35
|
The account settings certainly aren't in the wrong place. As in GNOME, you set up the account once in the system settings and you can use it with all applications without having to set it up again and again if you want to use different applications. I think it kiiind of 'works' like this in Android now, too. Of course, with Jolla still restricting third party access to any and everything, this isn't very obvious, but it is the intention. I hope we will live to see the day the restrictions are lifted.
|
|
2016-09-08
, 19:51
|
|
Posts: 943 |
Thanked: 3,228 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ Zagreb
|
#36
|
I can live with separate accounts settings but still fail to see the bennefit of having them outside of the app since I have to configure everything manually for each of them.
Name two apps that can share one account.
Seeing them all in one place does what exactly? On any platform.
I think that I have zero configured accounts under GNOME accounts but I sure do have more than a few in their apps.
Name two apps that can share one account.
Seeing them all in one place does what exactly? On any platform.
I think that I have zero configured accounts under GNOME accounts but I sure do have more than a few in their apps.
|
|
2016-09-08
, 20:24
|
|
Posts: 764 |
Thanked: 2,888 times |
Joined on Jun 2014
|
#37
|
Email applications, for one. Or an application for Facebook which does all the things Jolla's Facebook implementation doesn't do. Google, VK, ... Anything can share an account, just like any camera application can share the same camera. But again, so far there's no point to it yet.
Also, adding accounts in any GNOME application automatically adds them to the GNOME accounts section, or at least that should happen.
Also, adding accounts in any GNOME application automatically adds them to the GNOME accounts section, or at least that should happen.
|
|
2016-09-08
, 22:38
|
|
Posts: 1,548 |
Thanked: 7,510 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Czech Republic
|
#38
|
Originally Posted by cy8aer
Yeah, it's a pretty hard problem - if you add too many options you will drown in kombinatoric complexity, especially if you want to reasonably QA the thing.
+1, but...
Does this really work? Looks like the Gnome-KDE dilemma. Gnome: some parameters (too less) - KDE full parameters (too much?). I use gnome but with tweak tool, some gnome extensions, and additional dconf stuff. Less parameters but not good defined.
On the other hand if you have too few options or even remove them you hit another issue - even if a feature or an option would be/was used by just 5% of your users, it is usually a different %5 for each option/feature! So if you don't add/remove 3 such features you are not alienating just 5% of your user-base, but quite likely 15%, which is quite a difference...
I'm not sure what's the proper solution for this, possibly:
- good default and better automation/auto detection - so you have to ask the user less thing in general
- good automated testing - so that you can survive the complexity caused by additional options
- extension/addon/plugin interfaces - let the people add (and maintain!) the missing functionality or configuration options themselves
- basic/expert settinngs - see VLC or the Gnome Tweak tool as an example
__________________
modRana: a flexible GPS navigation system
Mieru: a flexible manga and comic book reader
Universal Components - a solution for native looking yet component set independent QML appliactions (QtQuick Controls 2 & Silica supported as backends)
modRana: a flexible GPS navigation system
Mieru: a flexible manga and comic book reader
Universal Components - a solution for native looking yet component set independent QML appliactions (QtQuick Controls 2 & Silica supported as backends)
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MartinK For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2016-09-09
, 05:35
|
|
Posts: 6,445 |
Thanked: 20,981 times |
Joined on Sep 2012
@ UK
|
#39
|
I think I've figured out where our differences lie. The "all settings in one place" camp come from the fruit or the search engine company background and want a phone that looks and behaves like one produced by those companies, but happens to run Linux.
I want a mobile Linux computer in my pocket that looks and behaves like a desktop Linux computer that just by the way also happens to make calls. I see absolutely no harm in having two, three or twenty email clients, all with their own set of account settings. I see absolutely no point in having all settings in one place. It breaks everything I believe a computer should stand for.
I want a mobile Linux computer in my pocket that looks and behaves like a desktop Linux computer that just by the way also happens to make calls. I see absolutely no harm in having two, three or twenty email clients, all with their own set of account settings. I see absolutely no point in having all settings in one place. It breaks everything I believe a computer should stand for.
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post: | ||
Back to settings; up to now I am convinced that the best way is to have settings in both a central place and accessible in the application itself, just as you originally stated I think.
There's no overhead really, and that way would suit both schools of thought. (remember, this is about choice, different users have differnt workflows!)