[Thunar-dev] Re:Interface Thoughts.

[Jari Rahkonen]

Erik Peterson wrote:

>Wow, that more response than i expected.  Thanks!  I am work in on
>compiling up the prototype.
>
>
>>While this provides a very fast way to browse into deeply nested
>>directories, its certainly too uncommon for the average Unix/Linux
>>desktop user.
>>
>
>Yeah it is different, no doubt, but from my view better.  Sure a lot
>of people might have to learn something new, but I am unsure if "easy
>to use", a concept of which I am a big fan, implies that  there is
>nothing new to learn at all, that systems should be super simplistic
>and alike. These seem to be an impossible (former) or silly (later)
>goal.  Instead I purpose that easy to use implies something like the
>number of choices, information space, at any particular point in any
>particular window is limited and _useful_ and that any action
>undertaken by the user will be met with a reasonable  and most of all
>logical behavior.  The choices in some window should be well named
>and/or with descriptive icons.  My personal view is that "state based"
>-my term- choices provide a greater cleanness to the interface, an
>example of this is the play button and stop button sharing the same
>space in itunes/rhythmbox and interchanging depending on the state of
>the software. Further examples of this are littered all about OS X.  I
>would also expect that an "easy to use" interface to be discoverable
>by exploration. (duh) I think that the average user can learn, to
>their long term benefit, if your interface is designed to guide them.
>

Yes but no amount of guidance helps if the user has no motivation
to learn. A more intuitive, powerful enough interface always
'sells' better than a less intuitive, more powerful one. If your
interface requires you to do things differently, the benefit of
learning to work in this new way must be obvious to a new user.
Or why do you think most of us still use qwerty keyboards instead
of dvorak ones?

>Now the type of view I am advocating may not be the end all of
>interface file browsing, and will not work for everyone, but it think
>this sort of behavior is not to bracing or mysterious for the user and
>could be learned, but maybe it is not learning but liking that is the
>problem to which i can think of nothing to offer, except my normal
>state of wonder and confusion that comes about anytime I try to
>understand people.
>

But isn't understanding the user (people) a basic requirement for
good interface design? :)

>
>My ultimate point is that just because something is more obscure /new
>should not be a reason not to use it, but new things should be freshly
>evaluated and used as need be.  Most people, I would geuss, wont be
>swtiching over to linux if they are not a least a bit curious about
>new things and approaches.
>

Obscure = less intuitive / harder to learn. Thunar's supposed to
become a simple, easy-to-use filemanager, not a power tool for us
geeks. Not that I'm convinced this feature would add that much
power anyway. And my guess/experience is that more and more
people are switching to linux for reasons like (lack of) cost and
virii...

>
>[ SNIP ]
>
>Erik.
>

- Jari