Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: The Plans For KDE Frameworks 5.0 Were Just Announced

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    You don't want KDE to follow Gnome3 do you? Rather than removing options it's better to hide them somewhere.
    yey! someone do understand me =D
    choosing words always a problem with me. my bad

    an option in KDE control panel. or even better , an icon (toggle) at window decoration.
    the option will hide (thanks krafman) most of the option which can be considered as 'complex' option.
    a simple toggle will revert it as normal.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misterpah View Post
    yey! someone do understand me =D
    choosing words always a problem with me. my bad

    an option in KDE control panel. or even better , an icon (toggle) at window decoration.
    the option will hide (thanks krafman) most of the option which can be considered as 'complex' option.
    a simple toggle will revert it as normal.
    I don't understand your issue. No options are shown until you click Settings -> Configure. If you don't want to see an option, can't you just not open the options dialogue?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    We could get rid of one of those if GTK would just use the native widget style when running under KDE, but they so far have not bothered to implement that, hence the need for a workaround in KDE. I don't see how you could get rid of the others.
    Well it could all be consolidated into a Desktop Theme category but that'd be a mess..

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by krazy View Post
    I don't understand your issue. No options are shown until you click Settings -> Configure. If you don't want to see an option, can't you just not open the options dialogue?
    yup. i'm completely understand that. but i'm thinking from the very noob computer user (btw, im a web/wordpress programmer 5years, python a little bit, 12 years of programming experience. so i don't think im a noob )

    for case of study :
    i am a noob.
    sooner or later, I will open the settings->configure to manage something (example : the color for the background of the what-what application)
    I will be confused with all the options, and then I will only use what the default setting. and sooner or later, i will rattle out from linux because "it's SOO HARD and Confusing" and settle back on the land of windows xp.

    im just saying, it's good to hide all the complex things from the noob. of course the power user still can view the complex options

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misterpah View Post
    yup. i'm completely understand that. but i'm thinking from the very noob computer user (btw, im a web/wordpress programmer 5years, python a little bit, 12 years of programming experience. so i don't think im a noob )

    for case of study :
    i am a noob.
    sooner or later, I will open the settings->configure to manage something (example : the color for the background of the what-what application)
    I will be confused with all the options, and then I will only use what the default setting. and sooner or later, i will rattle out from linux because "it's SOO HARD and Confusing" and settle back on the land of windows xp.

    im just saying, it's good to hide all the complex things from the noob. of course the power user still can view the complex options
    Unless this person is going "Oh Noes There's more than 1 (there are only 36) option whatever shall I Doez!?!?!?!?!?", I think Application Appearance is extremely obvious for the example you were pointing at. The kind of user you're implying would never change the defaults at all in the first place, and thinks a theme change means an entirely new OS; there is absolutely no reason at all to support such stupid behavior.

    Honestly this idea that Minimalism = Usability is absolute stupidity. Usability = Use Ability, this idea with dolphin for instance of "Let's hide the tagging and info panes by default" hides very important functionality from the user, and for what? Because You Think it overwhelms them? Give me a break that's utter garbage. Yes you give new users redundancy and extra choices they'll balk because they've never dealt with that before, however that's not what this is. This is declaring the average person using your DE an idiot and totally incompetent, and that you shouldn't be allowed to do what you want with it, instead that you should just do what they want you to do rather than what you want to (hey sound like a certain two companies, and another DE much?)

    And yes I know I'm being very harsh but this concept deserves it.

    Edit: In Fact if they're that low give them the Sugar DE until they learn to grow up and actually learn their computer, It's not that people can't learn, it's simply that they refuse to do so, they want you to hold their hand rather than actively learning. They want to be given a fish rather than be taught how to. Don't give in to them, They are to be taught not given.
    Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 08-10-2011 at 12:50 AM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misterpah View Post
    im just saying, it's good to hide all the complex things from the noob. of course the power user still can view the complex options
    The KDE devs did discuss having simple vs advanced options at one point. I don't remember the entire discussion, but it was basically shot down. I think the main arguments were that it was a hassle to maintain that way (even for documentation, you suddenly need 2 different screenshots for everything, and need to ask users what version they are looking at, etc.), and that no one would ever agree on which settings would belong in the "simple" group anyway. If there really were a set of clear "simple" settings versus the advanced ones, why wouldn't you just keep the entire app simple and move the advanced options into a config text file or something?

    It's sort of a difficult point to make. It probably does make sense in certain situations, but I believe the consensus was that in general it sounds nice in theory but doesn't tend to work in practice.

    So instead of just completely hiding advanced options, you can just make the options into a tabbed interface and put the simple ones first with advanced second. Or however makes sense for the application.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    The KDE devs did discuss having simple vs advanced options at one point. I don't remember the entire discussion, but it was basically shot down. I think the main arguments were that it was a hassle to maintain that way (even for documentation, you suddenly need 2 different screenshots for everything, and need to ask users what version they are looking at, etc.), and that no one would ever agree on which settings would belong in the "simple" group anyway. If there really were a set of clear "simple" settings versus the advanced ones, why wouldn't you just keep the entire app simple and move the advanced options into a config text file or something?

    It's sort of a difficult point to make. It probably does make sense in certain situations, but I believe the consensus was that in general it sounds nice in theory but doesn't tend to work in practice.

    So instead of just completely hiding advanced options, you can just make the options into a tabbed interface and put the simple ones first with advanced second. Or however makes sense for the application.
    thanks smitty3268! i do think you answer my question very well. thinking it again, i don't know why i ever think this idea. No way i gonna maintain 2 type of KDE (if im a KDE developer)

    sorry Luke_Wolf if i'm a total stupid person asking stupid question. sorry if i destroy your mood today.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misterpah View Post
    thanks smitty3268! i do think you answer my question very well. thinking it again, i don't know why i ever think this idea. No way i gonna maintain 2 type of KDE (if im a KDE developer)

    sorry Luke_Wolf if i'm a total stupid person asking stupid question. sorry if i destroy your mood today.
    My annoyance comes from the pretentious concepts that are behind making things minimalist by default, which seems to have cropped up somewhat in KDE, such as with Dolphin (Infopane is extremely useful and now new users won't know it's there, plus that loses the nepomuk integration for most, how are they supposed to tag and rate files and pictures now?).

    The School of Minimalist Usability says this: Our User is an absolute idiot, we know best and he should be contained into certain areas and not allowed to do certain things because he's too stupid to do them, what he want's to do doesn't matter.

    And you can't argue that's not the attitude because you just stated it was with your case study.

    Moreover there is no point designing for the absolute lowest common denominator, for the lowest common denominator it doesn't matter how user friendly or simple the interface is, even if the entire interface was simply a big red button that made fart noises because that's the childish ^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h (no that's an insult to children's intelligence), level they're at they would ask you how to make it work, simply because they want you to hold their hand rather than thinking at all for themselves. These are not the people we should be targeting, they are absolutely hopeless until they decide that they're going to grow up.

    The bottom you should ever assume is an ignorant but competent user who is willing to learn their environment, stick with that as your bottom you'll be fine, assume that your user base is lower and you should just go back to Gnome, Microsoft, or Apple to be with people who think the same about their users.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    You don't want KDE to follow Gnome3 do you? Rather than removing options it's better to hide them somewhere.
    No, it's better to have them clearly visible on plain sight via standardised UI action, not have them "hidden somewhere".

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    My annoyance comes from the pretentious concepts that are behind making things minimalist by default, which seems to have cropped up somewhat in KDE, such as with Dolphin (Infopane is extremely useful and now new users won't know it's there, plus that loses the nepomuk integration for most, how are they supposed to tag and rate files and pictures now?).

    The School of Minimalist Usability says this: Our User is an absolute idiot, we know best and he should be contained into certain areas and not allowed to do certain things because he's too stupid to do them, what he want's to do doesn't matter.

    And you can't argue that's not the attitude because you just stated it was with your case study.

    Moreover there is no point designing for the absolute lowest common denominator, for the lowest common denominator it doesn't matter how user friendly or simple the interface is, even if the entire interface was simply a big red button that made fart noises because that's the childish ^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h (no that's an insult to children's intelligence), level they're at they would ask you how to make it work, simply because they want you to hold their hand rather than thinking at all for themselves. These are not the people we should be targeting, they are absolutely hopeless until they decide that they're going to grow up.

    The bottom you should ever assume is an ignorant but competent user who is willing to learn their environment, stick with that as your bottom you'll be fine, assume that your user base is lower and you should just go back to Gnome, Microsoft, or Apple to be with people who think the same about their users.
    Just to start i'll stating i don't see any issuses with the usability of gnome or kde. Usability issues linux n00bs get hit by tend to be through driver isuses, dependecy problems and stuggling finding the right linux app for the job (perhaps they insist on stuggling to get all their windows apps running on wine). That said the idea of presenting a simple enviroment to guide new users around as they slowly uncover and identify new funtionality is an exilent learning tool when dealing with a complex and powerful interfaces. When done right. Not saying its what kde should do but the idea isn't about bowing to the total computer n00ds. Its to guild a new user though the features bit at a time without overloading them in one go at the same time not incoveniancing the expiriancenced users after with anything beyond what a simple tick box can fix.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •