On Saturday 10 Mar 2012 02:54:15 Steve Dougherty wrote: > Should we get rid of more of the steps in the first-run setup? Asking > about datastore size is a must, but perhaps we can get away with > something like what I2P does where it assumes a very low bandwidth limit > and encourages users to raise it afterwards. This could work well > alongside requiring a 5KiB/s minimum.
No, unfortunately Freenet won't work well with less than about 16KB/sec :( And a lot of people who want or even need to use it have less than that available. Usually we can detect the bandwidth from the router. We can't skip it even in that case because of the next item ... > I2P works very nicely with > something that would work without Javascript, but works much better > with: it shows for a given speed setting how much it will likely use per > month. That a way better way to deal with monthly bandwidth limits than > asking directly. More advanced users will definitely want to know the exact figure per second, but maybe we need an advanced mode - that's an extra step but it could be a checkbox or something. I agree 100% that we need to show traffic per month on the bandwidth selector. This is planned but not implemented IIRC. Although I'd need to see a mockup - it's a lot of information, doing it separately as we do now may be easier. Also more generally, fewer but more complex steps isn't necessarily more user friendly. > > -operhiem1 > > On 03/09/2012 07:50 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > > Am Freitag, 9. März 2012, 23:14:04 schrieb Matthew Toseland: > >> On Friday 09 Mar 2012 23:02:49 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > >>> Am Mittwoch, 7. März 2012, 22:14:39 schrieb Thomas Sachau: > >>>> So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly > >>>> shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some > >>>> sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or > >>>> there is no content. > >>> > >>> I think it goes even deeper: The installer fails for many. > >> > >> Does it still? If so we need to determine why. > > > > Last week someone in IRC had problems again. > > > > And I think the installer has to be as simple and straightforward as > > possible. > > What I saw in the chinese freenet installation youtube movie was much too > > complex. 6 steps in the installer (or so) and then 4 configuration steps > > (do > > we really need 2 steps with only 2 buttons on the site?). > > > > And then there are firewall and port-forwarding issues. > > > >>> Also Freetalk is not integrated with the other parts of freenet. There > >>> should be attachment options, where the post is only sent once the file > >>> finished uploading. And lots of other “small” stuff on the UI side. > >> > >> Agreed, as does p0s, but first it has to WORK. > > > > Jupp. Any plans about Sone? > > > > Best wishes, > > Arne > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Devl mailing list > > Devl@freenetproject.org > > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
