pkx166h wrote > On 04/12/13 17:24, Francisco Vila wrote: >> Warning. I this message, "Why don't we" does not mean "do it, you >> slave". It means just asking "do you think it's a worthwhile idea?" >> >> The thread about usability and promoting has forked too much and my >> thoughts are somewhat related to both. I am crossposting to hear users >> feedback also, sorry for that. >> >> I keep seeing newcomers double-clicking the LilyPond icon on the >> desktop despite of our warnings about not to do that. LaTeX is also >> just a typesetting engine and people do not try to work with it by >> first clicking on a desktop icon, do they? I don't really know what's >> the Windows LaTeX experience like, but I can assume the user base of >> LaTeX is far greater than LilyPond's, and newcomers have always an >> experienced user in the nearby ready to help. That's the "critical >> mass" effect that Finale and Sibelius already have and we don't. >> >> Despite of having a README just in front of your eyes, IMO we should >> expect people will always try to "open lilypond" to work in a typical >> program window. Why don't we just give them what they want? That is: a >> program you open. All programs are "opened" and it doesn't matter how >> hard we try, most people want to open the program. We could make the >> lilypond icon to launch a shell applet to open ly projects and a >> button to compile. Of course, a console output window and a PDF >> pre-viewer are necessary. I see the drag-drop ritual in the tutorial >> too few standard, too weird and too much lilypond-specific. That >> scares newcomers. >> >> But wait: this has been done. Valentin Villenave dit it once. A bundle >> that installed a PDF viewer and a small button panel with all the most >> basic operatons. I don't remember if it included a message output. >> >> But wait again: Frescobaldi already does this. It is super-easy to >> install on windows and it has got all the necessary items: an editor, >> a pre-viewer and a message output panel. Of course it has many, many >> more features, but even so it is lightweight (unlike the now almost >> defunct jEdit/lilypondtool). Why don't we do a cut-down >> Frescobaldi-like shell for the absolute beginner? The File->Open... >> menu entry must include a sub-menu with a lot of ready_to_compile >> fancy or real-world examples. >> >> Yes, we already promote easier environments, but in my opinion the >> bare minimum we offer is too weak as to be useful for all except >> mid-high level nerdies. >> >> I always think all you do to lower the entry threshold is never enough >> and ours is currently a bit too high. It's not the language, it's the >> experience. And never forget Windows users are potentially way more >> numerous than command line users. > Like this : http://lilypond.org/macos-x.html > > Are you just asking for a 'Lilypad' but for Windows? > > James > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user I'm confused. There is a Lilypad for Windows. It comes standard w/ the LilyPond installation. ? ----- composer | sound designer LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/A-thought-on-Windows-Experience-was-useability-promoting-etc-tp155017p155028.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
