Gianfranco, Thanks for your comment. I wholeheartedly agree. Target audience is a super important question in these matters.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Gianfranco Ceccolini < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi eveyone > > Although I normally refrain from entering this kind of discussions, I just > can help myself from entering this particular one :-) > > I think that the point that most of us are missing is that, prior to > decide the features on a particular product (a software in the discussed > cases), one needs to decide THE TARGET AUDIENCE of such product. > > I see myself dealing with this issue daily when working with the MOD and I > imagine that any other product, be it gratis or paid, free or non-free, > hardware or software, is no different in this issue. > > I personally believe that there is no such thing as "the perfect globally > accepted set of features" but only the ones that are accepted by a > particular group of users and thus the need to define the target audience > before deciding on the features. > > That said, I think that eveyone is right in their arguments and the lack > of concordance comes from the fact that each one is considering a different > target audience. > > Computer users (and Linux users also for that matter) can be spread over > an extensive spectrum that stretches from the "80 column monocolor terminal > lover" to the "keyoard hater" and will surely disagree on whats is a good > and what is a bad designed software in terms of user experience - the > thing actually working or not is a totally different matter. > > Best wishes to everyone. > > Gianfranco Ceccolini > The MOD Team > > > 2015-04-23 7:47 GMT+02:00 Thijs van severen <[email protected]>: > >> >> Op 23-apr.-2015 00:14 schreef "Fons Adriaensen" <[email protected]>: >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 08:43:11AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote: >> > >> > > Just one little note here. Back in 2001, I read an article in the US >> > > Keyboard magazine that made a strong case for stopping the use of >> > > skuomorphic GUIs (knobs etc) for a variety of reasons. It wasn't >> written by >> > > a software developer, but a musician. He was bemoaning how limited >> GUIs for >> > > audio software were because of their attempt to present things that >> look >> > > like hardware controls. >> > >> > There are different grades of that of course. Chickenheads, screws, >> > handles and ventilation holes in a plugin GUI just look silly IMHO. >> > But an 'abstracted' version of a rotary control can make sense, it >> > has some advantages over most alternatives. >> > >> > On the other extreme, I find the 'standard' widgets offered by >> > most GUI toolkits completely useless on anything that is supposed >> > to be 'technical' (including audio apps) rather than an office >> > application. >> > >> > People writing 'GUI standards' and trying to force them on everyone >> > should have a look at e.g. a modern 'glass cockpit'. >> >> We are not talking about someone that suddenly decided to make up there >> own set rules and then tried to fore it upon us >> We are talking about a group of people that conducted a study on a large >> group of random users, and based on that study they defined a set of >> guidelines for us to use ... or ignore >> #freedom :-) >> >> I mean the real >> > thing - Boeing or Airbus, not the Garmin etc. thingies used by sports >> > pilots that look like (and probabaly are) Windows apps. >> > >> > This is a very complex environment. A large amount of information, >> > often competing for attention, has to be displayed accurately and >> > unambiguously, in a way that is comfortable to be viewed for hours >> > on end, and that also remains functional in emergency situations >> > that may require split-second decisions. A lot of research and >> > effort has gone into designing these things. >> > >> > You won't find a single 'standard' widget on those displays. Nor >> > skeuomorphic imitations of traditional flight instruments. The >> > only thing that still looks a bit traditional would be the attitude >> > indicator on the PFD, but even that will be a very abstract version >> > of the old mechanical one. >> > >> > All of it is designed to be purely functional, no frills, no eye- >> > candy. Even the MCDUs (the things on the central console that look >> > like a calculator on steroids) have their own interface style and >> > conventions that will be quite different from what you may expect. >> > >> > And that's not because this is a primitive, conservative, or 'ten >> > years behind the state of the art' technology - these systems are >> > among the most advanced you can find anywhere. >> > >> > The same, but probably less extreme, you'll find in almost all >> > 'technical' environments where function is more important than >> > looks or tradition. >> > >> > >> > Ciao, >> > >> > -- >> > FA >> > >> > A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. >> > It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris >> > and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Linux-audio-dev mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-audio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > > -- Louigi Verona http://www.louigiverona.ru/
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
