[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

On Monday 28 April 2008 15:27, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
> bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
> what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for 
most 
> users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
> bandwidth limits, and it should be short.
> 
> I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
> think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
> This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
> comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
> a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
> non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.
> 
Implemented simple/advanced links on the config page in r19708. The advanced 
mode flag determines the default. The other pages still depend on the global 
advanced mode flag. AFAICS there's no real reason for them to have 
simple/advanced, it's just unnecessary clutter: advanced is only needed by 
devs etc who can turn on the global advanced mode.

Reasonable?
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Re: [freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

On Monday 28 April 2008 15:27, Matthew Toseland wrote:
 In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
 bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
 what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for 
most 
 users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
 bandwidth limits, and it should be short.
 
 I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
 think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
 This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
 comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
 a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
 non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.
 
Implemented simple/advanced links on the config page in r19708. The advanced 
mode flag determines the default. The other pages still depend on the global 
advanced mode flag. AFAICS there's no real reason for them to have 
simple/advanced, it's just unnecessary clutter: advanced is only needed by 
devs etc who can turn on the global advanced mode.

Reasonable?


pgpT8UslrJYnf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[David ‘Bombe’ Roden]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 23:33:59 Matthew Toseland wrote:

> IMHO there is a difference between a geek who knows what an IP address is,
> and an experienced freenet user.

Duh, nobody doubts that. But most of the people using freenet will probably 
think "why should I only look at the medium settings when I can also look at 
the advanced settings" and act accordingly. It makes the people feel more 
clever. They like that.

That's why I think that the medium settings page is pretty much a waste of 
time.


David
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 23:37, David ?Bombe? Roden wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 April 2008 23:33:59 Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> > IMHO there is a difference between a geek who knows what an IP address is,
> > and an experienced freenet user.
> 
> Duh, nobody doubts that. But most of the people using freenet will probably 
> think "why should I only look at the medium settings when I can also look at 
> the advanced settings" and act accordingly. It makes the people feel more 
> clever. They like that.
> 
> That's why I think that the medium settings page is pretty much a waste of 
> time.

Well, the main purpose for the medium settings page is to have the small 
number of settings that are useful to the average geek easily visible and not 
hidden amongst the large number of advanced options. To try to minimise the 
number of people who come to us asking how to open fproxy to their LAN.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 19:16, David ?Bombe? Roden wrote:
> On Monday 28 April 2008 16:55:45 Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> > - There will be 3 modes for the config page: simple, advanced and
> > developer. 
> 
> I would have gone with two modes renamed to "most common options" (showing 
of 
> course only the most commonly used options) and "all options". I don't think 
> anybody will use the "medium" setting: if a user doesn't see that she can 
> switch the settings she obviously won't mess around with it, everybody else 
> will switch to "advanced" because "hey, I'm not stupid, I can handle 
advanced 
> settings".

IMHO there is a difference between a geek who knows what an IP address is, and 
an experienced freenet user.
> 
> 
>   David
> 
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[David ‘Bombe’ Roden]

On Monday 28 April 2008 16:55:45 Matthew Toseland wrote:

> - There will be 3 modes for the config page: simple, advanced and
> developer. 

I would have gone with two modes renamed to "most common options" (showing of 
course only the most commonly used options) and "all options". I don't think 
anybody will use the "medium" setting: if a user doesn't see that she can 
switch the settings she obviously won't mess around with it, everybody else 
will switch to "advanced" because "hey, I'm not stupid, I can handle advanced 
settings".


David
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 

Re: [freenet-dev] Config page usability

[David ‘Bombe’ Roden]

On Monday 28 April 2008 16:55:45 Matthew Toseland wrote:

 - There will be 3 modes for the config page: simple, advanced and
 developer. 

I would have gone with two modes renamed to most common options (showing of 
course only the most commonly used options) and all options. I don't think 
anybody will use the medium setting: if a user doesn't see that she can 
switch the settings she obviously won't mess around with it, everybody else 
will switch to advanced because hey, I'm not stupid, I can handle advanced 
settings.


David


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 19:16, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
 On Monday 28 April 2008 16:55:45 Matthew Toseland wrote:
 
  - There will be 3 modes for the config page: simple, advanced and
  developer. 
 
 I would have gone with two modes renamed to most common options (showing 
of 
 course only the most commonly used options) and all options. I don't think 
 anybody will use the medium setting: if a user doesn't see that she can 
 switch the settings she obviously won't mess around with it, everybody else 
 will switch to advanced because hey, I'm not stupid, I can handle 
advanced 
 settings.

IMHO there is a difference between a geek who knows what an IP address is, and 
an experienced freenet user.
 
 
   David
 


pgpGeW212Let1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Config page usability

[David ‘Bombe’ Roden]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 23:33:59 Matthew Toseland wrote:

 IMHO there is a difference between a geek who knows what an IP address is,
 and an experienced freenet user.

Duh, nobody doubts that. But most of the people using freenet will probably 
think why should I only look at the medium settings when I can also look at 
the advanced settings and act accordingly. It makes the people feel more 
clever. They like that.

That's why I think that the medium settings page is pretty much a waste of 
time.


David


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 23:37, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
 On Tuesday 29 April 2008 23:33:59 Matthew Toseland wrote:
 
  IMHO there is a difference between a geek who knows what an IP address is,
  and an experienced freenet user.
 
 Duh, nobody doubts that. But most of the people using freenet will probably 
 think why should I only look at the medium settings when I can also look at 
 the advanced settings and act accordingly. It makes the people feel more 
 clever. They like that.
 
 That's why I think that the medium settings page is pretty much a waste of 
 time.

Well, the main purpose for the medium settings page is to have the small 
number of settings that are useful to the average geek easily visible and not 
hidden amongst the large number of advanced options. To try to minimise the 
number of people who come to us asking how to open fproxy to their LAN.


pgplazw357xi3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Julien Cornuwel]

Matthew Toseland a ?crit :
> In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
> bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
> what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for most 
> users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
> bandwidth limits, and it should be short.
> 
> I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
> think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
> This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
> comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
> a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
> non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.

IMHO you could even go for 4 levels. Options followed by "DO NOT TOUCH
THIS" are reserved for developpers. Even geeks don't need them.


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

Okay, these are the changes I am going to make (dbkr will help with CSS):
- There will be 3 modes for the config page: simple, advanced and developer. 
There will be tabs at the top to select between them, using a ? parameter. 
Options which are semi-computer-literate-newbie-friendly go under simple. 
Options which you need to be a geek without any detailed freenet knowledge go 
in advanced. Options which you have to really understand Freenet to use go in 
developer, so it also includes experienced freenet tweakers, the curious, 
etc.
- Similarly on other pages e.g. the stats page, the connections pages.
- The current "advanced mode" option will set the default for each page.

On Monday 28 April 2008 15:27, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
> bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
> what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for 
most 
> users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
> bandwidth limits, and it should be short.
> 
> I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
> think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
> This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
> comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
> a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
> non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for most 
users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
bandwidth limits, and it should be short.

I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for most 
users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
bandwidth limits, and it should be short.

I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.


pgpOgTuSG9dCY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Julien Cornuwel]

Matthew Toseland a écrit :
 In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
 bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
 what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for most 
 users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
 bandwidth limits, and it should be short.
 
 I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
 think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
 This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
 comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
 a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
 non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.

IMHO you could even go for 4 levels. Options followed by DO NOT TOUCH
THIS are reserved for developpers. Even geeks don't need them.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Config page usability

[Matthew Toseland]

Okay, these are the changes I am going to make (dbkr will help with CSS):
- There will be 3 modes for the config page: simple, advanced and developer. 
There will be tabs at the top to select between them, using a ? parameter. 
Options which are semi-computer-literate-newbie-friendly go under simple. 
Options which you need to be a geek without any detailed freenet knowledge go 
in advanced. Options which you have to really understand Freenet to use go in 
developer, so it also includes experienced freenet tweakers, the curious, 
etc.
- Similarly on other pages e.g. the stats page, the connections pages.
- The current advanced mode option will set the default for each page.

On Monday 28 April 2008 15:27, Matthew Toseland wrote:
 In simple mode, the config page lists things like what IP address FCP should 
 bind to. This is to minimise our support overhead from users who half know 
 what they're doing, but who don't see the advanced mode flag ... But for 
most 
 users, it sucks. The config page should only list simple stuff, e.g. 
 bandwidth limits, and it should be short.
 
 I will remove a load of geeky options from the config page. But we should 
 think about whether we should have three modes: simple, medium and advanced. 
 This might be the best compromise. There are lots of options that are only 
 comprehensible to people who've used freenet for a while, but there are also 
 a fair number of options that are comprehensible to geeks, but not to 
 non-geeks. IMHO these should go in medium.


pgp1Ip1XueGaW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl