Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Olivier Churlaud]

Hi,

Le mardi 27 septembre 2016, 18:24:36 CEST Jens Reuterberg a écrit :
> This is actually fairly tricky because what is needed is a metric to work
> towards: sayiing "fast and stable" is not very exact.
> 
> But you raise fair points - how do we ensure that it doesn't exclude anyone?
> To me a vision is a statement of intent, but not a boundary beyond
> practical choices. "Should we pick Y or X, we can only pick one?" Should be
> something that you can answer with it. In this case "Does one of them help
> professional users? Pick that!".
> Not "I want to do Y!" and then someone going "No you can't because X and Z
> would be more for professional users".
> 
> One is a boundary, the other is a vision I feel. We can't make a few
> sentences work as a complete boundary - that would take a way longer
> document. This is more like the header for a longer text, a statement of
> intent or coming things but it can't be something that defines complete
> usage.
> 
> Still, you bring up good points - but how can we realize them as a vision?
> How can "fast/stable" function except as something that would work for
> everyone, all DE's etc?
> 

My understanding of the vision is "what do we want". So if you say "Plasma 
targets professional users", it means "we do not care at all about the 
others".

I might be wrong, but it seems to me that what you want to say to the world is 
"we have the most reliable, proof of that: our products are used by 
professionals". So when reading this, I really think that the vision is about 
reliability, efficiency and good experience. Your target is just a way to 
access 
to this quality, so it's more part of your strategy.

Now I must be clear: in my mind the vision is shown everywhere when you speak 
about the product. To me, it should be used as a marketing weight to say "this 
is who/what we are". If you have that in mind, you don't want to have in big 
on the front page of your website and on your stickers "for professional 
users", because people will exclude themselves. I'm more afraid of this 
(people excluding themselves) than of people excluding others.

However, if you don't see the vision as what I just presented, it means that 
we don't speak of the exact same thing, and in this case I don't have anything 
against the current formulation.

Cheers
Olivier

> (also added plasma-devel since the thread is made for plasma-devel the reply
> got weird though halfway through)
> 
> /Jens
> 
> > IMO, the first step is to get rock-solid stable, performant (whatever you
> > call that in English) and productive desktop, so that everyone says: "I
> > want to use that". This is, to me, a nice vision.
> > 
> > 
> > Also, most of my friends (often using Ubuntu+Unity) told me "KDE
> > (understand Plasma) is the most good looking desktop out there those
> > days". Don't look boring, please (Office=boring). Also when I think
> > office, I think excel + word + firefox. You don't need a nice desktop for
> > that, anything would  be ok. Geeks and private people have more needs.
> > 
> > Disclaimer: I might have had one beer to many, and I mostly speak with my
> > kind of user case in mind, and try to extrapolate. I'm not always using
> > Plasma at work, but I think it's the best at home, and as a geek as well.
> > 
> > > If on the other hand this is a real worry, and an issue then the
> > > discussion
> > > shouldn't be what the vision statement should say but if it should say
> > > something at all. Which is not something negative but an actual option
> > > :)
> > 
> > I agree with that, but I don't agree that my point of view doesn't say
> > anything: see above.
> > 
> > Cheers
> > Olivier
> > 
> > > On 26 September 2016 18:33:00 CEST, Olivier Churlaud
> > > 
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > >Le lundi 26 septembre 2016, 15:12:08 CEST Thomas Pfeiffer a écrit :
> > > >> On 26.09.2016 13:27, Olivier Churlaud wrote:
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> > Sorry if I come late, I wasn't aware of this thread...
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > Le lundi 26 septembre 2016, 12:56:25 CEST Jens Reuterberg a écrit :
> > > >> >> "Plasma is for people using a computing device in a professional
> > > >
> > > >context,
> > > >
> > > >> >> where productivity, performance and privacy are essential"
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > I find that the "is for people .." kind of restrictive. I agree
> > > >
> > > >that you
> > > >
> > > >> > need to have a precise target audience, but don't freak out other
> > > >
> > > >people.
> > > >
> > > >> > If this is your vision, it should be the first big sentence that
> > > >
> > > >people
> > > >
> > > >> > will read. Normal users might say, 'uh, I want games as well, and
> > > >> > listening to music and editing videos: it's not for me'.
> > > >> 
> > > >> We could replace "is for" with "focuses on" if necessary.
> > > >> On the other hand, the stricter a vision is, the more useful it
> > > >
> > > >becomes to
> > > >
> > > >> focus effort. With the above vision, if someone complains about bad

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jens Reuterberg]

This is actually fairly tricky because what is needed is a metric to work 
towards: sayiing "fast and stable" is not very exact. 

But you raise fair points - how do we ensure that it doesn't exclude anyone? 
To me a vision is a statement of intent, but not a boundary beyond practical 
choices. "Should we pick Y or X, we can only pick one?" Should be something 
that you can answer with it. In this case "Does one of them help professional 
users? Pick that!". 
Not "I want to do Y!" and then someone going "No you can't because X and Z 
would be more for professional users".

One is a boundary, the other is a vision I feel. We can't make a few sentences 
work as a complete boundary - that would take a way longer document. This is 
more like the header for a longer text, a statement of intent or coming things 
but it can't be something that defines complete usage.

Still, you bring up good points - but how can we realize them as a vision? How 
can "fast/stable" function except as something that would work for everyone, 
all DE's etc?

(also added plasma-devel since the thread is made for plasma-devel the reply 
got weird though halfway through)

/Jens

> 
> IMO, the first step is to get rock-solid stable, performant (whatever you
> call that in English) and productive desktop, so that everyone says: "I
> want to use that". This is, to me, a nice vision.
> 

> Also, most of my friends (often using Ubuntu+Unity) told me "KDE (understand
> Plasma) is the most good looking desktop out there those days". Don't look
> boring, please (Office=boring). Also when I think office, I think excel +
> word + firefox. You don't need a nice desktop for that, anything would  be
> ok. Geeks and private people have more needs.
> 
> Disclaimer: I might have had one beer to many, and I mostly speak with my
> kind of user case in mind, and try to extrapolate. I'm not always using
> Plasma at work, but I think it's the best at home, and as a geek as well.
> 
> > If on the other hand this is a real worry, and an issue then the
> > discussion
> > shouldn't be what the vision statement should say but if it should say
> > something at all. Which is not something negative but an actual option :)
> 
> I agree with that, but I don't agree that my point of view doesn't say
> anything: see above.
> 
> Cheers
> Olivier
> 
> > On 26 September 2016 18:33:00 CEST, Olivier Churlaud
> > 
> 
> wrote:
> > >Le lundi 26 septembre 2016, 15:12:08 CEST Thomas Pfeiffer a écrit :
> > >> On 26.09.2016 13:27, Olivier Churlaud wrote:
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> > Sorry if I come late, I wasn't aware of this thread...
> > >> > 
> > >> > Le lundi 26 septembre 2016, 12:56:25 CEST Jens Reuterberg a écrit :
> > >> >> "Plasma is for people using a computing device in a professional
> > >
> > >context,
> > >
> > >> >> where productivity, performance and privacy are essential"
> > >> > 
> > >> > I find that the "is for people .." kind of restrictive. I agree
> > >
> > >that you
> > >
> > >> > need to have a precise target audience, but don't freak out other
> > >
> > >people.
> > >
> > >> > If this is your vision, it should be the first big sentence that
> > >
> > >people
> > >
> > >> > will read. Normal users might say, 'uh, I want games as well, and
> > >> > listening to music and editing videos: it's not for me'.
> > >> 
> > >> We could replace "is for" with "focuses on" if necessary.
> > >> On the other hand, the stricter a vision is, the more useful it
> > >
> > >becomes to
> > >
> > >> focus effort. With the above vision, if someone complains about bad
> > >
> > >gaming
> > >
> > >> performance in Plasma, we can just ask "Do you play games in a
> > >
> > >professional
> > >
> > >> context? If not, then sorry, your usecase is not what Plasma is made
> > >
> > >for."
> > >
> > >> Editing videos, though, for me is a classic example of a professional
> > >> context. Not everybody edits videos professionally, but if Plasma
> > >
> > >works
> > >
> > >> well for those who do it professionally, it should also work well for
> > >
> > >those
> > >
> > >> who do it privately.
> > >> 
> > >> It's really a question of "Do we dare scaring some people off in
> > >
> > >order to
> > >
> > >> focus more on our target audience?"
> > >
> > >This is, actually, what I'm afraid of. I wouldn't dare, but I'm not a
> > >"real"
> > >plasma developer, so I'm not to make the decision :)
> > >
> > >> > I wonder if the professional context is important. To me plasma is
> > >> > productivity, performance and privacy. To achieve this, you target
> > >> > professionals (more mission-like).
> > >> 
> > >> Again, depends on how much we want to focus.
> > >> 
> > >> > Some ideas, that still sound wrong to me, but less (I don't like
> > >
> > >the "for
> > >
> > >> > people"):
> > >> > "Plasma turns computing devices into productive, performant and
> > >
> > >private
> > >
> > >> > tools"
> > >> 
> > >> We had "performant" in our original draft, but then it was pointed
> > >
> > 

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On 26.09.2016 13:27, Olivier Churlaud wrote:

Hi,
Sorry if I come late, I wasn't aware of this thread...

Le lundi 26 septembre 2016, 12:56:25 CEST Jens Reuterberg a écrit :

"Plasma is for people using a computing device in a professional context,
where productivity, performance and privacy are essential"

I find that the "is for people .." kind of restrictive. I agree that you need
to have a precise target audience, but don't freak out other people.
If this is your vision, it should be the first big sentence that people will
read. Normal users might say, 'uh, I want games as well, and listening to
music and editing videos: it's not for me'.


We could replace "is for" with "focuses on" if necessary.
On the other hand, the stricter a vision is, the more useful it becomes to focus 
effort. With the above vision, if someone complains about bad gaming performance 
in Plasma, we can just ask "Do you play games in a professional context? If not, 
then sorry, your usecase is not what Plasma is made for."
Editing videos, though, for me is a classic example of a professional context. 
Not everybody edits videos professionally, but if Plasma works well for those 
who do it professionally, it should also work well for those who do it privately.


It's really a question of "Do we dare scaring some people off in order to focus 
more on our target audience?"

I wonder if the professional context is important. To me plasma is
productivity, performance and privacy. To achieve this, you target
professionals (more mission-like).



Again, depends on how much we want to focus.


Some ideas, that still sound wrong to me, but less (I don't like the "for
people"):
"Plasma turns computing devices into productive, performant and private tools"
We had "performant" in our original draft, but then it was pointed out that it 
is not a proper English word.

"Plasma is for people for which productivity, performance and privacy are
essential"
If we don't want to define our target audience in the Vision, then this would be 
a good alternative. Then again, aren't those important for pretty much anybody?

"Plasma aims at enhancing the productivity, performance and privacy of the
user experience"


I don't think an experience can have productivity... ;)

"Plasma: experience prod, perf and priv" ?


That sounds more like a tagline than a vision, but we already have the tagline 
"Plasma: Getting things done."

Well just some (bad) ideas...

They're not bad ideas at all, it's really a matter of how much Plasma wants to 
focus.

Thank you for the input!

Olivier

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jens Reuterberg]

So the current version after revisions looks like this. To this comes of 
course addendums like the one in previous versions. We simply want feedback on 
this so that we know the previous objections are cleared out and we can go 
forward

"Plasma is for people using a computing device in a professional context, 
where productivity, performance and privacy are essential"

Added to that may come the "detail parts" and it will be packaged up, we just 
want to give everyone a chance to comment first until we nail it down.

/Jens

On Monday, 4 April 2016 15:45:30 CEST Jens Reuterberg wrote:
> Hey, so me and Thomas have been hard at work on this for a while now and I
> think we are at a good point to show what we got.
> 
> Please remember that THIS IS JUST A DRAFT! Nothing is set in stone even if
> the document looks fancy (the PNG attached to this email)
> Below is the raw text of it.
> 
> /Jens
> 
> The Vision is split into three subsections:
> Vision, Details and and three key points.
> The actual Vision:
> Plasma is created to be the primary user interface for multiple device
> classes providing a stable, performant, usable and above all productive
> environment for professional computer users.
> Plasma's feature set is selected for its usefulness in a productive context
> with a constant care to user privacy.
> 
> Detail 1: Plasma not only promises to never invade its users' privacy
> itself, but also protect against other parties' attempts to spy on them.
> Security is a precondition to privacy, all privacy measures are useless in
> an insecure system.
> Detail 2: Our target audience works with their devices in a professional
> setting. Productivity is key for them and their user interface must give
> them an efficient and swift way of completing tasks.
> Detail 3: A perfomant desktop is the base of any productive environment and
> code quality, usability and aesthetic value are relevant to the experience.
> Nothing in the interface exists on its own merits but for what it brings to
> the user.
> 
> The Three Key points:
> Private, Professional, Performant.

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Tuesday, April 05, 2016 12:17:59 AM David Edmundson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Sebastian Kügler  wrote:
> 
> On Monday 04 April 2016 17:29:58 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > > I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
> > > for computer jargon
> > > 
> > > http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-> 
> > > > > wo
> > > rd -performant
> > 
> > It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we afford
> > the  jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also good
> > arguments against it.
> 
> I don't like it. How about "nimble", it expresses power and speed in a
> positively sounding adjective.
> 
> What I like about  "performant" is it doesn't just mean fast *.
> It covers a broader range of metrics, and the text beneath it in Detail 3
> goes on about code quality and usability which "nimble" doesn't really
> cover in itself.
> 
> David
> 
> *or at least it would if it was a proper word

I guess that's my gripe: If we create a vision, I'd really like it to be 
written in actually existing proper words, otherwise, that is the thing that 
distracts me from its meat. (And I guess others with language-OCD as well.)

How about "agile"? (Already has connotations in context of software, and is 
overused...)

Otherwise, we can also describe it "... performs well...".
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Tuesday, April 05, 2016 10:46:55 AM Marco Martin wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 April 2016, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > On Monday 04 April 2016 17:29:58 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > > On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > > 
> > > It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we
> > > afford the  jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also
> > > good arguments against it.
> >
> > I don't like it. How about "nimble", it expresses power and speed in a
> > positively sounding adjective.
> 
> to me nimble sounds like "small footprint" while would be a good aim to
> have  in the future, i am not sure i could tell that around with a straight
> face on the current state... (and if is so contrary to the current
> perception it may really backfire)

The vision is not about the current state, it's a description of our goal.
-- 
sebas

http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Marco Martin]

On Tuesday 05 April 2016, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> On Monday 04 April 2016 17:29:58 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > > I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
> > > for computer jargon
> > > 
> > > http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the
> > > -wo rd -performant
> > 
> > It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we
> > afford the  jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also
> > good arguments against it.
> 
> I don't like it. How about "nimble", it expresses power and speed in a
> positively sounding adjective.

to me nimble sounds like "small footprint" while would be a good aim to have 
in the future, i am not sure i could tell that around with a straight face on 
the current state... (and if is so contrary to the current perception it may 
really backfire)

-- 
Marco Martin
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jens Reuterberg]

On the one hand I fell in love with the word "nimble" (We have to do something 
cool based on words like "nimble" and "swift" one day - I don't know what but 
I will bribe you till you do it Sebas, we can't let those two words get to 
some marketing department somewhere)

On the other David has some good points - "performant" although fiddly is a 
better word I think.

Also this thread is GOLD - keep the critique coming everyone I am taking notes 
like paper is going out of style.


On Tuesday, 5 April 2016 00:17:59 CEST David Edmundson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Sebastian Kügler  wrote:
> > On Monday 04 April 2016 17:29:58 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > > On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > > > I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
> > > > for computer jargon
> > 
> > http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-wo
> > 
> > > > rd -performant
> > > 
> > > It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we
> > 
> > afford
> > 
> > > the  jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also good
> > > arguments against it.
> > 
> > I don't like it. How about "nimble", it expresses power and speed in a
> > positively sounding adjective.
> 
> What I like about  "performant" is it doesn't just mean fast *.
> It covers a broader range of metrics, and the text beneath it in Detail 3
> goes on about code quality and usability which "nimble" doesn't really
> cover in itself.
> 
> David
> 
> *or at least it would if it was a proper word
> 
> > --
> > sebas
> > 
> > Sebastian Kügler•http://vizZzion.org•http://www.kde.org
> > ___
> > Plasma-devel mailing list
> > Plasma-devel@kde.org
> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel


___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[David Edmundson]

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Sebastian Kügler  wrote:

> On Monday 04 April 2016 17:29:58 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > > I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
> > > for computer jargon
> > >
> > >
> http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-wo
> > > rd -performant
> >
> > It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we
> afford
> > the  jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also good
> > arguments against it.
>
> I don't like it. How about "nimble", it expresses power and speed in a
> positively sounding adjective.
>

What I like about  "performant" is it doesn't just mean fast *.
It covers a broader range of metrics, and the text beneath it in Detail 3
goes on about code quality and usability which "nimble" doesn't really
cover in itself.

David

*or at least it would if it was a proper word


> --
> sebas
>
> Sebastian Kügler•http://vizZzion.org•http://www.kde.org
> ___
> Plasma-devel mailing list
> Plasma-devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
>
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Monday 04 April 2016 17:29:58 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
> > for computer jargon
> >
> > http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-wo
> > rd -performant
> 
> It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we afford
> the  jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also good
> arguments against it.

I don't like it. How about "nimble", it expresses power and speed in a 
positively sounding adjective.
-- 
sebas

Sebastian Kügler•http://vizZzion.org•http://www.kde.org
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Montag, 4. April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:

> I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
> for computer jargon
> 
> http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-word
> -performant

It is clearly jargon. As Jens already said, the question is: Can we afford the 
jargon or not? We think we can, but there are certainly also good arguments 
against it.

> The main part which surprises me is the user profile for professional
> users. I guess you've thought about who that includes and who it
> excludes?  How does it differentiate us from the competition?

By definition, we don't exclude anybody. Anybody _can_ use Plasma, for whatever 
they want. The focus on professional users (using Merriam-Webster's first 
simple definition of professional as "relating to a job that requires special 
education, training, or skill") gives us the advantage of making clear that 
Plasma is for getting a job done. That doesn't mean it cannot be used for 
recreational tasks, but the focus is on productivity.

For example, any office suite I know is clearly made for professional use, but 
that doesn't keep people from using them at home. Yet if someone asks for a 
feature in an office suite that only makes sense in a recreational context, 
they 
will probably have a hard time convincing office suite makers to put 
significant 
effort into it, and I think that's a good thing.

We want the same for Plasma. When someone asks us to implement feature X, we 
should ask back "Please explain how this feature makes you more productive", 
and if all they can come up with is "But I like it that way!", we can point to 
our vision and say "Sorry, not our focus".

How does it differentiate us from the competition? In the desktop area maybe 
not so much (since most desktops seem to be geared towards professional 
productivity), but most mobile operating systems appear to be foremost 
environments for media consumption, and became productive tools more or less 
by accident. We can focus on productivity right from the start (Plasma Active 
did a lot in that direction, for example), allowing us to occupy a "niche" 
more easily (yes, Blackberry tries that, too, but due to their size, they need 
a far bigger niche to thrive in than we do).

Hope that helps,
Thomas
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[David Edmundson]

​I really like it. ++

It's distilled quite nicely into being a genuinely useful product without
being too restrictive.

David
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jens Reuterberg]

In all fairness Thomas mentioned that too :D But we thought "oh computer stuff 
works, lets keep it" plus its a nice catch-all word isn't it... Don't know of 
an alternative to it without adding a lot of extra word faffing tbh. (Anyone 
who knows: HALP!)

During CERN professionals came up as an example of what we wanted to aim to, 
now we may have gone in a tad hard for that (since I like exclusions as a way 
to define ourselves) - either that or we are stuck with "enthusiasts" (which 
means nothing at all) or "hobbyists" (which is not a grand group to be 
connected to when it comes to words I feel - I may be wrong of course these 
are just my reasonings)

On Monday, 4 April 2016 15:04:30 CEST Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> On 4 April 2016 at 14:58, Jens Reuterberg  wrote:
> > Thanks for feedback! :)
> > 
> >> First, it looks very professional, nice :)
> >> one thing tough , is the underline of the words, the red underline may
> >> look
> >> like a spellcheck error (i'm wondering if something else could be used
> >> instead of an underline, like bullets, those icons in small, or just a
> >> background..)
> > 
> > Yes now that you say it it does look like a spelling check going on :D Ok
> > ok this calls for some experimentation. Will edit that
> > 
> > But the text? What do you think about the text?
> 
> I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
> for computer jargon
> 
> http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-word
> -performant
> 
> The main part which surprises me is the user profile for professional
> users. I guess you've thought about who that includes and who it
> excludes?  How does it differentiate us from the competition?
> 
> Jonathan
> ___
> Plasma-devel mailing list
> Plasma-devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel


___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Marco Martin]

On Monday 04 April 2016, Jens Reuterberg wrote:
> Thanks for feedback! :)
> 
> > First, it looks very professional, nice :)
> > one thing tough , is the underline of the words, the red underline may
> > look like a spellcheck error (i'm wondering if something else could be
> > used instead of an underline, like bullets, those icons in small, or
> > just a background..)
> 
> Yes now that you say it it does look like a spelling check going on :D Ok
> ok this calls for some experimentation. Will edit that
> 
> But the text? What do you think about the text?

i like the text :)

-- 
Marco Martin
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jens Reuterberg]

MORE IRC stuff posted for safekeeping:

[16:04]  "for multiple device classes" and "computer users" could 
be better coupled, "device" can be all kind of things, but is first in text, 
while "computer" might be more bound to "desktop computer" and comes second. 
that part IMHO needs rework
[16:04]  or "devices"

On Monday, 4 April 2016 16:05:25 CEST Jens Reuterberg wrote:
> Ok so some good criticism from IRC that I thought I should document here for
> posterity:
> 
> [15:57]  - criticism: "Plasma is not good enough for professional
> use" [15:58]  - people complaining "but this is supposed to be a
> just for fun thing, nothing serious! I hate you now!"
> [15:58]  jensreu: point #3 : This is plasma vision and in 3rd detail
> you say.. "A perfomant desktop..."
> [15:58]  We can meet both with sensible arguments, just needs to be
> thought through
> [15:59]  jensreu: so I would rephrase 3rd detail completely... just
> not sure how
> [16:01]  bshah: would "performant user interface" work better?
> [16:01]  depends on if we consider Plasma technology or user
> interface..
> [16:01]  sebas: yeah true, should we soften the "professional" bit?
> [16:02]  yes, please try (not sure it'll work, but I'm curious what
> you can come up with)
> 
> 
> On Monday, 4 April 2016 15:45:30 CEST Jens Reuterberg wrote:
> > Hey, so me and Thomas have been hard at work on this for a while now and I
> > think we are at a good point to show what we got.
> > 
> > Please remember that THIS IS JUST A DRAFT! Nothing is set in stone even if
> > the document looks fancy (the PNG attached to this email)
> > Below is the raw text of it.
> > 
> > /Jens
> > 
> > The Vision is split into three subsections:
> > Vision, Details and and three key points.
> > The actual Vision:
> > Plasma is created to be the primary user interface for multiple device
> > classes providing a stable, performant, usable and above all productive
> > environment for professional computer users.
> > Plasma's feature set is selected for its usefulness in a productive
> > context
> > with a constant care to user privacy.
> > 
> > Detail 1: Plasma not only promises to never invade its users' privacy
> > itself, but also protect against other parties' attempts to spy on them.
> > Security is a precondition to privacy, all privacy measures are useless in
> > an insecure system.
> > Detail 2: Our target audience works with their devices in a professional
> > setting. Productivity is key for them and their user interface must give
> > them an efficient and swift way of completing tasks.
> > Detail 3: A perfomant desktop is the base of any productive environment
> > and
> > code quality, usability and aesthetic value are relevant to the
> > experience.
> > Nothing in the interface exists on its own merits but for what it brings
> > to
> > the user.
> > 
> > The Three Key points:
> > Private, Professional, Performant.
> 
> ___
> Plasma-devel mailing list
> Plasma-devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jens Reuterberg]

Ok so some good criticism from IRC that I thought I should document here for 
posterity:

[15:57]  - criticism: "Plasma is not good enough for professional use" 
[15:58]  - people complaining "but this is supposed to be a just for 
fun thing, nothing serious! I hate you now!" 
[15:58]  jensreu: point #3 : This is plasma vision and in 3rd detail 
you say.. "A perfomant desktop..." 
[15:58]  We can meet both with sensible arguments, just needs to be 
thought through 
[15:59]  jensreu: so I would rephrase 3rd detail completely... just not 
sure how
[16:01]  bshah: would "performant user interface" work better? 
[16:01]  depends on if we consider Plasma technology or user 
interface.. 
[16:01]  sebas: yeah true, should we soften the "professional" bit? 
[16:02]  yes, please try (not sure it'll work, but I'm curious what you 
can come up with)


On Monday, 4 April 2016 15:45:30 CEST Jens Reuterberg wrote:
> Hey, so me and Thomas have been hard at work on this for a while now and I
> think we are at a good point to show what we got.
> 
> Please remember that THIS IS JUST A DRAFT! Nothing is set in stone even if
> the document looks fancy (the PNG attached to this email)
> Below is the raw text of it.
> 
> /Jens
> 
> The Vision is split into three subsections:
> Vision, Details and and three key points.
> The actual Vision:
> Plasma is created to be the primary user interface for multiple device
> classes providing a stable, performant, usable and above all productive
> environment for professional computer users.
> Plasma's feature set is selected for its usefulness in a productive context
> with a constant care to user privacy.
> 
> Detail 1: Plasma not only promises to never invade its users' privacy
> itself, but also protect against other parties' attempts to spy on them.
> Security is a precondition to privacy, all privacy measures are useless in
> an insecure system.
> Detail 2: Our target audience works with their devices in a professional
> setting. Productivity is key for them and their user interface must give
> them an efficient and swift way of completing tasks.
> Detail 3: A perfomant desktop is the base of any productive environment and
> code quality, usability and aesthetic value are relevant to the experience.
> Nothing in the interface exists on its own merits but for what it brings to
> the user.
> 
> The Three Key points:
> Private, Professional, Performant.

___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jens Reuterberg]

Thanks for feedback! :)

> First, it looks very professional, nice :)
> one thing tough , is the underline of the words, the red underline may look
> like a spellcheck error (i'm wondering if something else could be used
> instead of an underline, like bullets, those icons in small, or just a
> background..)

Yes now that you say it it does look like a spelling check going on :D Ok ok 
this calls for some experimentation. Will edit that

But the text? What do you think about the text?


___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Jonathan Riddell]

On 4 April 2016 at 14:58, Jens Reuterberg  wrote:
> Thanks for feedback! :)
>
>> First, it looks very professional, nice :)
>> one thing tough , is the underline of the words, the red underline may look
>> like a spellcheck error (i'm wondering if something else could be used
>> instead of an underline, like bullets, those icons in small, or just a
>> background..)
>
> Yes now that you say it it does look like a spelling check going on :D Ok ok
> this calls for some experimentation. Will edit that
>
> But the text? What do you think about the text?

I'm not convinced performant is a word although it seems to be used
for computer jargon

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/38945/what-is-wrong-with-the-word-performant

The main part which surprises me is the user profile for professional
users. I guess you've thought about who that includes and who it
excludes?  How does it differentiate us from the competition?

Jonathan
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Re: A Plasma Vision draft

[Marco Martin]

On Monday 04 April 2016, Jens Reuterberg wrote:
> Hey, so me and Thomas have been hard at work on this for a while now and I
> think we are at a good point to show what we got.
> 
> Please remember that THIS IS JUST A DRAFT! Nothing is set in stone even if
> the document looks fancy (the PNG attached to this email)
> Below is the raw text of it.
> 

First, it looks very professional, nice :)
one thing tough , is the underline of the words, the red underline may look 
like a spellcheck error (i'm wondering if something else could be used instead 
of an underline, like bullets, those icons in small, or just a background..)

-- 
Marco Martin
___
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel