Re: Properly identifying applications
I like the idea of App name - function, or Function - app name. Either
way. There are enough hard-to-pronounce app names in the Linux world
that it should be required to list the app function along with the app
name. Even listening to Linux podcasts, there is never any consensus on
how to pronounce various apps, DE's, distros, etc. I also agree about
Evince being mis-labeled as a "document" viewer when in reality it is a
PDF file viewer.
Back to the original poster's comments, I would like Totem Movie Player
to be called just that, rather than Movie Player. Why? Totem has a
Youtube plugin that I often use rather than navigating to youtube.com.
I know Totem does this, but it doesn't say Totem in the menu entry. I
often get Movie Player mixed up with Mplayer, so usually on my
installs, I manually rename Movie Player to Totem Movie Player.
Patrick Goetz wrote:
It looks like no one responded to the concern raised below. It makes
sense to me that all applications should be identified by their name as
well as their function in gnome GUI menus. Furthermore, not doing so
frequently increases confusion for naive users. For example, due to
ongoing bugs with the linux acrobat reader postscript rendering engine,
users frequently come to our office because they couldn't print a pdf
file. We tell them to use evince instead of acrobat reader. They look
for a program called evince in the menus, and can't find anything. No
one knows to look for "Document Viewer" -- in fact, what does this even
mean? What kind of documents? In 9.04 Document Viewer appears to have
disappeared from the menu, but "Image Viewer" is still there. The
default image viewer used to be Eye of Gnome, but this appears to be
something different -- since the menu is non-standard, one can't tell
from the application itself; the only way to find out is to dig through
/usr/share/applications.
When the command line is more user friendly than the GUI, this should
set off those little alarm bells that something needs to be done
differently.
Of course the complication in the linux world is the plethora of choices
which exist for each application type, especially on larger networks
like ours where users are strongly opinionated about which {editor,
compiler, pdf viewer, image viewer, browser, etc.} is the best one and
must be installed. How to create a manageable user experience for the
less knowledgeable user in the presence of dozens of choices for each
task? I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment, but a no-brainer
choice is to clearly identify WHAT application is being invoked from the
menu.
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 13:41:43 +0100
From: Peter Berry
Subject: Using functional descriptions for default applications' menu
entries
To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Bug 105685 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/totem/+bug/105685)
was recently rejected again, on the grounds that "it's not a bug",
despite apparent consensus (from my and another's admittedly biased
perspective) that it is. See previous thread:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ubuntu.devel.discuss/1101
I have four media players installed: MPlayer, Xine, Totem and VLC. I
find all of them wanting from time to time and if one doesn't work,
it's useful to be able to try another. So on my system clearly "Movie
Player" is ambiguous and makes it more difficult to find Totem. (It's
also an Americanism and imprecise since it also plays pure audio - IMO
"video player" or "media player" would be better.) I also find it
galling that GNOME devs apparently think it is OK to say Movie Player
= Totem, as if nothing else in the world deserved the name.
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Properly identifying applications
Il giorno mar, 09/06/2009 alle 17.45 +0200, Soren Hansen ha scritto: > > > Couldn't this be easily resolved by you telling them to use "Document > Viewer" rather than telling them to use "Evince"? If all programs were equally feature complete and bug free, or if there was a clear winner and that was installed by default, yes. You can evaluate yourself if the precondition is true in jaunty V. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Properly identifying applications
Il giorno mar, 09/06/2009 alle 16.55 +0200, David MENTRE ha scritto: > > I agree. Displaying a "Document Viewer (evince)" or "Document Viewer / > evince" would be a big plus. Yes also because this is needed when talking to ordinary non-technical users e.g. my mother on the phone "I could not see the pictures" - "what program did you use?" "the picture viewer of course, do you think I am stupid?" :) V. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Properly identifying applications
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Soren Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:50:26AM -0500, Patrick Goetz wrote:
>> No one knows to look for "Document Viewer"
>
> If you put yourself in the place of someone who is not used to Linux:
> You have a document you want to open (and for some reason you don't just
> click on it in Nautilus, but let's ignore that for a little bit). How
> are you supposed to know to look for something called "Evince"? How is
> having that name in the menu going to be helpful?
It is useful if you know that that is the name of the app/package.
While I totally agree that for new users "Evince" gives no idea as to
the function of the app, it's pretty much equally difficult for people
who know the name but can't remember what the task name is. For
instance, with Gnome-do I have to know what the name of the app is as
it's written in the menu. I have to remember what the silly name for
evince is. I personally expect it to have PDF in the name and always
forget "Document" so I end up having to hunt in the menu to find what
the thing is called. Have you ever tried to open Seahorse via
Gnome-do? What I personally like to see is how F-spot and GIMP do it
where it's listed as like F-spot Photo Manager. It helps
"experienced" users like me find what I want, helps inexperienced
users know what apps do, and helps them if they need to know the name
in the future (say getting support or filing bugs).
>> Of course the complication in the linux world is the plethora of
>> choices which exist for each application type, especially on larger
>> networks like ours where users are strongly opinionated about which
>> {editor, compiler, pdf viewer, image viewer, browser, etc.} is the
>> best one and must be installed. How to create a manageable user
>> experience for the less knowledgeable user in the presence of dozens
>> of choices for each task? I'm not sure what the answer is at the
>> moment, but a no-brainer choice is to clearly identify WHAT
>> application is being invoked from the menu.
>
> I couldn't disagree more. The no-brainer choice it exactly to NOT show
> which application is being invoked. What's important is the task it
> performs, not what it's called. If the user needs to know the name of
> the application he's using to do something, we're doing something wrong.
> To view documents, you use a document viewer. If we change the default
> document viewer at some point, the user's experience shouldn't change.
> They shouldn't have to know that we've replaced Evince with
> FooPDFViewer. They should just keep using "Document Viewer" and have the
> best possible experience.
I can see where you're coming from, but do you really think that it
doesn't matter to people if the default app for a task changes? I
mean, I guess in an ideal world one shouldn't have to worry about the
name of the app they are using but for right now it very much does. If
I call up my university help desk and say I need help with how my web
browser acts with their site the first thing they ask me is what
browser I'm using. If all I can say is "in Ubuntu it just says Web
Browser" I'm not going to get very far.
Additionally, people aren't stupid, it's possible for them to learn
app names and I don't know that we need to treat them as if the actual
name of the app their using is over their heads. The important point
is that they shouldn't be left with *just* an app name in a menu as it
lacks almost all context (I know this "Pidgin" thing has something to
do with the Internet but I have no idea what it does).
-Jordan
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Properly identifying applications
Hello Soren, On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 17:45, Soren Hansen wrote: > You think "Evince" is more helpful than "Document Viewer"? How so? I personally think we should keep both, e.g. "Document Viewer (Evince)". Why not have an inclusive view instead of an exclusive one? The exact instantiation could vary, for example it could be a tooltip displayed with the menu item. Is having "(Evince)" in the menu item so confusing for the user? (honest question, studies might have shown that, I don't know) [...] > To view documents, you use a document viewer. If we change the default > document viewer at some point, the user's experience shouldn't change. > They shouldn't have to know that we've replaced Evince with > FooPDFViewer. They should just keep using "Document Viewer" and have the > best possible experience. This seems to me a bit theory vs. practice argument. I agree that for the casual user, he does not care if the document viewer is Evince or FooPDFViewer. However, for a more experienced user that has started to install new applications (e.g. FooPDFViewer), this is important. The application *is* different in some way (even in ABrowser/Firefix case). The user knows that he has installed the application but he does not know how to reach it, i.e. find the proper menu item. Moreover, it could be useful in other contexts. For example, I already had issues with some Ubuntu administration applications but could not report a bug against the correct package because I could not know its name. Anyway, do as you feel it. I just wanted to add another user feedback to Patrick and Peter ones. I personally think their remarks deserve some thinking. Yours, david -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Properly identifying applications
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:50:26AM -0500, Patrick Goetz wrote:
> It makes sense to me that all applications should be identified by
> their name as well as their function in gnome GUI menus.
I disagree. I /love/ the fact that our menu's aren't full of meaningless
names of applications. In fact, Gimp's and f-spot's menu entries annoy
me *a lot*.
> Furthermore, not doing so frequently increases confusion for naive
> users.
You think "Evince" is more helpful than "Document Viewer"? How so?
> For example, due to ongoing bugs with the linux acrobat reader
> postscript rendering engine, users frequently come to our office
> because they couldn't print a pdf file. We tell them to use evince
> instead of acrobat reader. They look for a program called evince in
> the menus, and can't find anything.
Couldn't this be easily resolved by you telling them to use "Document
Viewer" rather than telling them to use "Evince"?
> No one knows to look for "Document Viewer"
If you put yourself in the place of someone who is not used to Linux:
You have a document you want to open (and for some reason you don't just
click on it in Nautilus, but let's ignore that for a little bit). How
are you supposed to know to look for something called "Evince"? How is
having that name in the menu going to be helpful?
> Of course the complication in the linux world is the plethora of
> choices which exist for each application type, especially on larger
> networks like ours where users are strongly opinionated about which
> {editor, compiler, pdf viewer, image viewer, browser, etc.} is the
> best one and must be installed. How to create a manageable user
> experience for the less knowledgeable user in the presence of dozens
> of choices for each task? I'm not sure what the answer is at the
> moment, but a no-brainer choice is to clearly identify WHAT
> application is being invoked from the menu.
I couldn't disagree more. The no-brainer choice it exactly to NOT show
which application is being invoked. What's important is the task it
performs, not what it's called. If the user needs to know the name of
the application he's using to do something, we're doing something wrong.
To view documents, you use a document viewer. If we change the default
document viewer at some point, the user's experience shouldn't change.
They shouldn't have to know that we've replaced Evince with
FooPDFViewer. They should just keep using "Document Viewer" and have the
best possible experience.
--
Soren Hansen |
Lead Virtualisation Engineer | Ubuntu Server Team
Canonical Ltd. | http://www.ubuntu.com/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Properly identifying applications
Patrick, What a great line!!! Umm... "shoot the GUI"?? (my command-line response). Thanks for the smile. On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Patrick Goetz wrote: > > When the command line is more user friendly than the GUI, this should > set off those little alarm bells that something needs to be done > differently. > But I agree, being able to see what command is invoked without having to open the menus would be a nice feature! Cheers, --ldl On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:55 AM, David MENTRE wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 16:50, Patrick Goetz wrote: >> I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment, but a no-brainer >> choice is to clearly identify WHAT application is being invoked from the >> menu. > > I agree. Displaying a "Document Viewer (evince)" or "Document Viewer / > evince" would be a big plus. > > Sincerely yours, > david > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > -- --- NOTE: If it is important CALL ME - I may miss email, which I do NOT normally check on weekends nor on a regular basis during any other day. --- LD Landis - N0YRQ - de la tierra del encanto 3960 Schooner Loop, Las Cruces, NM 88012 651/340-4007 N32 21'48.28" W106 46'5.80" “If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing badly.” –GK Chesterton. An interpretation: For things worth doing: Doing them, even if badly, is better than doing nothing perfectly (on them). "but I trust my family jewels only to Linux." -- DE Knuth (http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1193856) Funny Quote of the Day - Douglas Adams - "I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Properly identifying applications
Hello, On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 16:50, Patrick Goetz wrote: > I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment, but a no-brainer > choice is to clearly identify WHAT application is being invoked from the > menu. I agree. Displaying a "Document Viewer (evince)" or "Document Viewer / evince" would be a big plus. Sincerely yours, david -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Properly identifying applications
It looks like no one responded to the concern raised below. It makes
sense to me that all applications should be identified by their name as
well as their function in gnome GUI menus. Furthermore, not doing so
frequently increases confusion for naive users. For example, due to
ongoing bugs with the linux acrobat reader postscript rendering engine,
users frequently come to our office because they couldn't print a pdf
file. We tell them to use evince instead of acrobat reader. They look
for a program called evince in the menus, and can't find anything. No
one knows to look for "Document Viewer" -- in fact, what does this even
mean? What kind of documents? In 9.04 Document Viewer appears to have
disappeared from the menu, but "Image Viewer" is still there. The
default image viewer used to be Eye of Gnome, but this appears to be
something different -- since the menu is non-standard, one can't tell
from the application itself; the only way to find out is to dig through
/usr/share/applications.
When the command line is more user friendly than the GUI, this should
set off those little alarm bells that something needs to be done
differently.
Of course the complication in the linux world is the plethora of choices
which exist for each application type, especially on larger networks
like ours where users are strongly opinionated about which {editor,
compiler, pdf viewer, image viewer, browser, etc.} is the best one and
must be installed. How to create a manageable user experience for the
less knowledgeable user in the presence of dozens of choices for each
task? I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment, but a no-brainer
choice is to clearly identify WHAT application is being invoked from the
menu.
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 13:41:43 +0100
> From: Peter Berry
> Subject: Using functional descriptions for default applications' menu
> entries
> To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
>
> Bug 105685 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/totem/+bug/105685)
> was recently rejected again, on the grounds that "it's not a bug",
> despite apparent consensus (from my and another's admittedly biased
> perspective) that it is. See previous thread:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ubuntu.devel.discuss/1101
>
> I have four media players installed: MPlayer, Xine, Totem and VLC. I
> find all of them wanting from time to time and if one doesn't work,
> it's useful to be able to try another. So on my system clearly "Movie
> Player" is ambiguous and makes it more difficult to find Totem. (It's
> also an Americanism and imprecise since it also plays pure audio - IMO
> "video player" or "media player" would be better.) I also find it
> galling that GNOME devs apparently think it is OK to say Movie Player
> = Totem, as if nothing else in the world deserved the name.
>
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
