Re: UI design [was Owen Taylor's paper]

On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 01:22, Justin Moore wrote:
>    I suppose you read (with great care) every ad that pops up in front
> of you, then?  
No i block them.....like i said if the dialogs are not relaying
information to you...you shouldn't be seeing them. Im very sure the ads
I see carry no valuable information to me so either block them or have
them opened in a tab of my browser out of my way.  

Some dialogs are useful, while other messages (or UI
> issues) are not; regardless, all should be consistent.  One thing that
> pisses the #$@# out of me is the six or seven combinations of hotkeys I
> need to press to get my current app to close.  Ctrl-Q?  Alt-W?  Ctrl-W? 
> Ctrl-D?  Etc, etc.  
hot keys are different...hot keys have no visual clues you can use while
using them.  Buttons...menus....yout have to look at them to use
them...you should be parsing more than the relative locations you should
be parsing the labels.

I (like most others here) spend about 12-14 hours a
> day in front of a computer.  I don't want to waste time trying to find
> out how to close my current app so I can go on and do other work; I just
> want it to close and be done with it.  
Well when we get a connection directly to the human brain we can skip
all this desktop layout issue crap that gets in the way and do just what
you want with a single thought.  Talk about enhanced usability for
disabled computer users!  The desktop idea we've been stuck on for what
20 years now is limiting im many ways...we need something
better.....before I go blind.

So why spend time writing you?  I
> think of it as an investment.  If I can convince one other person around
> here that UI consistency is a Good Thing (tm), then I can save time down
> the road by fighting less with seemingly-random apps. :)
I didnt say it wasnt a good thing...i just think its pretty low down on
the linux world domination todo list.  I'd rather see Redhat promote a
strong application set in their default menus across KDE/Gnome that
people can use instead of a less functional set of applications that
differs across the desktops but have a consistant UI.  Since whole
thread is based on Redhat priorities...application strength versus UI
purity...across the two desktops.  Is there a performance hit by using
UI incompatible apps under one desktop...yes sure there is.  But is that
performance hit really that important compared to providing a strong set
of default apps in the menus....i agree with Redhat that the UI
consistancy stuff isn't so important.

-jef