Transparency in the terminal windows: Do you have to know where the trash is when using the terminal? Aqua dock imitations or Dockbert variations: They look very nice, but are they really usable? You don’t even see the name of the window (the icon represent) unless you hold the pointer over it. The classic BeOS dock is very good to use. Windows are grouped by application, and you don’t see more than you need to.
There are many more examples on good and bad GUI designs.
I recommend all GUI designers to read a book by Donald Norman, for example “The Design of Everyday Things”. You will get more comprehension of what’s usable and not usable.
I can also recommend this webpage about GUI-design, guuui.com.
hi,
there are several books out there about useable interfaces.
each operating system/window manager has it’s own guidelines.
another one called “the humane interface” by jeff raskin (used by macs).
amazon has it here
an interface guideline for gnome. gnome looks nice but it’s becoming more and more like windows. i like gnome more than kde. but kde i think is more advanced and smaller.
eclipse has a very very nice interface. guidelines are here here
As long as I’m around, Haiku will have someone determined to have a usable interface and who has a clue what usability is really all about. I’m no expert, but I like to think that I do OK. Stephan is also aware of such things - WonderBrush is good evidence of that. The GE list and the forums are a good place to toss out ideas (particularly in the Suggestion Box), no matter how wacky they might be, but the members of the project will make the final decisions when the proper time comes.
Large grey concrete buildings might be effective and resource effective, but would you want to live in one?
I’ve always, well atleast for my first ten years in computing, been a fan of extreme minimalism and utilism. However, with my constant decline in computer interest so has my desire for effectivity decreased. I know my computer has alot of processing power and ram to spare, so while not use a small percentage of to make things a little prettier?
Ofcourse it should be an option for the user to decide, but something isn’t worthless because it’s only decoration. Doesn’t have to be like Windows Vista (moving a window uses 30% cpu on my Athlon 165 btw) but appearance does matter!
Large grey concrete buildings might be effective and resource effective, but would you want to live in one? ;)
…
I know my computer has alot of processing power and ram to spare, so while not use a small percentage of to make things a little prettier?
I’m a huge proponent of usability, but I also like to have a GUI that looks nice. Stephan Assmus’ new icon format and theme are IMO look phenomenal and are so small as to be theoretically faster than any other OS out there. While it has been changed some since I last worked on it, the decorator engine in the app_server is something I designed, along with the default Haiku decorator itself. I like to think that my work still hearkens back to the classic BeOS while still looking new and yet easy on the eyes. You can have both – it just requires lots of careful thought.
thanks to firefox, the biggest thing is tabs. perhaps soon we’ll see email with tabs, word processor with tabs. This is the next step from the Be concept of grouping. It’s better because with multiple windows and tabs, I can group things by task. For example, I can have a window with all the haiku sites in tabs, window with all my firefox tabs, etc.
So with workspaces, deskbar grouping and tab gouping we have enough hierarchy for all kinds of things. This would allow me to keep track of a lot of websites, a lot of email-a lot of everything at the same time!
I think the general theme of this OS should be “we’re not going to patronize you with baby things like My Computer. You are smart and have a lot of stuff to deal with but you don’t have time to deal with computerisms. We’re going to work on make managing all that stuff much easier. Simple but not simplistic”
totally agree…“you’re smart enough than to have us baby you. make things simple but not idiotic.” just like that… make thigs be useful and productive NOT be stupid
That's right. oh boy big icons....that's only good for a kiosk at disney world.
Not quite.
As for My Computer being babying, it may not be the metaphor you prefer for your computer, but it does not mean that it is babying. In anycase, with regards to your comment about the big icons, simplicity is not a lack of visually pleasing elements, it is ensuring that those elements operate correctly, productively, and pleasingly. Using a computer should not be like reading a flyer from a Microsoft Publisher '97 template. Like all things, interfaces should not be assembled backwards from function to form, they should be consciously designed with the principles of form and function in a harmony that creates a productive and pleasant experience for the end user. There are cases, where big icons do that. There are cases, in my opinion, where big icons could be appropriate for Haiku.
honestly i think gui comes down to 1. usability 2. flexibility to do all the shit your heart desires.
note that usability comes first. for example selecting folders with wildcards would make my life so much easy!!! tiny touches that helps you perform better. any type of list should need a search with wildcard option
and make it look cool…please. i dont ask for apple puffy explosions or twirly magical minimizing windows. but some neat icons, good colours that dont bother me, more than 256, background picture. its about making the space mine…
these would make me a happy camper =)
[for both of these imagination is the limit…but too much is always bad. its good having a lot of flexiblity…but not cool having a milllion of these shipped with R1…just choose the best 17 and thats it…let the user murder himself with more. but do provide the hooks to put more…]
so there…i solved your gui riddle…simple as 1,2 …umm 17
The mentality I’m against is the idea that all you need to do is 5 things represented by 5 big icons on the desktop. It gives the illusion that things are all easy and simple. But then if you want to do more than that, it becomes very hard.
For example, Gnome looks very simple but if you want to configure the UI you go to a config file. If you like the apps in ubuntu you’re fine but if you want to download something else that’s not part of the package, it becomes very very complicated.
So I guess what i’m trying to say is I have no real problem with big icons but don’t make the apparent simplicity a facade over a very bizarre foundation
I want ease of use to go all the way down to the command line and the API’s.
ar1000 wrote:
arielb wrote:
That's right. oh boy big icons....that's only good for a kiosk at disney world.
Not quite.
As for My Computer being babying, it may not be the metaphor you prefer for your computer, but it does not mean that it is babying. In anycase, with regards to your comment about the big icons, simplicity is not a lack of visually pleasing elements, it is ensuring that those elements operate correctly, productively, and pleasingly. Using a computer should not be like reading a flyer from a Microsoft Publisher '97 template. Like all things, interfaces should not be assembled backwards from function to form, they should be consciously designed with the principles of form and function in a harmony that creates a productive and pleasant experience for the end user. There are cases, where big icons do that. There are cases, in my opinion, where big icons could be appropriate for Haiku.
Transparency in the terminal windows: Do you have to know where the trash is when using the terminal?
The one case where you could use transparency are those modal dialogs that have to block your window for something important. Even then they shouldn’t be transparent by default but if you need to see what they are blocking you should be able to turn on the transparency.
I hate to say this, but there really isn’t any simplicity in an operating system. There is just shifting around the complexity. The key is to place the least amount on the user
[user==][dev======][OS==============]
The problem is that programmers are lazy, resulting in cranky users (and rightfully so).
[user======][dev==][OS==============]
I can’t remember offhand, but it’s a usability rule called the Law of Conservation of Complexity.
i agree with dark wyrm…hes right…but in reality the users and developers meet around halfway…because users try to use the os…and the developers try to program it…both get lazy and both try to find the easy way out…its just human nature…right? but if developers would try harder…definitely an os would be more usable…it depends on usser feedback too! so its more organic.
I hate to say this, but there really isn't any simplicity in an operating system.
Maybe not in the one you are using now. But, when a conscious effort is but not just into the programming of an interface, but into the design on an interface, it is necessary and proper for it to have simplicity. Unfortunately, it happens to be that this element is often not present in UIs that we use today.
Maybe not in the one you are using now. But, when a conscious effort is but not just into the programming of an interface, but into the design on an interface, it is necessary and proper for it to have simplicity. Unfortunately, it happens to be that this element is often not present in UIs that we use today.
I would certainly agree. Regardless of the code under the hood, the actual GUI of a program needs to be as simple and helpful as possible. I'd say that the reasons why there are so many complicated programs is lazy programmers, poor design procedures, or a combination of both. Design should come first and then the code, not the other way around, which is the common case.
Not all of the fault of bad BeOS apps lies with the developers, though. BeOS doesn’t have nearly the features that, say, OS X or Windows have, but it has enough to make lots of regular programs possible. The burden falls on the developer to make up for what the OS doesn’t provide. For some kinds of programs, this isn’t a big deal. For others, though, a BeOS developer has more work to do than developers for other OSes. Rich text editing (complete with tables and pictures) comes to mind, for example.
for example selecting folders with wildcards would make my life so much easy!!!! tiny touches that helps you perform better. any type of list should need a search with wildcard option
Latest Opentracker, alt+shift+a. Does RegExps, too…
The OS should do more so that users don’t have to work so hard. It shouldn’t make advanced actions more complex just because most people don’t use them. We want it to be easy to really take advantage of the computer and not be stuck at one maximized window at a time.
The UI should be ergonomic. It shouldn’t distract you from what you are doing but it shouldn’t be dull. Jumping on the latest ‘in’ style just looks dated after a while.
I’ve actually “asked tog” about the global menus on large monitors. he says his studies show they take less time overall even taking into account bring the cursor back to the app. he also said that pie menus could work to replace regular context menus even at the edge of the screen.
maybe we should take a look at next style vertical menus? You can move them around and tear parts off
My idea is to just have one word in the upper left corner "Menu" and when you move your mouse to it, it would pop up a vertical menu. This would save more space than the mac menu and especially the windows/beos approach which has menus for every window on the desktop.
or maybe give a choice between mac, next, beos/windows and my minimalist idea. After all, we give a choice of scrollbars.
