I don’t know if this is possible, but what if we raised funds to hire a usability expert?
Honestly, programmers and graphic designers usually suck at usability design.
There is already one – sort of. Me. :^)
I’m a huge proponent of usability and task-centered design. I’m no Donald Norman or Jef Raskin, but I think I know enough to at least help make sure Haiku stays on track in that respect. I’m also working on writing the UI guidelines for Haiku.
Stephan Aßmus (aka stippi) also keeps an eyeball on these things and we make sure that the other one hasn’t gone off the deep end, either.
at my previous job, I was extremely concerend with UI. I’d go ballistic about it, and a lot of the time I’d test test test, ask for feedback, test, ask for feedback. Try to conceptualise alternate methods, try to find the “best” approach. Test, ask for feedback, test. This was more down to how I am, than any kind of formal discipline I could bring to the situation.
I’m not suggesting that having any old schmoe do UI is a way forward, or that dismissing “experts” is a valid approach, but more often than not, I’ve found that some people value a good UI, and some don’t even know that such a term exists.
The fact that Darkwyrm and Stippi proclaim to think about it is a good sign, and to be honest, I’d be happy to see their fruits of labour than spending money on an “expert” at this stage in Haiku’s development.
Basically I don’t care about ‘expert’ visions. Just if somebody makes it good it’s enough for me!
Perfection and simplicity is the only thing what matters in good UI design.
DarkWyrm wrote:
There is already one -- sort of. Me. :^)I’m a huge proponent of usability and task-centered design. I’m no Donald Norman or Jef Raskin, but I think I know enough to at least help make sure Haiku stays on track in that respect. I’m also working on writing the UI guidelines for Haiku.
Stephan Aßmus (aka stippi) also keeps an eyeball on these things and we make sure that the other one hasn’t gone off the deep end, either.
Although I did not really comment on the guidelines I would like to mention Michael Phipps and myself as being usability-focused people, too. 
Cheery wrote:
Basically I don't care about 'expert' visions. Just if somebody makes it good it's enough for me!Perfection and simplicity is the only thing what matters in good UI design.
Perfection is subjective. Good is subjective. Simplicity is insufficient.
It is helpful to have a lot of research in your UI design. Both MSFT and AAPL spend quite large sums on this subject as a matter of fact.
ar1000 wrote:
Perfection is subjective. Good is subjective. Simplicity is insufficient.It is helpful to have a lot of research in your UI design. Both MSFT and AAPL spend quite large sums on this subject as a matter of fact.
I find it hard to believe that M$ spends as much as it does and still has products that suck as much as they do. To their credit, though, it seems like Vista and the new version of Office are at least going in the right direction. It’s about time.
Hey everybody (first post :))
Personally I think microsoft has been going in the right direction with every OS released (well, except WinME) but they’ve had an extra long way to go because early versions sucked beyond description. I still think windows suck though, otherwise I wouldn’t be looking for a new OS.
the problem with experts is that they may be wrong but people will say “tog said it’s good so…it has to be good!”
I don’t think there should be one menu for all apps. I think the BeOS, Windows way is better. Same with the taskbar. I just really love the macosx icons. They are so rich and I feel I’m missing something with windows/linux/BeOS icons. We are also better off without jelly scrollbars and other gimmicks that get in the way of what i want to do.
We need to take a look at all the OS’s: macos9, amiga, riscos, os/2…there are some big fans of those. They were left out. We have to ask them what they think is the reason they love their OS so much.
Re: menu bars…
I think Mac OS(X’)s global menubar makes a lot of sense in the MacOS context. It would make a lot of sense in Windows as well… but for BeOS, the design of which lends itself so well to small, lean apps that work nicely together (which is really the programming model I think should be encouraged), I think we should rather recommend no menubar at all, really, for most apps at least. A toolbar of 5-10 buttons should usually be sufficient.
I’m writing this from N+, which has 5 menus: File, Edit, Go, Bookmarks, and View. All the items in the View menu could easily be shifted to right click menus… The Bookmarks and Go menus could be unified and put in the toolbar or sent to another application (deskbar/dock/strip). This leaves Edit and File. Saving is already in the toolbar. Quitting is closing the window. Printing could easily be in the toolbar… All the edit commands could be implemented with drag’n’drop + a shelf (which I think we should have) if the standard commands aren’t enough. All that’s really left is Prefs, About and Find (find text on page)… and I’m sure those could go somewhere else?
Just a thought!
-Paws
the problem with putting menus in right click is that they already have lots of stuff like cut, copy, back, etc.
What about middle button menus?
arielb wrote:
the problem with putting menus in right click is that they already have lots of stuff like cut, copy, back, etc.What about middle button menus?
Please no.
That 1) just adds more confusion because a user possibly has to go through 2 popup menus to find what they’re looking for and 2) relying on a middle button is a poor decision as many cheap and older mice still lack them - not to mention trackpads, and alternative pointing devices.
it would save vertical space when there are many windows and obey fitts law perfectly as the menu would be right at the pointer.
For people with older mice or for using the keyboard…the menu key could bring up the menu. "Control menu" would bring up context menu.
arielb wrote:
the problem with putting menus in right click is that they already have lots of stuff like cut, copy, back, etc.
Hm, true, I suppose (although not for N+). One thing that’s important for menus too is consistency. Things should generally be in the same place…
Quote:
What about middle button menus?
Hm. I’m not sure about that. umcullough’s point is obviously valid. Having two sets of contextual menus is also a bit too… weird, I think.
-Paws
the menu will always be where the pointer is.
i thought about the 2 sets of menus. But to me the amount of space saved, the lack of clutter and the speed of use seem very compelling.
When I use firefox, I have the tiny menu extension so I have some sense of the benefit of all that space saved. I won’t switch back!
It would also be possible to have a flatter menu hierarchy which could make it easier to find things.
I’m giving up on the 3rd button menu idea…I want the OS to be more discoverable not less.
I would change the title tabs. the close button should have an X. there should be a program icon. (that will really help with keeping the length of the title down so that sliding can work) There should be a minimize and a send back button along with the zoom.
Minimize should be a down arrow, zoom an up arrow and send back could look like a diagonal arrow.
When you send back a window, the window should automatically align itself to the window that’s now in front and the tab should slide so that you get a row of tabs
Firefox and opera have shown that tabs are the way to go. I now hear that other apps that deal with multiple documents such as email and office apps want them too. Well we can have them for the whole OS!
I’ve joined the glass elevator list and trying to flesh out my ideas for how to organize the cluttered desktop and how to keep track of all windows in all workspaces. Graphics won’t do the job!
I know its bad etiquette to bump up ancient threads, but this place hasn’t much activity…
I felt the same; that BeOS would do better with apps not having menu bars. In my opinion, the apps should offer in their interface only that which the basic end-user wants. The advanced features will be accessible through keystrokes or editing files which are (generally) preferred by power users. The way I see it, end-users are happier with less customisability.
In my firefox,
the refresh-stop buttons are fused,
I use the personal menu extension [which is placed before the back-button]
I use fission extension and scrapped the status menu
I shifted the tab-bar to bottom so that the clutter is distributed in a moderate manner.
The about:config of firefox is what the end-user wont use but power-user will be at ease with.
In full screen, I think it obeys fitt’s laws moderately…