Davyd ([info]davyd) wrote,
@ 2006-02-05 16:00:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
I Like Your Old Stuff Better Than Your New Stuff
I hate to seem like I'm harping on about this topic again, but I wish I knew what was going on here.

This rant is about the loss of contexual information in the icons we use from day to day in the desktop. Here are two examples:



Now, it may not seem so at first, but an amazing amount of contexual information has now been lost in both of these dialogs. In the first dialog there is no longer any indication anywhere in the desktop as to what protocol you are using for a connection. While my mum may not care what protocol she is using, there are a class of people who do. They may have forgotten what protocol they're using to access some files on a webserver (is it ssh, dav, ftp?), because certain protocols may be too insecure to use over certain networks, only work on certain sides of a firewall or display different contents based on what network you're on.

In the second dialog, the graphical connection between file type and icon have gone. In the original icons it was easy to glean both: that the things you were looking at were images; and what type of images they were. This is no longer possible. You may have recalled that the image you are looking for was a JPEG and have some spatial awareness of where it was in the directory. Instantly your eyes will snap to any JPEG images so that you can read their file names. That is now gone. Additionally, the quick reference for the file type (there may be 100 reasons that you want to know this) has been removed. You still know that it is an image, but not what kind of image. This isn't the only example of loss of icon context, our rich icon library seems to have been completely depopulated.

To be perfectly honest, I am a little embarrased with what I've been seeing in the latest GNOME betas. I was really, really happy with GNOME 2.12, I loved showing off screenshots of its hotness. I'm currently too embarrassed to write a review of the GNOME 2.13 beta. Some things look really good, but some things are looking really ugly. I really hope we don't release like this.


Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

(Post a new comment)

Ep
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 08:36 am UTC (link)
Just use KDE ....

... just joking, I agree with you. Anyways those are minor nuisances and it seem that people are aware of them, so lets hope that will be fixed in the final 2.14. Don't forget that we're talkin' about a beta realease.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Ep
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 10:58 am UTC (link)
this is a beta release, but UI freeze started 3 days ago!

I'm seriously thinking to upgrade to 2.14 but keeping the old gnome-icon-themes and gtk-engines. I hope this will be possible.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Ah, the good old days.
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 08:40 am UTC (link)
It is quite sad to see that some basic and working functionality that I took for granted are being stripped down to a bare minimum.

I have also noticed that some of the system preferences dialogs like "Keyboard Shorcuts" and specially "Screensaver" are missing some entries that where present in the past versions.
For example, now there is no way to configure a screensaver or to preview it in fullscreen.

It's really strange to see how some working applications get stripped down while others get enabled with features that barely work.
For instance, now metacity snaps windows while they are moved and quite frankly it doesn't seem too do it in an optimal way.
Most of the time I feel annoyed by the resulting position of the window.
Another feature that I haven't mastered yet that I found extremely annoying is how new open windows start minimized and start flashing in the "Window List" task bar.
If I invoke an application through the "Run Application" dialog I expect the application to be started and visible!

What I don't understand is why is this 'broken' features are on by default?
And why they can't be turned off in the preferences dialogs.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Ah, the good old days.
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 10:33 pm UTC (link)
Even my mac shows “pdf”, “png” , “jpg” ,”wma” etc. on the little icons. No one can possibly tell me that apple has bad use cases and a “complicated” user interface design. Grandma can sure use my mac!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

MacOS X is not head-and-shoulders easier than other modern GUI systems. - (Anonymous), 2006-02-06 12:47 am UTC (Expand)
Re: MacOS X is not head-and-shoulders easier than other modern GUI systems. - [info]davyd, 2006-02-06 08:58 am UTC (Expand)
Re: MacOS X is not head-and-shoulders easier than other modern GUI systems. - (Anonymous), 2006-02-16 04:21 am UTC (Expand)
Regression
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 08:45 am UTC (link)
I gotta agree with you, this seems like a pointless regression. I mean, all the icons are already there! I don't understand this in the slightest.

Icon wise, I'm not happy with Tango. I really like Foxtrot, based off the Tango concept. It's consistent for one.

Maybe we're all getting our knickers in a knot and this will all eventually go somewhere quite nice. But at the moment it just looks like losing functionality we already have, same with the desktop backgrounds issue. I just can't see any real use behind this change.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Regression
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 08:55 am UTC (link)
these kind of changes[1] are not going to give GNOME any new users (computer newbies don't see the difference there..) but it might loose some oldtime users.

[1] i agree about gnome-screensaver too, personnally i miss being able to set a random screensaver: i'm staying with xscreensaver as long as ubuntu will let me

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: Regression - [info]davyd, 2006-02-05 10:02 am UTC (Expand)
Use the emblems, luke!
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 10:27 am UTC (link)
I was disappointed at first, too... But maybe the situation is not so bad.

Regarding images: you can guess the MIME type from the file extension. Maybe Joe A.V.G. User is not interested in distinguishing between PNGs and JPGs (my mother and father aren't interested at all, for example). A bigger icon showing a generic image (when previews are not enabled) is just more readable.

Regarding network connections: if your really care, you could just put an emblem for distinguishing them. Or you can change their name, adding the protocol you're using. When the network folder Just Works(TM), I don't care about what protocol it's using (and for exceptions, see above).

Furthermore, having a specific icon with a barely-readable acronym for every conceivable network protocol supported by GNOME VFS and for every known image type may become cumbersome (who will upgrade old themes when new protocols/formats are added?).

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

Re: Use the emblems, luke!
(Anonymous)
2006-02-17 01:01 am UTC (link)
The problem with your thinking w.r.t. network folders is that they frequently do not "Just Work", because of the realities of computer networks, which tend to break all the time (either physically or procedurally). You should read Joel On Software's The Law of Leaky Abstractions (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.html), which uses network file transfers as a specific example of an abstraction that is prone to failure.

Also, I should mention that power users are the group most likely to use network folders, and they are also the group most interested in knowing what kind of connection that folder refers to.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Use the emblems, luke! - (Anonymous), 2006-03-16 09:00 pm UTC (Expand)

(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 10:35 am UTC (link)
I don't agree with your comments on the second screenshot.

I *rarely* care if an image is in jpeg or png when I'm using nautilus, rather I care if it's an image or a video. Some users will care about this information sometimes, but when you do you can arrange the files by type or simply look at the filename. Where the old icon theme would force that distinction to everyone and could leave people wondering why some of their images have different icons than others. I'm sorry but I just don't think stuff like "You may have recalled that the image you are looking for was a JPEG" is common enough for people in general to warrant more attention than it already gets from nautilus (extension and arrange by type. Maybe nautilus could even let you search for *.jpg in a directory more quickly).

On the first screenshot the information missing in 2.13 could indeed be useful, but relying on the icon to provide it is not a good idea (bad accessbility for example). Reverting to the old behaviour for this might be a good idea until a solution in nautilus is worked out.

Regarding the icon theme itself, I'm glad it's getting some love. When you showed GNOME 1.x to someone they'd quickly be impressed by how beatiful the icons were, but now someone used to OS X or maybe even Vista and Oxygen will not be impressed by gnome-icon-theme at all. There are bugs, yes, but the work being done will allow the theme to develop which is (IMO) fundamental to the success of GNOME.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 10:59 am UTC (link)
Jep, if you really care for filetypes, then sorting by filetype is much easier anyway.

As for the ssh/ftp/.. icons... yeah... but i never got the point of a "folder" showing all those "connections". anyway, if this information is to be shown, displaying overlay emblems with the connection type would be much more sane i think.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 11:24 am UTC (link)
Totally agree with you. Especially the thing with the network mounts not showing their type anymore really bothers me. I hope this gets fixed before releasing 2.14

(Reply to this)

emblems...
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 11:41 am UTC (link)
I think it's a step forward, but the ground is still missing under the foot. A more optimal solution would be to display such additional info in emblems, not as part of the icon.

- You have to update a theme if a new type appears
- Not consistent between themes
- Are not visible when the icon is a thumbnail

I think text based emblems would solve the above mentioned problems.

Cheers,
Greg

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

Re: emblems...
[info]davyd
2006-02-05 12:17 pm UTC (link)
I think it's a step forward, but the ground is still missing under the foot.

Is this a pun?

Emblems would be suitable if they were automatically applied to relevant objects. I guess this would give users the option of having emblems turned on or off. It would also be possible (I guess) for emblems to be programmatically created.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: emblems... - (Anonymous), 2006-02-05 05:47 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: emblems... - [info]davyd, 2006-02-05 11:42 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: emblems... - [info]palfrey, 2006-02-05 08:14 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: emblems... - [info]trs80 [typekey.com], 2006-02-07 12:56 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: emblems... - (Anonymous), 2006-02-05 12:56 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: emblems... - (Anonymous), 2006-02-05 12:57 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: emblems... - (Anonymous), 2006-02-05 03:13 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: emblems... - [info]electrichamster, 2006-02-05 03:16 pm UTC (Expand)
Time to resurrect some Eazel feature ?
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 02:11 pm UTC (link)
I totally agree with you on that. I think it might be time to resurect the level feature originally design by Eazel. It was considered maintenance ovrhead by now think that it could reattract people that got fed up by oversimplifying the desktop (but being reasonable and not implement every feature on earth). One of the first thing I do when I have to work on windows is to make extensions visible again. Lot of people I know do it as well and lot of other don't by at least the choice is there.

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.

Ludovic Danigo

(Reply to this)

Different JPEG and PNG icons are needed
[info]alanhorkan
2006-02-05 02:38 pm UTC (link)
Even excluding the text label the old JPEG and PNG icons were far more distinctive and less ambiguous. The new icons use the sunset for both. (The old icons probably should have also used different colours for the text box)

Despite the freeze I think it is a terrible regression to be unable to disambiguate lossey JPEGs (which tend to be photos) from lossless PNG (which tend to be logos and lower colour graphics) so perhaps we need to request this change be reverted until a more balanced solution is ready?
Perhaps the Network share icons could be disambiguated some other way? SSH is secure shell, so perhaps we could have a more metallic safe box style folder for ssh shares or any other kind of graphical indication that network shares are similar but not all exactly the same.

Thanks Davyd for drawing attention to all these little issues. Wish I could be playing around with Gnome 2.13 (stuck on Windows, got to pay the bills).

(Reply to this)

Gnome features review
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 04:39 pm UTC (link)
Davyd, your presentation of the new features of gnome 2.12 was one of the best things I've seen about gnome in sometime. Could you do this again for 2.14? gst 0.10 (better av sync), nautilus-search, fast-user-switch-applet / deskbar coolness, etc. These are features that average desktop linux consumers would like to read about and might not know about otherwise. Not everyone reads planet gnome...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Gnome features review
[info]mlambie
2006-02-05 11:53 pm UTC (link)
It seems your previews are well respected. I for one love them.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: Gnome features review - [info]davyd, 2006-02-06 12:57 am UTC (Expand)
Gah!
[info]scottharmon
2006-02-05 05:04 pm UTC (link)
Why, oh why? Sometimes I wish there was a little more discussion before these type of decisions were made. What is the point of removing those icons? Less maintenance? More user friendliness? IMHO when a decision like this is to be made, justification should be given. I don't see how this makes anything simpler---it makes thinks more confusing! Imagine if we only had one icon for everything---then icons are pointless.

(Reply to this)

please do a review
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 05:08 pm UTC (link)
Oh no! Please, please, write the usual "gnome prerelease tour" this time too ! You might not realize how important this thing is. It's the first thing I like to read to know what new cool tricks I missed while I was busy fixing my borked Xorg ;) (just kidding the poor ubuntu devs)

Also, it's the first thing I show to my friends (even outside the free world) every six months.

Might I suggest something that would be really cool to "see" this time? Benchmarks. Like comparing some basic overall speed readings of gnome 2.12 vs gnome 2.14, presented in a cool, Davyd-like way.

(Reply to this)

Disappointed about network mount type icons disappearance
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 06:21 pm UTC (link)
I am rather disappointed about lack of different mount type icons, because it IS very essental to see what kind of network connection it is. Simply bring them back.

About pictures - I don't know, sometimes it is not so important, so it could stay that way.

(Reply to this)

Solution?
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 06:52 pm UTC (link)
Ok, here is a two-pronged solution that could be doable in the 2.16 timeframe if made a priority early on: 1. Meaningful emblems for quality - none, archival, archival+ - create an image in the gimp, scan a document at 3000dpi, or import a raw file from your digital camera, ? that's archival+ - import a jpg from your digital camera, scan a document at 1200dpi or rip a cd to a high-quality OGG or MP3? that's archival. Media at this quality should be able to be re-encoded for space savings and still look/sound excellent for the respective size of the destination file. 2. Reduce the need to store multiple formats - make GNOME applications work well with really large files - offer assistance in compressing and converting file formats whenever documents are moved/sent - Copying to a CD in Nautilus, Attaching via Email or GAIM, etc Sincerely, --Rob Caskey

(Reply to this)


[info]skankboy
2006-02-05 06:58 pm UTC (link)
who decides these things and why?
Was there any actual data involved, say about how many new users this would get vs. how many current users this would both?
It seems this is bothering a bunch of users (myself included) and I'm pretty sure I can't go and now say "Hey windows using friend, Gnome is now ready for you to use since they dumbed down their icons of all the extra information"
Yep. We're going to see a masive flood of exodusing windows users any second now once they here of this...

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 07:18 pm UTC (link)
This was done by the maintainers of gnome-icon-theme. They work at Novell, and from what I know they do perform usability testing there.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Icons are missing the point
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 10:00 pm UTC (link)
Why all the debate about icons, when really the real solution is to have all images displayed as thumbnails.

From a usability POV, clicking on a thumbnail is vastly more obvious than having to click on random image icons because you couldn't remember what you called a certain picture.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Icons are missing the point
(Anonymous)
2006-02-05 11:38 pm UTC (link)
About a year ago I worked with computer support, giving home users (using windows xp) advice over the telephone. My conclusion is that users are idiots, despite what Linus Torvalds says. Idiot is a greek word, meaning "a person who don't care about politics". An idiot in this case is a person who don't care about computers. Most people don't actually. I would say about 99% don't care about computers. They use them, but they don't care about how they work. Then there are the remaining 1%, the "power user" (everybody who reads this...).

I really like to see in witch format my pictures is. But most (99%) people don't. For them it's just unwanted information. My suggestion is, (as proposed above) too have this feature as an optional setting i Nautilus.

10x10 is not going to happen if only 1% of the users likes Gnome. But on the other hand, the power users is the ones that installs the OS on the "normal" users computers. Therefore the power users have to like Gnome too.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Use the list view then?
[info]mjog
2006-02-06 03:25 am UTC (link)
The list view shows you not only the exact type of a file, but also:

1. a whole lot of other useful information
2. allows you to sort by type (and everything else; my downloads directory gets sorted by lastmod time, for example)
3. doesn't force you to work out what the type is by looking for some illegible (~4px high) text that duplicates (in the vast majority of cases) a file name extension that is already clearly displayed as part of the file name.
4. lines up the type of each file in a column, making it easy to scan

I'm glad the extensions in the icons have been dropped.

(Reply to this)


[info]gnu_lorien
2006-02-06 05:03 am UTC (link)
I agree with you for one primary reason: All of the image icons look the same.

An "image," is not a file-type. PNG, JPEG, GIF, and others are file types. By showing all of these things with the same icon it gives the impression that they are the same type of thing.

I am a person that doesn't use extensions to represent file types, so many image directories I have don't show the distinction. Part of the reason that this worked is because GNOME would still pick out what the file was for and show me an icon with the type.

I know on another blog it was suggested that text is bad for internationalization reasons, but that sounds bunk when it comes to extensions. I was under the impression that these were relatively universal by sheer force.

(Reply to this)

Icon colors
(Anonymous)
2006-02-06 07:55 am UTC (link)
I thought about the JPG/PNG issue. Be honest: What enables you to quickly distinguish the image type in the old screenshot? It's not the text on the red label! It's the colour. Once you have noticed that jpegs are blue and pngs are brown you immediately notice each file's type. So I'd say the real step backwards is not the missing text, it's the fact that all images look the same on the new screenshot. The new icon, however, is also a step forward in one regard: It finally is a real image now instead of a sheet of paper with a tiny coloured blob on it.

my 2 cents
Stefan

(Reply to this)

I'm quite disturbed
(Anonymous)
2006-02-06 08:37 am UTC (link)
I've been using Gnome since 2.4 and I'm very happy with 2.10 on my Debian box. I've also installed GNU/Linux for my friends and taught them to use and love Gnome. The screenshots you show here are rather disturbing. (Maybe Linus was right at last?)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I'm quite disturbed
[info]davyd
2006-02-06 08:55 am UTC (link)
I hope not.

I am hoping that a lot of this experimentation can be identified for what it is (ie. not quite thought through) and rolled back for 2.14. 2.14 is going to be an important release. I know that Canonical are going to be supporting it for a long time, I think Sun are also going to ship 2.14 in Solaris 11 (don't quote me on this, I'm working off bad memory). Fedora Core 5 will ship with 2.14 and I assume at some point they will have to release a new RHEL with some recent technology.

With Cairo, GLib 2.10, faster Pango and lots of bolt tightning, 2.14 could be a heck of a release, as long as we fix these few things.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: I'm quite disturbed - (Anonymous), 2006-02-06 11:02 am UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm quite disturbed - [info]davyd, 2006-02-06 01:48 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm quite disturbed - (Anonymous), 2006-02-06 02:44 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm quite disturbed - [info]davyd, 2006-02-06 03:05 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm quite disturbed - (Anonymous), 2006-02-06 05:13 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm quite disturbed - [info]davyd, 2006-02-07 01:02 am UTC (Expand)
I Agree
(Anonymous)
2006-02-06 09:53 am UTC (link)
I still use those icons as I have multiple connections to the same server through different protocols. It would be very annoying to not be able to easily identify which connection I'm after, and I'm afraid it'd nearly be a showstopper in terms of using GNOME overall. Sure I may not be using this like the "average" user would, but how many of them would be using SSH and NFS connections?

I can understand the i8n issue to some degree, but is in that hard to convert the system to use emblems and then do the i8n stuff with them? Maybe even this way it'd provide some commonality across different themes, which could be a good thing.

Another annoying fact with the network shortcuts is that I can't easily rename them. Is it that hard to code to change the Text?

(Reply to this)

Not too bothered
[info]fragglet
2006-02-06 10:58 am UTC (link)
Having contextual information is useful in the network servers dialog, because there isn't any other way of distinguishing eg. SMB from SSH connections. However, for image files I think it's fine. In the file manager, the primary thing I'm doing is _selecting_ files. It doesn't matter much whether a file is a JPG or PNG (or a DOC or PDF): this is something that is more important when I'm saving the file.

I've never really paid much attention to the text on those icons: if I'm scanning down a list of things, the icons give me a quick visual indicator but what I'm really looking at is the filename - and the type can be seen from the file extension. So having the file type repeated in the icon is just useless clutter. Infact, the icons in the "images" screenshot look better than the old ones because they're more visually distinctive to me.

Of course, most images are thumbnailed anyway, so I don't usually see the file type icons for images :-)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Not too bothered
[info]davyd
2006-02-06 01:33 pm UTC (link)
Interestingly, you can dynamically rename them in GConf. It is still an outstanding issue that you can't rename them in the file browser. Perhaps send them a patch ;)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: Not too bothered - [info]fragglet, 2006-02-06 01:43 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: Not too bothered - [info]davyd, 2006-02-06 01:51 pm UTC (Expand)
Free to choose how simple or complicated
(Anonymous)
2006-02-06 04:51 pm UTC (link)
I have always been outspoken about the subject of application usability. I have had a few discussions about some of the changes done to the newer version of Galeon, where certain features were removed for the sake of "moms and dads" users... One day you're happily using a program that you feel confortable with and attends your every need... and then, after an "upgrade" you find out (the hard way) that some features are completely "missing" from action. In truth they are not removed but not accessible anymore from a GUI... but what about back compatibility? I understand the intentions are good but simplifying is not always the best solution! If applications such as xine and xorg (during manual configuration) allows the user to choose the level of functionality they want to be exposed to, why not then use the same system? Simplify it (or dummify it) if that's what it takes to make it more user friendly, but at least give people the choice of selecting their level of interaction.

Cheers,

Og Maciel

(Reply to this)

From Jon^D
(Anonymous)
2006-02-06 05:09 pm UTC (link)
For your second task, "you know you want a JPEG"; there should be some kind of quick-fire filter scheme in place for nautilus windows, so you were saved the job of manually checking through a list of files, with or without the filetype-indicator decals. Something swift, like type / (brings up the search dialog) enter the regexp jpg$ and the display is updated automatically.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: From Jon^D
[info]davyd
2006-02-07 12:59 am UTC (link)
You should check out the new searchable folders in Nautilus 2.13.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Hackyness for Hackers is OK.
(Anonymous)
2006-02-06 07:19 pm UTC (link)
.jpg on icons is a bit scary for regular users, but the people (of any nationality) who will actually see .h and .c files probably do want those extensions to be very prominent and are quite used to the Englishness of it.. That's the part that bothered you, and the one that should probably be reverted.

Murray

(Reply to this)


Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…