On 28 August 2011 23:22, Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> Equally, why are the settings given such high priority in the main
>> menu? Sure they are useful, but after the initial player setup how
>> many settings does one need access to? and given how poor the setting
>> layout is it is likely regularly used configs are saved in .cfg anyway
>> (and put on the quickscreen).
> I don't really think your speculation on what the most likely way
> users use the settings is means much. The honest truth is, we don't
> know. People have asked for a quickscreen that can hold more settings,
> meaning that there's at least 5 settings they want to change
> regularly. There are many people who didn't even know you could save
> custom .cfg files. We have no real way of knowing how the typical user
> experiences Rockbox. Even a poll would give a decidedly skewed result.
> We should be making our decisions based on something else. Perhaps
> "what will help a new user most easily find what they need." I'm not
> saying that explicitly, but rather, forward-looking ideas rather than
> "I think this is how users already use our software" guesses.
That is all a failure of the manual then, that's not to say the menus
aren't to blame also (we agree the settings menus suck), but not
understanding config files is a pretty fundamental failure of the
>> I think it makes sense to group items based on what they give the
>> user. Files and Database are "Find music to play" and should be
>> grouped. WPS, radio, recording are "listen to music" and should be
>> grouped. System and Plugins are "misc" and should be grouped. Playlist
>> catalog and bookmarks are "find previously saved playlists" and should
>> be grouped.
> I don't see how grouping is beneficial. Is the idea that they need to
> be in groups to make it easier for users to spot them? Are users even
> going to recognize that "playlist catalog" and "bookmarks" are the
> same group? I certainly don't see bookmarks as a playlisting function,
> at least. "Recording" isn't related to listening to music at all, and
> is arguably the exact opposite. The groups seem a little arbitrary in
> the first place, but I don't see a reason "grouping" is the approach
> we should take with this list.
Well of course the list is entirely arbitrary. My suggestion was to
try to add some logic to it. I can't be the only one to have an
opinion on this, so why dont people respond with their ideas?
> To me, rather, two things should be taken into account. What's visible
> on the screen on our smallest screen targets with the default theme,
> and what individual items are most likely to be sought. The screen
> visibility seems important because when a user first turns on our
> player, especially during the period they're unfamiliar, they're going
> to want to glance at the screen and see useful options. Not remember
> whether they need to go up or down to get to the ones they want. I
> think it's convenient for the most used options to be the least
> presses away, but "visibility on boot" is a little more important.
Indeed that should be a consideration but not *the* major one.
> That being said, the below list isn't bad. On the Clip+ though, the
> menu is six items I believe. This means "Recording, FM and System" are
> visible on boot where Bookmarks and Playlist Catalogue are not. I'd
> actually recommend moving FM below WPS, and squeezing those two
> between FM and Recording. I don't mean to belittle the value of
> recording, as such, but many of these devices don't even have the
> feature, and even those that do are mostly sold as music players.
> Features like Bookmarks and Playlists should be made more
> visible/accessible. Someone who's bought a unit primarily for
> recording purposes probably checked that Rockbox can still record
> before installing it, and will scroll down to look for it..
Bookmarks is hidden by default.
Now the real question is, why are we so bone-headedly against
customisable (main)menu layouts? I personally never use the database,
recording or fm so why must they have priority in my list? I know for
sure others use the database primarily and see the files as being
arrogantly in the wrong place.
Additionally, why are we so against changing the quickscreen to be a
list for those that want it like that?
That said, a patch to even just allow simple reordering of the main
menu isnt going to be trivial so we should figure out a better layout,
or admit we have no clue and leave it as it - which still leaves us
with the question of system/settings merging.
>> The order I'd like to see is then:
>> Playlist Catalogue
Received on 2011-08-28