Gnome-app-install new-look test-version ready
Matthew Paul Thomas
mpt at canonical.com
Wed Feb 1 02:37:34 GMT 2006
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 1 Feb, 2006, at 6:14 AM, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> Am Montag, den 30.01.2006, 15:45 +1300 schrieb Matthew Paul Thomas:
>> 1. The checkboxes are in the wrong place: they're under the category
>> list, but the list they control is the applications list.
>> 2. The window is lopsided: the top of the category list is above the
>> top of the applications list, and the bottom of the category list
>> is above the bottom of the application description. One of these
>> would be okay, but both looks bad.
>> These two can be fixed by putting the checkboxes in a horizontal row
>> under the search field.
>> 3. If you don't know what category a program is in, you have to
>> search them separately (at least, it looks like you do).
>> This can be fixed by adding an "All Categories" item to the beginning
>> of the categories list.
>> (Usual disclaimer: I think g-a-i should be replaced by an item in the
>> View menu of Synaptic or its successor.)
> yes, you are right: the dialog still looks a little bit unbalanced. :)
> To fix this I would like to remove the bold weight from the categories
> and to use a bold font for the application names. This would increase
> the visual attraction of the applications.
Removing the bold weight from the categories looks good. But it's
generally bad typography to vary weight and size at the same time, so I
disagree with making the application names both bolder *and* larger
than their short descriptions.
> The left pane could be a general modifier for the app list if we move
> the search box above the categories. The search should also include
> the categories, since it does not make any sense to me to show empty
> categories. Searching e.g. for "editor" would only display "all",
> "accessoirs" (gedit) and "office" (abiword, oo.o).
Now the search field is being as misleading as the checkboxes: it looks
like it's going to filter the list of categories, when it's really
filtering the list of applications. So this is a step backwards, I
> It is no good idea to move the checkboxes to the right pane since they
> would consume a lot of the space there
Not if they were a horizontal row, as I suggested.
> - and space is rar on the right pane.
> Placing all modifiers to the left pane would also allow the checkboxes
> to stay on their former placement.
I don't know what you mean by that, sorry.
> In the long term I would favor a separation of the gai and synaptic
> interface. They both address different needs and user groups.
85% of people who use Microsoft Excel use it just to make lists. That
doesn't mean Excel shouldn't include all the formulas and data
manipulation functions that it does. Nor does it mean that all those
people should be using a simpler spreadsheet most of the time,
occasionally being confronted with error messages of the form "<x>
can't do this, use Excel instead". As long as g-a-i is putting up
alerts of the form "I don't know how to do this, use Synaptic instead",
there's something wrong.
> Synaptic introduces the user to the huge terminology of package
That's a design bug in Synaptic. :-)
Matthew Paul Thomas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the ubuntu-desktop