Bug 153556 - Add option for tree hierarchy to System Settings
Summary: Add option for tree hierarchy to System Settings
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: systemsettings
Classification: Applications
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: 3.96.2
Platform: Compiled Sources Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Unassigned bugs mailing-list
URL:
Keywords:
: 156959 187578 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-12-06 13:40 UTC by Alex Dănilă
Modified: 2009-04-30 09:36 UTC (History)
18 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Alex Dănilă 2007-12-06 13:40:31 UTC
Version:           3.96.2 (using KDE Devel)
Installed from:    Compiled sources
OS:                Linux

1. The systemsettings has a new way of navigating between the settings, which I find tiresome. You have to click the back button a lot of times and don't have overview.
I vote for the tree view like in kcontrol, which gives the overview of where you are, and is a lot smarter.

2. Systemsettings does not have a menu, from where to call the manual, to view the version and things like that.
Comment 1 Sterling Christensen 2007-12-14 10:14:00 UTC
*** This bug has been confirmed by popular vote. ***
Comment 2 Grósz Dániel 2008-02-25 17:05:04 UTC
Could you please add an (optional) tree view of the modules as a sidebar?
Comment 3 marco cappoli 2008-02-26 10:12:55 UTC
On my idea the old kcontrol side bar work better, you have all the settings
at 1-2 mouse click of distance... after 1 months of kde4 use the old
behavior is a dream for me.

On 25 Feb 2008 16:05:10 -0000, Gr
Comment 4 Maciej Pilichowski 2008-06-08 10:13:19 UTC
Plus icon view. In general -- please respect what the users are used to, KDE is with us not since the last week.
Comment 5 J.O. Aho 2008-06-08 14:59:22 UTC
It feels a bit that the devels has made a repeat of what happen when Gnome2 developers just ignore what the users wished for and made something that isn't as good as Gnome was.
Comment 6 Ivan Wong 2008-06-09 08:12:31 UTC
4.1 beta is out and still I have to switch back kde3 after a 10 minutes tryout.
I have the feeling that I have to stick with 3.5.9 forever.
Comment 7 Alan Braslau 2008-06-09 12:17:52 UTC
Curious that one decides to give-up on kde4 after a 10 minute tryout (indeed, I spent very little time exploring 4.0, but 4.1 beta 1 has come a long way).

The new system settings is, unfortunately, very Mac OSX-like, and the present wishlist request is indeed confirmed by popular vote. But one should not really be spending too much time playing-around with system settings and rather concentrate on using the desktop productively!
Comment 8 Maciej Pilichowski 2008-06-09 13:52:07 UTC
System settings is part of desktop experience and I intend to spend some time to really polish my settings this time (if KDE4 SS will give my more freedom).

And just in case:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/09/11.html
the third paragraph.
Comment 9 Mike Bird 2008-06-11 05:46:13 UTC
Please post a link to those oft-mentioned usability studies.  I've used KDE for ten years and I want to know precisely who is responsible for deliberately making Kicker, Konqueror, and KControl so annoying.
Comment 10 Peter Paulsen 2008-07-30 12:30:48 UTC
How about changing the title of this report to something more suitable like "optional classic tree view instead of back button in systemsettings"? Bug 156959 seems to be a duplicate.
Comment 11 Alex Dănilă 2008-07-30 19:11:41 UTC
Agree, please change the title. 
It is like that because I was surprised when I first compiled KDE 4 and I just thought it is a quick and dirty method to give the users a menu, and it just needed to be emphasized.
Comment 12 Jacob 2008-08-22 10:45:52 UTC
It's true. systemsettings is tedious. Creating a false appearance of minimalism often results in enhanced complication and complexity, as exampled by either GNOME or Debian. I think that to take a page from the M$ book and make the current behaviour default with an option to convert to the more useful traditional functionality would be desirable.
Comment 13 Stefan Endrullis 2008-08-30 15:39:58 UTC
I absolutely agree. The navigation in systemsettings is a real regression compared to kcontrol.

For kids who cannot read it might be an improvement when they can orientate themselves by such big icons. But for people who can read it's only a visual overhead and it's not the most efficient way to find one category in a grid of 17 categories by searching for the description below the icons. IMO the navigation of kcontrol was already perfect (except some category classifications).

BTW I would also prefer a tree in KStart instead of the KDE4 version of KStart. These new navigation structures are the reason why I'm still not using KDE4.
Comment 14 Grósz Dániel 2008-08-30 15:53:09 UTC
What do you mean by KStart? On my system kstart is a command line utility to start applications with special window properties.
Comment 15 Stefan Endrullis 2008-08-30 15:56:35 UTC
Sorry, I meant KMenu, the popup menu in the task bar to start applications.
Comment 16 Grósz Dániel 2008-08-30 16:00:47 UTC
You can switch to the traditional menu with 2 clicks.
Comment 17 Stefan Endrullis 2008-08-30 16:22:41 UTC
Oh, you're right. Thanks!
Comment 18 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-10-08 18:04:40 UTC
Seems that Kubuntu's systemsettings is here to stay and there's not much we can do about it, not even KDE is immune from politics.
But KControl is in trunk in rev705755, a half-ported KControl3 for KDE4.
I wouldn't mind having KControl at least in extragear, is somebody already working on something like that?
Comment 19 Stefan Endrullis 2008-10-10 09:43:17 UTC
That would be very good news, but I could not verify them.
I found the directory /trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/kcontrol/, but this dir seams to contain only KControl modules (KCMs). :(
Can you post a link to your source, Teo?
Comment 20 Stefan Endrullis 2008-10-10 09:54:36 UTC
In terms of usability I found a nice poll on http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=423648 with the following question:
"Should KControl replace System Settings in Gutsy?"

Result:
Yes            - 65.75%
No             - 30.14%
Other(Discuss) - 4.11%

Thus 65% prefer kcontrol over system settings. Even if the poll is a bit old, it's an interesting result.

IMO usability issues should not be theoretical concepts but orientate at user wishes.
Comment 21 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-10-10 11:30:33 UTC
This is all I have found, and I don't know what is it exactly because I don't know the code http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdebase/runtime/kcontrol/kcontrol/?pathrev=705775 .
It obviously won't compile with current trunk, there's also deprecated stuff in CMakeLists that I don't know enough about to fix.
Maybe it would be easier to start from scratch.
Comment 22 Stefan Endrullis 2008-10-10 11:45:04 UTC
Thanks for the link. It's a pity that this project / svn directory has been removed later.
Comment 23 J.O. Aho 2008-10-10 14:38:01 UTC
Maybe we should file a bug report about the missing files.

Anyone here who has a clue how many man days would be required to get KControl to a working stage for the KDE4? 

I have to say I'm quite disappointed of KDE4, it's has really nothing new, just copied stuff from other desktop environments and did the same bad decision as Gnome2 did with Havoc as the captain. 

Comment 24 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-10-10 15:11:59 UTC
It's not a bug so there's nothing to report besides this wishlist item. Reporting it as a regression would be a waste of time and nothing more than trolling and flaming because many of the Kubuntu guys, although not that strong in numbers, are very loud about what THEY perceive as usability. It's a conscious political decision to remove KControl in favor of systemsettings and it's done, I don't think that any new KControl for KDE4 would go upstream and replace systemsettings any time soon.
Fortunately for us though, this is free software so nobody stops you from forking systemsettings, resuming work on KControl3->4 or rewriting KControl for KDE4.
I don't really have a clue as to how much work would it take to fix the existing half ported KControl, as I've said I've failed miserably because I don't know much about cmake, and there's a lot of deprecated cmake stuff to fix there, and that's just the start.
Comment 25 Grósz Dániel 2008-10-10 15:18:23 UTC
IIRC it was said that KControl wasn't ported to KDE 4 because problems occured. If that is the case, probably the easiest solution is to add a tree view sidebar to Systemsettings to get back the old way of navigation. It doesn't seem to be difficult. Are there other things besides the tree navigation that KControl has and you miss from Systemsettings?
Comment 26 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-10-10 15:46:50 UTC
The tree view and a main menu are needed, as well as more kcm's, but would all that be allowed in upstream systemsettings?
Comment 27 Stefan Endrullis 2008-10-10 16:44:29 UTC
Already in 2004 a draw about the "new kcontrol" was posted on http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php/show.php?content=10949

Who'd have thought that someone will come and implement it? :D
Comment 28 Alec Moskvin 2008-10-10 17:22:44 UTC
I think the best (and probably the least difficult) thing that could be done is to add a tree view to the current SystemSettings, possibly with a button to show/hide it. That way, the navigation will be a lot easier, and there won't be two control centers (which would be pretty silly).

I doubt that it would be rejected if somebody actually wrote that, since the current implementation does not have any advantages over KControl other than looking like Apple's.
Comment 29 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-10-10 17:34:06 UTC
It's not just a matter of hacking in a tree view, doing that could possibly really be a usability nightmare, with the same modules accessible all over the place, so if a tree view goes into systemsettings I think it would require a major app-wide switching button between classic and systemsettings interface.
Comment 30 Grósz Dániel 2008-10-10 17:43:57 UTC
So in what matter would a "major app-wide switching" differ from a button for hiding/showing the tree view? Do you mean that in KControl-like mode only the modules in a specific category should be shown if a category is selected in the tree view?
Comment 31 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-10-10 17:50:28 UTC
I think that in tree view mode there's no reason not to show more modules than those available though systemsettings.
Also, in treeview mode it would be a good idea to hide systemsettings' grid of buttons all together, it's of no use when a more powerful interface auch as the tree view is active.
And a main menu would be nice to have too.
Comment 32 Alec Moskvin 2008-10-10 17:54:39 UTC
I'm thinking of just adding a tree view on the left side of SystemSettings window, and a button to show/hide it. This would be actually be just like KControl, except that instead of the links to modules as in KControl, it would be current icon interface. The only thing missing would be the little information box telling you your name/OS/arch/KDE version, but I doubt anyone would really miss it. And, it wouldn't really change the "Usability" since the tree could be disabled by default.

I wish I could do that, but I don't have much experience with Qt or much free time :(
Comment 33 Martin Kunev 2008-11-28 16:09:48 UTC
I think the KDE4's systemsettings tools definitely is worse than the KDE3's kcontrol. The tree view was wonderful. I don't know why the developers chose to make the new tool to look like the tools from the other desktop environments while the tree view was much better. This regression is one of the reasons why I am still using KDE3. I switched to KDE 4.1 but few days after that I switched back to KDE 3.5.
Comment 34 Stefan Endrullis 2008-11-28 16:47:45 UTC
@Martin Kunev
I agree. I'm also still using KDE 3.5 because of such "obstacle" in KDE 4. Why should we switch when there are more disadvantages than advantages.
Comment 35 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-11-28 21:48:37 UTC
I'm using KDE4 trunk for Amarok development and for day to day use but I still see this as a major regression. I think I already wrote a few posts ago that probably this change to System Settings isn't only the developers' fault but is probably due to politics and questionable usability policies by KDE's and/or Kubuntu's usability experts or "experts".
To overquote everyone's favorite asshole, "This ‘users are idiots, and are confused by functionality’ mentality [of Gnome] is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it."
Anyway, I would be willing to get my hands dirty on this code but I don't know if I'm capable and if I have the time for it considering my current work on Amarok so I would need assistance.
Also it would be frustrating to do a great and useful piece of software such as KControl for KDE4 with treeview or maybe a patchset for System Settings to implement this, only to find it not accepted upstream for utterly retarded political or "usability" reasons.
Comment 36 J.O. Aho 2008-11-28 22:15:20 UTC
I have a feeling that the usability "studies" that are used as arguments to why do things in one or another way would be so much better than what people are already used to use, are just pseudoscience in the same way as falung gong claims that those who follow the rituals and deny medical health care are less sick than others.

The best would if we got a democracy where the majority of the users would choose how things should be and the developers would implement the wishes of the masses instead of forcing the masses to use something that only the developer likes.
Comment 37 Teo Mrnjavac 2008-11-28 22:21:25 UTC
Aho: you can't force unpaid free software developers to code what you want even if you are part of a majority.
For those developers who value the users' opinion, voting this bug up should be a good enough reason to at least consider some changes.
Comment 38 Grósz Dániel 2008-11-28 22:23:56 UTC
Unfortunately those who vote in such a poll are nt the same as the end users. But it is enough in many cases if developers decide and not usability "experts".
Comment 39 Alan Braslau 2008-11-29 01:48:40 UTC
Gee wiz. If we liked the new system settings application, then we would all be using the Mac. Or else we could always use that other (and most popular) so-called operating system.

I can live with it though, as I try to spend more time working with my system rather than playing with system settings. But each time that I DO have to change something, I am reminded what an awful regression this "new" scheme presents.
Comment 40 Roman Fietze 2008-12-24 14:19:38 UTC
Just adding myself to CC list.

I second the statements above saying the old tree view was much easier to use than the new Mac like style. Esp. when you are used to read instead of watching comic strips, and if you are going to walk through all setting to get an overview of what's there. With the tree view you just advance from page to page, with the new style you always have to remember where you had been. I already disliked that on the Mac, why should I like it with KDE, esp. because KDE is supposed to be better than OS X.
Comment 41 FiNeX 2008-12-31 15:05:32 UTC
*** Bug 156959 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 42 Adrian Dziubek 2009-01-14 00:33:09 UTC
I like the "because KDE is supposed to be better than OS X" from the last comment. I didn't have problems using new settings, but after reading this I realized that I don't use it. Whenever confronted with big icons, I run for search box. 

Maybe the kids out there, didn't ever had to use a dictionary, but for me an alphabetical order is very helpful. I never choose big icons over detailed views (Konqueror/Dolphin/Amarok's playlist... many other).

As I'm familiar with KDE, it's no problem to me, I know what to search for. A new user doesn't. I know the tree view is harder to design than tagging. You have to make fine decisions like: should the "Keyboard layout" go to "Keyboard and mouse" or "Regional and accessibility", but it has the big advantage of being explore-able and showing a bigger picture, reasoning behind order.

So although I see that it is justified for Kubuntu alike distributions to make it as easy to switch from other operating systems, this should not lead to accepting inferior solutions, but rather copying things that are better.

Concluding, I think the best solution is default tree view with optional big icons. I think it is superior from each of the three perspectives: distributions, advanced users and new users. And though the last may vote otherwise (considering past experience), it is the most important for them to have a tree view there.
Comment 43 tekwyzrd 2009-03-03 04:40:02 UTC
I can't remember where I read it but recently I read comments from a former gnome dev now involved in kde who switched to kde after realizing the "potential of kde". I suspect there are a large number of former gnome devs involved in kde now, and it's becoming obvious they're converting kde, making it the gnome they've always dreamed of.

The devs have turned their backs on experienced kde users, and are more concerned with meeting the demands of kubuntu and making kde gnome user friendly.

I had high hopes for kde4. I've abandoned these hopes and now I'm hoping I can find something suitable to replace kde 3.5 before it's killed off.
Comment 44 chapinjeff 2009-03-03 16:10:03 UTC
I'm in the same boat. I have been using fedora 8 for a long time, and they recently EOL'd it -- forcing an upgrade in the OS to get new packages, and security updates. That's normally fine, but now I am stuck with the choice of outdated, insecure packages/manually updating software (what is this? windows?) or 'upgrading' to a broken KDE, missing boatloads of features I use on a regular basis, re-learning the UI for no good reason, and having to deal with frequent crashes of the applications they are replacing stable things with.

The kicker? Half the regression bugs I report are closed and called feature requests, simply because some person on bugzilla has no idea what regression bugs are.
Comment 45 Maciej Pilichowski 2009-03-03 16:18:58 UTC
I completely agree with your feelings because I am in the same situation (well, bit better, opensuse has KDE3 included) BUT...

This is KDE bugzilla not the KDE blog -- by posting your personal feelings here about this or that you don't make any progress towards better KDE, quite contrary, developers have to spend more time reading all those comments, instead of coding. So would you like developers read more or code more? (rhetorical question).

Support wishes by voting, adding yourself to CC or discussing on technical matters. Thank you in advance for understanding.
Comment 46 Stefan Endrullis 2009-03-03 17:38:34 UTC
I agree with both of you.

> So would you like developers read more or code more?
If they code into the wrong direction I wish they would read more. Therefore critical comments should also be posted here.

BTW, good news for Ubuntu users which want to stay with KDE3. You can even upgrade to Intrepid and use KDE3, see
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=963695
Comment 47 chapinjeff 2009-03-03 17:43:28 UTC
Not to continue off topic, but voting and adding to the CC list doesn't really explain to the developers exactly why we think this is such a horrid design decision, but discussing it does. The developers would be much better off reading these comments and thinking about why users are voting '20' on poor decisions like this rather than going off half-cocked and coding some monstrosity. 

If they read, maybe 4.5 might be half as good as 3.5. If not, we can continue spiraling down into self destruction, horrible UI, and repeating mistakes every major version.
Comment 48 Thomas Weissel 2009-03-03 17:55:00 UTC
hehe.. i think i votet 20 because i just begin to understand this system here and i am not used to it.. what would be an appropriate vote if you find something important?

i think systemsettings lacks of overview... in win7 you have way too much possibilities to navigate and i dont like it but only one way.. back or forward and no real overview or indication where your are right now is too little.. i like the icon view but why not build it like dolphin.. an optional treeview.. and optional view modes..
Comment 49 Aldoo 2009-03-03 18:23:57 UTC
This suggestion about Dolphin makes sense.
I know Windows is not really a model of UI, but for ages you've had the possibility to browse the control panel with the explorer.
So why not a kio_systemsettings?
(and of course clicking a "file" in that kio would open the systemsettings kpart in Dolphin's current window)

PS: about KDE4, whereas I don't like some UI decisions like this systemsettings tool, I enjoy the overall feeling, as it is still a lot more configurable than GNOME! Almost as much as KDE3.5, actually (and this is only 4.2), and a lot of shortcomings of 3.5 that drove me nuts have also been fixed in 4.2.
Going back to KDE3 is now unthinkable for me. KDE3 is now an old piece of software which served well in its time, but that's over.
Comment 50 Alec Moskvin 2009-03-03 18:31:43 UTC
> So why not a kio_systemsettings?

Try "settings:/" ;)
Comment 51 chapinjeff 2009-03-03 19:33:36 UTC
Re: Comment 49

Configurability is not everything. I can deal with the reduction of options, no matter how asinine or poorly thought out they are, and I can deal with having to jump through extra hoops to configure the options that do exist (moving widgits on the panel, anyone?) as long as I can either see that the feature is not there, or have to do it just once. 

When I have to look up how to make some no-longer intuitive change to find out if it is even possible (like fixing the damn desktop default) we have a problem, and when when software crashes and failure to save settings require me to re-do the configuration multiple times a day, we have a huge problem.

I would *love* to see stability, as well as fix all the regression bugs. KDE4 has potential, but right now, it is more buggy than vista on release day.
Comment 52 Alan Braslau 2009-03-04 09:39:55 UTC
(In reply to comment #50)
> > So why not a kio_systemsettings?
> 
> Try "settings:/" ;)

I just added "dolphin settings:/" using the Menu Editor! Of course, one can also use konqueror.
The resolution of this bug report might be as simple as adding such an entry at the appropriate place in the default menu tree...

(I still very much dislike the "systemsettings" application, but I now learn that I have an easy alternative. Regarding KDE4, it has matured quite nicely and my installation is now pretty stable. We should focus on filing bug reports that will help to make it better, and I agree that regression bugs are indeed bugs. May I suggest to the developers that it could be useful to establish a concise list in a very visible place, say http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.2/index.php, of the major features (regressions) that are currently being addressed but not yet resolved, although I am myself not aware of too many reasons for one to wish to stay with KDE3 any more. Indeed, just yesterday I logged into a machine under KDE3 and was struck with the realization as to what point I have become accustomed to KDE4!)
Comment 53 Aldoo 2009-03-04 10:50:14 UTC
Oh thank you for reminding me this kio existed.
Now, there are still 2 missing things if we "replace" systemsettings by dolphin:
1 - clicking a settings icon will open a window (is there no kpart for this?)
2 - the folders tab will only show settings (sub)categories and not every settings icon (this is consistant with the way dolphin behaves with other filesystems, but not as good as what we used to have with kcontrol)

But yes, unmistakenly we do have a nice alternative to systemsettings (maybe my kubuntu days are finally over?... I mean I am using OpenSuse, this should have been a given!)
Comment 54 Pino Toscano 2009-03-19 10:52:44 UTC
*** Bug 187578 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 55 oneforall 2009-04-06 05:20:27 UTC
The fact is so far I see what it should be here. People are asking for it to be a CHOICE not replacement . I hate this thing called progress that is slow,annoying and a long scenic route how is that better? I love the pretty look of system setting but I will never get used to using something that irritates me from the beginning. Its way to slow as much as the turtle menu(new menu from K) they brought the classic back and it is much simpler and quicker to get a round it . The tree(overview,index) what ever you tech name it I don't care as long as you get the point. So far it is obvious with all the reason and people that are asking for it to be a CHOICE we are losing out :(
So far as much as I wanted to make my main system kde4 I can't move over to it . konsole has way to much to be ported,Home.desktop doesn't work and its a pain trying to find out why.It just refuses to show in either menu.Plus not everything is in konq yet and its 4.2.68.svn945504
anyway I feel like there is no hope of seeing some of these chioces so far .
Comment 56 Dotan Cohen 2009-04-25 12:15:52 UTC
I am changing the title of the bug to reflect the feature request in question.
Comment 57 tekwyzrd 2009-04-25 17:42:51 UTC
The matter has been addressed and as I understand it kcontrol4, which offers the choice of icon or tree view, is planned for release when KDE 4.3 is released. Though it still has a few rough points it does work well on KDE 4.2.2. Info at the KDE community forum:
http://forum.kde.org/call-for-testing-kcontrol-for-kde-4-t-38819-3.html
Comment 58 Grósz Dániel 2009-04-25 19:48:58 UTC
What are the plans (if there are) about the presentation of the two control centers in 4.3 if the KControl port is included? Will Systemsettings be dropped, or both of them would be installed and acessible from menus by default (confusing users) or one of them will be only optional?
Comment 59 Alec Moskvin 2009-04-25 19:58:34 UTC
KControl4 is exactly like SystemSettings by default except for a configuration button that allows you to switch to the "Classic Tree View" mode.
Comment 60 Ben Cooksley 2009-04-30 09:36:21 UTC
The tree menu option has been added in KDE 4.3