Version: 2.2.1 (using KDE KDE 3.1.1) Installed from: Debian testing/unstable Packages OS: Linux Plugins are a very nice way from the programming point of few to allow at the same time for modularization and extensibility. I think it is a very good thing, that Noatun uses plugins extensively. However, pure users are mostly not interrested in how the underlying project is interconnected or implemented. They often prefer an integrated solution, respectively, a task and problem oriented interface. I think that Noatun exposes too much of the underlying implementation. This can be seen of how all plugins are nicely grouped in the preferences - nice from the engineering point of view. However, this leads to a plugin-, instead of a task-oriented interface. Interface plugins, playlist plugins visualization plugins and other plugins are all grouped together in the preferences. However, all these plugins are not very much related with each other and can lead to confusion for a user which is not _used_ to the program. Therefore I propose a more task-oriented presentation of the underlying plugins architecture. Maybe a solution would be not to group all possible plugins together but allow for independent Interface, Playlist, Visualization etc categories. Also, I would not separate K-Joffel /Winamp Skins into an own category, as they is also part of the Interface. So why not put them there as well even though K-Jofol /Win skins are not plugins themelves. However, a user probably doesn't really grasp the difference between plugin and skin sections. So the Skins are more closely related to the different interface plugins and should be put into the same category. Also, the skin sections are dynamic and appear only if they their corresponding plugin is activated. This is also confusing. Futhermore, visualization plugins are special, because they are not really part of the main interface and may be changed or disabled more frequently, so why place them into the preferences, instead of putting them for direct access in the menu or the context menu of the main interface? Proposed Preferences menu: General Interfaces Playlist Other Plugins Both K-Jofol skins and Winskins sub-menu in the Interfaces category of the preferences. Layout of main menu or context menu: Open Quit Help -------- Equalizer Audio Effects Visualizations Actions Thanks! Beat
I will take a look at some of these IMHO very good hints and try to add some of them but due to my missing free time I'm not sure when it'll be done.
> Also, the skin sections are dynamic and appear only if they their corresponding plugin is >activated. This is also confusing. I don't think I can change this because the plugin has to be loaded to show the preferences part of it. Loading all plugins on startup and only showing the GUI the user selected is not really clever either because the Plugin system was invented to be flexible and allow saving resources (who wants winamp and kj
Please don't change anything before extensive discussion on kde-multimedia. Remember this is wishlist. IMO, this bug ignores the fact that noatun is *not* just an audio player. And must I explicitly mention that imitating MS style bloatware is out of question? OTOH, plugins are task oriented. I think the reporter is contradicting himself a little. That's exactly why there is such a thing as plugin: each plugin adds a different function to the program. The reporter writes: >Interface plugins, playlist plugins visualization plugins and other plugins are all >grouped together in the preferences. However, all these plugins are not very much >related with each other and can lead to confusion for a user which is not _used_ to the program. As you can see this is complete non-sense. All he's saying is "I'm not used to this interface so I want my winamp interface" If one wants better interfaces to choosing among visualizations or UIs or else that is doable without breaking plugin logic. There is no fundamental mistake about categorization of plugins or the way they are represented in the preferences.
> IMO, this bug ignores the fact that noatun is *not* just an audio player. And must I Well, this is true, you are right. Maybe there should an audio and a video interface? I mean if you are listening to an audio-file you will get another interface than when watching a movie. However, if you want just one interface that can do it all, watch movies from disk, DVDs and listeing to audio, then you can easly get a bloatware interface like the one of MS, see further below. > explicitly mention that imitating MS style bloatware is out of question? I didn't say that I like MS Mediaplayer. On the contrary. However, Noatun can be improved interface-vise, no? > OTOH, plugins are task oriented. I think the reporter is contradicting himself a little. > That's exactly why there is such a thing as plugin: each plugin adds a different function > to the program. I don't agree entirely. Plugins are used for _code_ extensibility. Of course they can add a certain functionality, however, so does a skin, which is no code, but just pixmaps. I'm not against plugins, on the contrary, however, I don't think that centralizing all plugins in the prefecens menu is intuitive and straight forward from the _user_ point of view. E.g. playlist plugins and visualization plugins really have nothing in common from the usage point of view. >>Interface plugins, playlist plugins visualization plugins and other plugins are all > >grouped together in the preferences. However, all these plugins are not very much > >related with each other and can lead to confusion for a user which is not _used_ to > >the program. > As you can see this is complete non-sense. > All he's saying is "I'm not used to this interface so I want my winamp interface" No, that's not what I meant. You can get used to almost any conditions. Look at people who grow up in war zones or people who live countries with dictatorships. Most get used to these extreme conditions and survive. Ok, I exaggerate here a bit of course :-). I mean you can get used to how to interact with Noatun, however, I don't think the interface feels natural or convenient when compared to other players. Of course there is always getting-used-to involved, but there are better and worse interface layouts. > If one wants better interfaces to choosing among visualizations or UIs or else that is > doable without breaking plugin logic. The aim - of course - would not be to break the underlying plugin approach, but to present it different to the user. > There is no fundamental mistake about > categorization of plugins or the way they are represented in the preferences. Here I don't agree with you. Don't think of how you implemented it, but ask users who have no clue about how to use a certain program and the learn from this. Micro$oft and Apple do interface studies, costs tons of money we don't have at disposition, so why not learn from them (the good parts, well, I would neither like an M$ Mediaplayer clone). Or what about putting online a survey and let the users vote from a list what they would like to see in a Mediaplayer? This post could maybe be hosted directly on the main page of KDE (http://www.kde.org). Cheers! Beat
Subject: Re: Noatun should be more task and not plugin-oriented On Saturday May 03, 2003 04:49, Beat Fasel wrote: > You can get used to almost any conditions. > Look at people who grow up in war zones or people who live countries > with dictatorships. Most get used to these extreme conditions and > survive. Ok, I exaggerate here a bit of course :-). I mean you can get > used to how to interact with Noatun, however, I don't think the > interface feels natural or convenient when compared to other players. Of > course there is always getting-used-to involved, but there are better > and worse interface layouts. Yes, there are better and wosre interfaces. The approach to UI taken by the default Noatun plugins is the superior route of attempting to follow KDE UI standards. This should lead to Noatun looking and acting like other KDE applications. That is the path to the greatest usability. If you don't like how Noatun looks, reconfigure your KDE. If you think Noatun looks inconsistent, stick to plugins that try to follow KDE UI standards.
please note that we do appreciate suggestions for concrete improvements!!
Subject: Re: Noatun should be more task and not plugin-oriented On Saturday May 03, 2003 05:14, Eray Ozkural wrote: > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. > > http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58044 > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From erayo@bilkent.edu.tr 2003-05-04 02:14 > ------- please note that we do appreciate suggestions for concrete > improvements!! Of course, and the give and take of debate is the way to find which improvements to use!
Eray Ozkural wrote: > please note that we do appreciate suggestions for concrete improvements!! Thanks! Neil Stevens wrote: > Of course, and the give and take of debate is the way to find which > improvements to use! Fine! > Yes, there are better and wosre interfaces. The approach to UI taken by > the default Noatun plugins is the superior route of attempting to follow > KDE UI standards. > > This should lead to Noatun looking and acting like > other KDE applications. That is the path to the greatest usability. This is generally true. However, mediaplayers are maybe an exception to this. It's interesting why it is like that, maybe because listening to music, watching films stimulates arts in people? Pun intended :-) And if people like it, why not? It's a matter of taste and people know what they are most comfortable with. Many might go with the default interface, but many would also like it different. More choice for the user and if presented coherently, the better, no? > If you don't like how Noatun looks, reconfigure your KDE. If you think Well, you have only limited possibities of how to influence the look via KDE. > Noatun looks inconsistent, stick to plugins that try to follow KDE UI > standards. I don't agree here, better allow for full skinnability or none. Currently, it feels like a half-way finished interface when using skins. Beat
Subject: Re: Noatun should be more task and not plugin-oriented Yust my 0.02 Cents... On Sunday 04 May 2003 02:32, Beat Fasel wrote: > Eray Ozkural wrote: > > This should lead to Noatun looking and acting like > > other KDE applications. That is the path to the greatest usability. > This is generally true. However, mediaplayers are maybe an exception to > this. It's interesting why it is like that, maybe because listening to > music, watching films stimulates arts in people? Pun intended This means a painting-programm doesn't need to follow the conventions, a writing-programm doesn't need to follow too, and my own KRec can be designed very special... Either every programm has a standardized interface (available) or you have to invent the wheel for every application and (as a user) learn to use the different wheels. > :-) And if people like it, why not? It's a matter of taste and people know > : what they are most > comfortable with. Many might go with the default interface, but many would > also like it different. More choice for the user and if presented > coherently, the better, no? Isn't that what the different "Interfaces"-Plugins are for??? > > If you don't like how Noatun looks, reconfigure your KDE. If you think > Well, you have only limited possibities of how to influence the look via > KDE. No, I can change my KDE from win to cde to kde look in about a minute... > > Noatun looks inconsistent, stick to plugins that try to follow KDE UI > > standards. > I don't agree here, better allow for full skinnability or none. Currently, > it feels like a half-way finished interface when using skins. Write a plugin which has the skinnability you want! Arnold
Arnold wrote: > This means a painting-programm doesn't need to follow the conventions, a > writing-programm doesn't need to follow too, and my own KRec can be designed > very special... > Either every programm has a standardized interface (available) or you have to > invent the wheel for every application and (as a user) learn to use the > different wheels. I agree with you, however, the world is not perfect. I mean it is a fact that almost every mediaplayer under the sun is skinable and people got used to it and like it. However, it should be noted that Noatun has already more than one skin of its own (Exellent + Milk-Chocolate). And why not, these different skins can provide different functionality (different complexity) and adapt better to the user's need. The question is, if the provided skins should well fit into KDE (like do Exellent + Milk-Chocolate) or be a bit more alien like Winamp and K-Jofol skins. I say, it's best like now, provide both options, so as to make everybody happy. Ok, why am I not completely happy then? Well, there are problems I encountered with Noatun reported in wishilist bug 58042: one interface at a time, 58026: Visualization plugins should be more accessible, Winamp/K-Jofol skins should be available not only for the main application but also for the playlist and the equalizer (wishlist bug 34380) and finally the plugin orientation instead of task orientation of Noatun from the user's perspective reported in wishlist bug 58044. Arnold wrote: >> also like it different. More choice for the user and if presented >> coherently, the better, no? > Isn't that what the different "Interfaces"-Plugins are for??? Exactly! However, the playlist and the equalizer are not skinable (winamp or k-jofol skins), that's the problem (see also further below). >> > If you don't like how Noatun looks, reconfigure your KDE. If you think > > Well, you have only limited possibities of how to influence the look via > > KDE. > No, I can change my KDE from win to cde to kde look in about a minute... Sure, but you cannot do e.g. button reording like is possible with skins. >> I don't agree here, better allow for full skinnability or none. Currently, > > it feels like a half-way finished interface when using skins. > > Write a plugin which has the skinnability you want! Ah, you missunderstood me. I'm perfectly happy with the Winamp skins available. What I proposed is the possibilty to have a skinable playlist and equalizer, thus a full XMMS/Winamp replacement. Personally I'm using Winamp skins (using XMMS), not just because I like their look, but mainly for two reasons: (1) Compactness: If you want to have the main application (Noatun), the Noatun playlist and the Noatun equalizer open at the same time, they cosume too much space (especilly the equalizer window being huge). This is different with Winamp skins. (2) Window interconnection: The default noatun, playlist and equalizer windows are not interconnected. If you would like to move noatun on the desktop to make space for another app, you have to move three windows therefore. Not very handy. With XMMS, you move one window (the equalizer and the playlist stick to the main window). However, I would love to use Notatun insead of XMMS! Better integration into the KDE environment, better look (AA fonts, XMMS being still a Gnome or gtk1 app) and supposedly better sound quality (due to using newer decoding libraries, I'm not sure about this however). Beat
Subject: Re: Noatun should be more task and not plugin-oriented On Sunday 04 May 2003 17:01, Beat Fasel wrote: > Arnold wrote: > >> also like it different. More choice for the user and if presented > >> coherently, the better, no? > > Isn't that what the different "Interfaces"-Plugins are for??? > Exactly! However, the playlist and the equalizer are not skinable (winamp > or k-jofol skins), that's the problem (see also further below). That has to do with one simple thing: noatun is modular, which means you can use whichever playlist you want (with its gui), you can use the EQ you want (you can add others from aRts within the effects-section), and so on... Perhaps you should write a playlist-plugin which uses winamp-skinning (with respect to the winamp-skin-settings) > >> > If you don't like how Noatun looks, reconfigure your KDE. If you think > > > Well, you have only limited possibities of how to influence the look > > > via KDE. > > No, I can change my KDE from win to cde to kde look in about a minute... > Sure, but you cannot do e.g. button reording like is possible with skins. What are toolbars and the customization of these for??? (all noatun-buttons are inside toolbars). In fact the "Configure Toolbars"-action is missing in noatun-excellent. Arnold
Subject: Re: Noatun should be more task and not plugin-oriented Moin, On Sunday May 4 2003 17:01, Beat Fasel wrote: > Ok, why am I not completely happy then? Well, there are problems I > encountered with Noatun reported in wishilist bug 58042: one interface at a > time This can of course be done but contradicts with another wishlist entry. Somebody wanted the systemtray-icon (named "young hickory" in noatun) to be an Interface-Plugin as well. That way you cannot have both a mainwindow and a systray icon anymore. What do you think now? I have no solution to this. > , 58026: Visualization plugins should be more accessible, I've created a patch and posted it to kde-multimedia mailinglist, no replies yet. > Winamp/K-Jofol skins should be available not only for the main application > but also for the playlist and the equalizer (wishlist bug 34380) and Somebody has to write a playlist plugin for that and you will never see one for KJ
Subject: Re: Noatun should be more task and not plugin-oriented On Sunday May 4 2003 00:32, sgehn@gmx.net wrote: > I don't think I can change this because the plugin has to be loaded to show > the preferences part of it. > > Loading all plugins on startup and only showing the GUI the user selected > is not really clever either because the Plugin system was invented to be > flexible and allow saving resources (who wants winamp and kj
> Somebody wanted the systemtray-icon (named "young hickory" in noatun) to be > an Interface-Plugin as well. That way you cannot have both a mainwindow and a > systray icon anymore. > What do you think now? I have no solution to this. Oups. I had a look at this bug report, well, sounds like a tempting idea for systems with low resources. When clicking on young hickory, you can make the main window disappear already. Well, I guess that the allocated memory resources are still used in the background, but at least CPU consumption should be down like this. Would it not be possible to get rid of the memory consuming resources while the main interface is minimized and reload the main interface if one clicks young hickory? Well, I don't know anything about the implementation, would be however unfortunate if because of this one would have to void the idea of having only one interface active at the time. But you know what, maybe one could allow for more than one interface active at a time (like is implemented now) but only for young hickory-style interfaces as for most people people, this kind of dualism is probably not disturbing. However, a full-blown winamp and a kjofol window avtive at the same time I find disturbing. What do you think? Beat
>> , 58026: Visualization plugins should be more accessible, > > I've created a patch and posted it to kde-multimedia mailinglist, no replies > yet. Great! Thanks a lot! Beat
The patch is in CVS
> The patch is in CVS Well, I don't have a cvs-version of KDE running, so I cannot see how your patch works, but thanks a lot for your work, Stefan! Cheers! Beat
As of KDE 3.2.2, Noatun is till plugin-oriented. Visualizations are now accessible more directly when using e.g. the winsamp skin, however, the perferences window is still pluging-oriented. Why not make the different plugins more accessible? Proposed tree menu: General Interfaces Playlist Visualizations Tagging where the Interface category would also incooperate the Winskin/K-Joffol etc sections. Cheers, Beat
I planned to redesign the preferences dialog and make pref-widgets a kcm. Unfortunately I don't have the time to do that before KDE 3.3.
Given that Noatun is now defunct, this bug can be set to wontfix I guess.