Version: 3.4.0 (using KDE 3.4.0, Debian Package 4:3.4.0-0pre4 (3.1)) Compiler: gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-12) OS: Linux (i686) release 2.6.11-1-k7 I am an advanced linux user, but my sister is just a beginner. I discovered that she is afraid of application(Konqueror) configuration,because it is too advanced for her and she is overwhelmed. I found the solution in xine-ui setup : "Configuration experience level" with the following levels: -beginner -advanced -expert -Master each level shows more and more configuration options(options not shown are set o default;Master shows ALL options possible). This should be implemented using radio buttons(see the picture attached). This idea can(should) be implemented in all configuration tools(like Control Center).
Created attachment 11194 [details] configuration experience radio buttons on Konqueror Config Dialog
I'm a big fan of this approach and I hope in KDE4 we take this on a more global level. This "radio button" could be something that applies to all KDE apps, so that we don't hide settings the way some people are on a (misguided) crusade to do, but we do tuck them away for users who don't want to see them!
*** This bug has been confirmed by popular vote. ***
This is a very good idea... it should be implemented!
I like the idea of a simple configuration for beginners and a powerfull one for experts. However, four radio-buttons make the whole thing even more complex. Two levels should be enough. Here is my Proposal: When the config-dlg. ist first shown, it's in simple-mode. In the bottom-line you've got the buttons: [help] [defaults] [expert-mode] <-> [ok] [apply] [cancel] When the user clicks the expert-mode button, all options become visible and the caption of this button changes to "simple mode". In simple-mode only the basic options are visible, the rest is default, while in expert-mode everything is accessable. that's it. This mode-switcher could become part of the configure-template dialog in KDElibs. All the developer needs to do it to set the flag in the construktor that this button is shown and then prefix the complex options with "if (expertMode())"
2 level can be enough only for apps with few config options, but for bigger apps(like konqueror) there are many,many options(some options are not in the config dialog : http://wiki.kde.org/tiki-index.php?page=Secret+Config+Settings ), so more levels are needed. with more levels your if statement will become a switch statement: namespace Levels { enum Level{Beginner=0;Advanced,Expert,Master}; } switch (ConfigLevel()) { case Levels::Beginner : ...; break case Levels::Advanced : ...; break ... //default:... } We should provide the app developer the option to choose what level should he use in the configure-template dialog depending on the complexity of the app.
and instead of radio button -combobox may be use or -a button [More Complex] that increases the level one by one My option goes for radio buttons(faster to change the level), but the effect is the same for all.
this is a great feature! why didnt someone think of this before?
"We should provide the app developer the option to choose what level should he use" I meant that a developer should be able to choose how MANY levels his config dialog will have
re to demian biscocho : Usually KDE user are Advanced(only few can be called Masters ;) ) so they need most options on screen.. But new users with less interest in configuration start to use kde(like my sister) : the best way to help them learn is to present them step by step learning(not showing them from the beginning how the world outside the matrix looks like). The developers should take care when selecting the defaults because many beginners will actually use them
On Wednesday 25 May 2005 18:06, demian biscocho wrote: > ------- this is a great feature! why didnt someone think of this before? It's been proposed on the lists many times, but I recall it being considered "bad" by "usability people".
First of all, linking to a bug from the outside and saying "Vote for this bug!!!!!!111one" is called vote skewing and causes the votes to be disregarded entirely by the developers. Secondly, I'll just copy/paste this from the kde-usability mailing list since gong over it again would be useless: Re: User Profiles From: Lauri Watts <snip@kde.org> (KDE) To: Ernst Johansen <snip@snip.ch>, kde-usability@kde.org Date: 2005-05-13 19:25 On Friday 13 May 2005 20.22, you wrote: > Hello, Hi Ernst, It's been discussed, and dismissed, many (many!) times before on this and other lists. I wrote this really long email about why user levels don't work, but then I realised I was just rehashing what's been said before, so instead here's a couple of links: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=101408630928215&w=2 http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=99616536430498&w= (Thanks Aaron) Regards, -- Lauri Watts KDE Documentation: http://docs.kde.org KDE on FreeBSD: http://freebsd.kde.org
We [KDE developers] definitely don't all agree about this. Big surprise... I just said that earlier anyway.
While I don't agree with having a "level" sort of gage in where a certain "level" would enable the display of certain options. I would say that less options or options that where presented differently would be good. An example of this I'd have to say would be in the IBM ISeries. here they have 2 different levels in which each screen has 2 different displays depending on the level (or mode), in which things where presented differently in order to make them a bit more friendly to people who are not computer savvy. The argument of "what options would stay in each level" I'd have to say is the perfect argument why you _don't_ want to use that approach. I personally would rather like to stay away from this however and just work on getting the configurations dialogs easy to work with without the use of any level or mode.
> I personally would rather like to stay away from this however and just work > on getting the configurations dialogs easy to work with without the use of > any level or mode. This is an argument I'm not going to get involved in beyond saying that there is no such thing as a one-size fits all, and I don't think we can even find something close to an 80-20 rule. It's just plain BS that we can reduce to a few small configuration items and that will be fine for everyone. In fact, reducing the KDE source tree to only basic options will alienate the people who make it in the first place (such as me). I don't care of some distributor who makes binaries strips out options (beyond purposely crippling an app and then sending bug reports our way - which has happened), but destroying real work on code that is used by real people is just a load of garbage and I really won't stand for it. That's my $0.02 and why I support at least some sort of configuration level system as a possible compromise on what is displayed for configuration options to the user.</allIHaveToSay>
Kaffeine already does this... so why not generalize to any application (or at least the most complex, like konqueror) ? BTW, votes can't be disregarded : people voting here don't do it because they were told to. They really "vote" for this feature (which means they have an account, they click on the various links to get here and they give away their 20 vote points). The first link in #12 is irrelevant because this is not what is discussed here : we're talking about a per-application setting.
First I never said lets just strip options out. I did however say that if we place options in better locations and also word them better. new users and old can have all the functionality as before and it wouldn't be in a foreign language to a new user.
Because I can't edit the comment #0 I will keep the ideas and revisions at http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=24616 so more users see them and bring new ideas
I think perhaps instead of a radio button or combobox, instead we should just have a small little button in one of the buttom corners, simply labeled "Advanced." This way, the beginners will probably never notice it, or if they do, they'll be able to easily switch back to "Basic" or "Simple" or whatever with a more obvious button in the same position as the "Advanced" button. However, I doubt anyone reading this would have any problem whatsoever glancing at a simple config dialog, and deciding to press the "Advanced" button as soon as they lay eyes on it. :D I've had to show far to many people how to use a computer, and they have always seemed to respond best to interfaces which were designed this way. Just my two cents. Oh, btw, beginners always seem to like big buttons and hate typing anything or spin selecting any numbers, for some reason, jic anyone hasn't noticed that. So some big stupidly annoyingly simple interface would probably, imho, be the best default. I personally have no problem with clicking an "Advanced" button to get a dialog like that out of my sight. :)
I like the idea in general, perhaps a drop-down box would be less confusing? I dunno, I mean, radio buttons aren't *that* hard to figure out are they? Doesn't Microsoft use radio buttons in their applications/OS's? If you build it they will come... my CAD$0.02 deposited romy
I was actually going to suggest something like this pretty soon. I just need to get some of the details worked out. My overall idea is this. When KDE is installed, the first run wizard that runs should ask the user his/her skill level. Also, whenever a new user is created using KUser, you can also set the users skill level. Of course the user can change the level from KControl. This would make the skill level a global option. This way developers could just set a list of options in the applications that should be used based on the users set level. From there, KDE takes over what to show in the application. This would make it very easy for developers. My main reason for having something like this is my wife was using Konqueror and didn't understand what the view profiles were: Midnight Commander, KDE Development, tabbed browsing. All she really needed was File Management and Web Browsing. Since KDE will probably take over offices before it takes over homes, this should be taken into consideration for office workers. This way Konqueror could just not show these view profiles for a user of skill level: beginner. This is just an example of what a global option like this could do.
I agree with Carl above sounds great.
A new idea appeared on http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=24616 Sliders: "Every widget in the Control Panel should have some difficulty value attached and based on the slider's value, the widget will be shown or hidden." I added sliders in the description of this wish at that link. In my opinion this is the best solution until now, but new ideas are welcome!
Well a slider isn't the best option for me. Because it's unintuitive (slider = number -> which number ?) and takes too much space. I think all the other ideas are better (but I prefer the combobox). However, I'd rather have a skill level application per application because you can both be an experienced konqueror user and a newbie for xine/kaffeine options. This doesn't remove totally the idea of having a global setting but it would fix a default skill level (overrided by application settings) rather than a global one.
Important: When u select advanced it should not open a new window(tab) with the new options, instead it should insert every new option into the its category(along the old options) and mark it(another color or a *) as advanced.
So...what? You, defenders of the user levels, tell me: how many levels should we have? 2? 3? 4? 5? n? We have a clear example of what a mess a user level conf dialog could be: xine and Kaffeine. I always give up with a "where the fuck is that damned option?", this because people starts to think "whoa, we have user levels now, let's throw every kind of option in the advanced mode". If any of you has ever lived in the real luser world there is a simple, basic rule: they NEVER change options. They ALWAYS stick on defaults, and judge the app basing their opionions on default behaviour. Fullstop. And you can please the intermediate and experienced users (I don't think more than 3 levels could ever be appropriates) by simply designing good config dialogs.
On Tuesday 05 July 2005 06:58, Davide Ferrari wrote: > If any of you has ever lived in the real luser world there is a simple, > basic rule: they NEVER change options. They ALWAYS stick on defaults, and If users "NEVER change options" then they can't get confused by having "too many options" in the config dialog - since they don't use it - so there's no point in user levels. Just throw everything in one place.
> Just throw everything in one place. No, you still have to care about users (everyone but true newbie) that do care about options, providing all the available options at hand in an easy way. The user levels concept is simply a workaround to bad designed UI. Moreover, with user levels when you're not finding the wanted option in your current level, you simply end selecting the most advanced level to be sure it will be present there. Or do you think people like hunt&chase with options trying every level one by one?
Initially I liked the idea of experience levels. But I think the comments of Davide have a good point. Instead of wasting time creating a new feature, this problem should be solved individually in each component. - new users really don't like to change a lot of settings, so I think the most import thing are default values. they should be good for an average new user. - some of the configuration dialogs really need a clean-up. in many cases it would be easy, just to create a tab "Advanced Options". This should keep the most important settings manageable for the average (new) user. against experience levels: - another gui element the user has to learn. one element more cluttering the gui, which might hide in some cases two or three elements. - every developer needs to change "his" config dialogs in case of experience levels, anyway. - to keep a good overview over the options, we would need to show "diffs" between option-sets ("huh? what changed now!?"). otherwise, if the level just adds more options at the bottom of a dialog or shows another tab, we don't need experience levels anyway. At the moment I'm tempted to say that we don't need experience levels. The most we could need, is e.g. a single checkbox like "show advanced options". But even this should/could be solved by each component individually. A strict convention about config dialogs and a review would still be good though.
I feel exactly like Kevin, davide is probably right. Kcontrol has a lot of options, but I don't feel lost except in konqueror options page. This page should be totally rethinked. I feel firefox style more intuitive, for example, even if ugly. An "advanced..." button (or even checkbox) would probably be useful to some applications (kaffeine and konqueror come to my mind)