Friday, May 15. 2009
From the Post 2.1.0 Git Vaults, Part 2: No more vertical tabs
I thought my last post about the upcoming audio cd collection was pretty cool, but since Leo and I are having a bit of a contest about who has the greater number of cool features ready for 2.2 and he just had to outdo me with his post about the amazingly cool last.fm based dynamic playlist biases I thought it was time to strike back! 
A while back, Seb added some cool new headers to the collections in the collection browser. This code was based on the elements in the service browser. Since Seb's versions actually looked much nicer than the ones in the service browser, I decided to "backport" the changes, and make the elements in the service browser look consistent with the collection headers.
Having done this made everything a bit more consistent, but it also highlighted some other huge inconsistencies in the way the browsers look and work. Currently there are basically 3 different navigations methods in place. For selecting the browser we have the oft criticized vertical tab bar, for selecting a service there is the service browser which is a type of dig-down interface, and for selecting playlist categories, we use a stacked toolbox approach. Obviously this is not good for usability, and it does not look good either.
So, in an attempt to standardize the navigation across these different browsers and the navigation between browsers themselves, we started discussing the options at the recent developer sprint in Berlin. We concluded that the interface currently used in the service browser was by far the most flexible and that it might be worth using this for all the browser navigation.
So skipping a few days of extracting, generalizing and putting this code to new use, we now have this:
And since a still image really does not really explaint he concept very well, here is a small vid to show the new interface in action.
This is in a pretty early state of development, and there are many cases where the interface of the different browsers/categories need to be made more consistent. Also, the current plan is to add a kind of "breadcrumb" bar as known from Dolphin to the top of the browsers, making navigation simpler and making it more clear what "page" you are actually on at any given time.
All in all, this cuts down our 3 competing ways of navigating through the browsers down to one, and finally gets rid of the vertical tabs completely.
A while back, Seb added some cool new headers to the collections in the collection browser. This code was based on the elements in the service browser. Since Seb's versions actually looked much nicer than the ones in the service browser, I decided to "backport" the changes, and make the elements in the service browser look consistent with the collection headers.
Having done this made everything a bit more consistent, but it also highlighted some other huge inconsistencies in the way the browsers look and work. Currently there are basically 3 different navigations methods in place. For selecting the browser we have the oft criticized vertical tab bar, for selecting a service there is the service browser which is a type of dig-down interface, and for selecting playlist categories, we use a stacked toolbox approach. Obviously this is not good for usability, and it does not look good either.
So, in an attempt to standardize the navigation across these different browsers and the navigation between browsers themselves, we started discussing the options at the recent developer sprint in Berlin. We concluded that the interface currently used in the service browser was by far the most flexible and that it might be worth using this for all the browser navigation.
So skipping a few days of extracting, generalizing and putting this code to new use, we now have this:
And since a still image really does not really explaint he concept very well, here is a small vid to show the new interface in action.
This is in a pretty early state of development, and there are many cases where the interface of the different browsers/categories need to be made more consistent. Also, the current plan is to add a kind of "breadcrumb" bar as known from Dolphin to the top of the browsers, making navigation simpler and making it more clear what "page" you are actually on at any given time.
All in all, this cuts down our 3 competing ways of navigating through the browsers down to one, and finally gets rid of the vertical tabs completely.
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Man, you guys are killing the excitement about 2.1, with all this blogging about cool stuff coming up in 2.2 
Hope the 2.2 release cycle will be a bit shorter than for 2.1
Hope the 2.2 release cycle will be a bit shorter than for 2.1
Thanks, Amarok is finally following the KDE4 style ! This is really great, all my friends were totally confused with those vertical tabs each time they use my computer.
Formidable
+1 for the breadcrumb navigation bar, otherwise people will get lost in a minute.
It may even be better than the "KDE4 menu style left arrow" to come back which is not at all convenient to use.
Rather implement a simple and powerful navigation bar
Anyway great news, keep going !
+1 for the breadcrumb navigation bar, otherwise people will get lost in a minute.
It may even be better than the "KDE4 menu style left arrow" to come back which is not at all convenient to use.
Rather implement a simple and powerful navigation bar
Anyway great news, keep going !
Hi Nikolai,
You know that I'm not usually the one who complains about changes, but this particular one has really disturbed me.
Instead of having a one-click switching [the tabs system provided], as well as instant side-bar collapsing, you decided to go for the Kickoff-like browsing which is one of the most-complained-about(tm) things in Kickoff.
The excuse of Kickoff is that "you shouldn't have to browse the applications that often due to recent and favourite application sections, so it is not something that gets in your way too much".
In the Amarok's case, you have to browse it every time you want to add a song.
use case 1: Peter added a last.fm stream to the playlist and he hears a song that reminds him of a song that he thinks he has on his computer.
He has to click the 'back' button a couple of times to get to the root list, then he has to click the collection button in order to search for that song.
Then, he remembers that it is not yet in the collection since he had downloaded it a few days ago and it is still in his download directory. He clicks back and then "Files" and searches the filesystem for the song.
Total clicks related only to navigation: 7
The same use-case with the current organization has only 2 clicks. And apart from that, after adding that particular song, it is just one click back to the exact service (last.fm in this use case) he was browsing earlier - the thing that will be broken with the new approach.
----
The second issue is the problem that you'll get two breadcrubms when browsing files - one for amarok's navigation and other one for the actual file-system.
Sorry for the long post.
Cheerio,
Ivan
You know that I'm not usually the one who complains about changes, but this particular one has really disturbed me.
Instead of having a one-click switching [the tabs system provided], as well as instant side-bar collapsing, you decided to go for the Kickoff-like browsing which is one of the most-complained-about(tm) things in Kickoff.
The excuse of Kickoff is that "you shouldn't have to browse the applications that often due to recent and favourite application sections, so it is not something that gets in your way too much".
In the Amarok's case, you have to browse it every time you want to add a song.
use case 1: Peter added a last.fm stream to the playlist and he hears a song that reminds him of a song that he thinks he has on his computer.
He has to click the 'back' button a couple of times to get to the root list, then he has to click the collection button in order to search for that song.
Then, he remembers that it is not yet in the collection since he had downloaded it a few days ago and it is still in his download directory. He clicks back and then "Files" and searches the filesystem for the song.
Total clicks related only to navigation: 7
The same use-case with the current organization has only 2 clicks. And apart from that, after adding that particular song, it is just one click back to the exact service (last.fm in this use case) he was browsing earlier - the thing that will be broken with the new approach.
----
The second issue is the problem that you'll get two breadcrubms when browsing files - one for amarok's navigation and other one for the actual file-system.
Sorry for the long post.
Cheerio,
Ivan
It's a trade-off: A few more clicks, but you get a much more consistent and logical navigation - We decided it's worth it.
One thing is for sure - the vertical tabs must die
One thing is for sure - the vertical tabs must die
Maybe a couple of up/down buttons for switching between browsers could provide faster usable navigation and still look good. You could also make it to optionally remember the exact location in the browser.
If they use the standard (Dolphin) navigation bar, "back" becomes pretty much unnecessary and you can go to the desired category with 2 clicks (e.g. "→", then "Collection") from any place.
Plus navigating inside the respective category gets easier to grasp, and the non-standard pseudo-tabs get dropped. I'd say it's well worth it
Plus navigating inside the respective category gets easier to grasp, and the non-standard pseudo-tabs get dropped. I'd say it's well worth it
This looks awesome, better than now! At the same time I think Ivan has very valid points that needs to be taken into consideration.
Keep up the awesome work! =)
(Ps. and please enable openID login)
Keep up the awesome work! =)
(Ps. and please enable openID login)
YES!! I love that you're removing these vertical tabs. THANK YOU!
I'm not sure if this is the best solution, though. I once saw a mokcup with a horizontal tab bar (kind of WMP style if you want to). I beleive this could be a even better solution.
You can't imagine how happy I am that you are doing something different instead of vertical tabs.
I'm not sure if this is the best solution, though. I once saw a mokcup with a horizontal tab bar (kind of WMP style if you want to). I beleive this could be a even better solution.
You can't imagine how happy I am that you are doing something different instead of vertical tabs.
hi,
Ivan is right.
The vertical tabs make Amarok much easier to use and SHOULD be kept for sure.
This new aproach will make usability worst and not better.
I don't know one person that like the Kickoff, everybody uses the classic menu... and even some people use gnome because the didn't know they can change that useless menu.
Ivan is right.
The vertical tabs make Amarok much easier to use and SHOULD be kept for sure.
This new aproach will make usability worst and not better.
I don't know one person that like the Kickoff, everybody uses the classic menu... and even some people use gnome because the didn't know they can change that useless menu.
I agree,
I have so far supported every change in amarok 2 but this it just doesnt make any sense to me. Looking at the other comments I dont think it make sense to quite a few people. Simply put what is the point in this change what does it actually bring to amarok?
Firstly what is wrong with the vertical tabs?
They provide the user with instant one click access to every section. What is wrong with that? why must the vertical tabs "die"?
Perhaps initially the vertical tabs structure is confusing to a new user who has never encoutered such a thing before in any other application(really?). But surely cant take long to figure out that to get to my "collection" I click "collection"?
Maybe some people feel the tabs are a little cluttered?
I defence of that they do provide a simple way of collapsing the entire bar greatly declutering the whole interface, and the long bar looks pretty ugly too.
Secondly if vertical tabs must "die" what advantages do this particular approach bring?
I cant think of any, only disadvantages.
Navigation is now greatly slowed down requiring multiple clicks to navigate(I think the 7 click use case mentioned above is pretty realistic).
Usability is disimproved. New users now have to learn that the collection section they were in previously and is no longer visible on screen is several clicks back. While with the tabs approach the new user only has to learn that the collection section is behind the button that sais collection and is on screen the whole time.
People might say it now fits in better with kde4 being like kicker but kicker is the only place I can think of this being used and its is consistantly the number one complaint about kde4, why would you want to copy that? Particuarly seeing as in my opinion it makes even less sense here.
One final thing looking at the screen shots and the video it is on no way obvious how you collapse this thing, I have no idea?
Please dont this as me flamin amarok I love amarok and whats happened with amarok 2, but please take it as constructive criticism. I really hope you will reconsider these changes.
I have so far supported every change in amarok 2 but this it just doesnt make any sense to me. Looking at the other comments I dont think it make sense to quite a few people. Simply put what is the point in this change what does it actually bring to amarok?
Firstly what is wrong with the vertical tabs?
They provide the user with instant one click access to every section. What is wrong with that? why must the vertical tabs "die"?
Perhaps initially the vertical tabs structure is confusing to a new user who has never encoutered such a thing before in any other application(really?). But surely cant take long to figure out that to get to my "collection" I click "collection"?
Maybe some people feel the tabs are a little cluttered?
I defence of that they do provide a simple way of collapsing the entire bar greatly declutering the whole interface, and the long bar looks pretty ugly too.
Secondly if vertical tabs must "die" what advantages do this particular approach bring?
I cant think of any, only disadvantages.
Navigation is now greatly slowed down requiring multiple clicks to navigate(I think the 7 click use case mentioned above is pretty realistic).
Usability is disimproved. New users now have to learn that the collection section they were in previously and is no longer visible on screen is several clicks back. While with the tabs approach the new user only has to learn that the collection section is behind the button that sais collection and is on screen the whole time.
People might say it now fits in better with kde4 being like kicker but kicker is the only place I can think of this being used and its is consistantly the number one complaint about kde4, why would you want to copy that? Particuarly seeing as in my opinion it makes even less sense here.
One final thing looking at the screen shots and the video it is on no way obvious how you collapse this thing, I have no idea?
Please dont this as me flamin amarok I love amarok and whats happened with amarok 2, but please take it as constructive criticism. I really hope you will reconsider these changes.
I too love the vertical bars and hate the long back-button on left that looks ugly and takes a bit of space there - why not to put an usual back-button on top if you must have a back-button?
Yeah, I agree. It's kind of funny to get rid of vertical tabs by adding a new huge vertical tab instead of the four old ones...ugh. Not excited at all. Why not move it to the top and add an additional / (index) button or something?
Hi,
nice feature, I think that this makes amarok much clearer...
But its not so nice for "power" users...
I think you could enhance the usability of this one if you build in a "quick navigation bar" like the one's from dolphin.
Don't know what I mean... hmm, how could i explain it...
Look here:
[URL=http://img33.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dolphinv.png][IMG]http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/452/dolphinv.th.png[/IMG][/URL]
Would be useful if it gets deeper than 2 menus!
nice feature, I think that this makes amarok much clearer...
But its not so nice for "power" users...
I think you could enhance the usability of this one if you build in a "quick navigation bar" like the one's from dolphin.
Don't know what I mean... hmm, how could i explain it...
Look here:
[URL=http://img33.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dolphinv.png][IMG]http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/452/dolphinv.th.png[/IMG][/URL]
Would be useful if it gets deeper than 2 menus!
I like vertical bars too, would it be an option, on the the way to consistency with KDE (Dolphin/breadcrumb) to keep it in the form of "Places" in Dolphin? Giving it a meaning of a bookmark would bring another flexibility and click reduction for each users favorite way of using Amarok.
I like this change.
A suggestion, an animation when changing te view can give it a better usability (like Dolphin's column view).
A suggestion, an animation when changing te view can give it a better usability (like Dolphin's column view).
Please, I don't like this vertical back button either - it's too hard to hit, even when it's on the left screen edge (well, the last applies to kickoff, I don't know for sure about amarok).
Anyhow: has anybody ever thought about implementing mouse gestures? Like the famous rocker switch RMB,LMB for "Back"? This would at least spare users the pain of having to aim for the narrow back button.
Best wishes,
rufus
Anyhow: has anybody ever thought about implementing mouse gestures? Like the famous rocker switch RMB,LMB for "Back"? This would at least spare users the pain of having to aim for the narrow back button.
Best wishes,
rufus
Mouse gestures are a global thing in KDE, supported in all apps. Unfortunately the interface for configuring them is a bit complex, but you can find it under 'input actions' in systemsettings.
My sansa clip has a 'Home' button which is used to flip between the top-level menu and displaying the currently playing track.
Could this concept be useful in the new-skool menus? A home button that takes the user to the top-level menus, to complement the back-arrow button to go up one place in the hierarchy.
Alternatively, have you considered flattening the hierarchy so that the 'Back' button always takes you to the top level? That is, clicking an item in the 'Internet' or 'Playlists' view will expand the list (and other internet/playlist items are still available above and/or below it) and clicking again returns to the bare Internet/Playlist view.
Could this concept be useful in the new-skool menus? A home button that takes the user to the top-level menus, to complement the back-arrow button to go up one place in the hierarchy.
Alternatively, have you considered flattening the hierarchy so that the 'Back' button always takes you to the top level? That is, clicking an item in the 'Internet' or 'Playlists' view will expand the list (and other internet/playlist items are still available above and/or below it) and clicking again returns to the bare Internet/Playlist view.
Breadcrumbs would fulfill the use cases you described. Without breadcrumbs I must admit the navigation is very confusing.
Like Ivan above I'm not usually a grumbler. But I don't think this is a good idea:
(a) I think it will be more confusing for the non-technical user:
The recent usability study suggested that users expected the vertical tabs to act as tabs but were confused when the items disappeared (when for example clicking on the "collection" tab when the collection is already open.
This approach exacerbates that problem as it leads to more things abruptly changing when you click on them without the familiar device of the tab widget.
I suggest keeping the old approach. The usability problem of the old approach could be fixed by animating a slide-in/slide-out when the tabs are collapsed, making it clear what has happened to them.
(b) Obviously, this makes switching tabs slower.
(c) this means there is no quick way to collapse the left-hand panel (for example you are listening to a playlist and you want plenty of space to display the wikipedia widget).
(d) I don't like the look of the big vertical back widget...
(a) I think it will be more confusing for the non-technical user:
The recent usability study suggested that users expected the vertical tabs to act as tabs but were confused when the items disappeared (when for example clicking on the "collection" tab when the collection is already open.
This approach exacerbates that problem as it leads to more things abruptly changing when you click on them without the familiar device of the tab widget.
I suggest keeping the old approach. The usability problem of the old approach could be fixed by animating a slide-in/slide-out when the tabs are collapsed, making it clear what has happened to them.
(b) Obviously, this makes switching tabs slower.
(c) this means there is no quick way to collapse the left-hand panel (for example you are listening to a playlist and you want plenty of space to display the wikipedia widget).
(d) I don't like the look of the big vertical back widget...
In summary I think that the old method is both clearer and more efficient.
The deficiencies in the old (tabs) approach can be fixed.
Please.
The deficiencies in the old (tabs) approach can be fixed.
Please.
i really dont like this navigation !
can i propose to make the navigation somewhat hierarchical ??? like an graphical treeview..
this navigation is from the kde start menü , which sucks big time.
can i propose to make the navigation somewhat hierarchical ??? like an graphical treeview..
this navigation is from the kde start menü , which sucks big time.
I prefer the tree organization: You can expan all, see this image plis:
http://www.jrmediacenter.com/images/MC12.jpg
http://www.jrmediacenter.com/images/MC12.jpg
Er. Idea.
As a next step, you could fold the context view's tabs into the breadcrumb too, and make the left and middle parts of the window into "equal" widgets with one breadcrumb each. That way, users can choose to have their context view left instead of right by just switching to the "Wikipedia" category in the navigation hierarchy, and have the "Collection" category in the middle section.
And if you introduce Dolphin's "split/unsplit" button, you'd get rid of the complaints that either the context view or the "browser" view (what's its actual name?) should be hidden, along with a straightforward way to switch between both.
As a next step, you could fold the context view's tabs into the breadcrumb too, and make the left and middle parts of the window into "equal" widgets with one breadcrumb each. That way, users can choose to have their context view left instead of right by just switching to the "Wikipedia" category in the navigation hierarchy, and have the "Collection" category in the middle section.
And if you introduce Dolphin's "split/unsplit" button, you'd get rid of the complaints that either the context view or the "browser" view (what's its actual name?) should be hidden, along with a straightforward way to switch between both.
Honestly I don't really like that approach. But stay tuned, I have another prototype that I might blog about sometime soon... This one is a bit further removed from being ready to commit, and its also not something we are totally sure we really want to do just yet though, but its still kind .
Awesome, those vertical buttons were killing me. I realize its a tradeoff, but i think its worth unifying the ways that navigation is done to make things less confusing. Also love the recently usability fixes put in (especially the click to slide down the hierchical view for collections currently in SVN for 2.1).
Hmm, to be honest, I dislike this new design, too.
However, what I find most disturbing about amarok 2 is the middle pane that can't be removed. I'm using amarok for classical music, mainly ripped/reencoded from various CDs, for which no information is available, so the middle pane is totally useless and simply wasted space.
All I need is a good display of the whole collection tree on the left (plus the playlists, also from the iPod) and the playlist pane on the right (which should be sortable by any field and must be able to display the composer as opposed to the performer).
Reinhold
However, what I find most disturbing about amarok 2 is the middle pane that can't be removed. I'm using amarok for classical music, mainly ripped/reencoded from various CDs, for which no information is available, so the middle pane is totally useless and simply wasted space.
All I need is a good display of the whole collection tree on the left (plus the playlists, also from the iPod) and the playlist pane on the right (which should be sortable by any field and must be able to display the composer as opposed to the performer).
Reinhold
In Amarok 2.1.0 there is an option in the amarokrc file to completely hide the context view. Due to string freeze it will not be available from the settings dialog until 2.1.1
Wow, that one really seems to divide the waters
Without actually counting, it seems that there are about an even number of thumbs up and thumbs down.
As for the people disliking the big vertical back button, I have to say I somewhat agree, and I am going to experiment with alternatives.
As always when I post this stuff, its very early in development and can still change in many ways, but that is also why I blog about it, as all this feedback is very valuable.
Without actually counting, it seems that there are about an even number of thumbs up and thumbs down.
As for the people disliking the big vertical back button, I have to say I somewhat agree, and I am going to experiment with alternatives.
As always when I post this stuff, its very early in development and can still change in many ways, but that is also why I blog about it, as all this feedback is very valuable.
Hi Nikolaj,
A problem that the Kickoff implementation in KDE 4 has is that a lot of users don't see the thin vertical 'go back' bar on the left-hand side of the widget and cannot figure out how to get back to the previous menu. Quite a few reviews mentioned it in additional to my own experiences watching users trying out the menu for the first time. Given that the one in Amarok is even more subtly-colored I think your users are likely to experience the same problem.
I don't think this is an unfixable problem with having a vertical 'go-back' bar but you'd need to think about how you can make sure users notice it:
a) When it first appears
b) When they look for it without having seen it appear in the first place - eg. because they were concentrating on something else at the time.
We've been watching some videos of users working with our proprietary desktop software at work recently and it really is a bit of an eye opener for a programmer how much many users don't see and how much they don't read when they use an interface for the first time.
A problem that the Kickoff implementation in KDE 4 has is that a lot of users don't see the thin vertical 'go back' bar on the left-hand side of the widget and cannot figure out how to get back to the previous menu. Quite a few reviews mentioned it in additional to my own experiences watching users trying out the menu for the first time. Given that the one in Amarok is even more subtly-colored I think your users are likely to experience the same problem.
I don't think this is an unfixable problem with having a vertical 'go-back' bar but you'd need to think about how you can make sure users notice it:
a) When it first appears
b) When they look for it without having seen it appear in the first place - eg. because they were concentrating on something else at the time.
We've been watching some videos of users working with our proprietary desktop software at work recently and it really is a bit of an eye opener for a programmer how much many users don't see and how much they don't read when they use an interface for the first time.
if the problem with Kickoff was only that...
The problem is that amount of time people people spend going back and forward to navigate in the menus.
This problem should not be added to Amarok too.
The problem is that amount of time people people spend going back and forward to navigate in the menus.
This problem should not be added to Amarok too.
I'm sorry but I have to say Ivan is right. You're not making Amarok more consistent with the rest of KDE by using logic from the Kickoff menu style. Kickoff isn't a success and it will probably soon be replaced by another kind of menu.
Forcing users to make too many click is a certain way of not making them pleaced!
Forcing users to make too many click is a certain way of not making them pleaced!
What the hell!? I meant the Creator had a Mastertape. I guess it is a bit of a masterpiece though 
Actually, The Sound of Muzak deserves no less than a full 5 stars. Everything else is subject to subjective taste
I agree to the other, who critizise the new style. However, I see the need to improve the cuurent wayy of navigating.
Maybe it is possible to get rid of the vertical Bars AND to have a fast navigation.
A breadcrump bar is a good first start, but maybe that conzept should be improved.
What is for example when the toplevel possibilities(don't know how to call them, those which are now the vertical bars) are alway visible? so when you navigate on one category you have the breadvrumbs, but when you want to switch completely to another category, you can just do it with one click. and when you click and hold the button of a toplevel category, a treeview with all subcategories pop out. So you can switch to another sub-category with just two clicks or so.
What do you think? Do you unterstand, what I mean? I think this solves all our problems
Maybe it is possible to get rid of the vertical Bars AND to have a fast navigation.
A breadcrump bar is a good first start, but maybe that conzept should be improved.
What is for example when the toplevel possibilities(don't know how to call them, those which are now the vertical bars) are alway visible? so when you navigate on one category you have the breadvrumbs, but when you want to switch completely to another category, you can just do it with one click. and when you click and hold the button of a toplevel category, a treeview with all subcategories pop out. So you can switch to another sub-category with just two clicks or so.
What do you think? Do you unterstand, what I mean? I think this solves all our problems
What need to get rid of the vertical tabs?
Tabs are an efficient and familiar mode of navigation.
As I pointed out, the recent usability study suggested that the only problem with them was not the tabbing behaviour but the hiding... an I think that this could be fixed by animating the hiding to give the user a visual hint as to what is happening.
The current design is just very good.
Tabs are an efficient and familiar mode of navigation.
As I pointed out, the recent usability study suggested that the only problem with them was not the tabbing behaviour but the hiding... an I think that this could be fixed by animating the hiding to give the user a visual hint as to what is happening.
The current design is just very good.
Another thing. What about releasing something like "AmarokTesting", which is actually just a testversion for different approaches for a new feature.
You say "Hey, we have three different implementations of a new thing we want to add in the next Amarok- test it and say us, which do you want more"
So the user can give you feedback, telling you whats better and you can focus on one way, instead of rethinking a concept several times and getting bad feedback after every release. That would be a easy to contribute for those, who cannot code.
That would be real beta testing. Not only bug search but also feature tests.
What do you think?
You say "Hey, we have three different implementations of a new thing we want to add in the next Amarok- test it and say us, which do you want more"
So the user can give you feedback, telling you whats better and you can focus on one way, instead of rethinking a concept several times and getting bad feedback after every release. That would be a easy to contribute for those, who cannot code.
That would be real beta testing. Not only bug search but also feature tests.
What do you think?
Can anybody tell me what exactly is wrong with the vertical tabs? They are an easy and quick way to reach different sources of music... No, honestly, I really want to know what bothers people about it.
And how is this going to be an advantage for new users? With the vertical tabs they can always see what sources of music there are, the names of the tabs are pretty clear I think. With the new approach they can't see that there are Internet services when they are browsing their collection.
The problem that new users are lost after they accidently hit the collection tab could be solved by an animation that minimizes the tab to the left indicating the collection is not gone but just hidden. Don't know if there is an easy way to implement an animation in this part of Amarok.
On consistency in KDE: DigiKam uses a similar vertical tab approach. The only difference is that Amarok's tabs are a lot prettier
I agreed with pretty much all of the changes in Amarok 2 so far but this one just doesn't work imho. So please reconsider this change.
Nevertheless, thank you so much for your work on Amarok
And how is this going to be an advantage for new users? With the vertical tabs they can always see what sources of music there are, the names of the tabs are pretty clear I think. With the new approach they can't see that there are Internet services when they are browsing their collection.
The problem that new users are lost after they accidently hit the collection tab could be solved by an animation that minimizes the tab to the left indicating the collection is not gone but just hidden. Don't know if there is an easy way to implement an animation in this part of Amarok.
On consistency in KDE: DigiKam uses a similar vertical tab approach. The only difference is that Amarok's tabs are a lot prettier
I agreed with pretty much all of the changes in Amarok 2 so far but this one just doesn't work imho. So please reconsider this change.
Nevertheless, thank you so much for your work on Amarok
One of the most stupied idea is to reborn mouse-clicking hell from windows into amarok. So, this is it.
+1 Looks like it's hi-time to get out from this lamer-oriented crap. Amarok 1.4 was the best... Rest in peace, amarok 
It's great to see the issues raised in the recent usability study being thought about and worked on in Amarok. The application is definitely better off without the "vertical tabs", since even long-time Amarok users and developers are not so used to them. They look like they should be tabs, but they're actually a cross between radio buttons and toggle buttons, which change the display mode in the left panel and its visibility. This was pointed out as confusing in the study, since they were universally expected to act like tabs, and the fact that they're being called the "vertical tabs" here just shows how confusing they are.
As for the replacement, it's been shown that the "big back arrow" isn't obvious to many users, who get confused how to get back. Animation would help here, breadcrumbs would too.
Whilst it may involve more clicks, I think this approach could be used to sort out the Collection view too, where there is a behaviour difference between the main headers and the artist and album headers. Replacing those with the main sidebar behaviour would make collection browsing similar to that on an iPod, which has proven to be a very intuitive way of navigating (although using a scrollbar rather than a hardware wheel device).
As far as speed for "power users" is concerned, why not have an always-visible search/filter entry box in the left sidebar, then give it keywords like "dev:" to jump to the devices view, "file:" to jump to the file view, "last:" to jump to last.fm, etc. Give the box a shortcut key to highlight it, then power users can have their efficient navigation, whilst casual users will never have to know that such things are there.
As for the replacement, it's been shown that the "big back arrow" isn't obvious to many users, who get confused how to get back. Animation would help here, breadcrumbs would too.
Whilst it may involve more clicks, I think this approach could be used to sort out the Collection view too, where there is a behaviour difference between the main headers and the artist and album headers. Replacing those with the main sidebar behaviour would make collection browsing similar to that on an iPod, which has proven to be a very intuitive way of navigating (although using a scrollbar rather than a hardware wheel device).
As far as speed for "power users" is concerned, why not have an always-visible search/filter entry box in the left sidebar, then give it keywords like "dev:" to jump to the devices view, "file:" to jump to the file view, "last:" to jump to last.fm, etc. Give the box a shortcut key to highlight it, then power users can have their efficient navigation, whilst casual users will never have to know that such things are there.
Wow, if you implement this the way I saw in the video, you will be introducing some serious suck. Kickoff is awful, you can't see where you are. Have you thought about trying to do something like what Lancelot does? It is sooo much better than kickoff and very easy to navigate with the no-click option.
While I do think the Lancelot is better than Kickoff (wouldn't have made it otherwise ), this is not the same situation and it wouldn't be a good solution in the case of Amarok.
), this is not the same situation and it wouldn't be a good solution in the case of Amarok.
Have you consider the solution implemented in kile inside the tab "symbols" ? (there is perhaps the same thing somewhere else but I don't know about it) :
- there is several horizontal tabs, but only one is open at a time. When you click on an other sub-tab the one open close.
-the content of the open tab is displayed just under the tab.
- this solution let a bit less space for the inside of the tab, but the top-level tabs are always visible.
- there is several horizontal tabs, but only one is open at a time. When you click on an other sub-tab the one open close.
-the content of the open tab is displayed just under the tab.
- this solution let a bit less space for the inside of the tab, but the top-level tabs are always visible.
Please, oh please make it at least an option to keep the vertical tabs. This new approuch ("everything is just a few hundred clicks away" as in http://www.theonion.com/content/video/apple_introduces_revolutionary ) seems no good, no matter how consistent it may be.
From a comment user in kdenews
"2 questions:
1º) When multiple widgets are added can be resizable? I would like decide who take more space... for exaple I would like get 3/4 parts of the column to the lyrics or more size... but until now every widget get a static size, awful when 1 of your favorite widgets has only a very little size.
2º) Finally, when only 1 widget is added will take ALL the column size? Is horrible to see the Lyrics widget to get only a little part of the column..."
"2 questions:
1º) When multiple widgets are added can be resizable? I would like decide who take more space... for exaple I would like get 3/4 parts of the column to the lyrics or more size... but until now every widget get a static size, awful when 1 of your favorite widgets has only a very little size.
2º) Finally, when only 1 widget is added will take ALL the column size? Is horrible to see the Lyrics widget to get only a little part of the column..."
I think you might be throwing the baby out with the bathwater on the vertical tab issue. The complaint was that they didn't act like tabs IIRC, not that they were hard to discover or whatever (though that may also be true...)
If you do go ahead, it needs the breadcrumb bar. Without that the navigation requires too many clicks, but I think with the breadcrumb a lot of naysayers will be pleased - it will certainly ameliorate a lot of the issues with having to constantly press the back button.
Also, is there a way to minimize it now that the tabs are gone? Amarok really needs a better way to manage the panes for that matter....
If you do go ahead, it needs the breadcrumb bar. Without that the navigation requires too many clicks, but I think with the breadcrumb a lot of naysayers will be pleased - it will certainly ameliorate a lot of the issues with having to constantly press the back button.
Also, is there a way to minimize it now that the tabs are gone? Amarok really needs a better way to manage the panes for that matter....
Finally. Congrats for this, Amarok vertical tabs were an awful usability mistake.
Cheers to you!
Cheers to you!
That's Horrible! If these stupid Ideas continue, I'll have to look for another media player - RIP Amarok 
Please add the option in the Collection category to expand all, is expanding manually is very bad.
Or include the option to None in the first level are listed all the songs and not just artists.
Or include the option to None in the first level are listed all the songs and not just artists.
I like the tabs down the side, but I could live with this change.
One thing that stood out as odd in the video though. It looked like, when browsing files, it was an icon view. It seems to me like speed, consistency, and amount of available space would make a tree/list view a better choice.
Later, Seeker
One thing that stood out as odd in the video though. It looked like, when browsing files, it was an icon view. It seems to me like speed, consistency, and amount of available space would make a tree/list view a better choice.
Later, Seeker
Yeah. For the file browser we actually use code borrowed from kate (IIRC), so you can switch between icon and tree view as you like. It is not very consistent with the rest of Amarok in either case though. There has been discussions about removing it completely, or writing a new one from scratch that fits better with the rest of Amarok, but no final decision has been made.
You can get a tree view on the file browser by right-clicking on the browser itself and choosing View > Tree View, although it's not on the toolbar.
Maybe this mode could be made the default one?
P.s.: I will also miss the vertical tabs, I hope you find a way to reproduce their functionality without the usability problems a lot of people seem o to have with it.
Maybe this mode could be made the default one?
P.s.: I will also miss the vertical tabs, I hope you find a way to reproduce their functionality without the usability problems a lot of people seem o to have with it.
I see a lot of people comparing it with kickoff. Personally I hardly ever use kickoff (and not the classical menu either as someone thought everyone did). My main navigation in kde is definitely Krunner. Why not be inspired by that too?
As far as I understand, the big downside with organizing the UI as exemplified above is that it takes more clicks to get where you are going. I don't really mind that since I am rarely in a hurry when using Amarok, but a good compliment would be a kind of Krunner inspired speed navigation for the power users, right? After all, Krunner is one of the most beloved apps in KDE.
As far as I understand, the big downside with organizing the UI as exemplified above is that it takes more clicks to get where you are going. I don't really mind that since I am rarely in a hurry when using Amarok, but a good compliment would be a kind of Krunner inspired speed navigation for the power users, right? After all, Krunner is one of the most beloved apps in KDE.
One quick comment: The stars in the playing list. You have at one side the name of the song, and in the other side you've got a lot of yellow stars. My eyes are going to be completely distracted by all those stars... they should only appear on mouse over or something like that. Or if you want to show them ,you make them visible but greyed out so they are not so distracted.
Probably you are not the author of that feature, but well I had to say it
Probably you are not the author of that feature, but well I had to say it
The playlist layout is completely configurable in 2.1, so you can decide if you want to show the stars or not.
Why not make it this way;
when you click on Collection it moves the other 3 "buttons" down to display the collection under the collection-header
and when you click on collection again it moves the other buttons for files etc back up and hides the actual collection again
i think that would be the best sollution and in a way combine the old vertical tabs with the new layout
when you click on Collection it moves the other 3 "buttons" down to display the collection under the collection-header
and when you click on collection again it moves the other buttons for files etc back up and hides the actual collection again
i think that would be the best sollution and in a way combine the old vertical tabs with the new layout
Sorry to come back and leave more comments, but I just want to try to clarify this discussion.
What is the problem that this is trying to solve?
[1] "consistency" is one thing that is mentioned. I'm not sure what about the current design is inconsistent, if it is that the navigation in the "internet" tab is inconsistent with tab system, then I actually think this is a good thing. It breaks up the navigation. Multiple levels of homogeneous can be disorienting.
[2] If this is a response to the usability study then it seems to miss the point entirely. The tab mechanism was easily understood by users, the only problem appeared to be the hiding of the left-panel.
It makes much more sense to me to address the problem directly (e.g. by animating the slide in/out of the left-hand panel) rather than introducing a new system which already has obvious problems and trying to fix the new problems.
What is the problem that this is trying to solve?
[1] "consistency" is one thing that is mentioned. I'm not sure what about the current design is inconsistent, if it is that the navigation in the "internet" tab is inconsistent with tab system, then I actually think this is a good thing. It breaks up the navigation. Multiple levels of homogeneous can be disorienting.
[2] If this is a response to the usability study then it seems to miss the point entirely. The tab mechanism was easily understood by users, the only problem appeared to be the hiding of the left-panel.
It makes much more sense to me to address the problem directly (e.g. by animating the slide in/out of the left-hand panel) rather than introducing a new system which already has obvious problems and trying to fix the new problems.
Like Ivan and others I think removing
the vertical tabs is a VERY BAD IDEA.
Kickoff style is just awful in any
program.
Put the vertical tabs back in, and remove the middle pane and put in
an Excel-style playlist too while you are at it.
the vertical tabs is a VERY BAD IDEA.
Kickoff style is just awful in any
program.
Put the vertical tabs back in, and remove the middle pane and put in
an Excel-style playlist too while you are at it.
Amarok Links
Calendar
|
November '09 |
|
||||
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | ||||||
Quicksearch
Categories
Syndicate This Blog
Blog Administration
We Listen To...
Powered by
