Tuesday, May 19. 2009
From the Post 2.1.0 Git Vaults, Part 3: Something really far out
Seeing how Leo refuses to give up in our little "battle of the blogs", blogging cool new feature after cool new feature, its time for me to fire the next salvo 
Disclaimer 1: What I am going to show you here is a personal prototype, made to facilitate discussions. It is currently not planned for inclusion in any version of Amarok. In fact there is no guarantee it ever will appear in a released version as it is quite a controversial topic among the Developers.
Disclaimer 2: The observant among you will notice many small bugs and glitches in the video, such as album covers in the playlist doing weird things, double borders around some elements and likely many others. This is par for the course when creating a quick prototype like this...
That being said, I would really like to hear the opinions of the wider community on this one, so let me know what you think: Want? Don't Want? Wonderful? Horrible? ... Or should I just try to get some more sleep instead of hacking up all this crazy stuff?
Now for the actual video. Due to its rather large size, this one is hosted on youtube to avoid killing our server:
And here is a direct link (which also gives you the video in better quality) in case syndications kills the embedded video.
Disclaimer 1: What I am going to show you here is a personal prototype, made to facilitate discussions. It is currently not planned for inclusion in any version of Amarok. In fact there is no guarantee it ever will appear in a released version as it is quite a controversial topic among the Developers.
Disclaimer 2: The observant among you will notice many small bugs and glitches in the video, such as album covers in the playlist doing weird things, double borders around some elements and likely many others. This is par for the course when creating a quick prototype like this...
That being said, I would really like to hear the opinions of the wider community on this one, so let me know what you think: Want? Don't Want? Wonderful? Horrible? ... Or should I just try to get some more sleep instead of hacking up all this crazy stuff?
Now for the actual video. Due to its rather large size, this one is hosted on youtube to avoid killing our server:
And here is a direct link (which also gives you the video in better quality) in case syndications kills the embedded video.
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Just one question. Kde developers WHY didn't you implement Amarok2 UI like that from the beginning? Provide sane default layout (whatever you want), but let me reorganize it to suit MY needs. Great job - please include it in amarok.
I agree. This looks quite similar to the UI behaviour in the eclipse SDK (http://www.eclipse.org/) and I suggest paying very close attention to how it is done there because the eclipse UI has been developed for many years and is very mature.
And it's geared towards advanced computer users (i.e. developers) so it's not the same as Amarok audience, so its UI may o may not fit the Amarok use case.
Awesome I would also like to have customizable button area. For example I have never used volume control in Amarok.
I would also like to have customizable button area. For example I have never used volume control in Amarok.
Nice, but 2 years late. You should
have learned all the widgets and planned
out the GUI before you started. How
many more iterations will there be?
Amarok2 is still missing a boatload of
real features from 1.4 which are to
do with playing and organising music.
have learned all the widgets and planned
out the GUI before you started. How
many more iterations will there be?
Amarok2 is still missing a boatload of
real features from 1.4 which are to
do with playing and organising music.
You willl definetly win with this.
Really nice feature, hope it goes into 2.2 it would really shut up most of the complaints about Amarok2 and show how awesome Amarok is
Really nice feature, hope it goes into 2.2 it would really shut up most of the complaints about Amarok2 and show how awesome Amarok is
+1
Amarok 2 is great, but I prefer the 1.4 layout. Witht this feature I can have it back. The center view is of no use for me. It is just some waste of space (fixed in 2.1) but mainly a waste of memory. I just don't need or like it at all.
Amarok 2 is great, but I prefer the 1.4 layout. Witht this feature I can have it back. The center view is of no use for me. It is just some waste of space (fixed in 2.1) but mainly a waste of memory. I just don't need or like it at all.
Beautiful!! Vote for inclusion.
Amarok2 really lacks flexibility, so it is definitely required.
Not everyone likes the new UI, so it will add them a possibility to customize Amarok UI according to their wishes.
Amarok2 really lacks flexibility, so it is definitely required.
Not everyone likes the new UI, so it will add them a possibility to customize Amarok UI according to their wishes.
I would love to have this in amarok. I think it would be especially useful for small form factors, such as netbooks, where screen real estate is at a premium.
I like the idea very much.
It will satisfy the i-want-amarok-1.x-back whiners since it will be possible to make A2 to look like the old one.
I don't know whether I'd change the layout of /my/ Amarok, but I'd sure experiment with it.
As for the implementation, I think it'd be better to have a context menu for 'lock/unlock layout' (something like Plasma has, or the standard 'unlock/lock toolbars' option in most KDE applications) than having the option in the settings dialogue.
Cheerio!
It will satisfy the i-want-amarok-1.x-back whiners since it will be possible to make A2 to look like the old one.
I don't know whether I'd change the layout of /my/ Amarok, but I'd sure experiment with it.
As for the implementation, I think it'd be better to have a context menu for 'lock/unlock layout' (something like Plasma has, or the standard 'unlock/lock toolbars' option in most KDE applications) than having the option in the settings dialogue.
Cheerio!
+1 for Amarok customization with right click (un)locking.
I've become used to the Amarok 2 layout, too, so perhaps I won't change anything (my taskbar is a the top, so the top controls, if I ever use them instead of shortcuts, don't annoy me), but the possibility to do so is exciting!
I've become used to the Amarok 2 layout, too, so perhaps I won't change anything (my taskbar is a the top, so the top controls, if I ever use them instead of shortcuts, don't annoy me), but the possibility to do so is exciting!
OMG!! Gimme gimme!! This is absolutely the only must have change in the A2 UI at this point.
Question: What are the cons according to Amarok devs who do not like this feature?
Actually, take it further and make the internals of part containing the play-buttons and the progress configurable, too. This way, one could easily add extra buttons like Shuffle, Repeat, etc. (I'm still missing those from 1.x)
So how did you achieve this? Did you "plasmify" all of Amarok or are these just widgets that became more flexible?
So how did you achieve this? Did you "plasmify" all of Amarok or are these just widgets that became more flexible?
No, no plasma magic here.
I figured out that with a few hacks, you can actually make QDockWidgets do some very interesting things that are not really described very well in the docs, such as "stacking" both vertically and horizontally in a single "drop area" as well as completely hiding the "header" when locking down the layout.
As such the amount of code changes required for this is quite small, but it took a lot of experimentation to actually make it behave the way I wanted.
An added benefit is that the main window now automatically handles much of saving and applying the layout on shutdown and startup something that currently requires quite a bit of custom code.
I figured out that with a few hacks, you can actually make QDockWidgets do some very interesting things that are not really described very well in the docs, such as "stacking" both vertically and horizontally in a single "drop area" as well as completely hiding the "header" when locking down the layout.
As such the amount of code changes required for this is quite small, but it took a lot of experimentation to actually make it behave the way I wanted.
An added benefit is that the main window now automatically handles much of saving and applying the layout on shutdown and startup something that currently requires quite a bit of custom code.
AFAIR Dolphin and Koffice works in similar way and I like it very much.
If you go this route, what will be the sense of the plasma panel, then?
At that point it would be easier, either to develop and to use Amarok2, to implement all "plasmoids" currently in the context view, as widgets for QDockWidget.
At that point it would be easier, either to develop and to use Amarok2, to implement all "plasmoids" currently in the context view, as widgets for QDockWidget.
i wan't that too.
just one note, on 1:07 the tabs should be on the left side near the others and not in the bottom.
just one note, on 1:07 the tabs should be on the left side near the others and not in the bottom.
Signed. It isn't very handy with the buttons on the bottom.
P.S. Very nice hack! I would like see this feature in 2.2 too.
P.S. Very nice hack! I would like see this feature in 2.2 too.
It's certainly a cool feature but I wonder if it's actually necessary. Adding features for the sake of geeky coolness (this is something that the average user would never use) isn't always a good idea.
Wow, that looks awesome, great flexibility. I am just wondering what the price is for such a great feature...
But it would be definitely be a plus to have this feature in Amarok
But it would be definitely be a plus to have this feature in Amarok
This is so ueber! I'd love to see that.
Amarok devs have done an amazing job so far. Looking forward to the future.
Amarok devs have done an amazing job so far. Looking forward to the future.
Okay, where is the GIT repository where I can get this experimental? 
This is what makes Amarok2 rock my world.
I have always said that KDE is great because it gives possibilities to user to customize the whole desktop environment to the needs of the user.
Other desktop environments/desktops are tied to one kind view or are very hard to tweak. KDE is always designed options in mind, but KDE4 really brought great need to minds of developers, the need of usability.
I hope that all KDE developers and developers who write software for KDE, keep in mind, that software needs to have great and easy to learn, default settings and UI. But that does not mean that they need to block off the advanced users or users who are learning, to tweaking settings for their purposes, because easy to learn, is not same as easy to use. KDE applications does need to have options and possibilities to tweak (like hide the menu with Ctrl+M, why this ain't on kdelibs?!) but those should not be possible trigger by default in mistake. (like remove default shortcuts to hide menu, but allow advanced users to set shortcut and use it this way).
I saw there few great settings what I planned to use if/when this is released.
I, as many other too, have always wondered why Amarok developers made choice to place the plasma-area middle of the player. When dragging files to playlist, it was always need to go over that area, until they implented the actions to plasma-area when dragging files.
I dont use daily purposes any wikipedia/lyric options, but I want them to be there if I want for some reason to see them. So placing that information as tab to same view as database, is just great. Or then move the plasma-area to right side. Those are two my favorite.
And the functionality to move the progressbar/playbuttons/volumecontrol to bottom of the screen, just dropped my jaws.... :-o
Just Marvelous!
This is what makes Amarok2 rock my world.
I have always said that KDE is great because it gives possibilities to user to customize the whole desktop environment to the needs of the user.
Other desktop environments/desktops are tied to one kind view or are very hard to tweak. KDE is always designed options in mind, but KDE4 really brought great need to minds of developers, the need of usability.
I hope that all KDE developers and developers who write software for KDE, keep in mind, that software needs to have great and easy to learn, default settings and UI. But that does not mean that they need to block off the advanced users or users who are learning, to tweaking settings for their purposes, because easy to learn, is not same as easy to use. KDE applications does need to have options and possibilities to tweak (like hide the menu with Ctrl+M, why this ain't on kdelibs?!) but those should not be possible trigger by default in mistake. (like remove default shortcuts to hide menu, but allow advanced users to set shortcut and use it this way).
I saw there few great settings what I planned to use if/when this is released.
I, as many other too, have always wondered why Amarok developers made choice to place the plasma-area middle of the player. When dragging files to playlist, it was always need to go over that area, until they implented the actions to plasma-area when dragging files.
I dont use daily purposes any wikipedia/lyric options, but I want them to be there if I want for some reason to see them. So placing that information as tab to same view as database, is just great. Or then move the plasma-area to right side. Those are two my favorite.
And the functionality to move the progressbar/playbuttons/volumecontrol to bottom of the screen, just dropped my jaws.... :-o
Just Marvelous!
WOW! Great feature! I like it.
Customization is a strength.
"Gartner predicts that ... by 2015, employees will customize 90% of the technology they use at work.“ [1] and at home.
According to (I think it was) Nuno "Then you get the amarok layout you want, not what we think you want."
[1] http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27235
Customization is a strength.
"Gartner predicts that ... by 2015, employees will customize 90% of the technology they use at work.“ [1] and at home.
According to (I think it was) Nuno "Then you get the amarok layout you want, not what we think you want."
[1] http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27235
Great! With this all missing from my amarok wish list would be:
- Stop the collection list refreshing itself whenever I classify one album as "various artists" or anything similar (any idea how annoying it is on a large collection?)
- Have the button area customisable too
At least if your proposal is implemented, amarok2 would be usable on my netbook at last!
Great work!
- Stop the collection list refreshing itself whenever I classify one album as "various artists" or anything similar (any idea how annoying it is on a large collection?)
- Have the button area customisable too
At least if your proposal is implemented, amarok2 would be usable on my netbook at last!
Great work!
Need ! Definitely !
How could that be controversial ? It's is absolutely fantastic !
How could that be controversial ? It's is absolutely fantastic !
"That being said, I would really like to hear the opinions of the wider community on this one, so let me know what you think: Want? Don't Want? Wonderful? Horrible?"
The comments here are about as close to unanimity as I have seen: you know what to do
The comments here are about as close to unanimity as I have seen: you know what to do
What really puzzle me: Why is there such controversy amongst developers about this?
Anyway, great and bitterly needed feature for Amarok 2. Go for it!
Anyway, great and bitterly needed feature for Amarok 2. Go for it!
I absolutely love this feature.
I also would like to read about the mentioned controversies. Is it because it makes it customizable? I always found this to be the great strength of KDE (and the reason why I am not using OSX nor Gnome anymore).
The way I see customization is, that sane defaults that makes all important functions visible to the user are important, but ideally everything can be set up in such a way that it fits *me*.
I also would like to read about the mentioned controversies. Is it because it makes it customizable? I always found this to be the great strength of KDE (and the reason why I am not using OSX nor Gnome anymore).
The way I see customization is, that sane defaults that makes all important functions visible to the user are important, but ideally everything can be set up in such a way that it fits *me*.
Great! This kind of interface customization is so cool and functional.
Must have!
Must have!
If you will introduce it into Amarok trunk, I will be happiest user in the world
From Nikolaj's earlier comment, it sounds like it might be relying on some undocumented Qt behaviour, which might not be wise long-term from a coding point of view (or have I misread?). I can't imagine why people would complain about it UI-wise, though: it's a great example of the kind of "passive configuration" aseigo mentioned a while back.
Amazing!!!!!!!
It's a killer feature that should be introduce as soon as possible! I was thinking about separating the context view in a tab (one tab for browser+playlist/one tab for context view), but this rock all!
Continue this job guys, you rock!!
It's a killer feature that should be introduce as soon as possible! I was thinking about separating the context view in a tab (one tab for browser+playlist/one tab for context view), but this rock all!
Continue this job guys, you rock!!
Nikolaj for President NOW!
Pretty pretty pretty pretty please, get this into Amarok tree! You'll save tons of kittens! Would you really kill'em?
Pretty pretty pretty pretty please, get this into Amarok tree! You'll save tons of kittens! Would you really kill'em?
Let me add just one more positive comment.
++nhn
To answer the question why this feature is/was controversial withing the developer team:
We know configurability does not make a program easier to use, certainly for non-tech users. It also looked like it would be a major technical challenge requiring a lot of code, high risk of regressions.
But now that we have this implementation I'm pretty sure most objections have gone. If we knew it would be this clean and easy there would probably be no controversy at all.
++nhn
To answer the question why this feature is/was controversial withing the developer team:
We know configurability does not make a program easier to use, certainly for non-tech users. It also looked like it would be a major technical challenge requiring a lot of code, high risk of regressions.
But now that we have this implementation I'm pretty sure most objections have gone. If we knew it would be this clean and easy there would probably be no controversy at all.
>configurability does not make a program easier to use, certainly for non-tech users. It also looked like it would be a major technical challenge requiring a lot of code, high risk of regressions.
Well, configurability will cause no problems, if it is hidden a little. Like in this video. You need to go to options, there unlock layout, then go back. Quiet hidden.
About regressions:
this looks like a killer feature, so I think it should be done even if it can have regressions.
Well, configurability will cause no problems, if it is hidden a little. Like in this video. You need to go to options, there unlock layout, then go back. Quiet hidden.
About regressions:
this looks like a killer feature, so I think it should be done even if it can have regressions.
(this is purely academic, but i'll respond anyway)
pushing new features that knowingly break stuff just because the new feature has an "oh cool, wow!" factor is not a good idea. then you end up with an app that can do some nice things but wait, turns out it has issues so you can't actually use it. oops.
pushing new features that knowingly break stuff just because the new feature has an "oh cool, wow!" factor is not a good idea. then you end up with an app that can do some nice things but wait, turns out it has issues so you can't actually use it. oops.
This is awesome! As long as it's hidden enough that users don't accidentally enable it, but discoverable enough that someone experimenting will find it, then it is a very welcome addition. Thank you
YES.
This is exactly what Amarok needs- for as much as the devs like their new layout, it should be changeable for people want something else. Winamp has always been the best at this and it's nice to see that Amarok may just follow suit.
The dockable toolbars in KDE are something that is far and away better than any other DE- discoverable, easy to use, great user feedback. Using that system like this makes for great customizability without having to resort to a non-standard solution. There's no reason NOT to do this.
Just allows us to turn off the playback buttons while keeping progress bar on, and this is PERFECT.
This is exactly what Amarok needs- for as much as the devs like their new layout, it should be changeable for people want something else. Winamp has always been the best at this and it's nice to see that Amarok may just follow suit.
The dockable toolbars in KDE are something that is far and away better than any other DE- discoverable, easy to use, great user feedback. Using that system like this makes for great customizability without having to resort to a non-standard solution. There's no reason NOT to do this.
Just allows us to turn off the playback buttons while keeping progress bar on, and this is PERFECT.
In a perfect world, you would be able to drag the elements out of the window and create another amarok window with the new elements.
Appart from that: How long till it lands in SVN? :grin:
Appart from that: How long till it lands in SVN? :grin:
wow, that's damn good and will make quite some people happy! the lock / unlock approach fits in just right!
go amarok, go qt!
go amarok, go qt!
Finally amarok2 becomes similar to what amarok1. some good old features are still missing, but it seems to me that amarok2 may soon fully replace the "best audio player ever"
blows the mind. definite +1 for me. here is the objective view:
Ups: configurability, I can make it look like i'm used to with amarok1.x..., the plasma section can tab behind the collections playlist, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Downs: maintainability/new bugs that are difficult to deal with? no definitive look-n-feel to amarok, new users could break the setup in a funky way.
Ups: configurability, I can make it look like i'm used to with amarok1.x..., the plasma section can tab behind the collections playlist, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Downs: maintainability/new bugs that are difficult to deal with? no definitive look-n-feel to amarok, new users could break the setup in a funky way.
"Downs: maintainability/new bugs that are difficult to deal with? no definitive look-n-feel to amarok, new users could break the setup in a funky way."
As for maintainability and new bugs, while there are a few regressions I have not yet dealt with (and the album cover thing is really weird...) its really not that much new code, and it actually simplifies some stuff that we manually had to deal with before, such as saving and restoring the size of the different elements between sessions.
By default Amarok would come with a predefined layout and the layout locked. This means that new users will always see the same standard Amarok, and most users will likely never change this.
And for users totally screwing up the layout, as someone has already mentioned (I forget if it was here or on IRC), a "rest to default layout" option would go a long way towards solving this problem.
So yes, these are potential issues, but I don't see them as insurmountable at all.
As for maintainability and new bugs, while there are a few regressions I have not yet dealt with (and the album cover thing is really weird...) its really not that much new code, and it actually simplifies some stuff that we manually had to deal with before, such as saving and restoring the size of the different elements between sessions.
By default Amarok would come with a predefined layout and the layout locked. This means that new users will always see the same standard Amarok, and most users will likely never change this.
And for users totally screwing up the layout, as someone has already mentioned (I forget if it was here or on IRC), a "rest to default layout" option would go a long way towards solving this problem.
So yes, these are potential issues, but I don't see them as insurmountable at all.
And of course being able to back up or save your layout, I hope?
I'm definitely for this change (you know,because we don't seem to have consensus.
I'm definitely for this change (you know,because we don't seem to have consensus
.
This is just great.
Please include this. I know that Markey once said that he does not like those "lego" applications, where you build your own layout. Many people out there do like them, so please please please include this. It goes well along the new gained UI flexibility in apps like dolphin, kmail, kopete and partially amaork (new playlist)
Thanks for the good work
Christian
Please include this. I know that Markey once said that he does not like those "lego" applications, where you build your own layout. Many people out there do like them, so please please please include this. It goes well along the new gained UI flexibility in apps like dolphin, kmail, kopete and partially amaork (new playlist)
Thanks for the good work
Christian
Great ! Go for it
And I think that a "restore defaults" button would make it more than safe enough for "unexperienced users". Just put it nicely visible next to the unlock option.
And for more advanced users this functionnality is FANTASTIC !
And I think that a "restore defaults" button would make it more than safe enough for "unexperienced users". Just put it nicely visible next to the unlock option.
And for more advanced users this functionnality is FANTASTIC !
woohoo looks great!
this would be a major improvement for me
thank you, great work!
this would be a major improvement for me
thank you, great work!
This, plus the fact that vertical tabs are going away, greatly improve Amarok UI and flexibility !
Thanks !
Thanks !
What would be even better would be if every vertical tab became its own panel (that could be docked, hidden, combined, etc) rather than continuing to treat them as a group where you can only interact with one at once.
Yes, that and a way to bookmark the whole layout so I can have different views for different use cases and can easily switch between them.
And maybe also break up the context view? Or have multiple context views.
And maybe also break up the context view? Or have multiple context views.
Sorry, but I can pretty much guarantee that will not happen. Amarok 2.10 is in deep feature freeze and the final release should be out quite soon.
I any case, a feature like this would need to mature in trunk for a while before it is released on an unsuspecting world.
I any case, a feature like this would need to mature in trunk for a while before it is released on an unsuspecting world.
I see no difference between this and the older version I tested months ago.
just like i see no difference between night and day.
but hey, we all have different perceptions
but hey, we all have different perceptions
Wow I have been wondering whether the such an approach would be adopted. That is simply great, it make perfect for small screen device such as netbook. One small question would it be possible to do the same with the plasmoid?
absolutely a MUST HAVE feature!!
i always wondered why the new design of amarok2 wasted so much space. most of the people today use a 16:9 display, so space should imho be used horizontal and not vertical. with this feature, nearly all complainments about amarok2 should come to an end, cause everyone could create his own preferred layout. nice job!!
i always wondered why the new design of amarok2 wasted so much space. most of the people today use a 16:9 display, so space should imho be used horizontal and not vertical. with this feature, nearly all complainments about amarok2 should come to an end, cause everyone could create his own preferred layout. nice job!!
+1, I think this is a really great idea.
Bonus points because the lock/unlock-style customization is the same as with plasma, so plasma users will feel right at home.
Bonus points because the lock/unlock-style customization is the same as with plasma, so plasma users will feel right at home.
+1 from me - I absolutely like it
It adds an extra flexibility without disturbing the average user if it is disabled per default. Noone even has to care about that change unless he explicitly wants it. So, you have my vote
It adds an extra flexibility without disturbing the average user if it is disabled per default. Noone even has to care about that change unless he explicitly wants it. So, you have my vote
Great, great feature! When using the beta's of Amarok 2.0, I always assumed that exactly this kind of configurability would come in the end anyway, and here it is
So why not push the idea one step further, and allow configuration not only for playlist, the plasmas and the collections, but also use multiple plasma collection boxes, so that you could configure the individual widgets, or the Internet/playlist/files/... tabs?
Leo is going to have a hard time topping this one!
So why not push the idea one step further, and allow configuration not only for playlist, the plasmas and the collections, but also use multiple plasma collection boxes, so that you could configure the individual widgets, or the Internet/playlist/files/... tabs?
Leo is going to have a hard time topping this one!
I don't like it.
I understand that opensource development is driver by experimentation and short-term code opportunities, but please, think a bit about it and then choose one direction for Amarok 2 GUI and user interaction and customization.
I mean, this feature is great, but what plasmalib is used for, then? I thought that you chose to use plasma to give a lot of freedom in customization to users. With a dockwidget structure, there will be an additional way, and additional level for customization!
Are all those levels useful or necessary, either from a user or developer point of view?
I see two main possible direction:
- the collection, internet, playlists and files panels could be implemented as plasmoids inside the current context view, that would become an "activity view", fully customizable by the users, with just some nice icons for switching to different "activities".
Add-ins and scripts could be developed as "plasmoids" and user could choose which put in each activity.
or
- scrap the whole plasma thing, and just provide a fully customizable dockwidget view, like songbird and foobar2k do. Add-ins could be developed as "widgets".
just my 2 cents written in my unreadable english ^^''
I understand that opensource development is driver by experimentation and short-term code opportunities, but please, think a bit about it and then choose one direction for Amarok 2 GUI and user interaction and customization.
I mean, this feature is great, but what plasmalib is used for, then? I thought that you chose to use plasma to give a lot of freedom in customization to users. With a dockwidget structure, there will be an additional way, and additional level for customization!
Are all those levels useful or necessary, either from a user or developer point of view?
I see two main possible direction:
- the collection, internet, playlists and files panels could be implemented as plasmoids inside the current context view, that would become an "activity view", fully customizable by the users, with just some nice icons for switching to different "activities".
Add-ins and scripts could be developed as "plasmoids" and user could choose which put in each activity.
or
- scrap the whole plasma thing, and just provide a fully customizable dockwidget view, like songbird and foobar2k do. Add-ins could be developed as "widgets".
just my 2 cents written in my unreadable english ^^''
'- scrap the whole plasma thing ... Add-ins could be developed as "widgets"'
What do you think libplasma is for and why do you think the Amarok devs included it?
What do you think libplasma is for and why do you think the Amarok devs included it?
I was pointing the fact that, using dockwidget, Amarok will have a configurable and extensible widget panel (the context view) inside a configurable and extensible widget windows (dockwidget).
My vote is for just one level of customization: a powerful "activity view", using libplasma to manage layout and widget, or a powerful dockwidget layout.
Of course, I understand that dreams need to be coded ^^''
My vote is for just one level of customization: a powerful "activity view", using libplasma to manage layout and widget, or a powerful dockwidget layout.
Of course, I understand that dreams need to be coded ^^''
Agree. The feature looks cool, but in this way it would look much cooler
Oh yes! For me DockWidgets are one of the coolest things in the GUI land. Please get it to the release ASAP.
cheers++; imho a killer feature but you devs have to evaluate the tradeoffs in maintainability (altough the concepts already look very sane). usability-wise the locking concept shields any unnecessary complexity from the user and the fact that similar adjustable/dragable gui elements are used throughout kde makes them feel very intuitively.
i think this feature could make a lot of people happier without "hurting" the other ones (classic win-win).
and as a sidenote, i like the new context view however the navigation is still a mess (but i trust in you).
can't wait till amarok becomes stable enough on other platforms in order to "infect" my friends (who already love amarok but live on the dark side of OSs).
btw you already might by aware of it but you guys totally rock =)
i think this feature could make a lot of people happier without "hurting" the other ones (classic win-win).
and as a sidenote, i like the new context view however the navigation is still a mess (but i trust in you).
can't wait till amarok becomes stable enough on other platforms in order to "infect" my friends (who already love amarok but live on the dark side of OSs).
btw you already might by aware of it but you guys totally rock =)
Awesome feature, great for persoanl customization. KDE is all about being able to have your system your way and not the way someone tells you to. This has been missing since Amarok 2.0 and there's really no reason to not have some layer of customization to it. You can see people want it (I've only seen 1 person say he doesn't like it here) so why should ths not be added?
Yes, please. This is likely to make a lot of people happy, including me.
I know you're trying to get rid of the vertical tabs but, if they end up staying, maybe hook those into this system? Like, each of those tabs is a moveable window or something?
I know you're trying to get rid of the vertical tabs but, if they end up staying, maybe hook those into this system? Like, each of those tabs is a moveable window or something?
Mercurio: This interaction isn't in plasma - its directly in qt, which is the core of this application. It's very similar to the behavior in Koffice2, if you have used that.
Of course, this feature is absolutely *brilliant*. Another +1 for a restore defaults button, but other than that this is pretty much perfect.
As a future evolution, I can envision breaking off one section and making it its own window. E.g. I take the controls and drag it off the main window into its own. Or, even better, I can rearrange the buttons within a section. I would love to have the controls on the bottom of the window, but only if the play/stop/next buttons were on the right hand side. Just some ideas for the future.
Of course, this feature is absolutely *brilliant*. Another +1 for a restore defaults button, but other than that this is pretty much perfect.
As a future evolution, I can envision breaking off one section and making it its own window. E.g. I take the controls and drag it off the main window into its own. Or, even better, I can rearrange the buttons within a section. I would love to have the controls on the bottom of the window, but only if the play/stop/next buttons were on the right hand side. Just some ideas for the future.
Yep! I was just pointing the fact with that feature, Amarok will have different levels of customization, with different metaphors and different underlying techs... and instead of hiding buttons'n'tabs, the interface is going to show more of them (without added functionalities)
Is all this really necessary? While I think dockwidget is a most needed feature, I see it just a quick hack, that will be used just to recreate Amarok 1.4 UI.
My previous post was meant to be just a incitement for developers: it would be sad if after all this noise about Amarok 2, it becomes an "overengineered Amarok 1.4 with a lot of regressions".
Instead, set the bar high, take a coherent vision (whatever vision, it's a choice of who makes the code!)... and follow it!
Is all this really necessary? While I think dockwidget is a most needed feature, I see it just a quick hack, that will be used just to recreate Amarok 1.4 UI.
My previous post was meant to be just a incitement for developers: it would be sad if after all this noise about Amarok 2, it becomes an "overengineered Amarok 1.4 with a lot of regressions".
Instead, set the bar high, take a coherent vision (whatever vision, it's a choice of who makes the code!)... and follow it!
"Instead, set the bar high, take a coherent vision (whatever vision, it's a choice of who makes the code!)... and follow it! ;-)"
We do, we try and we are! (and we take the flack for it quite often...)
This feature would not really change the overall vision of where we want to take Amarok 2 in any significant way. The default view, which will likely end up being used by a majority of users will still be defined by us.
And while it is quite obvious form the replies to this blog that many users wold like this kind of configurability, this is not the only argument for creating a flexible layout. In the future we are hoping to expand Amarok to other types of devices as well, and some of these might require very different layouts, or even different "views" altogether. So having a flexible system for moving/changing things around could be a great benefit to the developers as well.
So, I don't at all see this as being mutually exclusive with having a strong vision for where to take Amarok. It might even help us get there!
We do, we try and we are! (and we take the flack for it quite often...)
This feature would not really change the overall vision of where we want to take Amarok 2 in any significant way. The default view, which will likely end up being used by a majority of users will still be defined by us.
And while it is quite obvious form the replies to this blog that many users wold like this kind of configurability, this is not the only argument for creating a flexible layout. In the future we are hoping to expand Amarok to other types of devices as well, and some of these might require very different layouts, or even different "views" altogether. So having a flexible system for moving/changing things around could be a great benefit to the developers as well.
So, I don't at all see this as being mutually exclusive with having a strong vision for where to take Amarok. It might even help us get there!
I'm not against a flexible layout at all!
I'm pointing the fact that there is a panel hosting widgets with a flexible layout (the context view, using libplasma) inside a windows hosting widgets with a flexible layout (QDockWidget).
I vote for one or the other, but not both at the same time. Details are in my previous post a bit up there.
I'm pointing the fact that there is a panel hosting widgets with a flexible layout (the context view, using libplasma) inside a windows hosting widgets with a flexible layout (QDockWidget).
I vote for one or the other, but not both at the same time. Details are in my previous post a bit up there.
That'd be very cool!
It might be a neat addition to allow saving layouts, share them via GHNS, and easily switch between installed layouts
It might be a neat addition to allow saving layouts, share them via GHNS, and easily switch between installed layouts
I think exporting (sharing) layouts is a must have feature for new users. It's a nice step between the default layout and jumping into the abyss of unlimited choices. Perhaps amarok could ship with 2 layouts? This would guide a user into the feature without dumping him/her off a cliff of unlimited config options.
I can also imagine a gallery of layouts to browse and download.
The configurability of KDE is what keeps me as a user.
I can also imagine a gallery of layouts to browse and download.
The configurability of KDE is what keeps me as a user.
Damn. Leo just lost.
+1000 for inclusion in a future release..
Rock On!
+1000 for inclusion in a future release..
Rock On!
If this awesome piece of work makes it into a release, it will, finally, stop those flame wars about Amarok UI. Which is great. However, it seems to implement the same kind of functionality as plasma in CV does, which is quite confusing.
Also, it would be nice if a set of predefined layouts (for a number of obvious usecases) was available by default, and an option to save the current layout.
And please, consider the look of those docks, because
a) with Oxygen, they show too many lines together with the embedded frames (is that too much of a hack to remove these lines?)
and
b)when squeezed too much, the CV looks just ugly, while other UI parts may simply make little sense when squeezed. The docks shouldn't be able to go below some minimal size.
Overall, this looks very KDEish. I definitely vote for this feature.
Also, it would be nice if a set of predefined layouts (for a number of obvious usecases) was available by default, and an option to save the current layout.
And please, consider the look of those docks, because
a) with Oxygen, they show too many lines together with the embedded frames (is that too much of a hack to remove these lines?)
and
b)when squeezed too much, the CV looks just ugly, while other UI parts may simply make little sense when squeezed. The docks shouldn't be able to go below some minimal size.
Overall, this looks very KDEish. I definitely vote for this feature.
So many cool features...
CD support, ability to sort on the playlist and better device support (GSoC), scriptable context view applets, the end of the vertical tabs and now this...
If this Dockable thing is made for 2.2, amarok 2.2 will definitely rock the road!!
Keep up the excellent work guys...
CD support, ability to sort on the playlist and better device support (GSoC), scriptable context view applets, the end of the vertical tabs and now this...
If this Dockable thing is made for 2.2, amarok 2.2 will definitely rock the road!!
Keep up the excellent work guys...
Woooo-hooo!
Hurray! THE BEST feature in Amarok 2! Really! If you implement it bug-free Amarok 2 will be at least as good as its predecessor.
Great work!
Hurray! THE BEST feature in Amarok 2! Really! If you implement it bug-free Amarok 2 will be at least as good as its predecessor.
Great work!
An absolutely awesome feature!
With this level of customization nearly every user can create his favourite one.
Of course the locking/unlocking commands needs to be more accessible, but... this is the way!
I think you should create also some default layouts.. like "minimal", "full" and so on.
Great work!!!
With this level of customization nearly every user can create his favourite one.
Of course the locking/unlocking commands needs to be more accessible, but... this is the way!
I think you should create also some default layouts.. like "minimal", "full" and so on.
Great work!!!
Another vote for this. As others have said, I personally don't see a good reason not to have this, assuming it is not too easy to do by accident (the version in the video handles this fine) and there is an "reset to default" option. Even Dolphin, which is supposed to be a "simple" file manager, has this feature.
One idea: Would it be possible to make the parts of the current left panel use this as well? Currently you have three different ways to switch between overlapping pages: the plasma context view, the new breadcrumb left bar, and now this. I can see keeping the context view based on plasma, it serves a different role, but I think the items in the left bar should be treated as tabs in this new system so they can be moved around freely, turned on and off, stacked on top of each other, set to show multiple ones simultaneously, etc.
I would also make the control buttons (play, pause, etc) a separate components from the volume and progress sliders. That way you can put them next to each other on either side, above each other, totally separate, etc. Making the volume and progress sliders separate also may be a good idea, but I am not as sure about that.
One idea: Would it be possible to make the parts of the current left panel use this as well? Currently you have three different ways to switch between overlapping pages: the plasma context view, the new breadcrumb left bar, and now this. I can see keeping the context view based on plasma, it serves a different role, but I think the items in the left bar should be treated as tabs in this new system so they can be moved around freely, turned on and off, stacked on top of each other, set to show multiple ones simultaneously, etc.
I would also make the control buttons (play, pause, etc) a separate components from the volume and progress sliders. That way you can put them next to each other on either side, above each other, totally separate, etc. Making the volume and progress sliders separate also may be a good idea, but I am not as sure about that.
Very nice as a power I like and will enjoy this feature.
what I'd like to see with this feature are preset configurations and the ability to save my layout(s) and switch quickly between saved layouts.
Switching can be done with key shortcut, a combobox, 2 or 3 "default" modes easily selectable in a toolbox a "minimal mode", a "normal mode" and a "full mode" (like areas in kdevelop4)
as a power I like and will enjoy this feature.what I'd like to see with this feature are preset configurations and the ability to save my layout(s) and switch quickly between saved layouts.
Switching can be done with key shortcut, a combobox, 2 or 3 "default" modes easily selectable in a toolbox a "minimal mode", a "normal mode" and a "full mode" (like areas in kdevelop4)
+1
Yeah please!!
Please implement this as soon as possible into trunk!!
Yeah please!!
Please implement this as soon as possible into trunk!!
I'm one of those who thinks Amarok 2.1 GUI is a complete mess with no future and 0 usability. This proved me wrong!
Cheers. It will make Amarok the most flexible player out there.
Just one question. With all this customizability, why do we need the plasma context view? I'm not saying get rid of it, because, with a little of work and a GHNS to download more plasmoids, it could be a killer feature (though nuno could help a little with the artwork).
Anyway, this is great!
Please implement this!
Cheers. It will make Amarok the most flexible player out there.
Just one question. With all this customizability, why do we need the plasma context view? I'm not saying get rid of it, because, with a little of work and a GHNS to download more plasmoids, it could be a killer feature (though nuno could help a little with the artwork).
Anyway, this is great!
Please implement this!
Yes please!!, this prototype feature should have been added in Amarok "2.0" to shutdown UI flames. Works like Dolphin...
In 3 words: I love it.
In 3 words: I love it.
DO WANT YES PLZ NAO!!!!!!! Especially option to dock that middle view to the left!!! Frankly i don't need to see my collection all the time. It's much more "cleaner" and way prettier with just "2 active" views IMO. Also ability to move/resize control buttons would be nice. The wasted space between windeco and progress bar looks kind of ugly (probably meant for visualizer but when will phonon allow it?).
This is wonderfull! please implement this prototype in trunk.
It is the best way to customize Amarok to my needs and let it do what i want
It is the best way to customize Amarok to my needs and let it do what i want
This is awsome! It will silent all the people which want the amarok 1 layout back.
Oh yes, please bring this to trunk. I think the 'voting' in the comment is quite unanimous...
DO WANT!
Might I suggest also having "Lock Layout" in the context menu as well? In the same style as Plasma that is. (i.e. right click -> lock layout)
Might I suggest also having "Lock Layout" in the context menu as well? In the same style as Plasma that is. (i.e. right click -> lock layout)
Wow, the amount of comments on this issue really shows that you nailed the right spot. +1 for implementing it
...And on the 19'th day Nikolaj said:
"Let there be Awesome."
and behold, Awesome was.
rAmen.
"Let there be Awesome."
and behold, Awesome was.
rAmen.
I cant imagine this is not documented as many kde apps already use this feature for quite a while. (dolphin, kopete, just to name 2)
All i ever wanted
all i ever needed
is here in this blog
arguments against are very
unnecessary
they can only do harm
all i ever needed
is here in this blog
arguments against are very
unnecessary
they can only do harm
This is a really terrible good feature. Please enable it for Amarok 2.2 I'll give you +1 for this, cause it's the most flexible thing to create a stylish Amarok in your own way.
Fabulous! This may be interesting to you: When I first installed the Alpha version of Amarok 2.0 I simply assumed this feature was already there. When I didn't find it I figured it was a matter of time - and now here it is.
+1 to being able to customize more granular items like buttons and tabs.
+1 to restore to default.
+1 to multiple defaults for various use-cases (Party Mode, Amarok 1.4, Netbook/Small Screen, Explore More (with emphasis on wikipedia/lyric etc), Collection Management, Tabbed View...)
+1 to being able to bookmark/save custom layouts.
+1 for being able to import/export saved layouts.
Great work!
+1 to being able to customize more granular items like buttons and tabs.
+1 to restore to default.
+1 to multiple defaults for various use-cases (Party Mode, Amarok 1.4, Netbook/Small Screen, Explore More (with emphasis on wikipedia/lyric etc), Collection Management, Tabbed View...)
+1 to being able to bookmark/save custom layouts.
+1 for being able to import/export saved layouts.
Great work!
Amazing! Please include this feature. It is especially useful for people using small-screen computers like me. And while you are at it (as someone already mentioned earlier) please allow users to pick the size and type of buttons displayed (like Play/Pause, Stop, Fwd, Rev, Shuffle, etc.)
yeah please do it!
I don't remember where, but I already asked it to an amarok's dev . his answer was: already discus it will never be like that!(i.e dockable widget)
I appreciated ...
I don't remember where, but I already asked it to an amarok's dev . his answer was: already discus it will never be like that!(i.e dockable widget)
I appreciated ...
wooo teh Mark Kretschmann will hate this.
Just for that reason alone it should go in !
Fixed layouts are sooo 1995.
Just for that reason alone it should go in !
Fixed layouts are sooo 1995.
AWESOME!!
This is the coolest feature ever. Reminded me of when I first used dolphin and experimented with all the different panels and their placement. This is what makes KDE4 so great.
I would like to be able to use this feature ASAP. Please merge this with trunk as soon as possible.......
Keep up the good work.
This is the coolest feature ever. Reminded me of when I first used dolphin and experimented with all the different panels and their placement. This is what makes KDE4 so great.
I would like to be able to use this feature ASAP. Please merge this with trunk as soon as possible.......
Keep up the good work.
The best ever! Beautiful. Please employ your best diplomacy skills when talking to the other developers, so that this can go in. Since the panes are lockable there is really no reason not to have this. And the mass of people who commented here so far seem to absolutely love it. Congratulations!
Now reading all these comments, it just looks that most (if not all) commenters want this feature to Amarok2. And feels that only Amarok developers are against it.
I tought that this kind feature (lock/unlock) should come to other applications too, like Dolphin, what has the dockable sidepanels etc. I do not like the Dolphin sidepanel topic taking space, even it is styled by theme but...
I think there is no need to one developer use diplomacy skills to convert other devs to accept this. Only need is to show this blog comments and they can do the math.
If the only reason to keep this feature off is the quality of code, then improve it and make it such it works.
I hope other devs do not feel bad if they have been wrong about this kind features.
I tought that this kind feature (lock/unlock) should come to other applications too, like Dolphin, what has the dockable sidepanels etc. I do not like the Dolphin sidepanel topic taking space, even it is styled by theme but...
I think there is no need to one developer use diplomacy skills to convert other devs to accept this. Only need is to show this blog comments and they can do the math.
If the only reason to keep this feature off is the quality of code, then improve it and make it such it works.
I hope other devs do not feel bad if they have been wrong about this kind features.
Your right. The comments show what the users want
And to be honest. I can't be a regression for usability or anything else to include this feature. It is something someone can active in the settings if he wants to.
Users who don't need this feature do not get in contact with it.
Really a +1 from me.
And to be honest. I can't be a regression for usability or anything else to include this feature. It is something someone can active in the settings if he wants to.
Users who don't need this feature do not get in contact with it.
Really a +1 from me.
Well, the usability ain't problem if the feature ain't possible to use by mistake. And configuration options can be made clearly such that it ain't too complex to understand.
Too many times developers refuse to implenting a feature because they say it confuse user. Almost all features can be added, question is all features should not be default, sot he default UI stays simple and easy to learn for new users. But power users can always just turn UI how they need it.
In example of this, if in the options there is one mark-config what allows power users to tweak UI how they need it, how could normal user do it by mistake?
Important thing is too that config needs pop-up information/explenation what it does. So the user do not need to use handbook to understand the application configs. Hopefully this gets documented well.
Too many times developers refuse to implenting a feature because they say it confuse user. Almost all features can be added, question is all features should not be default, sot he default UI stays simple and easy to learn for new users. But power users can always just turn UI how they need it.
In example of this, if in the options there is one mark-config what allows power users to tweak UI how they need it, how could normal user do it by mistake?
Important thing is too that config needs pop-up information/explenation what it does. So the user do not need to use handbook to understand the application configs. Hopefully this gets documented well.
That. Is. Awesome.
This feature is definitely a must-have. As a matter of fact, despite all the cool features introduced lately, this is the first one that made my jaw drop and REALLY convince me that Amarok is heading to the right direction since 1.4.
Unfortunately I started by watching the video and I read the 1st disclaimer afterwards. I really really hope that this feature gets implemented (hopefully as soon as possible - version 2.2 even).
Keep up the good work!
This feature is definitely a must-have. As a matter of fact, despite all the cool features introduced lately, this is the first one that made my jaw drop and REALLY convince me that Amarok is heading to the right direction since 1.4.
Unfortunately I started by watching the video and I read the 1st disclaimer afterwards. I really really hope that this feature gets implemented (hopefully as soon as possible - version 2.2 even).
Keep up the good work!
The reason I have come to love linux and opensource over the years is because of choice and the ability to create an environment that looks and behaves the way I want it to. This is definately a great idea. as many have said I may decide the default layout is what I like but I have come to expect this kind of choice from opensource. Great Job.
Wow. This is amazing.
This would really make Amarok rock.
Now, PLEASE add this! And - to make it rock even harder, allow scripts to add new Docks. I would think that this shouldn't be hard, as the scripting interface of amarok already allows to modifiy the GUI, at least in some parts, right?
This would be so cool, because e.g. it would finally be possible to do a different collection browser via scripts. The current collection browser is one of the few things I don't like about amarok - for example, I'd love to have bigger album images in a gallery style view to browse my albums, or have a winamp/itunes style collection browser. I know that amarok devs wouldn't like the latter as default, but making it possible to do such a thing via scripts would make amarok the best player around. So far, for me, it (very unfortunately) remains winamp (only because of the collection browser. I love amarok's playlist and context view).
This would really make Amarok rock.
Now, PLEASE add this! And - to make it rock even harder, allow scripts to add new Docks. I would think that this shouldn't be hard, as the scripting interface of amarok already allows to modifiy the GUI, at least in some parts, right?
This would be so cool, because e.g. it would finally be possible to do a different collection browser via scripts. The current collection browser is one of the few things I don't like about amarok - for example, I'd love to have bigger album images in a gallery style view to browse my albums, or have a winamp/itunes style collection browser. I know that amarok devs wouldn't like the latter as default, but making it possible to do such a thing via scripts would make amarok the best player around. So far, for me, it (very unfortunately) remains winamp (only because of the collection browser. I love amarok's playlist and context view).
DO WANT IT
DO WANT
DO WANT
DO WANT
do want it right now, in the 2.1 release
this can certeinly be the best feature of 2.x release
something users realy needed in 2.0
DO WANT
DO WANT
DO WANT
do want it right now, in the 2.1 release
this can certeinly be the best feature of 2.x release
something users realy needed in 2.0
as has been explained multiple times, there is no way this is going to be in 2.1. we've been feature frozen for months, it is about to be released, and this feature needs time to mature for a while in trunk anyway.
it is a candidate for 2.2, not the 2.1.x series as nikolaj explained above
it is a candidate for 2.2, not the 2.1.x series as nikolaj explained above
this is the way to go - nice!!!
can't emphasize enough
LET THERE BE DOCKS!
+11111111
can't emphasize enough
LET THERE BE DOCKS!
+11111111
LET THERE BE DOCKS!
gays, I wait it so long !!! It's need for usability !!!
gays, I wait it so long !!! It's need for usability !!!
It's Great! Amarok2 really needed something like this! Many users compliments about the GUI of Amarok2 and now it's usefull to simply customize it. Great Job!
exacly what i want!!!
So i need to test the nighly build.
Can't wait to test it.
So i need to test the nighly build.
Can't wait to test 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
