Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] read it and drool
From: Paul Barton-Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Tue Dec 05 2000 - 04:35:11 EET
>> so, you think that any of the UI paradigm(s?) exemplified by Windows,
>> MacOS, BeOS, NeXTStep or anyone else is actually *good* for this kind
>> of thing ?
>
>Consistency in GUI design is a very important thing. It's something X11
>has forgotten, and which gnome and kde are trying to bring back.
that doesn't have anything to do with the question. i agree with
consistency. the question is: do the UI paradigms that one can
currently *be consistent* with really represent good models for
dealing with this stuff ? there's no point being consistent with an
inappropriate standard.
and X11 didn't forget this. it never even considered it in the first place.
>When every app uses a completely different interface with completely
>different widgets and completely different input methods, it only hurts
>usability.
agreed. but thats because we're still in an experimental phase with
this stuff (even on proprietary OS's). trying to rush this and say
"oh, audio apps should all be using the same (crappy) GUI elements as
text editors and spreadsheets and drawing programs just so they can be
consistent" - well, i am not sure, but i am not convinced that thats a
winning move. i think we need totally new widgets that *don't* work
like the existing ones, for the most part. exactly which ones, now
thats a good question.
>Common widget sets to be used across ALL applications helps a LOT. This is
>where macos and windoze do well over X11. gnome and kde will help X11, but
>more work is needed.
i don't think that gnome and kde will help this at all. they have VERY
little to do with GUI design, which is handled primarily by their
respective toolkits. gnome and kde represent (too me) extremely large
reimplementations of the windows/macos model of how applications
interact with each other and with the OS. as chris lansdowne noted on
alsa-devel recently, the problem domain they have been developed in is
totally different from the audio/midi world, and its far from clear
that they can help us very much. frankly, they alarm me. the concern
that people have over the tangled mess that is the windows95+ GUI kit
- a couple more iterations of gnome and/or kde, and we're going to be
in the same boat, just with different variable naming conventions.
and besides, take a look at:
cubase
cakewalk
samplitude
cool edit
protools
reason
pulsar/scope
logic
etc. etc. etc.
can you find much evidence of the windows/macos "uniformity" in any of
these programs ? nope. i know you think this is a mistake, but lets
not blame it (totally) on the lack of a single toolkit standard for
linux.
not that it wouldn't be nice if we had such a thing; but we don't, and
we won't, and i don't think we should be pining for it.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Dec 05 2000 - 05:01:51 EET