Re: [LAD] User eXperience in Linux Audio

Gianfranco,

Thanks for your comment. I wholeheartedly agree. Target audience is a super
important question in these matters.

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Gianfranco Ceccolini <
gianfranco@email-addr-hidden> wrote:

> Hi eveyone
>
> Although I normally refrain from entering this kind of discussions, I just
> can help myself from entering this particular one :-)
>
> I think that the point that most of us are missing is that, prior to
> decide the features on a particular product (a software in the discussed
> cases), one needs to decide THE TARGET AUDIENCE of such product.
>
> I see myself dealing with this issue daily when working with the MOD and I
> imagine that any other product, be it gratis or paid, free or non-free,
> hardware or software, is no different in this issue.
>
> I personally believe that there is no such thing as "the perfect globally
> accepted set of features" but only the ones that are accepted by a
> particular group of users and thus the need to define the target audience
> before deciding on the features.
>
> That said, I think that eveyone is right in their arguments and the lack
> of concordance comes from the fact that each one is considering a different
> target audience.
>
> Computer users (and Linux users also for that matter) can be spread over
> an extensive spectrum that stretches from the "80 column monocolor terminal
> lover" to the "keyoard hater" and will surely disagree on whats is a good
> and what is a bad designed software in terms of user experience - the
> thing actually working or not is a totally different matter.
>
> Best wishes to everyone.
>
> Gianfranco Ceccolini
> The MOD Team
>
>
> 2015-04-23 7:47 GMT+02:00 Thijs van severen <thijsvanseveren@email-addr-hidden>:
>
>>
>> Op 23-apr.-2015 00:14 schreef "Fons Adriaensen" <fons@email-addr-hidden>:
>> >
>> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 08:43:11AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
>> >
>> > > Just one little note here. Back in 2001, I read an article in the US
>> > > Keyboard magazine that made a strong case for stopping the use of
>> > > skuomorphic GUIs (knobs etc) for a variety of reasons. It wasn't
>> written by
>> > > a software developer, but a musician. He was bemoaning how limited
>> GUIs for
>> > > audio software were because of their attempt to present things that
>> look
>> > > like hardware controls.
>> >
>> > There are different grades of that of course. Chickenheads, screws,
>> > handles and ventilation holes in a plugin GUI just look silly IMHO.
>> > But an 'abstracted' version of a rotary control can make sense, it
>> > has some advantages over most alternatives.
>> >
>> > On the other extreme, I find the 'standard' widgets offered by
>> > most GUI toolkits completely useless on anything that is supposed
>> > to be 'technical' (including audio apps) rather than an office
>> > application.
>> >
>> > People writing 'GUI standards' and trying to force them on everyone
>> > should have a look at e.g. a modern 'glass cockpit'.
>>
>> We are not talking about someone that suddenly decided to make up there
>> own set rules and then tried to fore it upon us
>> We are talking about a group of people that conducted a study on a large
>> group of random users, and based on that study they defined a set of
>> guidelines for us to use ... or ignore
>> #freedom :-)
>>
>> I mean the real
>> > thing - Boeing or Airbus, not the Garmin etc. thingies used by sports
>> > pilots that look like (and probabaly are) Windows apps.
>> >
>> > This is a very complex environment. A large amount of information,
>> > often competing for attention, has to be displayed accurately and
>> > unambiguously, in a way that is comfortable to be viewed for hours
>> > on end, and that also remains functional in emergency situations
>> > that may require split-second decisions. A lot of research and
>> > effort has gone into designing these things.
>> >
>> > You won't find a single 'standard' widget on those displays. Nor
>> > skeuomorphic imitations of traditional flight instruments. The
>> > only thing that still looks a bit traditional would be the attitude
>> > indicator on the PFD, but even that will be a very abstract version
>> > of the old mechanical one.
>> >
>> > All of it is designed to be purely functional, no frills, no eye-
>> > candy. Even the MCDUs (the things on the central console that look
>> > like a calculator on steroids) have their own interface style and
>> > conventions that will be quite different from what you may expect.
>> >
>> > And that's not because this is a primitive, conservative, or 'ten
>> > years behind the state of the art' technology - these systems are
>> > among the most advanced you can find anywhere.
>> >
>> > The same, but probably less extreme, you'll find in almost all
>> > 'technical' environments where function is more important than
>> > looks or tradition.
>> >
>> >
>> > Ciao,
>> >
>> > --
>> > FA
>> >
>> > A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
>> > It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
>> > and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Linux-audio-dev mailing list
>> > Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
>> > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
>> Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
>

-- 
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.ru/

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Thu Apr 23 16:15:02 2015