[JDEV] UI opinions..

Fri Aug 6 10:15:33 CDT 1999

  Already done..  All major functions are accesible via right clicking on the system tray icon, including send message, away, exit, info, etc..
---
Thomas Charron

On Fri, 6 Aug 1999 08:49:18    Tim Lesher wrote:
>> > 4.  Kill the standard Window menu; use something that takes up less
>> > space, like the ICQ button.
>>
>>    Not sure what you mean.
>
>OK.  I'm looking at my Outlook Express window.  My menu bar contains seven
>menu items:  File, Edit, et al.  These seven items take up only half the
>width of the window, yet the Windows menu extends the entire width of the
>window.  Now, for a "normal" app like Outlook Express, this isn't a bad
>thing.  However, for an always-up messenger tool, window space is far more
>precious.
>
>As an alternative, look at the ICQ menu button or the Windows 95 "Start"
>button.  They hide a menu and allow access via a button, saving a lot of
>real estate.  I like that for small tools.
>
>>    Also, it'd be nice if you could get a list of on-line users from
>> the systray in a menu-style. Like just right click on the icon in the
>> systray, go to the "roster" submenu or whatever and see what's there.
>
>Hmm.... I like this.  What about, in the ubiquitous context menu you get by
>right-clicking on the tray icon, one of the menu picks is a "Send Message To
>>", which expands into your buddy list?  I know I would use that a lot--my
>usual algorithm is "Oh, I need to tell Joe about xyzzy.  Restore AIM, find
>Joe, double-click on Joe, send message, close message window, minimize AIM."
>This could be reduced to "pick send, pick Joe, send message" if the message
>window can be configured to close or minimize after this "quick send".
>
>--
>Tim Lesher
>mailto:timl at epix.net
>
>>
>> > If there are extra gizmos like the AIM "Search the Web" bar, allow
>> > the user to hide them.
>>
>>    Another must.
>>
>> > 5.  This is a little more out there, but skinnability a la WinAmp
>> > would certainly attract a certain segment of the online crowd.
>>
>>    Igh. But yes, it would attract certain ppl, so as long as you can
>> turn off skins and have it use your Windows/Mac/whatever colors
>> instead, this would be ok.
>>
>>    Also, it'd be nice if you could get a list of on-line users from
>> the systray in a menu-style. Like just right click on the icon in the
>> systray, go to the "roster" submenu or whatever and see what's there.
>> Clicking on someone's name in the menu could either do whatever the
>> default double-click action in your roster window is (presumeably
>> sending a message), or bring up a dialog with buttons to choose what
>> to do, from send message, file send, or whatever options. You might
>> make the tooltip for the icon include info like how many messages
>> pending, how many users in your roster are on-line, how many have
>> showed up/left since the prog was last unminimized, etc.
>>
>> On 5 Aug 99,, Jerrad Pierce sounded off on [JDEV] UI:
>>
>> > I have 3 better words: modular modular modular
>> >
>> > why should I even have to have the forsaken search bar, etc. In
>> > memory if I'm not displaying it.
>>
>>    I agree completely -- However, making it modular as you've
>> suggested is just one way of making it configurable -- A very good
>> way, too. :)
>>
>> On 5 Aug 99,, Scott Robinson sounded off on Re: [JDEV] UI opinions..:
>>
>> > Microsoft had the right idea when it allowed users to just drag
>> > and drop the buttons they liked onto the tool bar.
>> >
>> > Configurability with simplicity is the way everyone _wants_ to go,
>> > but getting there seems to be the problem. Bars or menus? Both?
>>
>>    I agree; nothing I said goes against allowing you to simply drag
>> and drop buttons (not that you said it did, but just to clarefy), in
>> fact where I referred to a "graphical toolbar creation tool," I was
>> thinking of things like allowing simple drag & drop rearrangement and
>> such. But, it might be convenient to also have a central toolbar
>> manager you can go to, and I want it to be extremely extensible, so I
>> don't want it limited to a set of standard buttons, which is why I
>> think it'd be good to specify buttons similarly to how I said.
>>
>> > While the ICQesque interface is generally agreed to be evil, that
>> > is what the user expects.
>>
>>    Really? I find the interface of ICQ 98 quite nice. Then again, I
>> wouldn't touch ICQ 99 with a 10 foot pole... Bloatware....
>>
>> > Skins? Customizable UI? If we wrote a standard (read portable)
>> > Jabber client that supported radical modification of the UI with a
>> > few nice defaults that we created, I would think this would solve
>> > all our problems. You may say "but that would be to hard! Think of
>> > all the code we'd have write to specialize the interface..."
>>
>>    This sounds like SUCH a good idea. I would love to see this
>> happen...
>>
>> > When that Jabber install program boots up, its only question should
>> > be "How do you want Jabber to look? ICQ/AIMesque? mIRCesqe? ..."
>> > and etc.
>>
>>    Agreed. Optimally, it should also bring up screen shots when you
>> click each one :)
>>
>> > As always, I'm officially "on crack" so anything I say can be
>> > disregarded.
>>
>>    Hey, nice disclaimer...
>>
>> --
>> "Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity,
>>  and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them."
>> --_Catch-22_, Joseph Heller
>>
>> Copyright 1999 Vivre Draco (cfc at paganpaths.org)
>> excelsior ad infinitum -- http://www.paganpaths.org/~cfc/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jdev mailing list
>> jdev at jabber.org
>> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>jdev mailing list
>jdev at jabber.org
>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
>


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.