Slashdot Mirror
KDE's UI To Bend Toward Simplicity
sfcrazy (1542989) writes "KDE Software is often criticized for being too complicated for an average user to use. Try setting up Kmail and you would know what I mean. The KDE developers are aware of it and now they are working on making KDE UI simpler. KDE usability team lead Thomas Pfeiffer Thomas prefers a layered feature exposure so that users can enjoy certain advanced features at a later stage after they get accustomed to the basic functionality of the application. He quotes the earlier (pre-Plasma era) vision of KDE 4 – "Anything that makes Linux interesting for technical users (shells, compilation, drivers, minute user settings) will be available; not as the default way of doing things, but at the user's discretion."
Simplification: the act of removing features that are deemed unnecessary, redundant, irrelevant.
Simplification (UI design): the act of removing or transforming discoverable, one-step, procedures in opaque, 3-step-after-reconfiguration procedures. See Gnome, Windows, OSX. Hopefully not KDE.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
So far that's been KDE - - since Gnome, Unity, Android, IOS, Windows, and others have all charged off the "dumb it down for the LCD!" cliff.
KDE had been marvelously resistant to that, and directly exposes a whole host of poweruser settings and configuration options, even settable on a per-app basis if you want, all through the GUI. If it's going to head off the cliff... what's left? Nothing. There are your ultralight envs like LXDE and XFCE but they don't compare to a full featured desktop like KDE.
Let's hope this doesn't end badly :-/.
ArcadeMan, if you are even really a man (do you even have a beard?), you have immediately jumped to the most negative conclusion. Many, perhaps lesser, men would have interpreted that as the advanced features are available to the unfamiliar user immediately, behind such an advanced settings button, but that those features are not thrown in their simple faces like a bucket of acid, scarring them.
Would you like an octopus?
KDE's UI To Bend Toward Simplicity
"Bend toward simplicity"? Couldn't you have just said "to be simplified"? That seems... simpler.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
"KDE Software is often criticized for being too complicated for an average user to use. "
By whom? Since when?
Me. If I think it is, then no doubt many people think it is. It;s why I stopped with KDE and just stuck with Gnome.
"The KDE developers are aware of it and now they are working on making KDE UI simpler. "
Thinking of GNOME, which was once somewhat useful and useable before the developers started talking like this, a shiver runs down my spine.
I would say that is a fair reaction, if you are thinking about Gnome. The more we compare, the more we sometimes drive things that way. We bash gnome now, defenders come out and defend it, and now we've really got a war on our hands. This happens often life.
"KDE usability team lead Thomas Pfeiffer Thomas prefers a layered feature exposure so that users can enjoy certain advanced features at a later stage after they get accustomed to the basic functionality of the application. He quotes the earlier (pre-Plasma era) vision of KDE 4 â" "Anything that makes Linux interesting for technical users (shells, compilation, drivers, minute user settings) will be available; not as the default way of doing things, but at the user's discretion."
Ugh. *Minute user settings* are actually very important to many non-technical users. This does sound like GNOME, unfortunately.
Sounds more like Windows to me. And that actually, may be a good thing. Seriously, Windows got a lock on the desktop because people liked it, and by people, I mean everyday joe blow secretary or the executive that can't even type his own emails or use a spreadsheet, in short the greater pool or end users.
People use what they like, the like what they can dive into, and later on pull back the curtain. Having tools to get into the guts is a great idea. And you know what, it was cool, at first, that I could pull up a terminal and look under the hood quickly when I used Ubuntu from the very get go years ago. That novelty quickly wore off when I ended up having to do these things. I like the ability, but clutter and a dozen options get in the way of getting basic things done.
I once read a great take on organization. If you have more than ten of something, you probably need another level for ease of use, be it files in a folder, icons in a start menu, etc. I took the time to redesign my start menu in windows, and boy I and anyone else could find right where any program was, quickly.
Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman should come together, and make a short video clip. And they should be screaming, "Designers! Designers! Designers!"
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
Exactly, UI's should be as intuitive as possible. RTFM should be kept to rare occurrences, like those completely inexperienced to a computer, or those that need to work under the hood. But even then, it should be kept as intuitive as possible, that is the key to any good design.
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
Simplifying does NOT mean "show what I think are the 4 most important controls and hide the other 47 behind a menu icon."
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Describing gconf as "convenient" is a wild exaggeration.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.