Task Launcher - mockups

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

On Thursday 31 January 2013 10:20:21 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 19:00:45 Thomas Pfeiffer wrote:
> > I'm very curious what you think about this approach, so comment away! :)
> 
> the idea of integrating it with the launcher is really promising (though we
> obviously still don't know for sure yet if it will work when all things are
> finally considered .. isn't design fun? :)

If we'd come up with a "solution" for a change in paradigm as big as this one 
(from applications to tasks) in a single iteration, that would be very 
suspicious. Things like that have to go trhough several rounds of discussion,  
mockups, testing, so yes, that's the fun ;)

> i'm not sold on the vertical columns, though i think they hint at
> interesting possibilities.
> 
> cons:
> 	* if i want to change a setting or create a document or go to a web page,
> i need to decide which category it belongs to first. so i have to go "one
> step back" and understand the designer's decisions before movign forward.
> this is the same problem we have in the desktop system settings and it
> isn't good. 

There is a big difference here: The categories in System Settings are purely 
technical language. "Network and Connectivity" or "Workspace and Appearance 
Behavior" have nothing to do with the users' language and that's why they are 
pretty useless.
And this is where I see the big advantage of the "verbal categories" approach. 
"Contact John via chat" or "Create a presentation" is much closer to the 
users' language as "KDE Telepathy" or "Calligra Active". The categorization 
could be done in a user-centered way, and if different users would describe the 
same task with different verbs (e.g. "Create an email" and "Contact Sarah via 
email") than that task can simply show up in both categories.

In fact, this is the core of my idea: To really let users forget about 
application names and only think about tasks. Again: The columns were only a 
design idea.

> * a grid means i have to navigate first horizontally and then
> vertically with my eyes and attention. this takes more effort than scanning
> a single body or direction. even a non-structured grid feels easier.

Yes.

> 	* it becomes less obvious how to elegantly integrate search results

Just hide all tasks not matching the search and all "categories" that are then 
empty? Sounds pretty obvious to me... ;)

> 	* it doesn't blend with any other part of Active's design, as Marco
> pointed out

True.

> however, the segmentation is interesting, i think. we could definitely
> arrange the entries in the current grid style grouped by type .. e.g.
> 
> create browse browse browse browse
> message message play play play play
> manage manage

> (where each of the words above is an icon :)
> 
> we could even provide some visual hints for the grouping, such a background
> colouring/hinting. that may, however, be more distracting than helpful.

That's possible, but the problem is: You wouldn't want to repeat the verb in 
every task name, but otherwise you'd lose the verbal anchor. Our goal is to 
get rid of application names, and replacing them with descriptions of the task 
is what would help users the most. This is the heart of the task-centric 
approach. Just sorting/grouping classical application launchers by action type 
(= verb) would hurt more than it would help, because if the action isn't shown 
than users can't see how the grouping is done.

> as for having a single Create icon at the front of the list, if it is fast
> enough and when pressed shifts the the launchers off screen, replaced with
> the creation options, it should not feel overly heavy. it means one more
> tap, but muscle memory for that will build very quickly if given a good
> position (e.g. first). the key would be a fast
> shift-out-the-old-and-populate-the-new-entries. i can imagine the launch
> list sliding off to the left and a new grid showing the create options
> sliding in.

> this would also have the benefit of allowing us to create the Create entries
> on demand (meaning no impact on startup time and no impact on memory
> footprint until in use; and better than a full external application)
> 
> still not wholely formed, but maybe edging somewhere useful.

Well, I see that we have to take this discussion one step back.
Both you and Marco mainly criticized my idea of a UI solution, which is fine 
and generally useful, but isn't what I really had intended. Again: The UI is 
merely an implementation detail. 
What we have to decide is: Do we dare the big paradigm shift? Do we want to 
replace "Plasma Media Center" (with its functions to play music and play 
videos) with "Play Videos" / "Play Music", and "Calendar" with the functions 
to view and manage calendars and create events with "Browse Calendar", "Manage 
Calendars" and "Create Event", "Marble" with "Browse/View/Navigate Maps"?
Just adding a global "Create" button to a grid of application launchers is 
only a tiny shift from app-centric to task-centric. Do we want to stay mainly 
with applications or do we want to go all the way? And in the first case: Where 
do we place all the other tasks that have nothing to do with creating things?

I admit that I've made a mistake: I thought that going in with a UI mockup 
would help to picture my idea and make the discussion easier. Instead it drew 
the focus to flaws in the UI itself, which I think should come later.