About Amarok's interface design

[Big O]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:24 AM, Teo Mrnjavac <teo.mrnjavac at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Big O <illogical1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:08 AM, Dan Meltzer
>> <parallelgrapefruit at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Casey Link <unnamedrambler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 11:26 PM, Big O <illogical1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> The seekbar could also be shorter and in the same line as the volume
>>>>>>> bar as you said, as vertical space is becoming very precious on
>>>>>>> today's widescreen displays.
>>>>> I concur!
>>>> Of this list, this is what I most strongly agree with. +1
>>>
>>> As this seems to be getting lots of support.. it looks like it's time
>>> to shoot it down.
>> I was thinking "shoot it down." meant you'd take care of it. Then I
>> got to the end of your mail :-(
>>
>>>
>>> One of the major reasons behind the top bar being designed the way it
>>> was is due to the progress slider.  The small progress bar (amarok 1.4
>>> style) is not big enough to allow for accurate seeking.  The large one
>>> does allow for this.
>> So if folks want more accurate seeking they can just increase the width right?
>> What bothers me most about the volume on top and the seekbar below is
>> that it just looks off.
>> See http://illogic-al.org/images/screenshots/interface_niggles.png
>>
>> That and the gaping "holes" in the window when nothing is being played
>> make it somewhat unpleasant to stare at.
>> See http://illogic-al.org/images/screenshots/lets_laugh_at_the_retarded_kid.png
>>
>> I was going to use words but I decided to test out the new Pixelmator
>> update instead. Here's a mockup of the window wasting less space.
>> See http://illogic-al.org/images/screenshots/at_least_we_used_up_the_space.png
>>
>> The idea is that the sidetabs are hidden (is it possible to hide just
>> the tabs) and whenever a button up top is clicked, that section shows
>> up in the sidebar.
>> I suppose if it's possible to hide the tab widget and the sidebar
>> separately we could just hook the buttons up top to a signal which
>> causes the switch on the side. The buttons would need work of course.
>> Yes, yes, if it's possible then something to do post 2.0 and all that jazz.
>>>
>>> As it stands it's not as utilized as it is going to be in the future.
>>> I still have plans of bookmarking support post 2.0 (and bookmarks on a
>>> small seekbar would... suck).  Throwing it randomly in line with the
>>> volume (but stretching the full remaining width of the screen) Would
>>> not really solve much, as the control icons would still require the
>>> same amount of vertical space.  I don't think it would be wise to
>>> shrink these icons down to a one line height, as they are important
>>> and should be large enough to click easily.
>>>
>>> I think it makes more sense to keep it where it is, as there is no
>>> benefit to moving it elsewhere/shrinking it down.
>
> Meh, I agree that the current state of the interface has potential but
> is plain ugly, yet I think it has been made clear that this is not a
> good time to bring this up as there is no way we can safely fix this
> properly before 2.0.
> Even if it were time to fix it, this would be an undesirable
> discussion anyway as we all already pretty much know what every one of
> us thinks about the current state of the interface and some weird
> consensus has been reached about it.
> We just need a row of therapeutic bad reviews, some constructive
> criticism from the users and a decent artist, things will be fixed in
> time.
> Cheers
+10
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok-devel mailing list
> Amarok-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel
>



-- 
All your gmail are belong to us.