[Panel-devel] The ALI: do we really need or want it?

[Janne Ojaniemi]

On Saturday 07 January 2006 20:05, Brian Beck wrote:
> Unless I'm totally misunderstanding this sounds awful.
>
> I have about 1000 music files on my computer, I also have one music player
> I like to use (juk).  I can tell you right off that I'd rather click on juk
> and use him to listen to my music then select x songs out of 1000 I'd like
> to listen to first.

I have over 1000 songs on my computer. And I don't really see how managing 
those songs would be any harder on this kind of system than it is today. Of 
course if you want to create a playlist on ad-hoc basis, using a real app for 
it would be better. The "content-menu" is really meant to access the content 
(in this case, playlists) that you already have there.

> So I guess I see two problems with the music example.
>
> 1. I have to select x songs out of y to just to listen to music.

If you want to listen to Metallica, you simply select Metallica, and be done 
with it. If you want to create a brand-new playlist, you should and could use 
a dedicated app for that task. Although the menu could offer rudimentary 
tools for that as well (read my description on the "Task"-section in the 
menu.)

> 2. What if I change my mind about what I want to listen to? Do I need to
> stop the player, dig through all my music files again and restart?

No. Selecting some music from the list would start the app of your choice and 
play back the music (although KDE might use some "embedded player" by 
default, I dunno). You could then use that app to listen to your music like 
you do today. If you selected some new music from the content-menu, the 
already running app (Amarok, Juk, Embedded Player etc.) would play them back. 
Or you could simply use the app in question to select new music. It's up to 
you.

> Currently I start Juk and type what I want to listen to in the search bar. 
> If I change my mind I type something different.  What could be easier than
> that.

And you could still do that just fine. NOTHING in my suggestion prevents you 
from doing that.

> Please if I've misunderstood, tell me where, but I've seen mock-ups and
> read descriptions, and it all sounds more complicated than going to the
> K-menu if I want an application or going to Konqueror if I want a document.

In both cases the user needs to know what each application does. He then has 
to choose which apps he decides to use. And then he uses that app to access 
the content. In my suggestion, he simply accesses the content, he doesn't 
have to know what each application does. Why should the user know what 
application does what? Why should he know what "Codeine", "Amarok", 
"Konqueror" and "Juk" are and what they do? How does it help the user to read 
through descriptions which say "Amarok, a Music player" "Juk, a music player" 
and "Some new Music-app, a music player"?

And in your example, you have to start a separate app to access the content: 
Konqueror. You then access the content which is not categorised in any shape 
or form (or, it has been categorised manually, and that is plain tedious). In 
my example, you do not have to start a separate app, and the content is 
categorised automatically.