Usability: XFCE vs. Windows 3.1

[diablo75]

I couldn't help but share because it's so true:

http://gandolf.homelinux.org/~smhanov/blog/index.php?id=54

I pulled this off reddit from here:

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/86ipx/usability_xfce_vs_windows_31/

A couple of comments at the top on reddit are just freaking hilarious. "This is LINNUUXXXXXX!!! Tonight, we design in Hell!!!"

[Naiki Muliaina]

Bleh! Although i can be prone to a degree of XFCE fanboi'ism, thats definitely not true ^^ Even as a non geek i have found everything i need in XFCE with no problems, even text options ^^

[ktzqbp]

Totally agree with the blog. XFCE's settings layout and design is absurdly impractical.

It's as if the system was designed by a bloke with memory loss, such that he had given no thought to where he had previously placed the settings. It's all over the place.

I would've thought it would be damn hard to mess up the design of control panels/settings windows when you have so few of them to begin with (it doesn't even have a bloody menu editor!)

[diablo75]

It's as if the system was designed by a bloke with memory loss, such that he had given no thought to where he had previously placed the settings. It's all over the place.

My theory is that it was designed by these two:

http://www.southparkstuff.com/images/stories/epiimgs/epi412/sp412_nerds.gif

After that heated argument over the number of Star Trek episodes resulting in one of them moving back to their parents basement and subsequently equal estrangement from each other, it was difficult for both to agree on much anything else from then on. Sometimes I wonder how often this actually happens with other open-source projects... (just joking you guys, so don't get all fired up about it).

[Naiki Muliaina]

(just joking you guys, so don't get all fired up about it).

If you actually feel the need to put that into your post, your aware of the fact you appear to be baiting :) So aside from text changes what else doesnt make sense to you in the settings menu? I have been browsing about it and i cannot see anything that isnt in a logical place, or is locatable in a few secounds.

[diablo75]

Well for starts (as stated in the blog), there's this:

http://gandolf.homelinux.org/~smhanov/blog/xfce-menu.png

In contrast to this:

http://gandolf.homelinux.org/~smhanov/blog/xfce-settings.png


Or maybe you're in the wrong settings manager. The first hurdle was in the Settings menu. Text settings aren't mentioned at all, although some things are in two or three places. I'm glad I'm not setting up a printer!

It just seems too spread out... He didn't even bother to take a screen shot of the menu that appears when you click Applications>System in XFCE (here's one I found via google):

http://customisinglife.files.wordpress.com/2006/09/new-menu.png

In effect, you basically have three different "Control Panels" of sorts. Why? In a word, it just seems silly.

[Netsu]

It's the same as in gnome where you have "preferences" and "administration".

[Naiki Muliaina]

It's the same as in gnome where you have "preferences" and "administration".

Beat me by secounds :)

Just to follow this up about XFCE vs Windows, im sure in XP theres 2 ways of viewing control panel (classic and something else? One had icons, the other was a page of options or something). The first time i saw that i couldnt find the ruddy thing i needed (system something). That was far worse than XFCE ever has been :)

Edit : Found the thing i hated, catagory view. Classic was so much better:-

http://catalyst.washington.edu/help/computing_fundamentals/troubleshootingxp/img/controlpanel_xp.gif

http://catalyst.washington.edu/help/computing_fundamentals/troubleshootingxp/img/controlpanel_classic.gif

[ZuLuuuuuu]

XFCE has some usability problems, true. Actually, it has a lot of problems but accusing it as "copying user interface layout from Windows 3.1" is just ridiculous. And look at the "usability" of the page of who's talking: http://gandolf.homelinux.org/~smhanov/index.html

[Giant Speck]

It's the same as in gnome where you have "preferences" and "administration".

Well, separating the Preferences menu from the Administration menu makes sense, considering everything in the Administration menu requires the root password at some point, whereas everything in the Preferences menu doesn't.

[Sealbhach]

Well, separating the Preferences menu from the Administration menu makes sense, considering everything in the Administration menu requires the root password at some point, whereas everything in the Preferences menu doesn't.

Yup, I know that going into Admin I have to be more careful, whereas in Preferences I can play around a bit without mucking things up too much.


.

[Naiki Muliaina]

So in gnome you have things under Admin and Preferences? XFCE just has System and Settings. Not everything in the System menu requires root to use but everything in there is a logical entry, as is everything in the System menu.

[RiceMonster]

As an Xfce user, I can see where this guy is comming from. 4.6 has made the settings manager a lot more intuitive. I still have a few complaints though: why are there two dialogues for window manager and why are most of the keyboard shortcuts in window manager, not keyboard? The keyboard dialogue contains shortcuts for launching applications whereas the window manager does, well, window manager shortcuts. Still though, wouldn't it make more sense to put them all in one dialogue, ie keyboard?

[chucky chuckaluck]

but, 3.1 doesn't support AOL4. (not sure about xfce.)

[oasmar1]

http://catalyst.washington.edu/help/computing_fundamentals/troubleshootingxp/img/controlpanel_xp.gif

http://catalyst.washington.edu/help/computing_fundamentals/troubleshootingxp/img/controlpanel_classic.gif

Well, those views cater to different people. For example, my Dad can only use the new control panel, it shows the most useful tools to a simple user - Add or Remove is clearly available, regional settings very easy to get to and he can easily change the appearance. While the classic is aimed more at more advanced users. The most important thing is that once a user switches it saves that view and a user will not have to switch between them again.

Also, I agree, the settings should be sorted out in both gnome and xfce.

[cardinals_fan]

The keyboard dialogue contains shortcuts for launching applications whereas the window manager does, well, window manager shortcuts. Still though, wouldn't it make more sense to put them all in one dialogue, ie keyboard?
I'm not quite sure about how this applies with 4.6 and the transition to xfconf, but with 4.4.x, the Keyboard dialogue controlled settings managed by xfce-mcs-manager that could be used with any window manager while the Window Manager dialogue was solely for Xfwm4. This was actually quite useful if you wanted graphical config tools for a *box desktop; just start up xfce-mcs-manager.

[Glucklich]

I use Xubuntu and I'm not an expert on computer issues. I installed it on a kind of desperate move because Ubuntu wasn't working properly. Locking every time I logged on with graphical problems and such. So much for the cool graphic effects, right? And I like it simple. Didn't used much of the customized stuff anyway. I just want a OS that allows me to do what I want and gets my computer working smoothly. Customization seems standard and effective. Now I just wish I found it earlier... I really think regular Ubuntu messed up my graphics card.

[RiceMonster]

I'm not quite sure about how this applies with 4.6 and the transition to xfconf, but with 4.4.x, the Keyboard dialogue controlled settings managed by xfce-mcs-manager that could be used with any window manager while the Window Manager dialogue was solely for Xfwm4. This was actually quite useful if you wanted graphical config tools for a *box desktop; just start up xfce-mcs-manager.

Ah ok. I guess it might effect modularity if they didn't do it that way, and I know they like to keep it modular, which I think is a good idea. Makes sense from that point of view, then.

[MasterNetra]

I use Xubuntu and I'm not an expert on computer issues. I installed it on a kind of desperate move because Ubuntu wasn't working properly. Locking every time I logged on with graphical problems and such. So much for the cool graphic effects, right? And I like it simple. Didn't used much of the customized stuff anyway. I just want a OS that allows me to do what I want and gets my computer working smoothly. Customization seems standard and effective. Now I just wish I found it earlier... I really think regular Ubuntu messed up my graphics card.

Nah it either didn't have the proper driver or your graphics card or the card was messed up already. OS's just use the hardware they generally don't mod it.

[Glucklich]

Nah it either didn't have the proper driver or your graphics card or the card was messed up already. OS's just use the hardware they generally don't mod it.

LOL! nVidia driver 173 available on the repositories? Wrong driver? That's the kind of assumptions that's making all the help on this community useless. My graphic cards was fine on XP. It worked on Ubuntu for 3 months fine. Then after that 3 months, the login became impossible with constant graphic errors.

[SunnyRabbiera]

LOL! nVidia driver 173 available on the repositories? Wrong driver? That's the kind of assumptions that's making all the help on this community useless. My graphic cards was fine on XP. It worked on Ubuntu for 3 months fine. Then after that 3 months, the login became impossible with constant graphic errors.

Some cards are better with linux then others though, its not like Ubuntu has billions of dollars to throw around like Microsoft.

[Glucklich]

Some cards are better with linux then others though, its not like Ubuntu has billions of dollars to throw around like Microsoft.

Well, I don't know about that but giving me the bullsh*t explanation that it was already broken? Please...
Then it was a miracle all the hours I spent playing Urban Terror on XP. PRAISE THE LORD! Now I can't make a single one. Be it on XP or not.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Well, I don't know about that but giving me the bullsh*t explanation that it was already broken? Please...
Then it was a miracle all the hours I spend playing Urban Terror on XP. PRAISE THE LORD! Now I can't make a single one. Be it on XP or not.

Well it is possible that the video card did die down a little, sometimes hardware has a mind of its own.
Take my old DVD player on my old computer, worked from when I got it in 2001 to 2003 and XP SP1, I think the update killed it for some reason.

[MikeTheC]

Hmm... of the three, I like the third the best! :)

http://catalyst.washington.edu/help/computing_fundamentals/troubleshootingxp/img/controlpanel_xp.gif


http://catalyst.washington.edu/help/computing_fundamentals/troubleshootingxp/img/controlpanel_classic.gif

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/1566/systempreferences.png

[SunnyRabbiera]

Most Linux control panels are like OSX, especially KDE4's

[K.Mandla]

I hate to admit this, but the first few times I used XFCE, I had the same problem finding settings that I wanted for fonts and so forth. :oops:

On the other hand, once I found what I wanted, it became a non-issue. So ... ?

[Dekkon]

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/1566/systempreferences.png

Agreed.

Out of all Apple's bad business practices, it does know something about usability. Seriously, how hard is it really to make something usable, Mac's Control Panel is nothing more then common sense and just flows with practical names and great categories.

[chucky chuckaluck]

I hate to admit this, but the first few times I used XFCE, I had the same problem finding settings that I wanted for fonts and so forth. :oops:

On the other hand, once I found what I wanted, it became a non-issue. So ... ?

"dad, hide it again!"

"daddy has work to do."

"boohoo!!!"