Den 16 februari 2012 09:35 skrev Aleksey Midenkov :

I think UI is horrible.

1. No toolbars; 2. Toolbox is out of image window;

People, what are you thinking about?!

Hi and thank you for your valuable and insightful input!

1. Not sure what you mean 2. That will be fixed in GIMP 2.8 with the introduction of the Single-window mode

Best regards, Martin

Den 16 februari 2012 10:25 skrev Aleksey Midenkov :

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Martin Nordholts wrote:

Den 16 februari 2012 09:35 skrev Aleksey Midenkov :

I think UI is horrible.

1. No toolbars; 2. Toolbox is out of image window;

People, what are you thinking about?!

Hi and thank you for your valuable and insightful input!

Hello! :-) Yes, that's me. But I think, that my message is all-sufficient despite its brevity. Toolbars where invented long time ago and are evident to everyone. Consider this link, if you still didn't get acquainted to them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toolbar

For such function-rich software as Gimp they should be: a. Customizable (to any function present in menu at least) b. Movable and stackable (to each other and to any side of the window)

Maybe look for good example at Eclipse or any other high quality graphical software.

Well, I know what a toolbar is, what I didn't understand was how adding a toolbar with "Save, Save As... Open, Print"-buttons to GIMP would make the GIMP UI better.

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

I think UI is horrible.

1. No toolbars; 2. Toolbox is out of image window;

People, what are you thinking about?!

Mostly we were wondering where the hell you've been all our lives with your insightful observations. Not a day without a thought "I wish Aleksey Midenkov came to enlighten us" :)

So thank you :)

Simply put, we know that GIMP's UI still sucks in many respects. We've been improving it since several years and results are there to see for anyone who goes beyond the boring "no toolbar = not usable" mantra.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

Simply put, we know that GIMP's UI still sucks in many respects. We've been improving it since several years

That's what I'm asking about. What are you thinking all these years?

Mostly we've been thinking about maintaining the project with what few developers we have around.

I'm using Gimp for years and ever wonder when the toolbars will go on the scene and why there are such crippled interface like toolbox going to background.

Toolbars are not a silver bullet.

Yes, I know that you know. And I know that I'm not the first one who writes about that.

So the point of your rant is...?

But along all these years when no one from Gimp creators scratched their head to get it more convenient

Dead wrong. See gui.gimp.org for reference. Then *after* you studied what exactly we've done with UI since 2006 (the first OpenUsability project) I suggest you come back and say in the open that you repeatedly made a wrong statement. Whether you are really sorry about that or not doesn't matter much to me.

everyone must ask that question. Over and over. And you should answer it every time, you deserve it. Spare your sarcasm.

Oh no :) I'm entitled to using as much sarcasm as I feel is required. You asked for it the moment you started a rant.

You see, we are quite open about what we do, why and how we do it. Our work is public. Everything we do can be questioned. The thing is: do you want to be polite and continue the conversation in a civilized manner or do you want to continue prancing around and end-up being ignored? It's entirely up to you. We deal with criticism on a daily basis.

To Martin: even Save and Save as on toolbar saves one click. Not saying about such repitive operations as Rotate, Resize, Auto levels etc. Now trivial photo treatment is done with the whole lot of clicks! I'm pretty sure their count can be reduced thrice with toolbars.

1. We are aiming at professionals who tend to rely on shortcuts. 2. We take a great care providing as much vertical space for actual images as possible.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

On 02/16/2012 12:56 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

But along all these years when no one from Gimp creators scratched their head to get it more convenient everyone must ask that question. Over and over. And you should answer it every time, you deserve it. Spare your sarcasm.

First it's an unfounded assumption, when you simply have no clue what has been going on regarding development.

Then the part about "deserving" it speaks of a rotten, poisonous mindset, when your are dealing with a project run by volunteers, who generously offer the result of their freetime-work for free as in speech and beer.

To Martin: even 'Save' and 'Save as' on toolbar saves one click. Not saying about such repitive operations as Rotate, Resize, Auto levels etc. Now trivial photo treatment is done with the whole lot of clicks! I'm pretty sure their count can be reduced thrice with toolbars.

The overall potential for time-saving goes down with increasing the number of toolbar icons, as it approaches an overwhelming forest of stuff.

Ambitious and professional users (the desired audience for GIMP) tend to learn shortcuts for the very frequent commands. To then have toolbar icons for them is just a waste of space.

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

Ambitious and professional users (the desired audience for GIMP) tend to learn shortcuts for the very frequent commands. To then have toolbar icons for them is just a waste of space.

Yes, I see how you treat people who uses your software. Just normal people, who have their opinion and have the right to speak it.

Expressing opinions and insulting are two different things.

people. That's says everything! You direct to some logs saying 'read what we did'! But I don't need read it.

Not "need". The right word is "must". You must study the subject before making an accusation. There's plenty of information available even in your native language about what changes to UI we've introduced over the past few years.

Whether you are relying on facts on preferring a system of beliefs disconnected from reality is, again, entirely up to you. But the next time you decide to speak your mind in the open, pretty please find some peace in your heart and talk with dignity. Suppressing hysterics would be even more desirable.

I as an ordinary user saw not much new since last 7 years.

Ah, suddenly "nothing" becomes "not much". I saw that one coming :)

And you don't blame me on that I use only basic operations.

Yes, we don't blame you for that. You've just provided us a wide range of other, far more interesting blaming options :)

On the whole, as a Linux user you have quite a few more applications to use, if you need just basic operations and a toolbar that's so dear to you. Pinta would be one, Krita would be another (albeit not really simple).

Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org

On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:07:51 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

To Martin: even Save and Save as on toolbar saves one click. Not saying about such repitive operations as Rotate, Resize, Auto levels etc. Now trivial photo treatment is done with the whole lot of clicks! I'm pretty sure their count can be reduced thrice with toolbars.

Generally, you're not doing those things more than once per image (well, when downscaling a large image by a lot -- say, reducing a 100 megapixel panorama to a web-size thumbnail -- I do it in multiple passes of no more than 50% each, which seems to reduce jaggies and moire patterns).

1. We are aiming at professionals who tend to rely on shortcuts. 2. We take a great care providing as much vertical space for actual images as possible.

With the increasing prevalence of 16:10 and even worse 16:9 screens, that's absolutely essential. Even with my 1920x1200 screen, vertical space is at more of a premium than horizontal. With a contemporary 1920x1080 or worse, the problem would be far more severe.

Now, I'm honestly a lot more concerned with high bit depth for editing those big exposure fused panoramas :-)

Hello Aleksey,

On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 18:03:11 +0400 Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

Ambitious and professional users (the desired audience for GIMP) tend to learn shortcuts for the very frequent commands. To then have toolbar icons for them is just a waste of space.

Yes, I see how you treat people who uses your software. Just normal people, who have their opinion and have the right to speak it.

Expressing opinions and insulting are two different things.

people. That's says everything! You direct to some logs saying 'read what we did'! But I don't need read it.

Not "need". The right word is "must". You must study the subject before making an accusation.

No, I don't. I am not satisfied. That is the true! It is even not an accusation. I don't compel anyone to do something. Just want that you know this. I am client, you are service. You serve to people by doing this job. That is your primary goal. If no, then talk is over.

I'm afraid it's not really a client/server relation and IMO you're a bit wrong with that assertion. It's more a server/user, and the service is free. The user in that case is free to use or not, there's no commercial contract between the user and the server/service. I don't think there's even a moral obligation for the server to accept any kind of criticism or request. You would contribute with sponsoring and donations, I would be the same. After that, it depends on people, both on server and user bases. According to the project team, it's often very different. And user requests are always taken into account differently, but this also depends on the user himself and the way he submit requests or feedback. Of course my words are mine (I'm a both a user and developer free and open-source software), I'm not talking in the name of the Gimp team.

Regards,

wwp

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

Do I look like screaming? That is reee-e-ally fun! :-) No, of course I'm not screaming.

I'm sorry, but with the amount of exclamation marks you used, the general negative tone and your unwilingness to have a civil conversation it _really_ looks like you are short of vitamins. But that's the boring part really.

Now, the interesting part is what users we should be catering to.

You see, development of an application is a lot about focus, especially when you are as shorthanded as the GIMP team and deal with as huge code base as the one that GIMP has.

We consider it crucial to satisfy the needs of advanced users in the first place. That involves studying their workflows (which we did in 2006 and then again in late 2011), working out strategies for further development, writing functional specs and, finally, writing the actual code. All of that is a huge amount of work, but we do it anyway.

Your general point boils down to this: you picked the wrong tool and you are blaming us for not catering to your needs. If you don't see what's wrong with that attitude, then subsequent conversation is just meaningless.

You are, of course, in your right to aggressively refuse checking facts and understanding what usability is about, but that's not the kind of behavior that's going to lead to a constructive discussion.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:13 PM, wwp wrote:

I'm afraid it's not really a client/server relation and IMO you're a bit wrong with that assertion. It's more a server/user, and the service is free. The user in that case is free to use or not, there's no commercial contract between the user and the server/service. I don't think there's even a moral obligation for the server to accept any kind of criticism or request. You would contribute with sponsoring and donations, I would be the same. After that, it depends on people, both on server and user bases. According to the project team, it's often very different. And user requests are always taken into account differently, but this also depends on the user himself and the way he submit requests or feedback. Of course my words are mine (I'm a both a user and developer free and open-source software), I'm not talking in the name of the Gimp team.

Simply put, we have a primary goal: making GIMP a great tool for advanced users and professionals. If we can make it better for users who have simple requirements, then it's a nice coincidence (which already is a case).

But we shall not reverse the strategy back towards folks who are happy with a handful of filters and 8bpc, come hell or high water.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 18:31:00 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:13 PM, wwp wrote:

I'm afraid it's not really a client/server relation and IMO you're a bit wrong with that assertion. It's more a server/user, and the service
is free. The user in that case is free to use or not, there's no commercial contract between the user and the server/service. I don't think there's even a moral obligation for the server to accept any kind
of criticism or request. You would contribute with sponsoring and donations, I would be the same. After that, it depends on people, both
on server and user bases. According to the project team, it's often very different. And user requests are always taken into account differently, but this also depends on the user himself and the way he
submit requests or feedback. Of course my words are mine (I'm a both a
user and developer free and open-source software), I'm not talking in
the name of the Gimp team.

Simply put, we have a primary goal: making GIMP a great tool for advanced users and professionals. If we can make it better for users who have simple requirements, then it's a nice coincidence (which already is a case).

But we shall not reverse the strategy back towards folks who are happy
with a handful of filters and 8bpc, come hell or high water.

Totally AGREE - Thanks you!!!!

Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

Not "need". The right word is "must". You must study the subject before making an accusation.

No, I don't. I am not satisfied. That is the true! It is even not an accusation. I don't compel anyone to do something. Just want that you know this. I am client, you are service. You serve to people by doing this job. That is your primary goal. If no, then talk is over.

The talk is over? Hmmm... :)

I strongly suggest that you read up on meritocracy. In your case that would be http://bit.ly/fECmnf. That should give you a general idea, what kind of track record in the project you are supposed to have, if you expect to get away with this kind of attitude.

Of course, we don't work on GIMP just for ourselves. It's actually quite exciting doing cool things that the target audience appreciates. Hell, it's even exciting to have a not very civil conversation with the target audience that hates this or that, especially when it leads to certain changes to the benefit of that very audience. But spending hours explaining basics to someone who's not even willing to listen? I think not.

Please continue not screaming, not accusing and not demanding.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

* Alexandre Prokoudine [02-16-12 07:10]:

Oh no :) I'm entitled to using as much sarcasm as I feel is required. You asked for it the moment you started a rant.

You see, we are quite open about what we do, why and how we do it. Our work is public. Everything we do can be questioned. The thing is: do you want to be polite and continue the conversation in a civilized manner or do you want to continue prancing around and end-up being ignored? It's entirely up to you. We deal with criticism on a daily basis.

....

1. We are aiming at professionals who tend to rely on shortcuts. 2. We take a great care providing as much vertical space for actual images as possible.

Contrary to a *few* quite vocal dissidents, exp. this thread, your collective efforts are greatly appreciated and vastly underpaid.

tks,

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

We consider it crucial to satisfy the needs of advanced users in the first place. That involves studying their workflows (which we did in 2006 and then again in late 2011), working out strategies for further development, writing functional specs and, finally, writing the actual code. All of that is a huge amount of work, but we do it anyway.

Looks like you trying to build a bulldozer forgetting than much more people just need a good car.

Designing interactions and interfaces is more than just throwing an occasional toolbar to UI and thinking your job ends there.

I'm sorry to hear that you are against relying on strategies for designing consistent UIs, but we won't go for an amoeba as a common denominator, and the matter ends there.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

As a gimp user of several years, with 18 years in the professional retouch and design arena, I would like to chime in on the topic of the UI. Yes the UI has a ways to go. That's called a milestone. Something to reach towards. The Gimp team has achieved many milestones over the years with great success. Some of that success comes at the cost of a delayed release. Personally, I would prefer a stable release that is late over a buggy release that is on-time.
The UI has improved quite a bit during the present development cycle. Tool bars and pallets in the window with the graphics are working in the development release and are expected to be in the stable release. The tabbed windows are a brilliant addition BTW. Though I was not part of the workflow study, I can attest to my workflow relying on keyboard shortcuts. Much faster than menus and less clutter than toolbars. If a user is willing to take the time to learn the shortcuts, they may find the toolbars to be redundant and can hide them - opening more workspace.

Gimp is not more for the amateur user than photoshop is. What this small team of under-funded developers have accomplished in their spare time is amazing. Their sacrifices ( working late nights and holidays, being away from family and friends, etc. ) is admirable and honorable.

I invite any user, including myself, to remember that this project provides us all with a fantastic tool without the expense of a commercial application. Let's honor the developer's efforts! If we have suggestions and feature requests, we should submit them with kind words and supporting real-world information on how the idea would be useful to the user base as a whole. In the case of a toolbar, create some illustrations showing your idea, add some supporting copy as to why it's a good idea and submit it at: http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/, then be done with it. If the developers like it and it fits in with their strategy, they will implement it. Have trust that they know what they are doing and are doing the best they can with what they have.

Also keep in mind that many features can be implemented as a plug-in. If what you are seeking is a feature that is a better fit for a select few, rather than the whole user base, then seek out assistance from a plug-in developer who would be willing to work on your idea. This concept frees up the time of the developers to work towards a stable core application. The more we users poke at them for changes, the longer the stable release will be delayed.

Thank you again to the development team for all you do!

It would be wonderful if we can rel;ease this present conflict and return the mailing list to positive forward motion.

On 02/16/2012 08:34 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

We consider it crucial to satisfy the needs of advanced users in the first place. That involves studying their workflows (which we did in 2006 and then again in late 2011), working out strategies for further development, writing functional specs and, finally, writing the actual code. All of that is a huge amount of work, but we do it anyway.

Looks like you trying to build a bulldozer forgetting than much more people just need a good car.

Designing interactions and interfaces is more than just throwing an occasional toolbar to UI and thinking your job ends there.

I'm sorry to hear that you are against relying on strategies for designing consistent UIs, but we won't go for an amoeba as a common denominator, and the matter ends there.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org
_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

W dniu 12-02-16 16:57, Aleksey Midenkov pisze: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote: >> On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:07:51 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote: >>>> To Martin: even Save and Save as on toolbar saves one click. Not >>>> saying about such repitive operations as Rotate, Resize, Auto levels >>>> etc. Now trivial photo treatment is done with the whole lot of clicks! >>>> I'm pretty sure their count can be reduced thrice with toolbars. >>
>> Generally, you're not doing those things more than once per image (well, >> when downscaling a large image by a lot -- say, reducing a 100 megapixel >> panorama to a web-size thumbnail -- I do it in multiple passes of no >> more than 50% each, which seems to reduce jaggies and moire patterns). >
> Yes once per image, you right. But this doesn't change the point. The > click count from menu is at least twice, if from submenu then 3x. Also > such functions as 'Autolevel' is 3-4 clicks. When I have 10 photos I > need to process in some manner if I spend on one image 20 clicks, it > will be 200 clicks. From toolbar it would be, say, 70-90 clicks. And > please don't suggest me to write batch script (I know you have that in > Gimp).

Why not? Write a script

* Aleksey Midenkov [02-16-12 10:55]:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

We consider it crucial to satisfy the needs of advanced users in the first place. That involves studying their workflows (which we did in 2006 and then again in late 2011), working out strategies for further development, writing functional specs and, finally, writing the actual code. All of that is a huge amount of work, but we do it anyway.

Looks like you trying to build a bulldozer forgetting than much more people just need a good car.

Ah, you have located the "nail", but not the hammer.

gimp is not a *general-painting-drawByNumbers* app but a *specialty* app for *specific* group of users, and *you* are trying to direct the project to a different group of users.

But, not a bulldozer; a finely tuned F1 for closed road courses rather than the "open road".

W dniu 12-02-16 17:25, Aleksey Midenkov pisze: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Bogdan Szczurek wrote:
>> W dniu 12-02-16 16:57, Aleksey Midenkov pisze: >>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:07:51 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote: >>>>>> To Martin: even Save and Save as on toolbar saves one click. Not >>>>>> saying about such repitive operations as Rotate, Resize, Auto levels >>>>>> etc. Now trivial photo treatment is done with the whole lot of clicks!
>>>>>> I'm pretty sure their count can be reduced thrice with toolbars. >>>>
>>>> Generally, you're not doing those things more than once per image (well,
>>>> when downscaling a large image by a lot -- say, reducing a 100 megapixel
>>>> panorama to a web-size thumbnail -- I do it in multiple passes of no >>>> more than 50% each, which seems to reduce jaggies and moire patterns). >>>
>>> Yes once per image, you right. But this doesn't change the point. The >>> click count from menu is at least twice, if from submenu then 3x. Also >>> such functions as 'Autolevel' is 3-4 clicks. When I have 10 photos I >>> need to process in some manner if I spend on one image 20 clicks, it >>> will be 200 clicks. From toolbar it would be, say, 70-90 clicks. And >>> please don't suggest me to write batch script (I know you have that in >>> Gimp).
>>
>> Why not? Write a script

-- cut --

> But we shall not reverse the strategy back towards folks who are happy > with a handful of filters and 8bpc, come hell or high water.

Now

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

I think UI is horrible.

1. No toolbars; 2. Toolbox is out of image window;

People, what are you thinking about?!

Mostly we were wondering where the hell you've been all our lives with
your insightful observations. Not a day without a thought "I wish Aleksey Midenkov came to enlighten us" :)

So thank you :)

So you are welcome!

Simply put, we know that GIMP's UI still sucks in many respects. We've
been improving it since several years

That's what I'm asking about. What are you thinking all these years? I'm using Gimp for years and ever wonder when the toolbars will go on the scene and why there are such crippled interface like toolbox going to background.

I want the toolbox to go to the background. Stupid wasting screen box with it. bring it on only when you need it

Your comments are just troll material. Go away

-- Owen

Another unsatisfied client.
Just give the man his money back and move on.

:-p

On 12-02-17 0:57 , Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:

On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:07:51 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

To Martin: even Save and Save as on toolbar saves one click. Not saying about such repitive operations as Rotate, Resize, Auto levels etc. Now trivial photo treatment is done with the whole lot of clicks! I'm pretty sure their count can be reduced thrice with toolbars.

Generally, you're not doing those things more than once per image (well, when downscaling a large image by a lot -- say, reducing a 100 megapixel panorama to a web-size thumbnail -- I do it in multiple passes of no more than 50% each, which seems to reduce jaggies and moire patterns).

Yes once per image, you right. But this doesn't change the point. The click count from menu is at least twice, if from submenu then 3x. Also such functions as 'Autolevel' is 3-4 clicks. When I have 10 photos I need to process in some manner if I spend on one image 20 clicks, it will be 200 clicks. From toolbar it would be, say, 70-90 clicks. And please don't suggest me to write batch script (I know you have that in Gimp).

Hi People,

Just to add another Slav by the name of Alex in the mix. I smell a conspiracy! :)

On a topic of counting mouse-clicks and slightly off topic considering GIMP UI, since it mentions 'kitchens'.

If anyone, anytime soon, happens to travel back in time. Please, find the guy or girl who started the mouse-click counting as a measure for 'quality' of user interfaces. Once you find him/her, please have them institutionalized. As a precedent. When you get back, I will give you a subscription to any dirty, non-dirty or cooking mag of your choice. For life.

Mouse-click counting is a nice heuristic tool ('heuristic' being just a fancy word for something that amounts to 'not even a guideline') with a history brimming with stupendous displays of misuse. It causes obsessive counting disorder, too. This obsession seems to be contagious, spreading out from the world of 'measure/manage/makebelieve' infecting hard working, nice, decent people everywhere.

For Alexei, and for myself, the other day I was counting the hits needed to hammer down a nail. About 6 hits per-nail on average! And not much of a nail it was. Inefficient hammer, inefficient nail, inefficient me? And the very keyboard I am typing on right now demands a stroke for each letter. Shouldn't it recognize my words almost automatically by now, somehow? Saddened by the inefficiency of the real world, I sat down to write; using good old ink pen and paper. Sure enough, I started counting the strokes! Too many strokes. Try playing a piano - minimum 3 keys pressed for a lousy chord. Take a walk... The steps! Running? Talking? Yikes!

Repetitive little actions here are a way to get the things done. Not the only way, mind you. Just a way. A means to an end. There are many ways to get those things done. Use glue instead of nails, dictate a letter, use a sampler instead of a piano, ride a bike...

There are many existing ways we can control a machine. There are also many open pathways we can explore to further the ways we control the machines (open source is a right setting for that, I think). Counting mouse-clicks and asserting that reducing mouse-clicking must be 'good', and that 'good' equals 'toolbars' is a mighy feat of jumping to a narrow conclusion. The mouse itself is an atavistic piece of 1-pixel pushing device. Ingenious device, but only a way to control a machine. At least those lucky enough to have both arms should be wondering every day: 'Why am I forced to push this 1 stinky pixel around when I have 2 arms and ~10 articulated fingers, a brain and motoric ability to support it? Can I have at least 2 mice, pretty please?' No, really, we should, and some do.

'Toolbars' are just a way of controlling the software, coming from a dogma that (almost) anything that can be performed by an application should be quickly accessible all the time. Generally, very questionable claim today, but admittedly useful sometimes to some people.

When it comes to designing software and it's interfaces, frustration and inspiration flows in our effort to design a 'perfect tool'. But thinking it 'a tool' is a mistake from the onset, I believe. Software, especially open source software, is often not a mere 'tool' but a a workshop, a worktable, a kitchen... Designing a 'perfect kitchen' or a piece of software is a bit more complex. It is a subject to customizations, arrangements and workflows. In fact, if I am not wrong, it is meant to be re-arranged and customized 'a posteriori'.

With this 'kitchen' metaphor in mind, I feel that 'demanding' mouse-click reduction via toolbars is like entering not ideally, but nicely equipped and stocked chef's kitchen, shouting at the fridge and the utensils, demanding for a '****** Big Mac already!'

Cheers,

alex

On 16 February 2012 16:25, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Bogdan Szczurek wrote:

Why not? Write a script

Aleksey Midenkov (midenok@gmail.com) wrote:

[...] my personal experience. And I know about [...] I note [...] my personal experience [...]

You don't seem to understand that your specific experiences don't help us at all in designing good user interfaces. It is vital that we do not care too much about individual data points, we need to come up with something that helps our target user group. And a careful evaluation from a usability expert is way more founded than some rants from an individual user.

Our resident usability expert convincingly made the argument about vertical space being important ages ago. You won't convince us with insulting and rude mails to ignore this advice.

Bye, Simon

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Simon Budig wrote:

Our resident usability expert convincingly made the argument about vertical space being important ages ago. You won't convince us with insulting and rude mails to ignore this advice.

Ah, but then Aleksey specifically stated that he isn't up to offending anyone. So it must be your overcomplicated mind imagining things that aren't there really :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

I'm not rude and not insulting anyone.

No, you merely dismissed our past work, refused to study facts and acted as if you were the one to tell us what to do and what not to do. That's hardly insulting, isn't it?

I have just one question. You joined the list to express your opinion. You did that. How much longer are we supposed to tolerate your disrupting behaviour?

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

Aleksey Midenkov (midenok@gmail.com) wrote:

I'm not rude and not insulting anyone.

You just denounced a mail where somebody put a lot of thought into it as "one great piece of rubbish!".

If that is not rude I don't know. No, smileys don't help alleviating this.

Also I tend to shorten quoted Mails to the stuff I respond to. That doesn't mean that I did not read it.

Bye, Simon

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

I don't dismiss your work guys.

This is getting really tiresome. Do I have to remind you how you neglected all the work we did on UI since 2006? I really don't feel like going through the whole thread to point out all of your wrong statements.

I have just one question. You joined the list to express your opinion. You did that. How much longer are we supposed to tolerate your disrupting behaviour?

You will tolerate it as much as you want. No one forces you to read this thread. You can mute it completely, many mailing clients allow that.

So far barely anyone liked your behaviour. Hence it's not the case of us muting the thread. It's the case of you learning to behave or quitting.

There is no seven. I count two who tend to note only negativity. If seven will say that they don't like my behaviour then I will quit.

Count me one more, and good bye, please!

On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:14:52 +0100, Olivier wrote:

There is no seven. I count two who tend to note only negativity. If seven will say that they don't like my behaviour then I will quit.

Count me one more, and good bye, please!

+1

On 12-02-17 19:42 , Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

'****** Big Mac already!'
That is one great piece of rubbish! :-) Because I'm telling about mouse-clicks from my personal experience. And I know about how much time they take because I'm using a lot of many different GUI. And when the GUI demands many mouse clicks, I note the inconvenience right away. This is my personal experience as of user of graphical environments for 15 years. And this poem looks like the training in essay skills.

Personally, I am glad to learn from your correspondence so far that there is a substantial experience, skill and a keen eye behind your opinion. My eloquence is oftentimes substandard and yes, from my humble experience, verbal communication can be very misleading when discussing interactions.

Rudeness aside, we should keep an open mind. So, if you would be so kind, time permitting of course, please contribute at least a simplest sketch that clearly articulates the toolbars you have in mind. Add text, diagrams, animations, comics, color coding, acting, anything that would help me/us to understand your idea of workflow. It would be awesome if you could put that sketch in coherence with current GIMP efforts and other GIMP functions. Try imagining various scenarios (there are some GIMP user scenarios online you can use) that show how your idea would help other people achieve more, too. Try to imagine how can a person manage the toolbars (both on-screen and in a sense of creating, storing, 'juggling'). Jump over to user mailing lists or forums, see how your idea flies, consider the praises and critique rationally...

With so much experience and bravado, it will be the easiest thing to do. And will not take a lot of your time, I am sure.

Until then, add me to those magical 7.

Cheers,

Alex

+1 (you can always fork it and merge your changes) On Feb 17, 2012 7:44 AM, "Aleksey Midenkov" wrote:

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:14:52 +0100, Olivier wrote:

There is no seven. I count two who tend to note only negativity. If seven will say that they don't like my behaviour then I will quit.

Count me one more, and good bye, please!

+1

Ok. I count 6. I'm pretty sure there will be 7. But who is the winner? :-) _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Olivier wrote:

There is no seven. I count two who tend to note only negativity. If seven will say that they don't like my behaviour then I will quit.

Count me one more, and good bye, please!

Um, it was "learn to behave or quit", not "just quit" :)

I just want to make it crystal clear that disagreeing is perfectly fine when the person who disagrees makes judgements _after_ having read facts, not _instead_ of it. Alas, this was not the case here.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

* Robert Krawitz [02-17-12 08:43]:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:14:52 +0100, Olivier wrote:

There is no seven. I count two who tend to note only negativity. If seven will say that they don't like my behaviour then I will quit.

Count me one more, and good bye, please!

+1

+1

+100000
if that will help...
I've learnt a lot being on this list... Its upsetting to see nice people [all the developers here] spend much time on answering upset mails...

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Paka wrote:

* Robert Krawitz [02-17-12 08:43]:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:14:52 +0100, Olivier wrote:

There is no seven. I count two who tend to note only negativity. If seven will say that they don't like my behaviour then I will quit.

Count me one more, and good bye, please!

+1

+1

--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

On 02/17/2012 05:43 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:14:52 +0100, Olivier wrote:

There is no seven. I count two who tend to note only negativity. If seven will say that they don't like my behaviour then I will quit.

Count me one more, and good bye, please!

+1

Ok. I count 6. I'm pretty sure there will be 7. But who is the winner? :-)

Whoever sends a message that terminates this thread (without prejudice).

W dniu 12-02-17 09:36, Aleksey Midenkov pisze:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Bogdan Szczurek wrote:

I've seen many people used to "clicking" and convinced them to use "my way". Haven't heard any complaint

W dniu 12-02-17 11:23, jcupitt@gmail.com pisze:

On 16 February 2012 16:25, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Bogdan Szczurek wrote:

Why not? Write a script

Am 17.02.2012 23:31, schrieb Bogdan Szczurek:

The second point is trivial, as GIMP's UI already drifts towards free choice of such behavior. The first and the rest of the discussion suggest that you specificaly want to have user customizable toolbars in GIMP, hence, you _are_ trying to convince devs to do so.

A more customizable GUI would be nice. I also prefer to have small toolbars, but that can be aligned both ways (horizontal/vertical). Additionally im really a fan of toolbars that contain dialogs. That means that the toolbar more or less acts like the default menu, but displays option dialogs instead of having single entries. For example if you want to change the color, you can click on the "color" icon and a color picker appears as a temporary popup. That way you can easily group tools and settings together, without having them displayed all the time.

If the user wants a permanent dialog, he should be able to drag it to the wanted place and it should stay there (single window or attached dialog).

This could be a nice addition even for the professional users. Even if you use a lot of shortcuts, there are still some functions for that you don't use them, just because you don't use this function regularly.

In the recent weeks i used MyPaint quite often. It is still very limited and far away from being perfect, but im really in favor of the approach of the gui design. You have quick access to all relevant functions, while still having a very small interface, even without knowing every shortcut.

Just my 2 cents
Tobias Oelgarte