I am cross posting this to the Lazarus list, since some of this relates
to Lazarus.
On 16/10/2024 01:07, Rainer Stratmann via fpc-pascal wrote:
- Lazarus looks very complicated with its many windows. And it is also
relatively complicated to understand and use. There are too many options that
are too nested.
About the options: This is 2 fold.
1) The count
2) The presentation
"Count": Of course (assuming that all those involved in the decision
making can be convinced) they can be reduced. Then existing users will
just have to live with the loss of their favourite setting. Or be forced
to install (included or 3rd party) add ons. Or worst, leave.
"Presentation": Oh, yeah, that could be a lot better. Including an
"advanced" mode, to reduce what is immediately show to a newby. And
Including a wizard.
Just needs someone to do the work.
Some part is bound to the underlaying structure where options are stored
=> that makes it more work to change stuff.
- Crosscompiling: The compiler file name is hidden in Tools - Settings instead
of in the project settings.
If it is cross compiling (using same compiler version), and if the
compiler is installed (as cross compiler):
Project Options > Compiler opts > Config and Target
- For a new installation of Lazarus: The most important quick start icons have
to be configured again at the bottom of the source code window. So that fast
and smooth work is possible. Instead of placing them like this from the start.
The many confusing windows I have already mentioned above.
You mean the editor toolbar?
I don't know if it has ever been discussed, if/what the default config
for it should be.
Am Mittwoch, 16. Oktober 2024, 04:00:30 CEST schrieb DougC via fpc-pascal:
I don't think the situations are vary similar, so I don't think the
comparison is useful.
I mainly wanted to say that it is possible to do so without extensive
marketing. Linux is another example. Linux does not spend a huge amount of
money in marketing. It is widely used because it runs stable and for some
other reasons.
However, Linux is marketed by countless people blogging and making
videos, as well as mentioning in PC related press/magazines.
IMHO its 50/50
The impression a user gets when using the project can decide if they
stay or turn away. But it does rarely bring them to the project to begin
with.
And, the impression is not just what they explore on their own, but what
help they have to explore. Not just language but also environment.
E.g., while I still prefer to search for text explanations of how to get
an app to do what I need, I would guess that many people want a quick
video showing them.
Yet, of course, no amount of help will change if the environment feels
familiar or not. On the other hand, we don't want to pay for that by
driving away old users, so we must preserve (at least as option) their
preferred functionality and presentation.
But all that does not bring anyone new. It does at best help to keep
them, once they are there. Word needs to be out, and it needs to be out
on all channels/media, and as much as possible.
Hence IMHO: 50/50.
And of course, it isn't just agreeing on this. We obviously don't have
many people for the marketing/social-media/... part.
But we also are limited on the implementation side.
Let's say we could find agreement on how to improve the editor-toolbar
=> then who does it? (initial changes, maintenance, options, ... not
all needed for the toolbar, but for other changes maybe...)
--
_______________________________________________
lazarus mailing list
lazarus@lists.lazarus-ide.org
https://lists.lazarus-ide.org/listinfo/lazarus
