> > * The configuration window - cramming everything into a single window > > creates a few issues. Visually, it's inelegant. In usability terms, it > > means that there's a lot for a user to process at once. I'd recommend > > splitting the options up into tabs. My mockups [1] demonstrate how this > > could be done. Have you considered them? > > Yes, if we were to go with tabs, I like how you broke it up. I have > been pretty resistant to tabs, because I felt like they would make the > user feel like they were "configuring" their backup (versus just > "making" a backup) and that hidden knobs on some other tab might be > super important.
Users will typically use the wizard to initially set things up, not the preferences dialog. That should guide them through the process of providing all the necessary information. > A backup program is different than, say, a chat program in that if you > open chat preferences, you can browse as you like and maybe click some > stuff but no big deal if you don't change anything (because they > really are 'preferences' that can just be deviated from the default). > But if you open these backup preferences, you kind of have to check > every tab to make sure nothing is different from what you expect, or > data loss may result. Why would a user have to review all the configuration options? This dialog would only be used to change specific options: adding a new folder to be backed up, or changing the details of the backup destination, for example. > I've tried to make the defaults as no-change-needed as much as > possible, but the user is still likely to want to review what the > default is at least. Again, they will use the wizard to set things up, won't they? There are a few other advantages to the tabbed approach that I didn't mention before, BTW: it allows the include and exclude lists to have an adequate amount of space, and it allows you to use drag and drop to add items to them. > I'm very sympathetic to the size of the dialog being a wart. And if I > try to add any more preferences, we're in real trouble. But my gut > reaction to tabs is not positive. I feel like all the settings should > be on one page. How do other people feel about it? I'd also like to hear other opinions on this (current screenshots are here [1], proposed mockups are here [2]). > What about presenting the backup settings and letting you "inline > edit" or use a small popup to change them? Think of ajax vs forms on > the web. Kind of like your proposed changes to the main window to > include backup info, but with 'edit' buttons or something. Maybe we > could do away with the preferences dialog then. I don't think it's a good idea to display configuration options in the main window - it would make it too complex. Ideally, the main window should be pretty clean and simple and should contain only relevant information. > > * I'd also recommend reevaluating the name and icon: neither > > communicate the app's functionality particularly well. > > Heh, fair point. The name is a bit of a play on words, but it doesn't > convey too much. But so many obvious and not-so-obvious backup > program names have already been taken. I don't think the icon is so > bad, but I am open to other designs. I'm open to suggestions on both > fronts. Why not request the Art Team make you an icon [3]? You could also speak to marketing [4] for name ideas. Allan [1] http://live.gnome.org/DejaDup/Screenshots [2] http://live.gnome.org/DejaDup/Design/Profiles#Design_C [3] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeArt/ArtRequests [4] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing -- IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ usability mailing list usability@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/usability
