FreeLists / openbeos / [openbeos] Re: BeOS/Haiku UI question

[Simon Taylor <simontaylor1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Koki,

The BeOS way from preflets tends to be (Apply)/Revert/Close. I have also 
explained why I think that is  a very sensible way of doing things.

I think your opinions are somewhat biased by your experience of Windows. You 
understand what "Cancel" does because of your experience with windows,

[...]

> My question is: why make the user click twice, when the same thing can 
> be accomplished with one click? That is not my idea of simplicity, but 
> it may be just me... :-)

I think you are confusing speed with simplicity. Adding a little-used (they 
opened the settings window so they presumably want to change something) 
"cancel" button whose only job is to save one extra mouse click on rare 
occasions is not my idea of "simplicity". Instead it gives the user yet another 
option for closing the window that they have to think about every time they see 
the dialog.

The "revert" button is quite capable of the important stuff cancel does, just 
without closing the window too. That means it allows for the "need to change 
setting->oops that's wrong->revert->change again->close" use case as well. I 
seperate the ideas of displaying/closing settings window (my "view" on the 
settings) and adjusting/reverting them. The Be button approach is good at that.

I feel the same about the "OK" and "Apply" buttons in windows - I have watched 
many, many users click Apply, then OK whenever using a dialog box. It's obvious 
why - the button's functionality overlaps so much that the user wants to feel 
sure they have "applied" the settings - as like you say there is confusion over 
what happens when clicking a button causes the window to disappear. Does "OK" 
mean "OK, I'm finished with the window" or "OK, apply these, and I'm finished 
with the window?". On the other hand "Close" does exactly what it says on the 
tin.

> Of course the Close button performs only one thing: closing the window. 
> But I think the question users will ask themselves is different: what 
> does closing the window do to my settings? Have they been saved? Or 
> have they been discarded? The answer is different depending on the 
> situation, and I wonder if this is clear to the user or not. The fact 
> that I made this post may be an indication that there may be different 
> interpretations to this question.

It's an issue as BeOS has a different philosophy to Windows. I believe the way 
I've described does make more sense instinctively to the user once they 
decondition themselves from the windows approach of settings changes being made 
in bulk in some seperate entity and then handed back to whatever's actually 
controlling the system. Once the user understands the Be way is to have the 
window be an actual view onto the live settings it makes a lot more sense. 
Closing the window simply closes the window. If there's a button on the form 
marked "Close" surely the user would expect that to do exactly the same as the 
close button on the title tab?

The issue is in windows where dialog boxes have 2 very different "Close" 
buttons - "OK" or "Cancel" - and the user has every right to be confused as to 
which action will happen if they hit the big X on the titlebar.
[...]

> The "Cancel" label has a very specific meaning that clearly and 
> unmistakenly reflects its effect (iow, there is no room for erronous 
> interpretation). I do not see how its use can be confusing or make 
> things complicated for the user.

I disagree. "Cancel" was appropriate before the days of multi-tasking where 
everything was in a defined order. You'd click "change settings" - the entire 
screen would be replaced with a settings screen, then you could obviously 
"cancel" that action. When the settings window can be left open, settings can 
be applied and tested with the window still open, "Cancel" is harder to 
interpret. At least it is harder to interpret than "Close".
 
> O the other hand, I can see that not having a Cancel button may lead 
> some (new?) users into thinking that the changes they made are 
> discarded when they close a configuration window, which may not 
> necessarily be the case. There is potential for confusion there.

Not without an apply button also. It's very simple - they select their 
settings, think "what now?" "hmm 2 choices - revert or close - must be close". 
This is an especially easy decision if the settings were obviously applied 
live, but anyhow once they've done it once it becomes second nature. Think of 
the same user faced with "OK", "Apply", "Cancel", and without any indication 
that they've had any effect by altering controls. The first dialog faced laid 
out like that is much more confusing IMHO.

> I have concerns that it may not be clear to some what closing a window 
> does (ie., does it save the changes? or does it discard them?). I think 
> the Cancel button gives an easy and unmistakable way to resolve this 
> concern, and therefore should not be left out altogether. But then, 
> that's maybe just me... :-)

It's obvious what "Revert" does too. Also it leaves the window open so it's 
also possible to *see* what revert actually did to your settings (unlike Cancel 
in windows).

Saving/Discarding settings is a very windows concept and one our users should 
lose fairly quickly :)

Simon

ps: Sorry for the long one, this will be my last to the list on this topic :) 
I'm happy to continue off-list if people want.

> Cheers!
> 
> Jorge


-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information