[openbeos] Re: ShowImage Bloat? [was: Re: Build Farm] (and more...)

On 2004-01-12 at 12:16:37 [-0800], Simon Taylor wrote:
> > A slideshow is little more than prev/next with a timer. Still not too
> > big
> > of a deal, really.
> 
> I think viewing a slideshow is a different task than viewing an image -
>  I certainly know in advance if I want a slideshow or not.
> 
> I was showing someone some pictures I had in a BeOS folder and wanted
> to show them as a slideshow. Instead of just "Open With"ing them with
> (the yet to be created) SlideShow, I had to open one of them in
> OpenShowImage, select "full screen", then select "fit to window", then
> select "view as slide show". So maybe some improvents in the interface
> would help the situation, but it still seems like a distinct task to
> me.

This I can agree with; the slidshow user interface could definitely use 
some touching up.

On 2004-01-12 at 12:16:37 [-0800], Simon Taylor wrote:
> > So, a seperate app that contains all of the functionality of
> > ShowImage
> > plus SlideShow, seems less bloated to you?
> 
> Yes it does.
> 
> In the same way that a separate app that contains all the functionality
> of ShowImage plus some editing functions (ArtPaint), is better than
> adding all the editing functions directly to ShowImage itself.
> 
> The seperate app could have a simple UI, uncluttered with ShowImage
> specific features (it would always be full screen, would always size to
> fit, wouldn't need to bother with dragging cuttings about). ShowImage
> itself could have a single command ("Run Slideshow"), that hands over
> to the other app for all the specific settings relating only to the
> Slideshow, making ShowImage a lot less cluttered too.
> 
> I think Windows does quite well at this - the "File and Picture Viewer"
> or whatever it's called, allows zooming, rotating 90 degress, and
> clicking a button to launch an editor (usually Paint), and another
> button to launch a slideshow. 

I agree, the XP picture viewer is genius. I can't think of a single 
complaint against it, and only one or two very minor additions I'd like to 
see. 

On 2004-01-12 at 12:16:37 [-0800], Simon Taylor wrote:
> That's it. Because they are seperate
> apps, it's also possible to start a slideshow directly from explorer
> without having to load the picture viewer for one file first.

I doubt they're separate apps; I imagine there's a command-line switch or 
somesuch that tells it to run in slideshow mode (feel free to try and prove 
me wrong, but I don't feel like checking ;-). That being said, the fact 
that the slideshow mode has its own interface tailored to slideshowing 
makes it both very usable and very asthetically pleasing.  

On 2004-01-12 at 12:16:37 [-0800], Simon Taylor wrote:
> > Honestly, someday, we will have a KeyNote/PowerPoint app, too.
> > Complex
> > slideshows belong in there. For now, though, a few dozen (guessing)
> > lines of code that enable users to shuffle through their images
> > doesn't
> > seem too much overkill to me. It isn't a gut wrenching change.
> 
> But to do a "nice" slideshow app needs more thought and more slideshow-
> specific UI bits that really would be bloat for the 99% of times people
> run ShowImage just to look at one image.

Personally I could care less if ShowImage does slideshows or if it's 
another app; it makes reasonable sense either way. But if ShowImage *is* to 
keep doing slideshows, a more refined UI for it would be nice.

On 2004-01-12 at 13:54:27 [-0800], Sikosis wrote:
> Personally, I don't see the problem here. I always thought ShowImage
> had too little features for me to use it.

I agree. The R5 ShowImage was basically useless as far as I was concerned. 
I actually use OBOSShowImage on a regular basis, now (vs. basically never 
using R5ShowImage). :-)

On 2004-01-12 at 13:54:27 [-0800], Sikosis wrote:
> The Next/Prev feature for multiple page TIFFs, I must say, is great.
> Think - faxes ... we use a fax program (at work) that saves items as
> multiple page tiffs - previously I couldn't view them.

And yes, this definitely needs to be in there for that very reason.

-Tyler

Other related posts: