Re: Proposed: evolution

On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 04:52 -0400, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> This is just wrong. They have quite a bit of meaning. How many Windows
> (TM) users go to look for "Spreadsheet" or "Word Processor"? They don't.
> They look for "Excel" or "Word". If I have 5 different "Web Browsers"
> installed and showing up in my menu, all with the same icon, how am I
> supposed to know which is which? We really need to keep project names
> around for things like this. And yes, we are working to make evolution
> simpler, but we are now UI/String frozen for 2.0. Not that there should
> not be multiple desktop entries for each major component (having one for
> exchange or brainread probably doesn't make sense), which show up as
> "Evolution Mail" or "Evolution Calendar". In fact, there is a patch
> lying around somewhere that does exactly that. But saying that generic
> names is the only way to go doesn't make sense, especially when in a
> standard environment, the user probably has several choices for what
> to use as their web browser, mail client, address book, instant
> messenger, or whatever.

I strongly agree with Rodney and Davyd here.

Providing some generic, descriptive name is good, as long as it comes
with an distinguishable name of the actual program. It's the
"Evolution", "Galeon" or "" part that makes it different
from any other PIM, Web Browser or Office Suite -- even visible to the

People (as in users rather than hackers) like names and they will use it
to remember and describe the application they are talking about.

IMHO "Evolution Mail", "Evolution Calender", etc. is the way to go.

+1 to get Evolution and friends into official GNOME Desktop.

(This includes evolution-webcal. Mentioning here, cause I currently
don't have anything to contribute to its respective thread apart from my
vote. ;-)

> On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 18:07 -0400, Bryan Clark wrote:
> > > Letting Evolution be Evolution is
> > > just fine, so long as we're not throwing in the corporate bias (Novell
> > > Evolution, Ximian Evolution, etc.)
> > 
> > That doesn't make sense.  Project names have little to no meaning to
> > people using the applications, this is why we require functional names
> > to appear instead.

I don't agree here.

I came across too many people actually asking/searching for "Excel" in, failing to see the "Spreadsheet" thingy...


char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0  ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]