Re: Gimp-style menus

[Kevin Cullis <kevincu orci com>]

Mike Newman wrote:
> 
> On 15 Apr 2001 12:30:46 +0100, colin z robertson wrote:
> 
> > I'm about to start work on the section of the UI guidelines dealing
> > with menus and there are a few issues I'd like some feedback on. The
> > first is about the status of Gimp-style menus accessible via a
> > right-click on the document. Should these be encouraged or discouraged
> > in the guidelines? To what extent are they appropriate?
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> 
> In my opinion (and I do seem to be expressing a lot of them today :-)
> these "Context Menus" are valuable and useful - but no GUI environment
> has yet achieved a consistency that actually makes users think "Ah! If I
> right click on this...". A context menu should relate directly to what
> in selected, focused or (at worst) under the pointer at the time of
> clicking, and should display (or allow activation of) only items which
> are possible/reasonable/advisable(?) in that specific context.

As a former Mac user, I always said that if I have to use a manual to
find an answer that I'm into details that are not normally used by the
average user.  The GUI, including a Contextual menu, should lead a user
to answers, not take the place of a normal menu system. However, I
should think that Contextual menus should follow a simple rule: place
things there that are considered the top 80% of menu useage, in context
of what I'm doing, which will speed up my productivity.  I agree with
Mike that it should be in a specific context.

> 
> The Gimp (and other graphics/DTP apps using) take this to the ultimate
> extent of saying "everything you can do with this image, you do by right
> clicking", but most programs will not need to approach the menus in this
> way. In my own code I use right click menus to expose features which are
> common enough to make moving the mouse to the toolbar, dropping down a
> menu or hitting accelerators a hassle.

Gimp, from my point of view, has overblown the use of contextual menus
and detracts from the "true" menu system, to lead a user to the actions
they want to perform.  In fact, I would venture to say that comparing
the Gimp and Adobe's Photoshop that Photoshop users are more productive
via how they've laid out their system than people using the Gimp. If
that is the case, other than cost, why would a user want to switch to
the Gimp if it takes me longer to accomplish a average task in the Gimp
than Photoshop?  There has to be a strong, new benefit for someone to
switch to the Gimp, and contextual menus are not one of them (I'm
guessing).

Just some thoughts.

Kevin