Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] GUI mockup... let's get this sorted once and for all

["Joel Duggan" <joelduggan gmail com>]

That mock-up looks good.  I've wondered for a while why the album art
didn't go beside the now playing bar.  If you want to get fancy, that
area could be resizable too, in order to let the album art be bigger. 
The problem would be that the Now Playing area would have a lot of
wasted space when made much bigger.

I am indifferent with the sources list going up beside the Now Playing
area.  I could take it or leave it.

Joel D.

On 3/22/06, Gareth Murphy <garethmurphy1 eircom net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 13:40 -0500, William Jon McCann wrote:
> > Scrollbars pretty much suck.  If you can't see about, say, 7 items at
> > once then scrollbars really don't help you.
>
> I agree that having about 6 or 7 items visible at any given time is good
> measure for usability, point taken.
>
> > I don't think this is true at all.  Most people with iTunes that I know
> > of have a huge source list full of playlists.  Let's do an informal survey:
> > http://flickr.com/photos/tags/itunes/
>
> Again, you are completely right... I myself have recently started to
> create one or two playlists and I also should have remembered that many
> people will have portable players in there too.
>
> > Resizing issues become a real pain when you have three panes.  Look at
> > evolution calendar as an example.  And not always showing the queue list
> > makes it kind of pointless - you may as well use the Queue source
> > instead of sidebar.
>
> True again... I was clinging at straws with that suggestion I must
> admit. :P
>
> > I don't think this is true.  One obvious counter-example is any portable
> > device.  Making assumptions about screen size and font size is generally
> > not so good.  Here's one of my personal metrics: the UI should be
> > perfectly usable with a 28 pt font.  This ensures that people with
> > vision impairment can use it and it also kinda makes sure it can be used
> > on small devices.
>
> This is where I have to stop agreeing. Virtually no laptops these days
> come with a screen size of under 1024x768. At 28pt on my 1280x1024 the
> whole desktop became unusable, nevermind just Rhythmbox. I feel that
> 16pt is a good judge for visually impaired users, maybe even one or two
> sizes more.
>
> Either way 100% of the people out there are never going to be happy with
> a single product, it's just a case of catering to the majority by
> default and giving the right amount of customisable options to keep as
> many of the other users as possible.
>
> > So anyway, I think there are a few interesting problems if we want to
> > add album art as a sidebar pane.
>
> Yes there are... perhaps we shouldn't put it in the sidebar at all? Que
> mockup... http://www.flickr.com/photos/gazam/116485003/
>
> Remember to read the notes on the image, then take a look at it full
> size and let me know what you think.
>
> P.S. Didn't get time to do the icons today unfortunately, but I've been
> thinking about some designs and would like to know what the rest of you
> feel? The idea of a simple box with a musical note sticking out of it
> isn't so exciting... surely we could break away from the whole image of
> an actual box? Banshee doesn't have an icon of a screaming Irish Banshee
> for instance :D
>
> Regards,
>
> Gareth
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhythmbox-devel mailing list
> rhythmbox-devel gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/rhythmbox-devel
>