Thank You for your continued support and contributions!
Also I think most usability "problems" could be solved by having a really big "MANUAL -- read it" link covering at least half the front page and flashing and playing some anoying sounds or something because we have a IMO pretty good manual (albeit not in very good shape for the h10 yet) and it seems it is very difficult to find it...
How about distribution a couple of cfg files with rockbox that get installed in, say, the root directory or /.rockbox. Then we could state "try the shipped configurations, if none matches your need just look into the manual and build a configuration yourself". That way we could have a "most users.cfg" that uses iCatcher as wps, turns on tagcache, selects a font that is suited to the screen size etc.
Of course, RockBox has much more Features, but they're often presented in a complicated way. I think that there even is the idea of making such a SimpleBox port shows how complicated RockBox ist to use.
Quote from: bluebrother on September 20, 2006, 05:09:28 PMHow about distribution a couple of cfg files with rockbox that get installed in, say, the root directory or /.rockbox. Then we could state "try the shipped configurations, if none matches your need just look into the manual and build a configuration yourself". That way we could have a "most users.cfg" that uses iCatcher as wps, turns on tagcache, selects a font that is suited to the screen size etc. Good idea That must be the least complicated way of shipping "default" settings, that most people will  use eventually.
Quote from: nls on September 20, 2006, 03:20:00 PMAlso I think most usability "problems" could be solved by having a really big "MANUAL -- read it" link covering at least half the front page and flashing and playing some anoying sounds or something because we have a IMO pretty good manual (albeit not in very good shape for the h10 yet) and it seems it is very difficult to find it... I don't think that you get the whole usability issue. The GUI of RockBox should be that simple, that you don't need to look at the manual for the most stuff!I mean, has anybody ever looked at the manuel for functions of the iPod original firmware? I think in terms of usability, the iPod original firmware is way better than RockBox. Of course, RockBox has much more Features, but they're often presented in a complicated way. I think that there even is the idea of making such a SimpleBox port shows how complicated RockBox ist to use.
Why include them in the firmware? If they're hard-coded, they're always in memory even when not used. How on earth is having them in seperate files a bad idea, since you still just browse presets and see a list of them?
Would it be possible to make a .rock plug-in for the simple interface for now so that people can experiment with how things work.
Page created in 0.073 seconds with 21 queries.