Pressing LEFT to get to WPS from file root

[stripwax]

I agree with previous.  My 2c:   If the Browser is the 'main screen' then how come it's not possible to play music without always going to the WPS screen?   Surely that would make the WPS the main screen, since that's the screen that always appears when you play music, when you turn the device on, etc.

Or, given that the mp3 player has no 'Back' button, and that the only way to go from the WPS to the Browser is to press the Select button (which presumably must mean 'Back' if the Browser is indeed supposed to be the 'main screen'), then how come pressing Select in all the other menus doesn't also take you back to the Browser?

I'd really have a hard time justifying to a new rockbox user that the Browser is the 'main screen' given the above.

If it's possible to rationalise this behaviour, then great, but I've still yet to get a working mental map and I've been using rockbox for over a year now.

[Llorean]

Well, let's start with the WPS does NOT appear when you boot up by default. You seem to have forgotten that you enabled auto-resume, or something.

When you first boot up, if you haven't changed settings, you'll always boot into the file tree.

The select button is "Invoke". Or "Click" if you will. If you click on a file, it runs. If you click on a menu entry, it takes you to the result. If you click on the WPS, it clears to the filetree, much like some *very* temporary windows that display text and say "Click to continue" without even prompting you as to where.

Honestly, I had used Rockbox for less than 3 hours before the mental map made sense to me. I'm not saying I'm typical, but it's entirely possible that you aren't either.

Regardless, it's neither your software nor mine, and it's pointless to argue over it as it's a matter of preference either way, and the people who have control over it get to pick which preference is chosen. Being open source, you're free to make your own build.

[Mikerman]

With all due respect, one of the purposes of this forum, I think, is for users to express their opinions as users, possibly to try to encourage the developers.  I realize that this firmware is open source and that one always can change it, but not being an engineer or with any amount of computer expertise, let's face it--I can't.  (I'm happy if I can patch it.    )  Hopefully, the devs listen to the users as to actual user needs and preferences, and that a sympathetic dev then considers a requested feature or implementation.

I still am using patched firmware that allows me to get to the WPS by pressing the joystick left, and it is a standard and valued feature for me.  It seems a relatively simple implementation to me, from the original patch; but hey, what do I know--I studied Spanish medieval literature in college.

Part of the frustration with the player manufacturers is that they don't listen--part of the reason why users like Rockbox is because Rockbox does.  I hope it always stays that way.

[Llorean]

Well, normally I'm all for users suggesting things, but when a few of the original devs have come in and said they don't like the idea (I think one mentioned needing to be dragged kicking and screaming) and the topic's been discussed several times with the devs standing pretty solid, it starts to feel like it's time for people to start accepting that maybe the core devs' user interface philosophies are different than theirs, and either learn to love it or come up with a way to compensate for it as you have by running a patched build.

There are arguments against adding this code as an option that can boil down to "It makes the Archos binary larger." Basically, options that would affect all targets (as this one necessarily would) have to be weighed in as being pretty solidly valuable. This one doesn't have practical value, so much as a minor convenience / preference. Yes, it's tiny as a patch, but several tiny things do add up. You've basically got the core devs against it as an interface design issue, and practical reasons why it's not a good idea to add it even as a user configurable option.

Unfortunately even though it's an open source project, not everyone can be made happy in every way.

[rdtyphn]

"Hopefully, the devs listen to the users as to actual user needs and preferences, and that a sympathetic dev then considers a requested feature or implementation."
I agree completely.
This is a small feature that would make a lot of people very happy.

[Llorean]

So, practical reasons be damned?

[Mr. Brownstone]

Any comments on my previous post? I tried to reconcile various users want of the WPS as the "main-screen" by offering a few small changes to the current implementation, hopefully making the concept of the Browser being the main-screen more intuitive.

[Llorean]

Well, to summarize: I personally am against scrolling or animating transitions, such as the entry of the WPS. But, it's also a good way of showing that the WPS is on top of the browser.

I'm also personally against leaving the WPS up when playback is manually stopped. I think leaving the WPS up is okay if you reach an automatic stop (end of playlist with no repeat or next-folder actions happening) but I'm not really sure where else I feel it's proper for the While Playing Screen to stay displayed when nothing is playing.

Also, I'm somewhat against making the Play button do something other than what it currently does. I feel that its current use should be extended across all menus, so at any point it can return to the playback screen and/or resume music playback.

But I do like your ideas. They're in what I see as "the right direction" (but remember, I'm one person), that being, to make it more intuitive to the user what's going on. The only differences I have with them are that I'm a grumpy young man who likes the controls just fine as they are.

[rdtyphn]

Llorean, no need to be so confrontational with your questions! 
The only practical reason you've given against this option is that it would make the code a little bigger.  I think having something a little easier to use is a practical option.  Some others feel the same way.
Regardless, thank you for your defense of the status quo, it's good to hear what you have to say.  And I'm glad that we can all agree that there should be some movement in a direction regarding the interface. 

[Llorean]

But that's the thing. It's not *easier* to use. Right now, there's a button that goes back to the WPS. Your method, a different button goes back to the WPS. For many people, your method *removes* a function, because you can't use left to reliably get to the root when not looking at the screen.

Yes, I'm being confrontational. There's a purpose though, and that's to get you to fully expand upon your suggestions. You say "add a little code size." But it adds code without adding functionality, simply adding user preference. Nothing is actually gained in terms of new abilities (another way of doing the same thing is not a new ability.) That's my argument.

So, expand upon how the idea is practical, while avoiding the topic of "People like it this way."

[LinusN]

Also remember that there is another solid argument against it. It makes it a lot harder to navigate for blind people. When you can't see the screen, you want to be able to push Left one or two times too many, to be sure that you are in the root. Then you don't want to end up in the WPS.

[Falco98]

It seems to me that a flawless solution (and still easy enough for blind users) would be to require it to be a long-push of "left", *after* you're at root (i.e. the same long-push that gets you TO root from a deep folder won't then dump you into the WPS and/or start rewinding).  thus, someone could tap "left" enough times to be sure they're at root if they want, without worrying about dumping out into the WPS, but it would be as easy as simply holding it down for 2 seconds once you're there.  any thoughts?

[Llorean]

How is this different from the current method of pressing Play to get into the WPS? I mean, it's just a different button choice at this point.

[Mr. Brownstone]

It's not a flawless solution because again, it's trying to fit the iRiver firmware methodology with the ROCKbox one.

I think it's starting to become more clear that the problem is less programmatic (although I stand by my last post) and more to do with public-relations. ROCKbox is NOT the iRiver firmware -- ROCKbox is not any of the firmwares it is designed to replace -- and users should have no expectation that it will work in the same way as the original software for their device. There has clearly been some difficulty is communicating this to users.

Back on the programmatic side, I strongly feel that optional animation that is on by default - as described in my previous post - would go a long way in giving users the visual feedback they need to understand that ROCKbox treats the hierarchy of its screens differently to the stock firmware. New users need to feel comfortable in their choice for ROCKbox when they first use it to assert that they have indeed made a smart decision - because they have! Any doubts about the intuitiveness of the interface can really be helped with visual feedback.

Apple are all about user-experience -- they would not have animated the iPod layout if they did not think it helped their users understand how they were navigating their music. I think such a philosophy would greatly help ROCKbox get the mainstream attention it deserves.

[RowaN]

Wow I can't beleive this thread is still going hehe. I've been half way around the world and back since I started it. I really like Falco98's suggestion of long hold left.. that would be improving on the iriver's feature because as you said, you can get back to the root as normal without accidently going into the WPS. Must learn how to compile rockbox myself... or perform a jedi mind trick on the devs to get this implemented haha. This is the feature you are looking for.  =p