More controlls for the quick option menu?

[JdGordon]

how would it be ordered?

[Llorean]

Personally, I'd be happy just having it in the order that I "added". You could then add a context menu option for them for "move up" and "move down" to allow people to reposition them if that's not good enough?

[bluebrother]

Couldn't it be like the current quick screen (in terms of how you add things)?

As in, "Context menu - add to custom menu"

And from within the custom menu "Context menu - remove"?

That's how I thought about it too. As for the ordering question: since we now have "set as top / bottom / left / right  quickscreen item" it could be much simpler with a "append / prepend to custom menu". Also, is there a reason not to have a context menu in the custom menu with the items "move up" and "move down"?

[JdGordon]

Just thinking about keeping the bloat/settings down, but sure, context menus inside the quickmenu would work.

Also, I want to add more than just settings, shortcuts (into the filebrowser or just using the shortcut plugin), and it would be really cool if it could actually have a tiny file browser built in so a "setting" line could be the config directory and left/right would go through the .cfg's in the folder.

[gbl08ma]

[...]
Also, I want to add more than just settings, shortcuts (into the filebrowser or just using the shortcut plugin), and it would be really cool if it could actually have a tiny file browser built in so a "setting" line could be the config directory and left/right would go through the .cfg's in the folder.

Great!
But, it seems I'll be unable to take advantage of the quick screen without looking into the screen... well, as I'm the only person here who seems to be seeing some advantage in the fact of not needing to look at the screen to use the quick screen, as it is now (hold Menu, then press a directional key), then yes we can go with the menu GUI... the quickscreen goes less practical to me, but, "if you can't beat them, join them"

EDIT: I just remembered that we could add a "quick menu" and keep the quick screen as it is now, then let users choose between quick screen and quick menu depending on their personal taste. However, this would make a big part of the GUI very conditional, because the context menu for each setting would vary conform user is using quick menu or quick screen. And as some developers say there are too much settings...

[JdGordon]

don't hold your breath though, until any code is actually written this is all wishful thinking still (and the fact that this will almost certainly just stir up more arguments there isnt much motivation for me to do this)

[gbl08ma]

don't hold your breath though, until any code is actually written this is all wishful thinking still (and the fact that this will almost certainly just stir up more arguments there isnt much motivation for me to do this)

Yes, but without anything done it's hard to see what is wrong and what needs be improved/replaced/removed. Only after having *something* done we will be able to stir more arguments.

[oayz]

But, it seems I'll be unable to take advantage of the quick screen without looking into the screen...

What about "double timeout"? Hold select for 2s and GUI shows up, keep holding for another 1s and you've got you "blind" mode.

[gbl08ma]

But, it seems I'll be unable to take advantage of the quick screen without looking into the screen...

What about "double timeout"? Hold select for 2s and GUI shows up, keep holding for another 1s and you've got you "blind" mode.

It's another very good idea too, I'm just not sure if it's possible to distinguish between two hold times.
To simplify the addition of items to the quick menu/screen, the "blind mode" could just bring the first four items of the usual menu list.
Is anyone thinking on working, or already working on this? From some post I've read on this thread, I got the idea that this has already been discussed before with no consensus, so, isn't it time to make a decision and choose between keeping the quick screen as it is now, or doing any improvements?

[Llorean]

Everyone posting in this thread is aware that the vast majority of Rockbox can be operated blindly through the spoken interface, right? Even normal menus?

[oayz]

Yes, but for "normal" use it's overkill, IMHO. If could turn it on/off quickly ... quickscreen, but this is catch22

[Llorean]

Yes, but it somewhat mitigates the general insisting that the quickscreen be usable blind - if you need blind use, there are other ways to accomplish this.

As well, as long as you create the new menu, you know "down three, select, down two" to choose a value. On the current quickscreen, pressing up or down to change "shuffle" settings (or whatever you have set there) provides no audible feedback, so one way or another you're still counting button presses.

The current screen isn't particularly usable blind any more so or less so than a normal menu, especially one you've selected yourself.

[torne]

From some post I've read on this thread, I got the idea that this has already been discussed before with no consensus, so, isn't it time to make a decision and choose between keeping the quick screen as it is now, or doing any improvements?

No, that's a silly decision. It's not "keep it as it is" vs "change it"; it's "change it to specific proposal A" or "change it to specific proposal B" or "leave it as it is until someone comes up with another proposal". Nobody is against changing it full stop.

FWIW I don't like the idea of the quickscreen just being a menu, because that's not as *quick*, which kinda defeats the point You can't use unvoiced menus on a touch scrollwheel target without looking, because you can't reliably tell how far you scrolled, and turning voicing on is not really a sensible 'fix'.

[Llorean]

There's an option to beep/tick for each step moved in the menu, though, without requiring voice, isn't there?

I'm just not sure how high a priority "being able to use it without looking" should be compared to "make it able to meet more needs over all." As long as it's technically still usable without looking (a list is), at least. I'd like to get some real information on how many people regularly use it without looking, without making mistakes.

[gbl08ma]

@torne, thanks for the clarification. I agree with you.

There's an option to beep/tick for each step moved in the menu, though, without requiring voice, isn't there?

I'm just not sure how high a priority "being able to use it without looking" should be compared to "make it able to meet more needs over all." As long as it's technically still usable without looking (a list is), at least. I'd like to get some real information on how many people regularly use it without looking, without making mistakes.

Yes I think, but it's annoying to hear a beep when you don't need it, that is, everywhere in Rockbox except the quick screen. Unless you plan to have the beep setting pinned to the quick screen so you can enable it quickly just to use the quick screen...

I suggest we should start working on a menu-based quick screen and add it as an optional patch to the tracker, and at the same time work on the first proposal I did, and it it as a patch too. Then we could test which one is more usable, and choose the best.
Additionally, I suggest the two patches should be kept on the tracker so the users that don't like the definitively chosen screen type can change to the old one, or to the other screen proposal, by building the source with the patch patched. But that are things to see later, *I'm just dreaming*.