Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion
Proposition: SimpleBox
keuleJ:
Why?
Maybe because a simpler interface would be more efficient and easier to use & learn?
Maybe because more people would use RockBox and its great features if the interface would be easier?
Maybe because it's annoying if you wonder the 10th time which button to push to get to menu x to change setting y?
tucoz:
I agree. There is a lot that could be done to simplify the user experience. Also a lot to be done with the first impression of rockbox. And a simple fix to that is to provide a demo.cfg with a prettier wps, larger font etc.
Wrt the navigation, key assignments, menu layout etc. I think someone will have to convince the developers that their approach is better than the current one. And a nice way of doing that, is to provide a patch with your proposal for the developers to try. Another thing to do is to really put some effort into a restructure proposal wiki-page, and try to convince the devs that this is good :)
Martin
(sorry for the off topic spin off here)
Peter200lx:
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. Then have some way to auto load the plug-in at start up for the people that want to use a simple interface. I personally like the current interface, but I can see why people might like something a little less complex. And we could have an option in the simple interface to go back to the standard one. Maybe even have the simple interface have a settings menu that only has basic stuff like SHUFFLE:[yes...no] .
Just my 2 cents.
LinusN:
I think a good way to start is to try to explain what it is that makes the current interface so complex. When we know that, we should be able to figure out a way to make it simpler.
bazmonkey:
--- Quote from: Peter200lx on September 21, 2006, 01:43:29 PM ---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.
--- End quote ---
There is no "simple" interface. The original poster wasn't even announcing one. It's a pipe dream right now.
BUT, this is a great time for everyone to tell everyone what's wrong with the interface? Besides "it's hard", or "I didn't get it at first".
Like the equalizer, what's difficult about it? It's got 5 bands like the custom EQ's on many players. It's got a graphical interface. If you only adjust the gain, it works EXACTLY like a "normal" custom EQ that y'all are used to. So what's wrong?
I'm all for a cfg that has a bunch of popular settings enabled that usually aren't in the default settings. That just makes sense, that the initial settings be the ones the most people will be satisfied with. I understand some things can't be on as default because some players don't support it, some aren't working well yet, etc. But if you've got a new-ish player, color screen, and nothing crazy going on in your music collection, a little cfg would do no one any harm.
A couple of people have thrown out "read the manual" as a solution to a difficult UI, which it isn't. I personally don't think it's that difficult, but reading a manual on it doesn't make the UI easy. A flight manual doesn't make piloting aircraft magically easy. A bad interface with a manual is just a documented, bad interface. But rockbox's interface isn't bad IMO.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version