Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion
Proposition: SimpleBox
mnhnhyouh:
--- Quote from: tucoz on September 23, 2006, 06:24:22 PM ---
And the devs have in fact played with the idea of being able to select if you end up in the filebrowser, or a top-level menu when you boot rockbox. So that idea looks like it could be made possible.
--- End quote ---
More settings? YAY!!!!
h
Yotto:
Remembering back to when I myself was a Rockbox noob, I recall not knowing how to get to the menu. Yes, I know the iPod has a button for it. Doesn't matter, it was not intuitive because it wasn't on the screen.
I of course solved this by reading the manual, but I'm an exceptional noob :D
Would it be difficult, or even possible, to have a *file* named "Menu" or "Main Menu" residing in the root? A newbie could select it and get the menu. Just a thought. We've been arguing about putting a "file browser" in the menu (not a bad idea, to be frank), but nobody's thought to put a "menu" in the file browser.
Llorean:
1) Putting anything in the file browser pretty much makes it not a "file browser" any more. Why is pressing a button to get to the menu even remotely a non-friendly concept? I don't think putting a visual option for it in the filetree makes things more intuitive. Once you do that people go from the concept of "Filetree" to "Base level of the menu" and I think that ruins everything. Filetrees don't have options in the same list as files. In the context of TagCache is the same limitation even necessary? If you're browsing an in-RAM tagcache there should be a way to manage creating the list without even particularly much extra memory since it's already in RAM (I'm sure someone can come up with it) and if it's in disk it could probably be loaded by parts or something. Just a few ideas, for that aspect.
2) Out of curiosity how is 400 *not* a sane setting for "Max files in Dir Browser." The larger you make the setting, the worse battery life gets, and the vast majority of decently organized music collections should only have about 30 or less songs in a folder (the size of a moderately large single album).
3) In regards to the Noob question: I think the idea isn't "the noobs can just deal with it" but rather that "noob-friendly usually meanys dumbed down, and that's different from improved, so we should concentrate on how to squeeze more out of it, not how to simply simplify."
I personally am quite against the idea of putting non-files in the filetree. It's already quite easy for someone to see the main menu, and I honestly think it's rather stupid of ANYONE to replace the firmware on their multi-hundred dollar MP3 player without looking at least briefly at how it works first.
bluebrother:
--- Quote from: tucoz on September 23, 2006, 06:24:22 PM ---We are all noobs sometime, and i wouldn´t want to not have them rockbox for whatever reason.
--- End quote ---
Sure, we are all noobs sometime. But the point is if someone is actually trying to get a new thing known (be it a software, some hardware design or whatever). Currently I see a load of noobs who are not interested in getting to know Rockbox, it's simply a "I don't like apple, so I need to use something else (but this should be the same)". Writing this "Quick Start" for the manual was one attempt to make it more noob-friendly (which still could be improved -- but it's a bit frustrating to see those questions answered there getting asked again and again simply by those people not reading it).
--- Quote ---Rockbox should be made simpler. By that, I don´t mean changing the fundamental design, but reorganizing the menu, installing a prettier theme by default.
--- End quote ---
IMO Rockbox should be made more consistent, not simpler ;)
There are some inconsistencies that should get eliminated. The "quick exit" patch was for one of those. Using "nicer" defaults is another, but with those defaults I also see some problems: the current defaults don't need any additional files. When using iCatcher as default it will fail if the theme is not installed (unlikely) or the fonts are missing (extremely likely). As missing fonts aren't warned about the theme will look completely broken and users will report this "broken" theme (or call rockbox "crap" because of this).
Maybe the best solution would be to (a) include some "runme.cfg" file in the fonts package's root folder or (b) generate a separate zip file with some try-me-first configurations.
--- Quote ---I would like all people (to some extent) to use rockbox instead of their original firmware.
--- End quote ---
This is something like a "holy war" like Linux vs. Windows. I'm a linux user and would like to see more people using it, but I have stopped trying to convince people. Why? Those people who are not willing to get themselves used to it only create hassle. So while I'm sure to use the OS that's better for my needs I don't want others to use it just for the sake of doing so.
Rockbox can play doom. How many users install Rockbox simply because of doom and "it's cool", but don't actually want to get used to it? I don't think those will keep using Rockbox, but those are creating a lot of disturbances by their ignorance and super-noobish-behaviour.
--- Quote ---I do however agree with you on the gnome issue. I would not want to remove the tweaking heaven rockbox is. I think of rockbox as all about settings, and doing what you like with it.
--- End quote ---
Unfortunately there is always a tradeoff between simplicity and settings. More settings automacitally means to make it more complex. So I don't think there is actually a way to make it simpler without sacrifying the settings options. Some menu reordering could be done, indeed.
Some ideas:
- the recording screen could get moved up one level. It's a bit strange it is hidden in another submenu while e.g. the fm screen isn't. The recording settings would fit below the "General Settings" along with the "Playback" menu. As the Recording Settings are accessible directly from the recording screens also I don't think this would complicate it.
- reorder the main menu a bit so that additional screens (fm, recording) come last (except the "Info" entry which should stay the last IMO).
- implement the "quick exit" patch. The menus are toggled, and thus it should be able toggling them from everywhere.
- provide a "start me first" configuration package, possibly including a README file.
- I don't like this "startup screen" patch but would prefer to have the screen last active saved and restored upon reboot.
--- Quote ---And the devs have in fact played with the idea of being able to select if you end up in the filebrowser, or a top-level menu when you boot rockbox. So that idea looks like it could be made possible.
--- End quote ---
Really? AFAIK this is "only" a patch in the tracker. Might be possible, though.
tucoz:
--- Quote ---IMO Rockbox should be made more consistent, not simpler ;)
--- End quote ---
I think there is language confusion from my part here. By simpler I do not mean less options, but more consistent and intuitive menu(s). Just a reorganization of the main menu would be splendid in terms of that (like a lot others point out).
--- Quote ---This is something like a "holy war" like Linux vs. Windows. I'm a linux user and would like to see more people using it, but I have stopped trying to convince people. Why? Those people who are not willing to get themselves used to it only create hassle. So while I'm sure to use the OS that's better for my needs I don't want others to use it just for the sake of doing so.
--- End quote ---
Hmm, I think I know what you mean. It´s an uphill battle in any case, but I would´t consider myself part in that war. People use what suits their needs. I said i want all people to use rockbox. - Consider this a dream situation. :) And to be honest, I do not like the noob term. I do not think it´s the noobiness that is the problem with lazy people, but lazyness.
--- Quote ---Really? AFAIK this is "only" a patch in the tracker. Might be possible, though.
--- End quote ---
well, this has been discussed in irc at least once by people i consider core :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version