Blimey! This is all just to complicated for a dope like me.
Printable View
Blimey! This is all just to complicated for a dope like me.
You already use an inverted mouse pointer for Select Under and a mouse pointer with a circle around it for Select Inside. Why can't you use something like a single vertical arrow (and if PrintScrn would capture it, I'd show you what this looks like in my database app!) to indicate that the next click will be an 'alignment click'?
To cancel the operation, simply press Esc and the vertical pointer turns back into a standard mouse pointer. Or, if you had the toolbar button remaining depressed when you're in 'alignment click' mode, simply pressing the toolbar button again to return it to an undepressed state would indicate that that would take you back out of 'alignment mode'.
You're right about retaining some kind of dialog box to account for variations on the theme (To distribute selected objects evenly using (a) their top edges or (b) their bottom edges or (c) their centre points or (d) by gap between them.) but these are, generally speaking, rarities. They don't happen often and, speaking for myself, I generally tune this sort of thing by eye anyway.
Again, speaking for myself, most of the time I just want to rapidly "align this lot of objects all by their left-hand edges lined-up over against that thing... there." Or possibly right-hand edges, or top or bottom.
If I can do that in 2 clicks, I'd solve most of my problems.
If I *did* want to distribute the centres of selected objects in an exponentially-growing spacing pattern along a pre-designated curve, I'd *expect* to have to go into a dialog box and be asked a couple or three questions.
But for most (97%?) work, I would literally like to be able to say, "You lot. Line up over there."
Two sentences. Two thoughts. Two clicks.
Oh, and nice to see you here. :)
Here is an idea. Many probably won't like it, but it's just an idea.
The horizontal shift and vertical shift buttons in the following graphic are meant to be 'either, neither, but not both' toggle state buttons. If the user clicks the horizontal shift and then clicks the vertical shift, the horizontal shift button unselects itself. If the user then clicks the vertical shift again, the vertical shift unselects itself, so neither is selected. When the 'vertical' button is selected, the user can click in the box without holding the 'Shift' key down, and the same thing happens as if the shift key was being held down. Same for the Ctrl key and the horizontal button.
The horizontal and vertical positions buttons are similar, in that only one 'horizontal' button may be selected at a time, and only one vertical button may be selected at a time. They work almost exactly like the existing drop-down combo boxes, but are much easier to use, although the icons are first drafts.
I hope it makes sense. As I said, it's just an idea. A purist would note that the bottom buttons make the top 'graphic screen' part unnecessary, as the bottom gives more precise control more easily, but I like the top part for the feedback.
I think it depends a lot on of what type of work you are doing. For designing web pages for example, distribute selected objects evenly using (a) their top edges or (b) their bottom edges or (c) their centre points or (d) by gap between them options are usefull and used regularly.
He're's my suggestion - it has similarities with the existing dialog, but uses far less screen estate - you can fit it onto a menu bar.
The idea is to get as close to 'one click' alignment or distribution as possible, without filling the window with buttons. With six buttons we can replicate the existing dialog.
Graphically you can see the symbols of horizontal or vertical alignment/distribution. If the alignment isn't what you want you can either cycle through the options by clicking the symbol (toggle version) or pick from the drop down. Then you can choose align or distribute.
If (like me) you often repeat similar tasks, once you choose a particular alignment, you will be left with a single-click operation since the dialog will retain the last choice. If not, you have very little mouse travel (which is a PIA with the current dialog) and very few clicks. Because this version uses very little screen estate, it can be put as a menu panel, or whatever.
What's the opinion on this? We certainly don't need the graphic showing what's going to happen.
Paul
Better still? (BTW I have never, ever aligned anything I haven't selected, so I think the 'within' part of the existing dialog is redundant).
If anyone wants an interesting read, try the book "Why software sucks" - www.whysoftwaresucks.com
Hate is a strong word. I would say I dislike the functionality of a particular tool or dialog within the interface but I don't hate it... much!! ;) I would like to see an option to dock the align dialog. I think most dialogs should included this option.
Personally I would have made it so there was only one or two ways to dock dialogs and that would be to double click or right click on the top border with a small clickable text option that would say "Dock". This way that cuts out all the other auto docking irritations.
Why tie the alignment dialogue into combinations at all?
If it were to have a single alignment at a time and each step happened on screen immediately, instead of the combinations that are first selected then applied, it would be simpler and with fewer mouse-clicks (no need to click on the drop downs or the apply button).
For instance to align all selected to the left and distribute top to bottom;
With the present dialogue that would take no less than seven mouse clicks/keypresses (including opening and closing the dialogue).
Without the combinations it would take four mouse clicks.
Click-open dialogue, click -everything selected aligns to the left, click - selection distributed from top to bottom, click-close dialogue.
And you can see what is happening on screen as you do it.
This would leave 14 align and distribute options (no need for the no change-option) and the three areas options = 17 icons altogether.
Still too big to be on the selector options bar permenantly, but easier to use?
Seriously, why stick with the combinations style dialogue?
I'm not sure if you're referring to the old dialogue, or my suggestion.
If you're referring to my suggestion - my original suggestion was a button panel offering a one-click solution. It takes up a bit of screen-estate and I'd like it dockable, though others would use it as a floating panel. This suggestion is similar to yours - a panel of buttons.
The other thought is to have a smaller screen footprint that could be adopted on a menu bar and (if required always present). The smaller screen footprint requires a compromise in screen-estate, which means one-click isn't always achievable.
So, it's a question of having a compact option or a larger panel, one-click, or minimal clicks.
Judging from this thread, I appreciate Xaras problem more. Some users like what we have, some don't. If they do nothing, people have the same attitude about this, but changing it risks the displeasure of parts of the user base.
I have certainly been surprised by the support for the existing dialog - how can so many people like such a thing? .. ;-)
Paul
It is similar to your suggestion in that each operation is a one button click, but simplifies things a little by removing the combination of two operations at one time.
You can't cover all the combinations available (189) with one click buttons, the panel would be enormous, even if you had the basic 63 combinations and the three area buttons to modify them, it would still be a big panel.
If you make it a one operation at a time dialogue; click - align in one direction and (as with your idea) the operation happened immediately on screen, then click - to make another alignment if needed.
There would be fewer mouse clicks, even for combinations, than at present and the user can see what is happening on screen as they do it.
This would need 14 buttons for the various align and distribute operations and the three area options.
The panel could have three sections;
one for the three area options (radio buttons),
one section for the six alignment operations (icons/graphics),
one section for the eight distribution operations (icons/graphics).
Not quite the ideal one click for all align and distribute combinations, but one click for single alignments and two clicks for any combination is better than using the drop-downs and apply button (which needs 2-3 clicks for a single alignment and 5 clicks for combinations) and I think it would be easier to understand than the present dialogue.
Maybe you should make a mockup so people don't have to imagine..
Well, O.K this may give some idea of what I'm saying, it will need a lot of work on the graphics, I'm no designer, LOL!
Each button would execute the operation immediately on screen, if you need two operations then simply doing them one at a time is still quicker than with the present dialogue.
isn't this all leading to simply copying fireworks' align panel?
it's got all i need.
sorry, baby in hands so no uppercase.
I don't get it. Xara's Dialog box will do most everything you want and it is persistent. Just Control or Shift click the mouse in the dialog to get your variations. I do this so much and its become so automatic for me that I can't even remember the combinations anymore.
John
Exactly jclements,but what about newbies? That dialog is sooo weird to anybody coming from any other app. Xara needs more users for sure, and the best way to get them is to ease the learning curve a bit.
What's wrong with standard dialogs? You would learn to use them too.
Paul,
It all goes to show that there is no one single user interface that everyone will find acceptable.Quote:
Judging from this thread, I appreciate Xaras problem more. Some users like what we have, some don't. If they do nothing, people have the same attitude about this, but changing it risks the displeasure of parts of the user base.
I have certainly been surprised by the support for the existing dialog - how can so many people like such a thing? .. ;-)
If you accept this as true then the answer would be to offer various choices of user interface. (Docking / No Docking, Variable Align / Distribute options etc) But the option of choice leads to further confusion .... confused ... I am.
I would pay for an SVG import/export and an better AI import/export and an Scripting Engine and new vector drawing functions, but not for an enhanced Align Panel...
Remi
Sadly, you get what you're given with software. The AI import/export is certainly ripe for an update.
Don't bother wasting your time on what comes down to just taste ... do some real work and get on with implementing some proper new functionality to this vector application which has had nothing but window dressing for the users for the the last two 'major' updates ...
But it's nice insight into a Xara Dev Teams working day!
It's no wonder a commercial business desided to go open source.
If you use Xara as an animation tool, exporting to flash would be a much bigger advantage than an alignment panel. I would also hope for scripting, which allows users to customize certain features of Xara to automate things. Corel has this and it is a real time saver if you collect the scripts.
Assigning scripts to toolbar locations with a customized icon is my favorite time saver.
As far as alignment goes, the folks as isocalc.com has a free script for alignment that I use all the time, you can leave the tool up all the time, just takes a second to launch it and it is exceptionally easy to use. If you can read you can use it, also comes with diagrams of everything, if you are into that. The one tool is all I have found I need, does everthing.
Being able to have some kind of a description in the layers palette of items on a layer is a very useful feature. If you are having trouble finding things, it is a real time saver.
Also like guides that rotate. Though don't use it allot.
I was really disappointed with dropping the support for spot color as X1 had. If you are using the program in a professional printing environment, it is useful to have the spot color ability, that and a good print preview dialogue box.
Whether toolbars dock or not, no big deal. It would be handy if you could have both the line color and the fill color up at the same time. As it is, I am switching a lot. It would be a timesaver for me.
As with all new releases there are always a few new features and then some fixes to the old features. And that goes for all software.
I don't expect Xara to spend all of their time on the Align panel, far from it. Making the changes to it should be a piece of cake. They have the code and all that moves objects so it is just a matter running the same code via a more standard align panel, which to me looks a lot more simple task than it must have been originally with the old panel. The new panel would ONLY have simple buttons/icons that do not move or anything.
So fear not, should this be done it would not be a big deal regarding Xara's resources or what other features get implemented or not.
Ps. I second the idea what someone said that the align panel and the color panel should act the same way as other panels. They should dock, and there should be an option to turn off docking altogether.
As for the docking thing, I don't mind that.
Once docked each gallery remembers its size and position, I tend to keep the layers gallery open and quite slim on the right.
It would be nice if we could dock several galleries at once, one on top of another and they were accessed by tabs, or we could toggle all palettes/galleries off and on with a hotkey (like the Tab key does in Photoshop).
MarkMyWords, I posted this earlier in this thread. It is not necessary to keep your galleries docked. NONE of my galleries dock anymore, not since this informative thread:
http://www.talkgraphics.com/showthre...hlight=docking
Thanks Drifter, but I really don't mind them docking, I'm just thinking about quick, easy and consistent ways to clear the screen if I have one or several galleries open at once.
I suppose I'm just trying to transplant my working preferences from Photoshop again LOL!
Learning all the hotkeys is O.K., but a simple toggle to clear the screen of all the clutter and bring back the stuff when you need it is quite a good way to work (for me at least).
Then again, perhaps I over-emphasise the need for speed in my workflow.
A lot of the user interface in Xtreme sucks big time. It's as if the programmers think they are catering for users with 2" monitors (yes, TWO inches) that can only display 100 x 200 pixels, or something.
If you are going to give the user options, DISPLAY as many of them as possible, as MUCH of the time as possible, so the user doesn't have to click and click and click, over and over again, every time they want to select what they've just selected a million times. It's down to bad program design, pure and simple, and a complete inability to empathise with other people. i.e. a GOOD programmer will ask himself, when implementing the user interface: "How would somebody who'd never seen this program before use this piece of the interface? How can I make it easier to use? How can I put as much information as possible in front of the user, so they don't have to search for functions that could be on the screen already, or click their way through numerous unnecessary steps every time?" Unfortunately, most programmers don't ask these questions...
Why can't we have up and down buttons to adjust the zoom, and the line border? Why are all the arrows that ARE on the user interface, so tiny they are a real pain to use? (Again, if you had one of the programmers' mythical 200 by 100 pixel screens, I guess those arrows would look pretty huge...)
No, it isn't 'sad', it's a completely justified complaint. Drop down menus are a waste of time. They are almost NEVER implemented out of necessity. The ONLY time they are necessary is when the space on the screen is insufficient to show ALL of the options in the drop down menu. So far, having used hundreds of programs, I've never seen that occur. You simply show ALL of the options, immediately, without making the user click, click, and click again, every single time they want to adjust something. It's BAD design. You are plainly unable to think outside of what Xara have given you - now THAT'S sad...
Yes, that's exactly it. That's the way ALL alignment tools should look. One fly-out button. The same goes for just about every other use of the wretched drop down menu - use a fly-out menu, with ALL the options visible! If you have fifty options to choose from, how much easier is it to have them all displayed at ONCE in the fly-out menu, rather than having to click on a drop down menu, scroll down, and then make sure you click on the right option. Drop down menus suck, they are rubbish, end of story.
Well, I've just had a go with it, and it's completely rubbish. It's great if you're a five year old who's never come across the 'align' function ever before, but for anybody who wants to USE it more than once in their lifetime, the fly-out box mentioned above is infinitely preferable. Do you actually like clicking and selecting items from drop down menus unnecessarily? How is this quicker or easier than two intuitive clicks - once to bring up the fly-out menu, once to select the option you want? The current drop down menu system is absurd - you have to use TWO of the wretched things half of the time. It's bad enough using one.
Duke, please consider: This is a friendly forum.
The object alignment dialog box is really not the most important function in a drawing program and your words sounds so "unbalanced". So, sit down with a cup of tea and create a nice drawing with Xara Xtreme...
Regards,
Remi
Beautifully put, Brian. The fact that some people prefer the non-intuitive, labour intensive Xara way, can only be down to habit and custom, not good design. I use a program at work that forces me to use drop down menus all of the time, and in every single case, a fly-out menu would save me literally an hour each day. Multiply that by every member of staff who use this piece of **** (I can't name it for fear of being sacked!) and my company are wasting literally tens of thousands of pounds in wasted staff time each year. But because the idiots who bought the system know sod all about computers, and especially computer interfaces, they seem to be almost afraid to ask the software company to fix this dumbass problem. I share your frustration. Bad programmers, who lack empathy, pure and simple.
Tom
I bet you're mug is never half full is it? Always half empty.
No program, is perfect of all the 'hundreds' you've used the fact that you're now trying Xara means you're still looking.
Do a drawing or something and post that; there are plenty of people besides you pointing out areas that need improvement. Perfection is a gradual process.
Derek
Yes, I discussed it with my manager. She doesn't know the first thing about computers and is of the opinion that she mustn't upset the company we have paid hundreds of thousands of pounds to, by asking them to change (i.e. improve) the software... Go figure.
That's what you find a lot in life: most people know nothing about user interface design, especially programmers. Most people learn software and no matter how bad the interface is, they defend it as if it's 'the right way', precisely because it was so HARD for them to learn! It's almost like a religion to people.