Can I say how much I hate.. ?

[MarkMyWords]

To be honest, those behaving like 'Trolls' are the ones attacking a poster simply for stating his opinion.

I'm surprised and disappointed at the childish response to a criticism (which after all is only one persons opinion), simply stating that you disagree with another posters opinion would be enough.

The constant posting of criticisms and 'wish lists' is not a direct attack on other posters here, it results from a combination of things. That may vary from each users specific needs to the influx of new users who find Xtreme useful, but want it to work in a more familiar way.

We know very well that there are reasons why Xtreme doesn't pack all the 'bells and whistles' of some other programs, and they are good reasons, but regular posters must settle themselves the the facts of life;

If (as is the stated intent of Xara) lots more people become new users, then there will be many more posts like those you seem to object to.

Perhaps a sticky with FAQs put by newcomers to Xtreme might help alleviate the problem?

[Markku]

Remi, DoT wasn't the first one being personal, so like Paul said, now is a good time to back off from being peronal.

This a long thread and I think Xara developers have now a pretty good idea what people think about the panel. I can't close this thread, but I don't think anything new will come to this anymore. It is just going to bad direction.

[pauland]

Like I said, user interface design is EASY, you only have to get it right ONCE, and that's it. Change it, try different things, show it to as many people as possible, listen to what they say, and improve it, until the maximum number of people find it the easiest and quickest to use.

Now those are the words of someone who hasn't done user interface design in the real world. Getting concensus isn't easy and you are often taking people from a UI they are used to into something out of their comfort zone. People get used to bad interfaces - they learn how to use them over time.

Xara has an excellent UI but with many rough corners. It has a fanatic user base who value the conciseness of the UI. The only problem is that it's evolution is slow whilst some innovations are taking place elsewhere.

One thing I know, but am still trying to practice, is that people are far more receptive to an argument/propostion if views are presented politely and with respect for others views, even if I don't share them. Having respect for others views is as important as presenting your own view well - it's something I'm still working on.

Paul

[remi]

Remi, can we back off from the personal stuff?

No problem with me. Go ahead and discuss the alignment dialog box.
I would prefer to stop this "emotional" kind of discussion about features of a software - not this discussion, only the "emotional" part.

Regards,
Remi

[Soquili]

I use many different programs during any given day. I find the difference in the various interfaces refreshing. I'm not stuck seeing the same alignment icons between the development environment, drawing application, icon editor, word processor, database, and spreadsheet programs.

It makes me know I'm not an automaton churning out code, graphics, documentation and data.

At least I think I'm not an automaton

It does exercise the few brain cells I have left

[Thatch]

Don't try to speak for other people. User interface IS really easy to do well - why do you say otherwise?
We are talking about SOFTware here, so it's very easy to change the implementation of the interface. Unfortunately, that requires the ability to think, and to empathise. Something a lot of programmers are incapable of. Oh, and the ability to admit you're wrong, and to try a new method.

In what way was I speaking for you? I thought your line was foolish and I still do. Interface design is a career in and of itself and while some programmers in very small shops might do that job, they are probably the worst suited to do so. Finding an intuitive work flow in a complex software application is far from easy and a multitude of issues have to be contemplated in it's design. When a coder does UI they more often than not do it based on back end logic not user work flow. Simply having object oriented code that is easily swapped from this button to that is not UI design.

Good UI design comes from direct study of user habits and expectations while creating a consistent methodology throughout the applications so the user begins to anticipate the applications behavior just as the application attempts to anticipate the user.

As for the issue of this thread.... well I do think the alignment menu is clugey and should be changed. I'll not defend it for a second. Whether the menu is good or not, or the whole of xara needs a retooling or not has nothing to do with the line "UI design is easy", which is, in short, ignorant.

J

[DukeofThomas]

DukeofThomas, I back you up on 90% you said. The missing 10 is because I generally think Xara is awesome.

I don't think DoT has to come up with an example of the best UI in the world to prove his point. This isn't about such big things as world peace or even the best UI in the world. This is about one small thing - Xara's alingment panel.

And Tetris is a darn good reference to Xara's Align panel at the moment.

Well done, DoT!

I really like X1 too. I like the way it's really quick to produce just the sort of images I want, EXCEPT for the editing afterwards, and some aspects of the interface design. I think it was great value for money, and is really fast too. There's plenty about it I like, otherwise I wouldn't use it! The bevels are perfect for my web design work, it's just a few minor problems with editing and interface that make my work much harder than it has to be. We have every right to complain about problems we have with any piece of software, if we've paid for it. If two of us disagree on something, the answer is very simple: give BOTH options in the software. That is, after all, what software is supposed to be about! But how many times do we see software that does exactly the opposite: you have one way of doing it, or not at all.

[DukeofThomas]

Not putting forward any argument for or against anything.
Just asking a question is all.
You don'thave to answer of course.

>shrug<

I did answer - I don't know of any program that's perfect. Again I ask - are you therefore suggesting that X1 and Xtreme cannot be criticised, nor improved upon?
Do you want more people to use the program or not? To increase the customer base, a very good way is to improve the interface. People who try the software on trial won't get even as far as I have, as I've paid for it and WANT to use it. People who are just trying it may come across the same problems I did and just say "I can't do this with this program, therefore I can't buy it". That's why I have no intention of buying Xtreme at the moment - I can't do what I want with it any more easily than on X1.

[DukeofThomas]

Yes, I agree with Markku. DukeOfThomas may be pretty abrasive in the way he says things, but much of what he says is correct. Just so his ego doesn't get totally out of hand, I'd also say that much of what he's said has been said by others before, with little effect thus far...

I apologise if my way of writing comes across as abrasive! You see, I am very slow to take offence, so what appears to me to be an acceptable discussion of facts may appear to others as me being pushy or know-it-all.

The only frustration I ever feel is when I am using somebody ELSE's idea of how a program should be designed and it hampers my workflow, or literally makes me waste hours of my life on unnecessary mouse clicks and keystrokes.

This comes down to what I have termed "The Programmers' Dictatorship".

Take Microsoft, for example. Let's say there is part of one of their program's interfaces that needlessly wastes the users' time, makes them press three buttons on the screen instead of one, makes the buttons hard to press because of their location and size (i.e. too small), etc.etc. Let's imagine that 30 MILLION people have to use this program every day, because their boss tells them to. Their company uses Microsoft software, and they have no option.
Let's say each time a user uses function 'X' that it takes them one second longer than if it had been designed properly in the first place, and that they use it 100 times a day.
That's 100 seconds, per person, per day.
That's 100 x 30 MILLION seconds of people's lives WASTED, every day. That equals 3 BILLION seconds, which is 50 MILLION minutes, or 833,333 HOURS, or 34,722 DAYS wasted every DAY. Now multiply that by all the other bad interfaces that needlessly slow the users down, all across the board, from all companies. We are talking about literally wasting hundreds of thousands of DAYS worth of time, every single day! That amounts, quite literally, to people's LIVES being wasted, clicking and pointing, typing and bowing down to the computer, which is meant to serve YOU, not the other way round.

I call it the "Programmers' Dictatorship" because a tiny minority of people are deciding what YOU have to go through every day, with regard to computer software. The worst thing is that they are, in the main, not in the least bit interested in improving your life, i.e. improving the interface, because THEY designed it, and THEY think they know best!

Dictatorships never last, because they are unnatural. In the animal world, it is unheard of (to my knowledge) to have one animal rule over thousands of others, and make them sacrifice their food, time, safety, etc. for him/her. The same goes for the "Programmers' Dictatorship" - it is unnatural, and counterproductive. The way to make programs work is to get as many people as possible to decide how they want them to work, and if they don't all agree, simply offer them two, three, or more ways of doing whatever it is they don't agree on. That's the wonders of software!!!

To elaborate a little more: I have spent the last six months designing, in my spare time, my e-commerce website, which will go on line very soon. It took me that long because I was constantly changing things and perfecting them until they looked as good as I can make them, but most importantly of all, I was constantly changing things so the CUSTOMER (i.e. the USER) will find the site as easy as is physically possible, to use. That means that the colour and size of every single word was checked, changed, adjusted, etc.etc. The layout was tweaked and moved until everything was as clear as possible. And most importantly, from the very BEGINNING, I asked everybody I know "Please have a look at my site, and tell me what problems you have. Tell me what parts aren't clear. Tell me what parts are in the wrong place, what bits you don't understand, tell me anything that you didn't like the look of, the colour of, the size of, etc." I got people to use the site right in front of me, so I could see where they clicked the mouse, what they looked at, how they did it, if they got stuck, etc.etc.

THAT is how you design a user interface. Ask the customer. The customer is always right.

[DukeofThomas]

Now those are the words of someone who hasn't done user interface design in the real world. Getting concensus isn't easy and you are often taking people from a UI they are used to into something out of their comfort zone. People get used to bad interfaces - they learn how to use them over time.

Paul

I don't think any of the problems with X1's interface are necessary to its function, i.e. I don't find they help at all.
What specific parts of the interface do you think have to be different from the 'normal' way of doing it? (I'm genuinely interested as I've always been interested in user interface design. I've always found it easy and that's why bad interfaces bug me so much!)


Does the alignment box help anybody? The fly-out box mentioned by somebody else is by far the most obvious and quickest way of doing it. Too many people seem to have got used to doing things 'the Xara way' and seem to defend it with an almost religious fervour, even when it's impossible to argue that it's better than the 'normal' way.
The problems I've had with Xara's interface could be fixed in about ten minutes - they only involve changing the sizes of the 'nudge' arrows (is that what they're called?) so they are no longer minute(!), changing the fonts used in the Galleries' buttons (who decided on them? They are straight out of Windows 3.1 and are tiny on my display!), fixing the alignment box, adding up/down arrows to the zoom, border size and font size boxes, and a few other things. Basic, simple things that should have been there in the beginning.

(The up/down arrows for the font size is a major bugbear of mine- Word uses that wretched drop down menu too. What a masterpiece of design! You want to increase your font one point at a time, just to 'tweak' it? Well you can't! You have to type it in! No simple one click fix! You have to click once to open the drop down menu, then move the mouse accurately onto the size you want, then click on it. If the size you want isn't there, you have to type it in! Why not have a fly out box with every size from 1 to 150 on it, with no spaces in between? (i.e. no 'dead space', which is superfluous and counterproductive). Then you can just click once, the box opens, and you click once on the one you want, without having to scroll!)