If you want to nudge the size up you can click on the box then use your arrow keys...
Printable View
It would certainly seem that the two basic 'camps' on the 'perfect' U.I. are those who want less clutter, even if that means more mouse-clicks per operation, and those who want more options visible (ie: every font size or align and distribute option, for one click operations).
Having both available, to be set in user preferences, seems at first to be the answer, but then wouldn't loading all the options clutter the code with resultant slow-down?
It would seem some kind of 'modular' approach is the only way to satisfy all. That's easier said than done of course LOL! Maybe as the Linux version developes there will be add-ons for various options?
Of course 90% of these requests for U.I. additions/changes could be covered with an Actions palette. If implimented properly (similar to Photoshops or even better) this would allow user recordable actions, and present them as buttons, for almost every concievable operation.
Sadly that does sum up a large part of your posts, which tend to be lectures rather than concise points. I've been accused of exactly the same.
I don't know what era you live in, but programmers these days generally do as they told and may have a UI dictated to them..
That's all very well and good for you as an individual, but how do bad user interfaces affect the millions of people who have to use them every day? How many millions of hours per year are completely wasted, all because of the Programmers' Dictatorship? That affects you! It affects all of us.
I take no pleasure in using bad interfaces. Different interfaces is another matter. It's quite possible for one program to use a different way of doing things from another, especially in the list you gave.
About the 'nudge' : Yes, I get caught out like this too..
All the programs in the list have drawing features, it seems every type of program wants to be a drawing application :)Quote:
Different interfaces is another matter. It's quite possible for one program to use a different way of doing things from another, especially in the list you gave.
If you ask ten people what is the perfect interface you will receive ten different answers. Increase the number by 10, 100, 1000, etc.
We all seem to agree that interfaces are not perfect and things should be changed. The problem appears to get a concensus of what changes should be made.
Saying that the programmers are to blame doesn't solve the problem and if they are reading this may delay some resolution to the problem (only kidding).
Programmers work for their employer and work within the design parameters set forth for the project they are assigned. Changes to an established interface are often discussed almost endlessly in meetings. Often the changes may require changes to other modules within the overall program.
To say that a change should be minor and can be implemented easily isn't something that anyone can say without a thorough examination of the source code.
So, our discussion here may help us spend some free time and provide some feedback to the Xara Group Ltd. development staff. It is very obvious that no changes can be made overnight.
With the pending important announcement about a Xara product, we can only wait and hope for now. :)
Well, I have to disagree Bill. I don't think you will get 1,000 different answers from 1,000 different people about, for example, the alignment box in Xtreme.
I don't think there ARE 1,000 different ways of doing it!
You're making the problem out to be much bigger than it is! I only wanted a few really simple things changed: images that look like arrows changed into buttons (bigger buttons at that). This isn't rocket science. It's easy as pie. It's contained within Windows itself, just use the Windows standard interface buttons. The same goes for the buttons in the gallery dialogues: who decided to use a very small font like that, that looks nothing like the rest of Windows? What purpose does it serve? Surely it was MORE difficult to implement a non-standard font than to use the standard Windows ones? Who is using a 200 x 100 pixel display?
I can say it. How difficult do you think it is for the programmers of Xara to generate, for example, a dialogue box with some buttons in it? About as easy as pie! The user interface has parameters within the program, so all that is required is to change those parameters: i.e. if the code for an arrow makes it 4 pixels by 4 pixels, simply edit the code to make it 8 x 8 pixels. How difficult can that be? It's not as if this is difficult stuff.Quote:
To say that a change should be minor and can be implemented easily isn't something that anyone can say without a thorough examination of the source code.
The problems are down to design, not programming skills or the lack thereof.
I think you're fudging the issue with the idea that there can be more than three or four ways of presenting a given interface element. It's not as complicated as that.
As I said before in another thread, you are using an old piece of software (from 2004). :rolleyes: