[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Meaningless name (was: Re: rpms/xchat/devel ...)



On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 07:33 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 18:13 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 17:03 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > 
> > > If you're referring to migrating Windows users, even they realize there
> > > is more than one program to accomplish the same task.  Think of AIM,
> > > Trillian, ICQ, blah blah blah.  Or McAfee vs. Symantec.  Or IE vs.
> > > Firefox.  Hell, even Microsoft doesn't label IE as "Web browser" (which
> > > is another bogosity we do but one thing at a time).
> > 
> > How convenient that the desktop team can alternatively be slammed for
> > copying Windows or for failing to copy it... 
> 
> Wait a minute... I'm not slamming anyone.  Nor did I alternate here..
> (at least I don't think I did).
> 
> I'm simply saying that including a program's name in the menu entry
> seems common sense to me.  What I don't understand is your
> classification of "regular user" and why you think having the program's
> name in the menu entry is confusing to them.
> 

The program name in the menu doesn't help you make a choice unless you
know the programs by name. That was the argument for including "Firefox"
in the menu item even though Firefox is the default browser, because the
name is well-recognized even with people who don't spend a large
percentage of their life in front of a computer. Since x-chat doesn't
have the same "brand recognition" that firefox has, adding its name to
the menu does not help.

Anyway, as Owen said, after the merge, and with the packaging guidelines
agitating for putting everything in the menus, organizing meaningful
menus is largely a lost cause, and we should concentrate on making
application browsing in bigboard work well instead.




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]