Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Feb 2007 16:40 UTC, submitted by dumbkiwi
X11, Window Managers Following on from three earlier articles, here are two more articles highlighting usability features of Beryl; the wheel window switcher and the 'wall' for managing virtual desktops. Videos included, so go on, indulge yourself, boys and girls.
Thread beginning with comment 214893
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by msundman on Tue 20th Feb 2007 22:35 UTC in reply to "RE"
Member since:

First of all, I didn't comment on anything about anything else than what I replied to and quoted in that reply. It was just about the "you can't criticise unless you can fix" line of thought (or lack thereof).

> to call the Beryl Developers incompetent is what I have
> issues with.

They are probably good programmers, but I don't know how competent they are in the field of UI design. Either way I can't comment on that.

> There is a difference between criticism and accusations
> of incompetence.

Actually you were the one who started talking about "incompetence". Anyway, it doesn't matter. (FWIW, in my personal experience both "normal" end users and OS designers are equally (namely highly) incompetent when it comes to UI design. I'm not very competent either, even though I've taken a few UI design courses, read a few books and done some UI research in a real UI lab (which, btw, wasn't completely useless, even though its cameras and huge one-way mirror made it look more like an interrogation room, but I digress).)

> I am not particularly fond of wobbly windows but I keep
> it on (with reduced wobble) because it provides the illusion
> of smooth movement.

Yeah, devs really should try to understand the importance of motion blur. There isn't really any substitute for motion blur when using discrete motion. Without it motion of crisp objects will look jerky. That is, unless you have extremely small pixels (relative to your eyesight and the distance to the display) and a very high frame rate (somewhat relative to the magnitude of the movement), which would make the motion truly continuous from your retina's point of view.

There is the same problem in some new, no-so-high-budget movies, such as the (imho) awful 28 Days Later, where the camera's shutter speed has been set so high that there is no detectable motion blur, causing the weeny 24 fps of the big screen to look really jerky. Somehow some people don't understand that if a discretely fast-moving object is crisp it doesn't at all look like it's moving very fast, but more like a bunch of similar objects popping in and out of existence one at a time.

So, fellow developers, implement some decent motion blur to your menus, drop-down lists and whatnot, and you can animate them in less than 20 fps and it'll still look very smooth.

> Let Ubuntu, Fedora, and Suse come up with the set of configs
> they think will fit their target market.

I fully agree.

Reply Parent Score: 1