Many noted that knowing there is a group of windows just by glancing at the task bar is important to them. Very, very few find value in the little number, however. So putting it all together, in 4.10 a small arrow will be shown drawn over the window icon when there is a group, as is seen in many other dock apps. This preserves the most useful information while also limiting visual noise, creating a more compact layout in the window listing and finding consistency with other implementations out there in the wild.
As a bonus, the arrow is no longer the (in my opinion) ugly black thing that was specific to the window list but the standard arrow used throughout the rest of the Plasma workspace interface.
Thanks to everyone for your feedback!
Bonus time! ;) A curious little walk down memory lane: in the later 3.x releases of kicker (I forget if it was 3.4 or not; but around that time, I believe) I implemented a new look for the tasks widget which was made configurable via the task applet's configuration dialog. The old look was kept as "classic" and the new look was named "elegant". When Plasma Desktop 4.0 was released, the tasks widget was rather different and looked a lot more like the "classic" style, but I kept to my commitment of deferring these things to the people doing the graphics, as long as they did not impact usability (which would trigger a discussion to find a consensus-base solution). With 4.10 we are now back to something much like the default "elegant" layout in later 3.x tasks applets. The grouping element is now nicer, but otherwise .. it's "elegant" from the old days. It's funny how sometimes things go full cycle like that. I'm just enjoying my nice, calm panel with fewer lines and borders.
 |
| Current master, which will eventually be released with Plasma Desktop 4.10 |
44 comments:
I haven't followed this discussion closely nor experimented with the sources you've provided but I don't see a reason to remove the number-in-the-group indicator.
I group my tasks (when taskbar gets full), I'd like to see if I'm dealing with a group or a single item. I have no particular need to know how many items there are in a group (*) but I can't say that I'm bothered by it.
Group indicator: yes. Arrow or number? I'd call a number "informative" rather than "visual noise". I don't see a 'win' in removing it.
(*) when having more groups open, I do select on number but it's really bad desktop behavior to have so many screens open.
@Caesar Tjalbo: "I'd like to see if I'm dealing with a group or a single item. I have no particular need to know how many items there are in a group"
.. and that's the entire point. if it does not serve a purpose, it is just more information presented
note only do humans have a limit (on average) to the amount of information that they can process usefully, but modern design is driven in part by the removal of unnecessary elements to create more elegant results. "everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler." in this case, the #s were not delivering value, but the grouping indicator was.
where is the group indicator in your screenshot? I can't see it...
oh, wow, why did you use the ktorrent icon as indicator? This is very confusing...
er .. that is not the ktorrent icon. it's the standard arrow used throughout Plasma and is part of the theme. ktorrent has an arrow in its icon, but that's where the similarity ceases :)
Is the indicator on the konsole task? I think people are missing it because it looks like part of the icon.
This is one of the issue several people pointed out in the previous thread, you need to make sure the indicator clearly stands out from the icon so people don't miss it. In my opinion at least, this one doesn't.
"Is the indicator on the konsole task? I think people are missing it because it looks like part of the icon. "
This kind of thing is usually simply because you are looking at a screenshot. The actual desktop will (I am sure) be more obvious.
"Is the indicator on the konsole task? I think people are missing it because it looks like part of the icon. "
Usually it is simply because we are looking at a screenshot. I am sure the actual desktop icon will be obvious.
Wish I could respond in the previous posts, maybe it would be more appropriate.
I don’t agree with the proposed changes for the group indicator.
I think the last one goes against the basic principles of design (not only UI design):
First, the transparent arrow over the icon is a an element missing contrast and clarity, it's shape is not quickly distinguishable in the interface as a whole. It leaves an impression of a smudged spot. A black arrow is not nice by itself but is a clear indicator in the whole.
Second, there are no repeating elements. The "stacking icon" is very bad while the "transparent arrow" is some bit better but it's not perceived as a repeating element because it's form is influenced by the underlying icon.
Think why we use bullet lists, this way the elements are visually perceived as part of a group in a fraction of a second. Imagine a bullet list where every single line uses a different symbol. Not so useful.
Unrelated to the principles of design, personally I find very useful the number indicators, they help me to keep my workspace tidy while working with many instances of the same program: "Hey, I have 4 terminals, 3 browsers, 6 image viewers and 2 video players open, let me take a look if I don't need some of those any more..."
Aaron, I appreciate very much your work on KDE, I became curious about KDE while reading your blog some years ago. Using it daily now.
For sure there is a way to refresh this interface element, but I think this is not the right way.
I can think to try with different background colors or bolder borders for groups but for now this seems for me like a dead end. Maybe I will try to do some brainstorming and mockups.
While the new arrow is arguably nicer than the "ugly black thing", its role is also *obviously* less obvious, especially the way it is melt inside the window.
I completely agree that the amount of information is usually a source of problem for the user and it leads too usability issues. But having both the icon and the arrow at the same area does not remove any information, it just merges two unrelated informations which leads to confusion.
Please also listen to the feedback after making a proposal. I have the feeling that the change (is it already in 4.10?) is just a personal interpretation of the feedback you had received.
The arrow above the app icon is not clear. Why not right aligning it. Or use bolder borders for groups as Ink Apnea mentioned.
I have to admit I miss the indicator two times before spotting it (confusing it with video-display icon). However, I don't think that a triangle is the best choice to indicate that a task is a group; obviously I can learn so, but it isn't natural; to me it seems a sort of "pin".
I have to agree that this arrow does not help!!!
Honestly, i had a really hard time to find it!!! It should be more visually easy to find!!! Maybe placing it under the text or something... Because under the icon just make it feel like it's part of the icon (like someone already said). Because of this, one cannot easily understand that where are dealing whit a group!
I do agree whit turning things simple, but please, don't make them worse.
And, by the way, the numbers are not that evil, they kind of help! So if you're planing to remove them, at least create an option to allow users to get them back
Aaron J. Seigo:.. and that's the entire point. if it does not serve a purpose, it is just more information presented + the rest of your comment. I get it.
Now, if there were no grouping and you'd introduce grouping, you could start a discussion about how to display grouping and it's reasonable to say "we don't need to know exactly how many items there are in a group".
Here however is an existing situation where you feel compelled to remove an indicator and replace it with another indicator containing less information.
Apparently, the number irked you enough to take action and you'd feel better having just a grouping symbol, also because people are allegedly bad at processing information.
Now, I'm happy if you're more happy but let's call it what it is: a pet peeve.
Number or generic grouping indicator are both items of information. One contains less than the other but they're both deviations of the standard where one taskbar item equals 1 window.
If you want to make a case for "less information is better", you've achieved marginally less information but you gained nothing. It's still a grouping indicator, it's still additional information and there's no added advantage for the user (there's even a disadvantage).
Allow me to introduce to you a feature I use myself, and have been for a very long time: "auto-hide". Get rid of that taskbar with its in-"elegant results" and "visual noise" altogether (*) until you've a need for it and the information it contains.
Your proposed change may suit you but isn't the improvement you claim it to be. Imho, you haven't made a case for changing the existing situation.
(*) hack tip: delete the background .svgz files for even less "visual noise".
Caesar Tjalbo "Here however is an existing situation where you feel compelled to remove an indicator and replace it with another indicator containing less information."
the difference is:
a) don't tell anything, present everything the same
b) tell that pressing this entry will have a *different result* than the normal tasks, just add something to reduce the "surprise"
c) add even more information that may or may not be useful
so, b) is quite important, while c) may add something, or may detract from the final experience because adds the little to make it more crowded, so more information dense, so slightly slower to understand at a glance (besides being uglier)
"(*) hack tip: delete the background .svgz files for even less "visual noise"."
uhm, if you are talking about the panel svg (we already hidden the tasks svg backgrounds) actually adds visual noise, all the noise of the wallpaper
How about moving the indicator to the right part after the title, similar to arrow position in systray applet?
May be this could work.
I looked at the image. 3 times! And i couldn't find the arrow. After reading some comments i "found" it hiding just below the konsole icon.
I hope you don't consider this as "nice" or "neat" or the way forward. It's barely noticeable and you will only find it if you really look at it. That's not how it should be.
The arrow icon should be noticeable and clearly visible. You shouldn't have to search for it.
My recommendation: Move the arrow icon to the right of the tasks element where the text is fading out. If that doesn't look nice then just place the arrow on the right of the app icon and move the text some pixels to the right (just to make room).
Sorry for criticizing your creation, but hopefully you find my feedback constructive and not just "it sucks" ;-)
The 'ugly black thing' some people are advocating don't work with black plasma themes.
A lot of our users use those.
The entire point is for it to be subtle. There is no value in grouped windows to be the most obvious thing in the window listing.
Looking at the various reasons for identifying grouped windows and the means for doing so, it's evident that identifying groups is useful in various use cases but neither critical as a primary task nor does it need to be presented in a way that is visible even when not really looking at the window listing.
The question is not "can you spot it in a random screen shot of a desktop you've not used in less than 1/N seconds?", but rather "during usage is it reasonably evident which are grouped?"
For those who suggested separating the arrow (ignoring utterly that this is what was there already), this causes various issues with layout and alignment that are solvable only by uglifying other things. Given that we also need to communicate states such as needing attention, minimized, etc.; be themable; and work in small areas it's not a simple matter of "slap some borders" or other quick-fix-off-the-top-of-my-head idea.
With the new implementation for 4.10, the arrow is noticeable in practice, even by glancing at the window listing and from a distance. It takes all of about 10 seconds to get used to as the new indication (which would be an issue with *any* change to this). What it isn't is in your face and taking up extra space.
In cooking, there are some ingredients that are wonderful in small amounts and which absolutely kill a dish when overused. This is one of those things.
Keep in mind that the theme can adjust the look of the arrow, it scales with the size of the icons (so it is bigger on bigger panels, e.g.).
I would go one step further and ask if the current default task-list is the most suitable approach for todays usage of the panel.
You already indicated that with the comming version of KDE there will be even more elements in the panel by default (share-like-connect). This leads to a further reduced amount of space in the panel.
Let me clarify my point:
With 5 opened applications (like shown in your scrennshot) most of the window titles are truncated and do therefor not offer much useful information anymore. Why not go ahead with icon-tasks as the default behavior and polish and improve its experience even more?
Advantages
- Windows (Vista, 7, 8) and Mac OS users will be familiar with it
- reduced visual noice by removing the mostly useless window titles
- ... room for new elements (SLC)?
One suggestion for SLC:
What about an one icon approach (generic "SLC-Button") which then shows the three choices?
Aaron,
being "subtle" is usually not a strong argument when it comes to usability. It should be about a desktop which is pleasant, intuitive and efficient to use.
It seems that you "utterly" ignore most constructive arguments and say that "there is no value in grouped windows to be the most obvious thing in the window listing". We are talking about one arrow which is supposed to serve a purpose. An arrow which should be obvious while looking nice ("the most obvious thing in the window listing" is a joke, right?). An arrow which is only present for grouped items.
In the 4.10 behaviour (as it seems that *you* already made the decision...):
- you neglect the fact that a grouped item should be recognized
- you uglify the application icon by merging a "subtle" arrow in an obvious way
I can hardly see an improvement. I would say that the change is wrong, both in terms of aesthetic and behaviour.
A grouped item reacts differently. The whole concept is challengeable but provided that it is here (actually even by default), it is crucial to avoid that the user gets "surprised" when clicking on an item. Even if the new arrow above the icon is "noticable", a good usability consists in offering a behaviour which is expected, not only expectable. That's about efficiency, not about subtility.
There are *many* elements in the plasma desktop which can be considered obtrusive and which somehow kill the dish. But if you want to improve the table for a dinner, pouring the vodka in the water glass is confusing, even if it leaves more room because you get rid of one tiny glass. I suggest to start removing the oven from the table, there is a better place for it.
Regarding changes in general, please take the usability arguments into account, it is a community project and you advocate open-source projects for a reason. Defending your own decision is understandable but it is not enough, a decision should be challenged. KDE is supposed to be open and I strongly disagree that some changes are forced into the project.
I must say it took me a *really* long time to find the indicator.
I think the point is that the indicator must be really obvious, it's maybe even more important than the icon, that I often don't recognize because I don't know it apart half a dozen ones.
@Maik Keller:"Why not go ahead with icon-tasks as the default behavior and polish and improve its experience even more?"
It's exactly what the current taskbar does, when there is not enough space for the text, it goes icon only.
But there is no reason for crippling it even when there would be enough space, shrinking the hit targets and having *more* noise (yes, more, because now the icons are crumpled one next to other without any whitespace whatsoever)
"What about an one icon approach (generic "SLC-Button")"
and
@Benoit "it is a community project and you advocate open-source projects for a reason."
Those are things already been discussed. It is indeed a community project, but being a good citizen of said community doesn't come for free(shocking!). One should participate to discussions in the usual channels, like mailing lists, irc and in-person meetings.
Also in case of code, actually trying to understand it (and produce patches;)
In the case of design, it should come with the understanding of the history of the project, the current design paradigms and why (no, things weren't done randomly;) and read what is the current status of research/theory.
So yeah, it's a community project and everyone is welcome, but I fear it takes a tad more than commenting on a blog :p
Hey, uh, could I ask what font that is that you use in taskbar? I really like it!
Oke, looking at my (default) kde setup it currently shows the grouping on the right of the taskbar entry (just after the faded text) with an arrow and the number.
So why don't you just do:
- Arrow in actual plasma style
- Remove the number
but leave it where it is!
You've had enough constructive feedback here to know that your current solution just isn't the one we (most of the people commenting) want. Nearly all seem to agree that the number of windows is useless so that can go. The arrow should stay where it is right now only in the plasma theme.
@Ioannis A: Oxygen, by Vernon Adams, which is designed for use with KDE software. :) You can find this and other of his fonts here:
http://www.fontsquirrel.com/foundry/Vernon-Adams
@Ivan Čukić: "The 'ugly black thing' some people are advocating don't work with black plasma themes. A lot of our users use those."
Not here :-) Just installed a dark theme Ronak (i think it's the default one on ChakraLinux) on my openSUSE 12.2 with KDE 4.8.5 and it works nice, the arrow and the number are white and clearly visible.
@Benoit: "t seems that you "utterly" ignore most constructive arguments"
This is now the 2nd time you have made this claim. First time I ignored it. Sadly, you repeated it.
I ask you to pull your head from you anal cavity long enough to consider the following so you may understand what utter horse shit you are spewing:
My original change was to have no indicator at all, as an experiment to find the impact. I then blogged about this publicly asking for feedback.
Due to that feedback, it was clear an indicator was needed (even though I *personally* can live without it). Taking that feedback into consideration, I searched for a way to accommodate the needs of people. I tried a few different ideas people suggested, tested them on various people and out of that synthesis of input, trials and a number of other issues (there's more to take into consideration than the grouping indicator in isolation) I came to the current result.
During this process I not only asked for feedback and received it, it was key in forming the results.
So here's how this is going to work: we can disagree, I'm fine with that. However, the kind of comment you are offering here is not of interest nor acceptable here.
"and say that "there is no value in grouped windows to be the most obvious thing in the window listing"."
That's right, there isn't value in group indication being the most obvious thing (note the words "most obvious").
Groups are less important than windows claiming they need attention; given that entries can have no text, it is more important to ensure it is clear what entry the grouping is associated with than making it obvious; given that themes may have both different colour schemes and frame style (including none) it is more important to make such things (needed for, e.g., accessibility) work well than it is to make grouping the most obvious thing in the tasks widget.
There is also the matter of aesthetics which falls in behind the above in terms of importance and, as shocking as it may feel, you (Benoit) don't get to define what those aesthetic goals are.
So .. yes .. grouping indication is not the most important thing in the window list.
@markg85: "most of the people commenting"
here, perhaps. all 3 of you. while self-selecting groups can reflect general opinion, self-selection does not imply that particularly in small sample sizes.
correctness is not a popularity contest, nor is it a competition judged in decibels.
therefore why "most of the people commenting" on my blog can not be used as a means of absolute design dictation should be obvious.
that said, I did take into consideration the feedback on this matter, it altered the results I produced (I think in a positive way).
I accept it may not be what you consider right now to be the perfect solution for you. Pleasing everyone, given that people have different needs / priorities / tastes, is impossible. Thankfully, Plasma lets you easily address that due to its highly componentized nature.
@Ink Apnea: yes, the themes generally provide an appropriately coloured arrow for the tasks widget.
and that arrow is at worst different from all the other arrows in the interface, and at best simply duplicated making more work for the theme creators.
by using the "normal" arrow, in theory something has been lost: previously theme creators could use any symbol for grouping indication .. in theory. in practice, there are limitations to this and no theme that i know of took advantage of this in any useful manner.
in theory, something has been gained: consistency, less work for theme designers, less redundancy in the theme images.
you had also mentioned you might do some mockups / brainstorming. any progress on that?
@Notmart: "Those are things already been discussed. It is indeed a community project, but being a good citizen of said community doesn't come for free(shocking!). One should participate to discussions in the usual channels, like mailing lists, irc and in-person meetings."
You are completely right, just complaining in a blog is not enough and the dedicated channels should be used to discuss those topics, although I must say that I have not found any discussion regarding that topic in the usability mailing-list... Regarding source code, I would say it is here the least of the problems and a patch is anyway a waste of effort as long as there is no real consensus.
On the other hand, when a decision is obviously unpopular, especially when it is challenged by real usability arguments, I do not see the point in endlessly defending the decision. It should not be a personal thing.
Hi Aaron,
""it seems that you "utterly" ignore most constructive arguments""
You probably noticed the quotes, I was actually referring to your comment and using your own wording which you obviously find offending.
The argument itself, however, is not a personal attack. It just refers to the fact that many users described their need to clearly identify an item as being a grouped item and that many ones explained that they hardly could identify the arrow after the change. I personally think that you should give more regard to those comments. You can agree or not, but please don't answer with insults. We are talking about bytes and pixels, not about persons.
"That's right, there isn't value in group indication being the most obvious thing (note the words "most obvious"). "
I of course did not miss the words "most obvious", that's why I considered it to be a joke. It was far from being the "most obvious" thing and I personally thing that it is now "not obvious" enough.
Regarding "aesthetics", I was here referring to the objective degradation of the original icon as it is now merged with the arrow. It is not about seeing it as nice or not.
I hope you also read my points regarding the usability, the whole thing is meant as a discussion and I tried to argument everything and to provide constructive criticism. Of course it is you blog and if you do not like those feedback, I can of course stop.
ok, now i got it. I thought the indicator was the ktorrent icon you can see on the right side of the taskbar. I thought it was an indicator for the skype task.
After reading other comments i got that the indicator is under the konsole icon.
Anyway, wow, that is a small indicator :D
Does this work well when you're using icons only on the tray? This would be the case for instance, for those of us with the panel displayed vertically on the side.
I would agree with most people above that the 'group' icon is far too inconspicuous. I spent quite some time looking for it, and would probably have taken longer if I hadn't glanced at the comments. Nice aesthetics are great, but usability should come first IMO.
"here, perhaps. all 3 of you. while self-selecting groups can reflect general opinion, self-selection does not imply that particularly in small sample sizes.
correctness is not a popularity contest, nor is it a competition judged in decibels."
Aaron, you sound quite stubborn here. It's not just 3 people, actually most people who commented feel the triangle was hard to spot or aesthetically displeasing. And none of the commenters actually say they like it! So you have virtually 100% negative feedback concerning the visual representation of the indicator. Of course you can say the sample size is small, but hey, how many comments do you expect on your blog (it is popular but not that popular)..?
Myself, I needed some 15 seconds to spot the arrow, and I was actively looking for it. Overlapping visual elements are a bad idea in my opinion, especially if the contrast is low. I would suggest the same as what mark85 is proposing.
ok, now i got it. I thought the indicator was the ktorrent icon you can see on the right side of the taskbar. I thought it was an indicator for the skype task.
After reading other comments i got that the indicator is under the konsole icon.
This exactly what happened to me. Generally, I welcome the change, and agree with the Aaron's reasoning for the change, but I don't like proposed implementation.
Overlapping visual indicators can be hard to notice as they are "too subtle". If I were to explain to, say my father, "look at this small arrow icon down here" I don't think he would be able to notice the difference of grouped vs non-grouped, and he just wouldn't understand what I am taking about.
That grouping indicator should be more noticeable, that's all. Other than that, thanks for the great job.
Hi Aaron,
Just my 2 cents but I also found the arrow really hard to spot. It took a fair amount of time to figure out where it was. I think there are good reasons for putting it over the existing icon (for vertical or icon only arrangements) but I think that it does need to be a little more obvious.
I'm one of the people who was struggling to see the icon at first. Time for an appointment with the seller of expensive glasses (also called optician)?
When I found it, my first thought was also that it would be a better idea to place the indicator to the right of the application icon - but I would place it immediately to the right, not after the text as some have argued. It has to be close to be easily spotted.
In my day job I use SAP, and they sometimes combine similar functions in an icon to save space. To indicate this they place an arrow/menu-icon immediately to the right of the icon (no spacing) which represents the default action. The arrow is half the width of the main icon. In other words, click the main icon for the default action or the arrow to the right for similar choices (example: default is choose report layout and related are change report layout and manage report layouts).
The only problem with this is that people without a steady hand may have a hard time hitting the arrow.
OS/2 had a similar solution in application menus where a menu item with submenu items could have a default. The submenu arrow would then display inside a rectangle if I recall correct, and to actually display the submenu you would have to click inside the rectangle. Weakest point was that you would have to *know* what the default was, as there was no hint of the default unless you displayed the submenu.
However, good counter-arguments have been provided, and when I enlarged the screenshot (I use a panel height of 70 pixels at home) the indicator/arrow is easily visible. As far as I can tell it is also offset from the icon a little, so it would not easily be missed due to being too similar to the icon.
In my setup the new icon is certainly going to be more visible than the tiny arrow I currently get at the right edge of the task bar "button".
The "arrow to the right" option would not work well with a vertical panel displaying icons only (i.e. a panel where the with is the icon size + margins).
So, to conclude: Good job, both in thinking through the scenarios and in coming up with a solution that would not conflict with any use cases!
PS: Instead of an arrow you could use a "standard" symbol indicating that there are many windows: http://www.wearyourchinesename.com/chinese-symbols/chinese-symbols-m/chinese-symbol-for-many.html
You could, but I don't think you should :-)
@Maik Keller: No, removing the titles is a bad suggestion. I definitely don't want a dumbed-down interface mimicking Windows 7.
What should be considered instead (in my opinion) is making the default panel vertical and wide enough to display say the first 15 characters or so of the window title - as wide screens are more common today and the main problem for most users is vertical space.
With my screen and 70 pixel high (horisontal) panel I can have more than 20 windows open before stacking is performed as the task bare intelligently starts using two rows when the first one is full. However, that is an entirely different debate, and an indicator for stacked windows will be necessary in any case.
After reading many, and scanning many comments above I initially agreed with the "indicator is not visible enough" camp.
I think actual usage will be a much better measurement of usability than looking at the screenshot, and I think it won't be a problem in practice.
Things sometimes seem too subtle until you get used to them. After the fourth look I felt comfortable with it and it creates less visual bloat as well, something that KDE has always been accused of.
So maybe let's give it a chance before we jump to conclusions.
Love the borderless tasks!
I also first thought arrows was to subtle - but the more I think about it I think it's the right solution.
Thanks for thinking so much about these details.
I'd like to start with saying that I appreciate what you're doing here. You propose a change and ask for feedback and then use that feedback. I hope you've found this useful and hope you're internet-hardened enough to see through all the criticism, if not downright abuse.
Now back to the topic.
For the past few days I've taken note of the little number in the groups. I've noticed it before of course but never gave it much thought; I accepted it as a natural thing. I did make the conscious decision to allow my taskbar items to be grouped.
Generally speaking it's useful to distinguish between singular items and groups, without having to know how many items there are in a group. However, I found that I do use the number.
I've hinted at it before but will expand a bit more. I do my things for a certain length of time, being mostly concentrated with each task. Then, after a while, I take a breath and lose my concentration, I start to recap what I've done. Including a look at the taskbar to see what's still open.
I prioritize my subsequent actions based on the tasks and the number of open instances. Just 'a' group doesn't tell me anything but when I see I have more than 2 instances of KDevelop open, I start to wonder why and whether that's still necessary. I might not give 2 instances of Okular much thought but 4 or more is cause for attention. 3 windows of GIMP is normal, less or more is odd.
So, I use the counter on the taskbar groups and I'd hate to see it go. Is it an option to solve this the KDE way and make it a configurable setting?
One idea I have not thought very much aboutthe consequences on usability. Why not open all the windows of a group in a tabbed window?
This way you have a hierarchical organization: applications on the taskbar and instances on the window title bar.
Post a Comment