On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 13:50 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote: > OK, so here's the problem with this. Compromise sometimes works well > when trying to form rough consensus, or for finding the least > disagreeable position for the most people - for politics maybe. > However, it does not work well as a technique for designing products > that people love to use. When you find the middle ground between > great and awful you don't find good - you find mediocrity and malaise. > Please read http://headrush.typepad.com/ for more on this topic. > > We've been designing compromised products for far too long. We need > to acknowledge that we can't please everyone all the time and need to > make choices. We need to resolve to be great - it doesn't just happen > by accident. Sorry, but I think you're picking entirely the wrong case to try and make your point. Try as hard as I can, I can't see how it would be better to have the Brave New World mixer and a wiki page instructing people on how to use alsamixer than it is to have the Brave New World mixer and a second mixer application available in the menus. The total cost to the design of the desktop is: one additional menu entry. I'm really having a hard time seeing how this is a terrible design decision. (and later in the post you repeat the "somewhat atypical system/setup" canard. "I want to select an input channel" is not remotely atypical.) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
