aMule Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

We're back! (IN POG FORM)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7

Author Topic: A new look for aMule 2.2.0  (Read 92814 times)

Kry

  • Ex-developer
  • Retired admin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: -665
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5795
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #15 on: November 19, 2007, 11:34:11 PM »

As for you, apo, wxWidgets ALREADY uses GTK on linux and native toolkit on MacOS (Carbon/Cocoa). Releasing different interfaces for every platform would be disastrous on so many ways, starting by support.
Logged

natsirt

  • Newbie
  • Karma: 0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #16 on: November 19, 2007, 11:41:30 PM »

Kry, do you think it's possible to add a file type icon in front of every file, as I mentionned before?
I know it's getting closer to emule GUI but I think this would really be useful...
Logged

apo758

  • Guest
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #17 on: November 19, 2007, 11:54:35 PM »

That's why I asked. I'm not a developer so there's a lot of things that I don't know how they work and why they do. I read something about wxWidgets an now I think to understand the way they work but what I was talking about concern design guidelines.
For example,

the arrows in the picture show three things that look bad on Mac but I think they look good on other OS. That's what I meant with my post. Now I know that it's impossible or at least very difficult and I hope there will be a solution to make aMule look perfect on every OS. Anyway, thank for the reply! ;)
Logged

brainnolo

  • Approved Newbie
  • *
  • Karma: 5
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2007, 12:29:16 AM »

Kry: why one should know about how an application works? All I know is that I want to download my favourite linux distribution (although I am a Mac user) like everybody and I want to do be able to do that without any hassle. The program should just work without setting anything, except the things one should care about, like where to download and what to share. I AM ignorant of how the application works AND I want to remain ignorant about it because it is just a mean to an end, and I think my time is better spent watching the installation of the linux distro I just downloaded instead of trying to squeeze the last byte of performance.

What puzzles me even more is why you say they are so vital when I didn't touch any setting and it just worked.

I respect your desire to keep the aMule interface the complex monster it currently is, especially cause I saw work is done toward EC (libamule would rock too) and anyone can roll its own interface based on it (and I will try to accomplish said task if I get enough time). Keep up the good work, under the hoods aMule is surely a great application and it shows that constantly. I do not like at all the way it interacts with me, but one can only ask so much for this price I guess.


BTW: The reason for which I do not want all those options is because they confuse me and divert the attention from the important parts. I wonder if you would be at least open for a re-organization of options and functionalities (with some re-labeling maybe). Still painful change to accept for sure, but hey :D
« Last Edit: November 20, 2007, 12:33:52 AM by brainnolo »
Logged

apo758

  • Guest
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #19 on: November 20, 2007, 12:37:13 AM »

I think you're right, brainnolo, but there are people who wants to squeeze the last byte of performance. A show advanced features check box?
Logged

phoenix

  • Evil respawning bird from aMule Dev Team
  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 44
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2503
  • The last shadow you'll ever see
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2007, 04:10:08 AM »

Well, it seems to me that you are talking about different things and both sides are not hearing the other.

I totally agree with Kry: the gnome way is stupid. Because of one simple thing: you loose your freedom to choose. I sometimes want to know all and sometimes want to be ignorant. But I need no stupid programmer to tell me I cannot choose the options I will use when I print. "Oh, lets hide this from the poor stupid ignorant user, he does not know what he is doing..."

That said :) I agree with brainolo that aMule interface is bad. It is a copy of eMule, which is originally bad. But in its root, aMule was designed to be a clone of eMule. To change that, would be to write another program.

Usability has nothing to do with configuration options. You can tweak a thousand options, as long as there are sane defaults to them. Or even if the program tries to figure out sane default values. And of course, buttons to restore sane default values :) . When I say the interface is bad I mean the way things were originally designed, and here wxWidgets does have an influence.

So, to be practical, this is a list (unpublished until now) of things I consider bad in aMule GUI:
1) There should be a menu interface. Even if just to use the keyboard. I am a keyboard fan, I just use the mouse when I don't know how to use the program. There could even be an option to hide the menu bar for those who like "aMule Classic".
2) aMule should use tabs to swich the views. Code sucks as a result of not using the proper control at the proper place. Not to mention that the user does not exactly expect that behaviour from buttons.
3) The button to clean downloads is a surprise the first time you click it. But you get used to it. I'd rather have it in a toolbar. Maybe with a broom or a mop icon :P
4) Swiching the upload queue is also in the level of guessing that the program has this feature.
5) Looking at the sources is also a guess that a double click will do something that is not in the right button menu. The mid-button click is also a nice undocumented feature that I use all the time.
6) We rarely use common dialogs where we should, notably to enter file names.
7) The "network" windows is a mess, it mixes servers with networks and application logs. A single connect button is not very appropriate if we have two different networks to connect. Enabling or disabling a network should be in this window, not on "preferences".
8) Preference windows should have buttons to restore sane defaults
9) And I could go on and on...

aMule/eMule are *very* complex applications. And there has always been programmers that help and/or join the team doing the most amazing things. But where are the programmers that do GUI? In my oppinion, we do not receive many interface contributions from the community because to change aMule interface you need wxDesigner. And in spite of the kindness of the author of the program to give aMule developers a license, the program is not free, so it is not like anyone with an idea can help.

So, yes, I would like to change aMule. But how are we going to prototype? I have real life issues, I can't keep showing a lot of ideas that people can criticize and improove. It will be a long way, but in my oppinion we will have to switch toolkit if we want to go one step ahead. And the only reasonable option I see is QT, a trully multiplatform toolkit with a nice interface designer that could be used to prototype the interface way before its core has been written. Then we could start receiving contributions in that area.

aMule 2.2.0 is delayed. And guess what is the problem? GUI bugs on windows and Mac. How come??? GUI is delaying the app? With so many other complex things to go wrong, aMule core works perfectly, most problems are with the GUI.

We need help folks. We have our lives. We have to find a way to increase the community participation in the development of the application. Otherwise, aMule will fade.
Logged

skolnick

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 24
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1188
  • CentOS 6 User
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2007, 04:17:58 AM »

aMule is a complex application. It can be customized to work on many different environments. Its options allow it to work equally well on slow connections as on very fast connections, and on either cheap routers or good hardware, it has to have all the options so it can do its job properly. If you don't want to learn how to configure it, then it's your problem. Then go and find some peer to peer software that let you get all you want just by double clicking on it. I am sure all your software is simply plug and play, and it guesses all the options you need, and it works just out of the box without you touching anything. However aMule is not that kind of software, because internet connections and computers and network topologies are things that can have very different setups and aMule is supposed to be able to work on any of them. And just to inform you of some things: UPnP cannot be "hidden" because there are networks where it would either not work, or produce som misconfigurations. And I am one of the user of the "do not connect at startup option". Do not ask why, I simply need it to be there. And I am 100% with Kry, that stupid mentality of "let's assume what the user wants" is what makes some software useless for me, particularly gnome. And sorry about the aMule interface not being "centered" on a tab, or having "useless" options. I am pretty sure you can develop a software that does the same as aMule, with only an on/off switch and a search box (and obviously "centered" on it).

Regards.
Logged

Kry

  • Ex-developer
  • Retired admin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: -665
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5795
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #22 on: November 20, 2007, 05:22:23 AM »

phoenix, you're falling int the "But, if we were using QT, we would have no problems!" when the reality is, we would ahve different problems. That's just displacing blame. The bugs are not only not just GUI, but also quite probably our fault.\, not wxWidget's. And no, wxDesigner is not the problem in this case either, because no external coder will change the gui, only maybe propose changes to it. Can you imagine a complete revault of the GUI patch? Some of the things you propose might be valid and possible, but they're also trivial to implement and you can change them as much as I do.

Just saying.
Logged

lfroen

  • Guest
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #23 on: November 20, 2007, 07:28:22 AM »

Quote
Well, it seems to me that you are talking about different things and both sides are not hearing the other.
That's because you're talking about things from two different perspectives. Kry, for instance, fail to see that from usability point of view, aMule interface is crap. On the other hand, brainnolo fails to comprehend, that even user have to have some idea about how application works. For example, every one knows, that Word save your text in file with '.doc' extension. Same way, every aMule/eMule user have to get an idea what is that stupid server list is about.

Quote
I totally agree with Kry: the gnome way is stupid
Reality seems to be different - a hole lot of people think that Gnome way is OK. I'm using Gnome at home and see no problem with their approach.

Quote
I agree with brainolo that aMule interface is bad. It is a copy of eMule, which is originally bad.
You messing cause and effect. aMule interface is bad, but similarity with eMule is good. It is widely accepted as most common p2p application. If you're about to redesign interface you've got two choices: either make it extraordinary good, or make it like something people already know.

Quote
Usability has nothing to do with configuration options
Absolutely. Nobody forces users to press "Preferences" button, given sane defaults. On the other hand, I have almost no complains about preferences GUI design. It is way better that other areas.

Quote
1) There should be a menu interface.
Agree.

Quote
2) aMule should use tabs to switch the views.
No. The hole idea here is broken. Have you seen Winamp interface? They're using docked windows where aMule using views. That's just an idea. Don't be trapped inside "we have X views, let's find out how to switch between them".

Quote
5) Looking at the sources is also a guess that a double click will do something that is not in the right button menu.
Why not in separate non-modal window? Why messing availability per-source with rest of files?

Quote
7) The "network" windows is a mess, it mixes servers with networks and application logs.
You so right. I never understand WTF log doing in network window.

Quote
And the only reasonable option I see is QT
After aMule 2.2.0 I will evaluate an efforts required for porting core.

Few words to skolnick:
Quote
that stupid mentality of "let's assume what the user wants"
Can you please drop some ignorance? "Assume what the user wants" is the way the whole economy works. If you got your assumptions right - people will be happy to use your product; wrong - and nobody want it. What your argument here? Complex application can't have decent GUI? I disagree, and other people as well.

Quote
phoenix, you're falling int the "But, if we were using QT, we would have no problems!"
Yes, Kry - we will. But we will not have problem of people that can't contribute to Open Source project due lack of license to development tool.
wxDesigner is a disaster. I would better prototype GUI in Power Point and than code it manually in C++ instead.
Logged

Kry

  • Ex-developer
  • Retired admin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: -665
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5795
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #24 on: November 20, 2007, 07:43:57 AM »

You're free to try and make the move to dialogblocks then.
Logged

lfroen

  • Guest
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #25 on: November 20, 2007, 01:49:12 PM »

You're free to try and make the move to dialogblocks then.
I have yet to see decent GUI builder for wx. I may check dialogblocks, thow
Logged

phoenix

  • Evil respawning bird from aMule Dev Team
  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 44
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2503
  • The last shadow you'll ever see
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #26 on: November 20, 2007, 02:06:27 PM »

I have nothing against wxDesigner as an application, it does its job very well, but beeing non-free complicates our matters.

As for the object of our previous discussion, I want to add that I am not the gui kind of guy :), so it is true that many of my proposals are trivial, but this is a hobbie to me, and coding gui is not something that motivates me. Even then, I sometimes take the time to fix amulegui :)

As for wxWidgets, it sure has problems, and serious problems in my opinion. A toolkit that behaves differently in different platforms is not what I would call "multiplatform". Remember the OScopeControl problem? And why is GTK imune to the bugs we have today puzzles me.

I know, QT would certainly introduce other problems, it is not perfect. But the Trolls are accessible and sensible to your complaints. As sensible as a Troll can be :)

Cheers!
Logged

wuischke

  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 183
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4292
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #27 on: November 20, 2007, 02:33:01 PM »

One: Our current focus is a new icon set and that's the actual purpose of the thread. Please don't forget this.

Two: What's the point in moving from one proprietary GUI designer to another? If you want to move, please use at least an open file format, like (Kry, don't laugh) XRC. AFAIK, both wxDesigner and DialogBlocks get along with XRC and there are couple of free (wxGlade, XRCed) tools to edit these files as well, although they are not that good...

Frankly, I like the idea of using a core-gui model and I think this should be where we are heading. We already have a working core, now it's only a matter of good GUIs to go further down that path. And we don't even have to rewrite the whole application nor to change the toolkit.

Logged

phoenix

  • Evil respawning bird from aMule Dev Team
  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 44
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2503
  • The last shadow you'll ever see
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #28 on: November 20, 2007, 02:48:00 PM »

QT Designer is not proprietary. It is open source and fully functional without a license. Since version 4, even on windows. And the data file is XML, pure text.

I also like the idea of core/gui separation. But if we really had this separation, core would not need a toolkit. Ok, maybe for sockets, though I believe windows now supports decent sockets, not that WSAsync bullshit.

I vote for a core free of wx. Then anyone could code the GUI in whatever language and toolkit you want. That is why "External Connections Protocol" needs attention.
Logged

lfroen

  • Guest
Re: A new look for aMule 2.2.0
« Reply #29 on: November 20, 2007, 03:03:29 PM »

Quote
core would not need a toolkit
Oh, really? Wait for it ...
Quote
Ok, maybe for sockets
And strings. And file access. And threads. And process start/stop. And interlocking. And .... The point is that either you're using toolkit which support all those things on all platforms or you're gonna build one yourself. Which I find quite useless idea. No need to re-invent the wheel.

Quote
That is why "External Connections Protocol" needs attention.
Anything wrong with protocol? What exactly needs attention?

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7