5 ms·

Following that example, looks like there is no minimalist general case, but should be possible to achieve a minimal product for journalist, taking into account

Following that example, looks like there is no minimalist general case, but should be possible to achieve a minimal product for journalist, taking into account what they need. By further extending this logic, would be possible to arrange different sets of minimal features for every type of users, or at least cover a majority of those user cases and not force a one size-fits-all approach.

heavenlyblue 7y ago
Except it’s much easier to learn how to ignore all the features you don’t necessarily need, than to start learning a completely new product every time one of the features you need isn’t in the one you’re currently using.
- heavenlyblue 7y ago
  On that matter, it should be possible to re-package the same product but with different UI configurations. I am pretty sure modern IDEs are quite configurable. Why not word processors?
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    Because now every repackaging works differently and you need N copies of the same product if one doesn't contain all features you need.
    - gmueckl 7y ago
      This is why a lot of applications provide something like workspaces where you get to pick and choose a UI configuration based on the task at hand. I first saw this in Blender and Eclipse (Blender 2.80 has made this feature more prominent, but it's from the old 1.x days). Maya has this to some extent. Adobe has introduced this in Photoshop and some other products. And all of these programs allow you to come up with your own configurations, too. FreeCAD also has this kind of concept, but there the workspaces are actually pretty much corresponding to UI modes, even though you can switch bith independently. The worst outlier here is Visual Studio. It has this kind of concept internally and keeps different UI configurations for editing and debugging. But you get zero control over that as a user. The UI switch when entering/leaving the debugger is hardcoded.
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        Sure. But workspaces are a way for the user to refocus the UI on particular family of features. But all other features are not gone; they're still there in the program. Depending on the feature type, some may be accessible through menus and could be included into workspace on demand by changing some options.
        heavenlyblue 7y ago
        So what's the problem with having those features if we are focusing on the fact that only the presence of them in the UI may make the it more distracting?
        TeMPOraL 7y ago
        The article we're discussing argues for removing features, not merely their UI indicators. As for the justification for keeping rarely used features somewhere in the UI anyway, a minimally familiar user will be able to ignore currently unused features faster than they'll be able to find hidden features when they're needed. Human vision has an amazing ability to filter and focus.
  - nitrogen 7y ago
    Word processors used to be. You could drag and rearrange toolbars and icons to reflect your own needs.
bryanrasmussen 7y ago
Normally the solution everyone gets then is that the products particular users need is done via some sort of plugin system, and then because the menu shouldn't get too bloated you have a plugins entry on the menu, and then the user has to click that, and then click the journalist entry, and then probably some other plugin specific entry that will be different from every other plugin writers' entries - something like Text functions (because probably the Journalist plugin was written by a programmer somewhere who thinks Text functions is totally a great name to put the little atomic functions that do stuff with text in) - to get to the word count entry. And the installation process for these plugins is going to be arduous and mind-numbing too. Why, yes, I have used eclipse before! How did you know?

heavenlyblue 7y ago

Except it’s much easier to learn how to ignore all the features you don’t necessarily need, than to start learning a completely new product every time one of the features you need isn’t in the one you’re currently using.

heavenlyblue 7y ago
On that matter, it should be possible to re-package the same product but with different UI configurations. I am pretty sure modern IDEs are quite configurable. Why not word processors?
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Because now every repackaging works differently and you need N copies of the same product if one doesn't contain all features you need.
  - gmueckl 7y ago
    This is why a lot of applications provide something like workspaces where you get to pick and choose a UI configuration based on the task at hand. I first saw this in Blender and Eclipse (Blender 2.80 has made this feature more prominent, but it's from the old 1.x days). Maya has this to some extent. Adobe has introduced this in Photoshop and some other products. And all of these programs allow you to come up with your own configurations, too. FreeCAD also has this kind of concept, but there the workspaces are actually pretty much corresponding to UI modes, even though you can switch bith independently. The worst outlier here is Visual Studio. It has this kind of concept internally and keeps different UI configurations for editing and debugging. But you get zero control over that as a user. The UI switch when entering/leaving the debugger is hardcoded.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Sure. But workspaces are a way for the user to refocus the UI on particular family of features. But all other features are not gone; they're still there in the program. Depending on the feature type, some may be accessible through menus and could be included into workspace on demand by changing some options.
      - heavenlyblue 7y ago
        So what's the problem with having those features if we are focusing on the fact that only the presence of them in the UI may make the it more distracting?
        TeMPOraL 7y ago
        The article we're discussing argues for removing features, not merely their UI indicators. As for the justification for keeping rarely used features somewhere in the UI anyway, a minimally familiar user will be able to ignore currently unused features faster than they'll be able to find hidden features when they're needed. Human vision has an amazing ability to filter and focus.
- nitrogen 7y ago
  Word processors used to be. You could drag and rearrange toolbars and icons to reflect your own needs.

bryanrasmussen 7y ago

Normally the solution everyone gets then is that the products particular users need is done via some sort of plugin system, and then because the menu shouldn't get too bloated you have a plugins entry on the menu, and then the user has to click that, and then click the journalist entry, and then probably some other plugin specific entry that will be different from every other plugin writers' entries - something like Text functions (because probably the Journalist plugin was written by a programmer somewhere who thinks Text functions is totally a great name to put the little atomic functions that do stuff with text in) - to get to the word count entry. And the installation process for these plugins is going to be arduous and mind-numbing too. Why, yes, I have used eclipse before! How did you know?