7 ms·

As a matter of fact, I wrote that very program, Switchboard. It's getting late and I don't want to write a whole book about it's design (though I could), but

by aroman 13y ago

As a matter of fact, I wrote that very program, Switchboard. It's getting late and I don't want to write a whole book about it's design (though I could), but basically here's the story: I saw some mockups Daniel Fore (the project's founder and lead designer) created for a hypothetical system settings app. Here's an example: http://danrabbit.deviantart.com/art/User-Accounts-Plug-198608643 http://danrabbit.deviantart.com/art/User-Accounts-Plug-19860... I set about coding the app. I was painfully aware of the visual similarities between OS X and Switchboard. I spent literally MONTHS wracking my brain trying to find a better design which was as elegant and efficient. I argued with Dan (who had created a mockup which would become the main interface for switchboard, which you linked), I talked to other designers, I mocked things up by hand. And I/we came up with some really creative alternatives which looked very little like System Preferences in OS X. In the end however, I was faced with an ultimatum. Do I change the settings app JUST to look different than OS X, and lose out on the well-established excellence of Apple's design? I truly felt awful about having to face that question. Frankly, it made me upset and depressed for quite a bit. Ultimately however, I was convinced and just said "screw it". You're absolutely right that I'm not the first one to "copy" Apple's settings program. Here's Ubuntu's. It's extremely similar to the two ones you linked: http://zeth.net/archive/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/ubuntu1110-2-settings.png http://zeth.net/archive/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/ubuntu111... You could say that I failed. You could say I failed to come up with a better interface. And in that sense, I did. But I get extremely frustrated when people dismiss the product of my careful investigation and thought into this matter as "oh, he just wholesale copied OS X". Because it ignores the fact that I really tried to come up with a better solution. In the end I couldn't, and it seems nobody else has either. I will say though, I did really try to innovate on the technical side. And in that sense, I think I succeeded. You can see that in some of Switchboard's finer points, such as exposing APIs to the settings panes (which are called Switchboard "plugs") which allow them to actually interact with Switchboard's internal UI, providing, among other things, progress bar support in the title bar. I wrote an article for the elementary Journal announcing Switchboard here: http://elementaryos.org/journal/attack-settings http://elementaryos.org/journal/attack-settings And I put together a quick presentation highlighting Switchboard's vision and architecture here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF37THZoNsA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF37THZoNsA | https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=0Aah2wnTpXrZAZGRuaDI4bmdfNWYyOWpzN2Rm&hl=en_US https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=0Aah2wnTpXrZAZGRuaDI... Hopefully, you can see that we did not just "senselessly copy" anything.

msutherl 13y ago
There's a certain downside to mimicking the OS X design that you may not be taken full account of, which is that for people who have used OS X, your designs look like a not-quite-perfected copy. It's a sort of uncanny valley thing that manifests itself likewise in the common discussion of whether something feels "native", or whether you should use the OS-provided UI elements vs. re-invent the wheel when writing an app. For instance QT apps on OS X. It's better to either do an exact copy or to be different enough that you don't invite comparison, otherwise what you've come up with will always look like an inferior copy of the original. At least until the user has spent enough time with it that it becomes the new default. But don't forget that user acquisition is just as important as long-term usability.
- aroman 13y ago
  I appreciate the input. All I can really say is that you have to remember elementary is not a business. We don't have investors. We don't aim for market share or target X number of users by X date. Fundamentally, we build what we think is best, and if other people find it valuable too, they use it. So far, it's worked. So "user acquisition" isn't really a concern for us, though frankly, I believe it should be. And until it is, I guess we really can't complain about the flak we get for being "copycats". And for what it's worth, I am an active user of both OS X and elementary OS and Switchboard feels 105% native on elementary OS. They each feel right in their native environment. Then again, I'm about as biased as possible (though I'd like to imagine my views are somewhat normative ;)).
  - StavrosK 13y ago
    I don't really know what people are complaining about. You're making something amazing that people really really need, you are doing it with donations (as far as I understand, anyway), and it's not like you set out to copy Apple wholesale. I think the benefits far outweigh any drawbacks (I can't really see any), so you'd probably do well to ignore the negative feedback and keep doing what you're doing.
    - 13y ago

by aroman 13y ago

msutherl 13y ago

There's a certain downside to mimicking the OS X design that you may not be taken full account of, which is that for people who have used OS X, your designs look like a not-quite-perfected copy. It's a sort of uncanny valley thing that manifests itself likewise in the common discussion of whether something feels "native", or whether you should use the OS-provided UI elements vs. re-invent the wheel when writing an app. For instance QT apps on OS X. It's better to either do an exact copy or to be different enough that you don't invite comparison, otherwise what you've come up with will always look like an inferior copy of the original. At least until the user has spent enough time with it that it becomes the new default. But don't forget that user acquisition is just as important as long-term usability.

aroman 13y ago
I appreciate the input. All I can really say is that you have to remember elementary is not a business. We don't have investors. We don't aim for market share or target X number of users by X date. Fundamentally, we build what we think is best, and if other people find it valuable too, they use it. So far, it's worked. So "user acquisition" isn't really a concern for us, though frankly, I believe it should be. And until it is, I guess we really can't complain about the flak we get for being "copycats". And for what it's worth, I am an active user of both OS X and elementary OS and Switchboard feels 105% native on elementary OS. They each feel right in their native environment. Then again, I'm about as biased as possible (though I'd like to imagine my views are somewhat normative ;)).
- StavrosK 13y ago
  I don't really know what people are complaining about. You're making something amazing that people really really need, you are doing it with donations (as far as I understand, anyway), and it's not like you set out to copy Apple wholesale. I think the benefits far outweigh any drawbacks (I can't really see any), so you'd probably do well to ignore the negative feedback and keep doing what you're doing.
  - 13y ago