Alan,
On 02/04/2015 07:51, Alan wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2015 14:03:28 -0800
> spencerone@??? wrote:
>> I took a deeper look at the screens shared by Alan and had some
>> thoughts
>> about the underlying structure of the greeter, which, after digging
>> into
>> the existing flow here:
>> https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/greeter_revamp_UI/, prompted me to
>> explore my thoughts visually and share them here with you [attached].
>>
> Thanks for this very nice graphical thoughts. I find it quite clear.
> One question thought: are B, C, D and E different exclusive options or
> do they combine together somehow, and if yes, how?
>
They are different, each with their own issues. D is most effective, as
it employs the logic flow already in place [I just didn't show any other
screens the first time around].
>>
>> Though the attached proposal contains a few structural options, I
>> think,
>> ultimately, I am suggesting a simplification of the greeter by
>> reducing
>> the need to fork the Tails greeter flow only to when someone opts for
>> a
>> guided walkthrough/tour of the configuration settings or opts for no
>> guided walkthrough/tour of the configuration settings.
>
> I apologize if we weren't clear enough on that, but we're supposed to
> have
> already validated the flow with UX people at NUMA and do some
> paper testing sessions on that flow, so I'm a bit reluctant to go back
> and have to go through these steps again. That doesn't mean there's no
> room for improvements or new ideas, but I'd like to make clear that the
> flow documented on the blueprint should be taken as a basis and that
> I'll need strong argument to start from the beginning again.
>
Yeah, sorry to be so late to the party. I wasn't going to jump in on
this but after seeing tchou's accordion suggestions I figured it was now
or never. Besides, though I am unfamiliar with NUMA, they should have
had similar thoughts. I don't look at this as going back, just as a
refinement of the underlining architecture of the existing flow,
reinforcing all of the work done thus far and unifying the flow for all
people.
See attached for a [hopefully] clearer low-res explanation of option D.
>>
>> I am also
>> suggesting a summary of all of the configuration settings, default or
>> saved, upfront on the first dialog screen [Option D].
>>
> That sounds like a good idea to me to be more clear on what are the
> defaults when one clicks "Start Tails" button. Have you seen that we
> aleady have a similar screen when defaults are saved:
> https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/greeter_revamp_UI/#index1h3.
> In this case the 1st screen is already a "check and go" screen, which
> is what I understand that you suggest in option C.
>
Yes, but it was my understanding that the 'Check & Go' screen only
loaded if "saved localization options" were detected. The suggestion
here is having the first screen be the same always, just displaying
either default or saved configuration settings, instead of having three
or four different appearances.
>
> We could genelize that if we find a consize UI to show which advanced
> options
> will be selected. Would that address your suggestion?
>
I am not sure. The suggestion is to display all of the configuration
settings on this first 'Check & Go' screen. We would need to explore the
UI and decide what the best composition would be.
>>
>> Let me know what you think :)
>>
> About option B (walking every person though the entire settings): I
> think it's not something we desire as one of the goals of the redesign
> is to have an interface as straightforward as possible for simple
> cases, and that most of the advanced options are very specific.
>
Yeah, though I think this, and option C, present the most
straightforward approach, I understand and respect your reservations.
Though, for clarification sake, the logic behind these are the use
cases. These are:
1. Start Tails using saved or default settings [Most occurrent]
2. Start Tails after self configuration [Commonly occurrent]
3. Start Tails after walkthrough configuration [Least occurrent]
Though numbers 1 and 2 above can be debated/interchanged in their
occurrence, it is difficult to argue that people would keep needing
number 3, the basic walkthrough, making options B and C quite
functional. But again, I am all for option D.
>
> Thanks again for spending time on that, it's nice to see it raises some
> interest!
>
It certainly does; I am a HuX Designer gone rouge, and Tails seems the
best fit for my interests, especially since I wouldn't get very far
writing my own, being that I only have experience with web mark up and
'Hello World' in various languages : )
>
> Cheers
>
Thanks for being so cool!
Wordlife,
SpencerOne
