PureBasic Forums - English

Alright I'm the poll guy, not you!
This is a re-post.

But with a slight change.
From a users point of view!

As a programmer, you might want to just satisfy their needs, as a user.. Well, you'll tell me what you'd like to see. This is just to know your preferences and nothing about marketing. For that we already made our own researching.. So its just a friendly poll, dont be afraid!.

Mixed feelings..

Certain apps, like ones that I use ALL the time.. I don't want them pretty.

But some apps, i.e. Spyware Dr. ... live in my tray.. only needs to be
pretty when I 'have' to look at him.

But for programming. Functionality first.. then there is always the
possibility of making it pretty.



- np

But of course, however This time I asked as a programmer, what do you preffer?. Which is what I care at the moment.

I've had some arguments with my brother yesterday morning (hes systems engineer, yet sometimes he acts like he wasnt)... About this exact topic.

My point is, As a programmer I know how everything works (yes, kinda on some topics. You dont know everything and you'll never know everything! just face it), Also I've been working with hardware on a PC service company since I pretty much have memory (yes, start low and begin step by step up to the roof, thats how it was). Now, enough talking about me I don't enjoy that on forums.. Anyway, the point is you just want functionality. And sometimes, something "cute" could be well-designed, not specifically it needs 200MB of bitmaps to look pretty, at least not to me!.

Something that has been well-thought could end up well designed, and thats something you get to see, you can notice that pretty easily. (Although many times when its not about open-sourced applications, you still can notice some very well-thought stuff indeed, although not "internally" speaking).

Basically you don't really need a skin to make something functional. And sometimes enhancing the visual style (they over-do it) brings problems. Just like with anything that was bad designed (graphically speaking now).


Some developers just won't cut it when it comes to graphics, face it!.
But, anyway... What I mean is that you don't really need all the eye-candy.

Now, as an "average joe" you might find the programs more "friendly" if they are skinned and "cute" to your eyes. This average joe does not understand the diference between b (bits) and B (bytes) and rarely cares about his CPU temperature. So, speaking of that.. I don't think they'll care much about RAM usage on a certain process, would they?.

Okey I'm putting them all in the same bag, wrong.
Just a big % of PC users are like that, you can't disagree though.

I'd say.. if you want eye candy, go ask your mom for her MAC!






Other imporant points:

*) It depends about the type of application
*) It depends on the market you're aiming to (pretty much like the above though)
*) Varies between user-groups and age (again pretty similar).

And much more ...



The real point is, and it goes to developers: let the people CHOOSE, always! for EVERYTHING. And yes, if you're afraid of "newbies" touching what they shouldnt, just and simply separate "advanced" items from the others!. Yet, let them choose between SKINNED and NON SKINNED mode!. Yes I know that means extra programming for you, and its pretty boring since what we like to do most is solve problems, develop algorithms and drink coffee. But thats not enough argument for not satisfying your customers boy!.



Let me list some alternative software I use...

For Audio playback I was a full-time Winamp2 user (then winamp3, etc.. until I got pissed off at their memory consumption rates!) Then moved to WMP just to find out the same after some new releases... So I ended up going for the essentials. I personally enjoy FOOBAR2000 for audio playback. You don't need a skin for playing audio, it wont make your audio sound better, trust me. I'd ratter have some built-in ambiental FX supported, than an ugly skin sucking my RAM!.

For Video playback I also had to switch from many applications to VLC.. (even the "skinned" version is light enough to be good).. (well I also have power-dvd at work but thats another story).


For IM I used to have official clients... For example, MSN Messenger... Up to build 6.x it was all nice.. Until they got spammy, addy and crappy with all unnesesary 12yo-lover features. That really wouldnt cut it for me anymore, so I had to try out many clients. ended up using Miranda IM (since its OpenSourced aparently as well) which supports many protocols includding Jabber! and IRC. (yup pretty much like Trillian, but you wont have to support any ads nor pay them for the client that actually sucks as many ram as you'll ever think about sucking with any of your applications! -probably not but .. just over-sizing things a little to make you go "hum"!! - hehe).

For image viewers I was an acd-see customer myself, and got tired of all the "crap" they were adding on each new release, so I just "quit" them and went to IRFAN VIEW... which is a nice freebie may I mention!. (too bad they dont provide some free jp2 encoder...)




Alright I have more to say but I'm quite late so.. Be it later.
But anyway, for anything else I've pretty much developed my own (and thats also what some people might tell you "you dont like it? go make your own!" hehe they dont know you if they are saying that..!)






Notice: I have more ram that I ever used, so thats not the problem.. If you thought about that, you just didnt get the point of all this..

Skins: no, but coloured gadgets: yes.

I think that for some kind of apps, users like skins.

i like the normal GUI interface, because i dont want waste my memory for stuff i dont really need, however it may look the app a bit better ^^

btw, i know skinning only from Windows appz! Is the same thing possible for Linux and Macintosh appz?

Applications should by default stick to the standard default gadget system of the OS, for example, so if the OS has a theme it blends into the desktop, a choice of skinning should be a secondary option.

Users identify with your application quicker if you layout your tools options like simular applications they've used before, and what more alike can you be than to blend into the operating system gadgets that are already there, not not re-invent the wheel.

Skinning is a pointless waste of cpu cycles that could be better spent recycling the image formats the skin is made in, in the recycle bin.

People like skins or they don't, it's up to them. In business, I was always told by corporate clients that extra colours, skins and general 'brightness' only confused their workers and lowered productivity. 15 years ago, I would have agreed with them.

Now, with the average skill level of corporate workers, they can handle extra colours, skins and such without distractions and in fact look forward to it, makes them more relaxed when something day to day looks a little less ordinary and they are far more productive.

This is where you have to conduct surveys as to what people want. A flashy interface will never replace a good, uncluttered interface. You can make a bright, breezy, colourful, skinned application that's useful as well with good planning.

If you have a paying customer and he wants skins, you don't but he's paying the bills, you put in skins. It's simple.

If you are making something for yourself, you do it whichever way you like.

depends on her skin...

dell_jockey wrote:depends on her skin...

Pink, with purple love hearts and polkadots.