Re: Focus on Infusion

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Focus on Infusion
by Shawn Gordon on Friday 15/Jun/2001, @22:32

The interface paradigm is not unique to Outlook, nor was it invented with Outlook and overall it makes sense in an application that has categories and functions. However the "look" of Aethera is nothing like Outlook, whereas the "look" of Evolution and Infusion are almost identical clones of Outlook.

If you don't like our "pretty" picture, you can dismiss it by closing the dockwidget that it is part of :).

Related Links

·   Articles on KDE PIM
·   Also by Shawn Gordon
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Focus on Infusion
by no-control on Saturday 16/Jun/2001, @00:01

So what you're really meaning when you say 'look' is the artwork?

What I'm talking about when I say 'look' is how the interfce is laid out, and I think (as you agreed) it is fair to say that Aethera's interface looks like the Outlook one (albeit with different pictures) - even if Outlook didn't invent this paradigm.

http://www.thekompany.com/projects/aethera/images/aethera-mail.png

Take away the bar thing with the mail gfx at the top, give it a normal windows like theme, I would suspect that it looks rather like Outlook.

Plus I'm still not sure I can see the similarity with Evolution's graphics and Outlook's. Evolution's do look so much nicer. I do know that Evolution's menu layout were copied directly from Outlook's, but is this a bad thing? I don't really think so.

And I am glad you can remove the ugl^h^h^hpretty pictures, it just annoys me when I have to, because I always think I shouldn't have to. But at least you can remove them, which is always something :)

Not that any of this matters, in the long run. I don't care if it looks like Outlook or if it doesn't, just that it does what I need it to with the minimum of fuss.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Focus on Infusion
by Chad Kitching on Saturday 16/Jun/2001, @03:11

Paradigm? Are you in marketing, by any chance, Shawn?

Aside from segregating the contact list, notes and mail capabilities into separate sections, I fail to see any real distinction between Aethera, Infusion, Evolution, or Outlook. And to be quite honest, I get a whole lot more from something like Magellan or Outlook that doesn't enforce the segregation of the different elements because it means I can turn off the left-side toolbar, free up screen space and work just as efficiently as someone who heavily uses that toolbar.

So, Shawn, how exactly is your "look" different from Outlook, whereas Evolution and Infusion are clones of Outlook? From my perspective, and apparently from the perspective of a lot of other readers, Aethera is just as much a clone as all the rest.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Focus on Infusion
by Shawn Gordon on Saturday 16/Jun/2001, @03:50

I've been programming for 22 years, the word paradigm comes up a lot and is descriptive.

Look at the flat panel layout of Outlook and Evolution. Does Aethera look like that? No, it does not. The UI has been further modified but is pending our rewrite of the current UI code, which is about 6 weeks away.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Focus on Infusion
by Chad Kitching on Saturday 16/Jun/2001, @05:04

The word paradigm has been abused for years to mean just about anything, most people don't even realise what it really means. I've come to loathe the word as it is thrown around with all the rest of the garbled technobabble that populates so many press releases and "journalism" today.

Either you mean flat panel as in the graphics used, or flat as in the panels are unmovable in Outlook. Either that, or I still don't know what you mean. I know it's probably not real flattering to be called a clone of another interface, but from my perspective, arguing against this seems to be more of a distinction without a difference. I could just as easily say Aethera is a clone of Netscape Mail, Outlook Express, Groupwise, etc. The point is, it's not a drastic departure from the standard e-mail client look, and there are very few clients that are (Eudora Light 2.0 for Windows 3.1 springs to mind, and perhaps the UNIX command-line "mail").

Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to belittle you or your project, but it just seems that maintaining that you're not a clone of Outlook while everyone else is, seems a little silly, when functionally your UI isn't all that different from theirs.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Focus on Infusion
by John on Monday 18/Jun/2001, @12:05

Who gives a rats ass anyway. There's only so many ways you can present mail and a folder tree.

There's very little difference in the look of most modern cars these days too. And consequently the features list, customer experience ( drivability, power, economy, etc ) are more important that the overall look.

So long as it works well, is intuitive, stable and fast, and meets the needs of its targeted customer base, then it's in!

John

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"Njaard was simply NOT designed for Europe." -- Nikolas Zimmermann
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.