I've been going through my system, and gradually eradicating mousestrokes. Just yesterday, i finally managed to get my head around the last of the important keybindings in Conkeror, my now default web browser. This effort comes with a sense of accomplishment, but i've been asked recently why i do this, and why i'm so passionate about it.
The mouse, as a tool of use, has inherent limitations, for those of us who compose, input, edit. record, etc., using a computer.
It's too slow and tough on the body.
Now that might seem horrifying to some, but it's a fact we suffer from using the digital rodent day in day out. In earlier times, when musically related apps weren't dual use, that is they relied on the mouse for mainly navigation, there wasn't the same awareness of injuries that could be sustained from using a mouse all the time. Most apps in the commercial world pay lip service to keystroke users, and at least 2 of them offer no alternative at all, so we're getting setup for injury as a result.
Whether it's a commercial decision or not (adding keybindings to a programme isn't glamorous), the end result is we're seeing more and more users suffering from distressing conditions like RSI, and Carpel Tunnel Syndrome, among others. For a musician, this is a life changing state of affairs. We batter ourselves enough as it is, with constant practise and playing, both activities that share the potential for injury brought about by sustained use.
So why make it worse, when a default perspective of mouse AND keybinding options would go some way to alleviating this potential for harm?
It frustrates me to add up the excuses i've heard over the years for this omission, and i've been fortunate that so many linux developers.....get this, and try their best to do both. There's still a gap, although it's nowhere near the frankly ludicrous parsity of options in commercial apps. (How a developer can build a great set of actions for one editing process, then expect the user to take their hands off the keyboard, use the mouse to navigate and then go back to the qwerty, confounds me. It's up to them i guess, but don't dare call the app professional, because it isn't.)
So how can developers add to the quality of their apps, with a clever and intuitive keybinding framework?
I offer the following suggestions, and i'll do this over more than one blog. So here's the first.
1.) Navigation.
When navigating in an app, it seems all to easy at a development level to rely on the mouse to get from A to B. And this seems ok at the time, in a codewriting environment, where the dev will add a feature to be navigated to, and expect that using a mouse will cover the user sufficiently. The coder generally tries this a few times, and thinks it's ok, and successful, which in this context it is. The challenge arises when the user will perform that navigation action not a few times, but hundreds or thousands of times, in an editing session, to use an example.
Consider an audio track, into which the user is placing wavs. He's under the pump, with the client due through the door in the next day or two, and has a lot to finish. He might click on the mouse several hundred times to position wavs in a single track, and adjust them in the timeline. and that's before he starts editing each wav. Then, if the user wants to do an A/B comparison between wavs, he's clicking furiously to go between them, trying to listen at the same time, distracted by the relative position of the mouse, and most importantly, performing both gross and fine movements with the same set of muscles repetitively for long periods.
That's 1 track.
Chances are, he's got a lot more than that.
A colleague of mine, who does mainly drum editing, has learned to use a mouse in either hand, because after an hour of constant use, he's in pain, and has to swap hands. He has no choice, because the app that provides him and his family with a living, has no intuitive navigation coded in, and the mouse is the only option. This does not make sense to me at all, as adding keybindings to an app would surely be an assett for fulltime, or heavy users, and they're generally the ones who offer the most experience in suggestions for improving the quality of an application, in it's ACTUAL use.
For midi editing, keybindings are paramount, and any app that leaves them out, or relies only on the mouse for navigation in a midi sequencer, for example, does so at the peril of hearing less than complimentary remarks about their app. Midi editing is intense work, with a lot more editing to do, per bar, per track, and the idea of using a mouse to input notes, or get from one note to the next, is a workflow killer of enormous proportions. The home user, who might write a few bars a day, or week, may never notice this, although the accumalative effect on their hands and arms is just as significant, over a longer period of time. Any more than that, and the effects are felt quickly, and just as frustratingly, inhibit speed of workflow, something one needs when the client is due, and the bills need to be paid.
It continues to surprise me that some coders don't get this, with comments like "you can't use keybindings for everything", and "how often are you going to use this action?"
There is no reason, imho, why an application can't be built by default using a complete set of keybindings to cover every action, not only for an editing or inputting command, but navigation too. we have a list of tracks on one side of the screen, and selection of wavs to be included on the other. two actions, one for each "block" to handle gross navigational movements, and then further, generic actions to deal with navigating "inside' the block. I've heard the first reason so many times i've lost count.
The second is even easier to deal with. If we use a single action once a day, or once a session, it's not the only one. Add to that more "light use" actions for other commands, or actions. That one action is then 20, or 100, or more. A collection of single or light use actions soon adds up, and the user is then back to square one. Heavy mouse use, and potential for harm over sustained use. And we don't all use a programme in the same way, or the same way at different times in the A to B to C process of creating, recording, editing, and mastering. An action that isn't used in the creation mode, might suddenly get called into heavy sustained action in editing mode.
It makes sense from a practical user perspective to include keybindings for every action performed in an app. Imho, the coder should "practise' with his new code forcibly excluding the mouse at all, to do anything. coders should plug into, and draw from user experience, after all, we're the chaps who will use the app, and either sing its praises, or use something else.
With a keybinding menu from which the user can "create" their workflow, assigning the limited number of qwerty keys and combinations to those actions they will use, the application gains strength from this inherent flexibility, and a reputation for being adaptable for a much wider range of users. Users being who they are, particularly in a community based philosophy like Linux, will compare "keysets", and swap ideas and suggestions to help each other. I've already seen this happen, and been, and continue to be, enthusiastically involved in this process.
After 2 years in Linux fulltime, i'm a little wiser as to some of the challenges, many of my own making, through lack of knowledge, or my enthusiasm for user error.
But after over 30 years of writing music, including using music based applications for creating in a box, from the inception of this process, i have a greater understanding of workflow, particularly as i've been doing it for a living for that time.
I can still find no reason why apps shouldn't be constructed with a complete set of keybindings, for every action, totally mouse free. This aspect of working in a computer fulltime continues to mystify me, and the reluctance of some devs to acknowledge the inherent wisdom in supplying a great feature that will further enhance their application.
It's frankly clumsy, and frustrating, to go from qwerty to keyboard and back again, many many times in a session. Add those sessions together, and that frustration becomes permanent to the point of looking for something else to use, that isn't frustrating. I'm not lazy at all, and more than willing to build a great keyset according to how i work. I can't afford to be complacent about this, as my living depends on it, as it does other users who work fulltime, or for long periods of time.
My new browser, Conkeror, is a treat to use. It's one answer in the never ending quest to crush the use of the rodent, and have a much faster, more productive, and pain and injury free journey. I'd happily recommend it to others, who are willing to put in a bit of time and effort learning the keyset. It's not hard at all. (and thanks to the Conkeror devs who made this possible. It's appreciated.)
Musical production and creation applications tends to be more complex than a browser, that's fair. But with a comprehensive and COMPLETE menu of actions, for which the user can build an individual and personally suited keyset, that complexity ceases to exist.
Keybindings aren't glamorous, or "cool', but they are essential when the glamour or cool wears off, and the user gets down to, well, use.
More to come.....
Alex.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Saturday, October 31, 2009
24 hours with Ubuntu?
It's a rather amusing, and somewhat ironic start here at tuxical with a blog to respond to another blog.
A few days ago, a bbc journalist (technical) called Rory Cellan-Jones posted a blog on the BBC, called "24 hours with Ubuntu". The response has been....enthusiastic, to use a politically correct term. Far from eliciting just warm, fuzzy, derisory, and contemptuous noises from microsoft acolytes content in the assumption they KNOW what all of us want, and with the tone of the piece rather dismissive of Ubuntu, adding further ammunition into the gleeful feeding frenzy that accompanies any OS vs. OS debate, Rory found out the Linux community is alive and well, articulate and thoughtful, much larger than he assumed, and in full intelligent voice when highlighting the attributes of not only Ubuntu, but Linux more generally. You can read the original blog here.
What's more surprising from the comments to Rory's blog is the wide and varied user base that have plugged into the Linux journey. Even more surprising is the number of ordinary users that jumped in to add their enthusiasm, and recount their own stories of setting up Linux on their own computers, as well as those of friends, families, and colleagues. Several posts were from business owners and employees, who's operations were entirely based in Ubuntu, or another derivative of Linux.
As a fulltime linux user who's run the course of Ubuntu, Debian, Suse, and settled on a self built kernel and Gentoo with Fluxbox, i know most of the plusses and minuses of using Linux for writing music, and recording, fulltime, and based on my own workflow. There have been challenging moments along the way, a lot of testing, and a real sense of achievement, as my own skills grow.
But my view of ordinary desktop use of Linux was always going to be somewhat removed, as my requirements excluded much of what constitutes an "ordinary desktop."
I wonder if those who view Linux through the eyes of historical assumption realise just how far the desktop has progressed in Ubuntu, and distros who list a desktop version in their portfolio.
As the blog grew, it dawned on me that apart from complex games, a genre yet to be exploited in Linux, there's every chance that ordinary user is going to enjoy their linux desktop journey, and in many cases, exceed previous workflow expectations.
Ubuntu 9.0.4 Karmic Koala is arguably the most complete desktop linux package Ubuntu has built. In this release, they've strengthened the framework, and added a lot of little features and components that were previously missing, and a source of minor irritations for the average user. The BBC blog is replete with success stories for this build, to a much higher percentage than has previously been the case, and if one were to objectively consider the success percentage compared to other operating systems, it's my view that Ubuntu has......arrived.
Many linux users will say this has already been the case for some time, and that's true for those of us who enthusiastically work on their own systems, and know where and how to solve any challenges, with a large degree of self help riding on the back of our own ever increasing skillset and knowledgebase. For the average user who simply wants to "plug and play" this is not always the case, nor do most want to know and understand their system to this degree.
So the Karmic Koala release is something of a defining moment, giving those average users a real step up in using a linux based system without the hassle of having to learn something outside of daily desktop use. It's my view they'd benefit from learning something new, but it's their choice.
More importantly, imho, is the point about install options, and the ever growing number of hardware manufacturers who are taking up the Linux flag, and selling computers with Linux pre-installed. For most computer users, the idea of installing their own operating system represents a step too far, and can be the difference between "will i try this, or not?" There are now 4 computer manufacturers who offer Ubuntu as an alternative to buying a computer pre-installed with windows. That's real progress in my view, as the commercial pressure on hardware companies who dare to step outside of monopolistic expectations of exclusivity can be considerable, and it could be seen as an act of courage by these companies to take a step in a new direction. It's a rather sad state of affairs that HM's go through this, and our society is so overwhelmed by this ruthless business model, particularly obvious and well documented in the case of Microsoft, but alternatives are gaining ground, however slowly and surely.
This blog was also important in that it highlighted the inherent difference in psychology between users who have paid the Microsoft tax, and users who took the plunge and installed opensource.
In days of yore, OS vs. OS debates would have been predominately bloody and messy affairs, with many casualties on all sides, including common sense, and fact.
This time, i noticed a sea change in the presentation of Linux, and what seems to be a far more articulate enthusiasm from those enjoying the benefits. There's far less of the "RTFM Noob" attitude, and a much greater collective sense of responsibility across the community in support of opensource alternatives. Correspondingly, the responses from most MS users and supporters seems to be pretty well the same as before, quickly degenerating into personal insults, and out and out fabrication of "facts" in what seems a desperate attempt to justify their own fiscal choice.
This was highlighted like never before with this news about Microsoft's own Best Buy Employee's training plan. Read it here.
A clumsy and seemingly desperate exercise in propaganda that would be more suited to a third world dictatorship, than a responsible commercial entity, professing to be on the side of users.
The general tone of this would indicate a positive move for Linux in general. In past years, Linux was all too quickly dismissed as a "Geek's" operating system, and never got much time or effort from commercial operators. Now, there is an air of fear and desperation in commercial circles as they suddenly and somewhat belatedly realise that Linux for the desktop has caught up, and the previous propaganda liberally spread as "fact" no longer holds water, with a growing number of ordinary users.
That MS spent money on this latest nonsense is an indication that times are changing but they're not, reverting instead to the ruthless suppression of competitors, as has been their business model since the day they sprang into life.
Most importantly for the average user is this.
There was a time, not that long ago, where the idea of microsoft as a company ceasing to exist would have had enormous consequences across the planet. This is no longer true.
Users, hardware manufacturers, etc., have a choice, and although any transition would have some degree of distress involved, it would be relatively short lived. Despite the what seems deliberate attempt to dumb down societies, human beings are, after all, inherently adaptable, when they need to be.
On top of this is a massive, global, opensource community who have, and would, step up to the plate, imho, to ease new users into a new environment. I think we underestimate our fellow man sometimes, and in this case, it would be wrong to assume the world would.. "end" for many, simply because one company stopped functioning, or in microsoft's case, got fined out of existence for disreputable business practises.
It would be fair to say that windows and osx get a disproportionate amount of publicity from organisations like the BBC. Not surprising when one considers the potential benefit their journalists are likely to get from large corporations willing to "donate" in the neverending drive to maintain constant public view. Rightly or wrongly, the BBC, like other public broadcasters, seems to be something of a special case, as a product getting airtime here could be said to be more........ "credible".
This is patently untrue in the blog Mister Cellan-Jones wrote, as he seems to be incapable of installing extra software from a programme designed to do just this, however easily it's presented. The title "BBC tech journalist" seems to be all too easily earned in this case, and certainly falls far short of the standard set by other BBC technical journalists, like Bill Thompson.
There are those who generously assume that RCJ wrote his blog in haste, as he was heading on holiday, and didn't have time to do a better job of appraising a Linux based desktop alternative.
I'm not so sure about this, as both he and others know that once the blog goes up, the die is cast in the reader's eye, and the idea he seems to be pushing is that Linux has somehow to "match" windows in desktop use, instead of considering that the reverse might already be true.
Whatever the viewpoint, it can no longer be safe for the BBC to so obviously apportion time to examining these options based purely on their own, and sometimes paid for, perception that one commercial product deserves more airtime than another, or in our case opensource offering. With the relentless takeup of Linux across Europe and beyond, by governments, and large commercial organisations interested in getting much better value for money, the BBC runs the risk of appearing more biased in their presentation, and increasingly isolated in their unflinching support for commercial entities to the current level.
Finally, i wonder why reporters continue to make the assumption that everything must automatically be compared like for like with a windows desktop. There's a lot of attributes and features in a Linux based system that windows doesn't have, and don't get mentioned for this reason.
Why?
Are tech journalists and reporters so dumbed down, so corporate sponsored, or retain so little objectivety in this modern age, that the idea of exploring and highlighting a new feature, or a better version of a not so new feature, outside of their preferred or paid for environment, is beyond them?
more to come.....
Alex.
A few days ago, a bbc journalist (technical) called Rory Cellan-Jones posted a blog on the BBC, called "24 hours with Ubuntu". The response has been....enthusiastic, to use a politically correct term. Far from eliciting just warm, fuzzy, derisory, and contemptuous noises from microsoft acolytes content in the assumption they KNOW what all of us want, and with the tone of the piece rather dismissive of Ubuntu, adding further ammunition into the gleeful feeding frenzy that accompanies any OS vs. OS debate, Rory found out the Linux community is alive and well, articulate and thoughtful, much larger than he assumed, and in full intelligent voice when highlighting the attributes of not only Ubuntu, but Linux more generally. You can read the original blog here.
What's more surprising from the comments to Rory's blog is the wide and varied user base that have plugged into the Linux journey. Even more surprising is the number of ordinary users that jumped in to add their enthusiasm, and recount their own stories of setting up Linux on their own computers, as well as those of friends, families, and colleagues. Several posts were from business owners and employees, who's operations were entirely based in Ubuntu, or another derivative of Linux.
As a fulltime linux user who's run the course of Ubuntu, Debian, Suse, and settled on a self built kernel and Gentoo with Fluxbox, i know most of the plusses and minuses of using Linux for writing music, and recording, fulltime, and based on my own workflow. There have been challenging moments along the way, a lot of testing, and a real sense of achievement, as my own skills grow.
But my view of ordinary desktop use of Linux was always going to be somewhat removed, as my requirements excluded much of what constitutes an "ordinary desktop."
I wonder if those who view Linux through the eyes of historical assumption realise just how far the desktop has progressed in Ubuntu, and distros who list a desktop version in their portfolio.
As the blog grew, it dawned on me that apart from complex games, a genre yet to be exploited in Linux, there's every chance that ordinary user is going to enjoy their linux desktop journey, and in many cases, exceed previous workflow expectations.
Ubuntu 9.0.4 Karmic Koala is arguably the most complete desktop linux package Ubuntu has built. In this release, they've strengthened the framework, and added a lot of little features and components that were previously missing, and a source of minor irritations for the average user. The BBC blog is replete with success stories for this build, to a much higher percentage than has previously been the case, and if one were to objectively consider the success percentage compared to other operating systems, it's my view that Ubuntu has......arrived.
Many linux users will say this has already been the case for some time, and that's true for those of us who enthusiastically work on their own systems, and know where and how to solve any challenges, with a large degree of self help riding on the back of our own ever increasing skillset and knowledgebase. For the average user who simply wants to "plug and play" this is not always the case, nor do most want to know and understand their system to this degree.
So the Karmic Koala release is something of a defining moment, giving those average users a real step up in using a linux based system without the hassle of having to learn something outside of daily desktop use. It's my view they'd benefit from learning something new, but it's their choice.
More importantly, imho, is the point about install options, and the ever growing number of hardware manufacturers who are taking up the Linux flag, and selling computers with Linux pre-installed. For most computer users, the idea of installing their own operating system represents a step too far, and can be the difference between "will i try this, or not?" There are now 4 computer manufacturers who offer Ubuntu as an alternative to buying a computer pre-installed with windows. That's real progress in my view, as the commercial pressure on hardware companies who dare to step outside of monopolistic expectations of exclusivity can be considerable, and it could be seen as an act of courage by these companies to take a step in a new direction. It's a rather sad state of affairs that HM's go through this, and our society is so overwhelmed by this ruthless business model, particularly obvious and well documented in the case of Microsoft, but alternatives are gaining ground, however slowly and surely.
This blog was also important in that it highlighted the inherent difference in psychology between users who have paid the Microsoft tax, and users who took the plunge and installed opensource.
In days of yore, OS vs. OS debates would have been predominately bloody and messy affairs, with many casualties on all sides, including common sense, and fact.
This time, i noticed a sea change in the presentation of Linux, and what seems to be a far more articulate enthusiasm from those enjoying the benefits. There's far less of the "RTFM Noob" attitude, and a much greater collective sense of responsibility across the community in support of opensource alternatives. Correspondingly, the responses from most MS users and supporters seems to be pretty well the same as before, quickly degenerating into personal insults, and out and out fabrication of "facts" in what seems a desperate attempt to justify their own fiscal choice.
This was highlighted like never before with this news about Microsoft's own Best Buy Employee's training plan. Read it here.
A clumsy and seemingly desperate exercise in propaganda that would be more suited to a third world dictatorship, than a responsible commercial entity, professing to be on the side of users.
The general tone of this would indicate a positive move for Linux in general. In past years, Linux was all too quickly dismissed as a "Geek's" operating system, and never got much time or effort from commercial operators. Now, there is an air of fear and desperation in commercial circles as they suddenly and somewhat belatedly realise that Linux for the desktop has caught up, and the previous propaganda liberally spread as "fact" no longer holds water, with a growing number of ordinary users.
That MS spent money on this latest nonsense is an indication that times are changing but they're not, reverting instead to the ruthless suppression of competitors, as has been their business model since the day they sprang into life.
Most importantly for the average user is this.
There was a time, not that long ago, where the idea of microsoft as a company ceasing to exist would have had enormous consequences across the planet. This is no longer true.
Users, hardware manufacturers, etc., have a choice, and although any transition would have some degree of distress involved, it would be relatively short lived. Despite the what seems deliberate attempt to dumb down societies, human beings are, after all, inherently adaptable, when they need to be.
On top of this is a massive, global, opensource community who have, and would, step up to the plate, imho, to ease new users into a new environment. I think we underestimate our fellow man sometimes, and in this case, it would be wrong to assume the world would.. "end" for many, simply because one company stopped functioning, or in microsoft's case, got fined out of existence for disreputable business practises.
It would be fair to say that windows and osx get a disproportionate amount of publicity from organisations like the BBC. Not surprising when one considers the potential benefit their journalists are likely to get from large corporations willing to "donate" in the neverending drive to maintain constant public view. Rightly or wrongly, the BBC, like other public broadcasters, seems to be something of a special case, as a product getting airtime here could be said to be more........ "credible".
This is patently untrue in the blog Mister Cellan-Jones wrote, as he seems to be incapable of installing extra software from a programme designed to do just this, however easily it's presented. The title "BBC tech journalist" seems to be all too easily earned in this case, and certainly falls far short of the standard set by other BBC technical journalists, like Bill Thompson.
There are those who generously assume that RCJ wrote his blog in haste, as he was heading on holiday, and didn't have time to do a better job of appraising a Linux based desktop alternative.
I'm not so sure about this, as both he and others know that once the blog goes up, the die is cast in the reader's eye, and the idea he seems to be pushing is that Linux has somehow to "match" windows in desktop use, instead of considering that the reverse might already be true.
Whatever the viewpoint, it can no longer be safe for the BBC to so obviously apportion time to examining these options based purely on their own, and sometimes paid for, perception that one commercial product deserves more airtime than another, or in our case opensource offering. With the relentless takeup of Linux across Europe and beyond, by governments, and large commercial organisations interested in getting much better value for money, the BBC runs the risk of appearing more biased in their presentation, and increasingly isolated in their unflinching support for commercial entities to the current level.
Finally, i wonder why reporters continue to make the assumption that everything must automatically be compared like for like with a windows desktop. There's a lot of attributes and features in a Linux based system that windows doesn't have, and don't get mentioned for this reason.
Why?
Are tech journalists and reporters so dumbed down, so corporate sponsored, or retain so little objectivety in this modern age, that the idea of exploring and highlighting a new feature, or a better version of a not so new feature, outside of their preferred or paid for environment, is beyond them?
more to come.....
Alex.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
