On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Joey Morris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rjmorris@nc.rr.com" target="_blank">rjmorris@nc.rr.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Christopher Kerr <<a href="mailto:mythtv@theseekerr.com">mythtv@theseekerr.com</a>> wrote on Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:16:12PM +1100:<br>
<div><div class="h5">> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Joey Morris <<a href="mailto:rjmorris@nc.rr.com">rjmorris@nc.rr.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Christopher Kerr <<a href="mailto:mythtv@theseekerr.com">mythtv@theseekerr.com</a>> wrote on Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at<br>
> > 11:02:48AM +1100:<br>
> > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Yeechang Lee <<a href="mailto:ylee@pobox.com">ylee@pobox.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > Michael T. Dean <<a href="mailto:mtdean@thirdcontact.com">mtdean@thirdcontact.com</a>> says:<br>
> > > > > No, Watch Recordings used the INFO to show info (and *context* menu)<br>
> > on<br>
> > > > > the selected recording. It was changed because many people whined<br>
> > that<br>
> > > > > "Any sane user interface doesn't need 2 menus," so now we have 2<br>
> > menus<br>
> > > > > and an impossible to describe user interface ("Hit MENU, and if you<br>
> > > > > don't see <whatever>, hit MENU, again...").<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > How is this harder to use, or describe, than telling people they have<br>
> > > > to bind two separate buttons and remember what functions appear in<br>
> > > > which menu? Besides, you and I both know that the Watch Recordings<br>
> > > > menu is context-sensitive and will almost always do the right thing.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > > Again, INFO was always for information/context menu and MENU was for<br>
> > > > > "main" menu (i.e. like the one you'd have at the top of the<br>
> > > > > application, versus the right-click/context menu).<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > What Mike says is 100% accurate (and not the revisionist history of<br>
> > > > > those who complained until MENU got changed).<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Please spare us the patented Michael T. Dean passive aggressiveness.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > No, it makes no sense, in an environment with relatively limited<br>
> > > > buttonspace (I have a programmable remote with softkeys, but most<br>
> > > > don't), to have two menus that are completely separate and require two<br>
> > > > different buttons. You were wrong when mythtv-users had this debate<br>
> > > > after 0.22 was released. More importantly, other developers disagreed<br>
> > > > with you; otherwise the change would never have occurred.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > Well, as a user, with no affiliation with the developers: I liked it<br>
> > better<br>
> > > before, too. MTD's analogy between application menus and right click<br>
> > menus<br>
> > > is right on the money - changing the way the interface works does NOT<br>
> > > belong in the same context as altering the details of a specific<br>
> > > recording/video.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > If you use a remote with too few buttons, that's your problem - I'd<br>
> > rather<br>
> > > that you and others didn't ruin my experience to solve your own issues.<br>
> > The<br>
> > > interface was logical, now it isn't.<br>
> ><br>
> > I don't understand the problem with the current interface in Watch<br>
> > Recordings. With a recording selected, INFO gives me the recording's<br>
> > details. With a recording selected, MENU gives me the context menu for<br>
> > that recording. With a group selected, MENU gives me a menu of mostly<br>
> > group-related items. How is this illogical?<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> Because I don't think of that list as being "groups" - I have it configured<br>
> to only display All Programs and program names, not recording groups or<br>
> anything else. As such, moving over to the "Series List" panel to change<br>
> group options makes no damn sense to me at all, nor any of the other users<br>
> in the house.<br></div></div></blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
For someone like me who didn't use MythTV before this change, your<br>
preferred method would be frustrating. Suppose I have a recording<br>
highlighted and I want to access its menu. Logically, I'll hit the<br>
MENU button. But then the Group Menu pops up! What? Oh, I need to hit<br>
the INFO button to see the menu, not the MENU button.<br>
<br>
I'd summarize the two alternatives like this:<br>
<br>
1) Press MENU over widget A to see widget A's menu. Press MENU over<br>
widget B to see widget B's menu.<br>
2) Press MENU no matter where you are to see widget A's menu. Press<br>
INFO no matter where you are to see widget B's menu.<br>
<br>
Do you really consider (1) the illogical one? If so, I think you're<br>
confusing "illogical" with "inconvenient given my usage patterns".</blockquote><div><br></div><div> Except that you've got (2) wrong. It was:</div><div><br></div><div>(2) Press MENU no matter where you are to see a menu of globally relevant options (recording groups, parental filtering and so on). Press INFO over Widget A to see a menu specific to doing things with Widget A. Press INFO over Widget B to see a menu specific to doing things with Widget B.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Now are people seeing my "Application Menu" vs "Right click menu" argument? In Word, I can pull up the File menu any time I like (well, when it had one I could, anyhow). To do something with a specific paragraph, I'd highlight it and right click it to pull up a context menu. See how that's like (2), and akin to how every other application in the universe works? Logical.</div>
<div><br></div><div>- Chris</div></div></div>