unity-design team mailing list archive

[Jan-Christoph Borchardt <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 4 May 2010 20:20, Diego Moya <turingt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I preferred the old way where
> you used a single precise click to reduce a deafening sound, instead
> of having to wheel down during a couple seconds to achieve an
> acceptable level. This critical case is not well supported by the
> current volume control.

How often does this critical case happen to users that it would
justify having a sound slider present at all times? It is just one
click more.


On 4 May 2010 21:49, Diego Moya <turingt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I've created a mockup for a simple version of the panel with
> per-application settings.
>
> Instead of volume sliders for each application, a tri-state button
> (muted, low, high) can be used to give priority to the focused
> application.
>
> Usually only one application would have high volume, clicking High on
> another application would set the previous focused app to low. This is
> to avoid micro-managing of the panel. But it could be allowed to set
> several applications at High with Ctrl+click, like multiple selection
> in lists.

This is far too complex for normal users and a normal use case.

If you go out and monitor a ton of users, how many will know that a
Firefox sound control also controls Flash apps inside the browser?
They will just use the slider provided by the Flash app because that’s
what is nearby. And if the case happens where they have 20 tabs open
(rarely ever happens for normal users * **) and try to find the guilty
one, they can still use the global control.

* http://dubroy.com/blog/how-many-tabs-do-people-use-now-with-real-data/
** http://mozillalabs.com/testpilot/2009/09/30/test-pilot-ready-to-dig-into-some-data/


On 4 May 2010 22:31, Alex Launi <alex.launi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> What's insufficient about the current Sound Preferences UI? I almost never
> have to adjust application volumes, is this where we should be focusing our
> energy?

I fully agree.