Quote:
posted by Stoepsel
But there is a tendency to stress stylishness over usabilty nowadays, which is a bad thing, I agree. Developers should concentrate on functionality first, then design (as in layout, not software design).
|
I completely agree with you. In fact I even know some people who choose their computers based on the external look rather then the performance and recommendation of past users. That most likely explains why computers have gotten more "cool" looking in the past few years. For software design, I think the layout only needs to be intuitive, rather then pretty looking. I'm sure most of you have used programs that make you go through several confusing steps before being able to do a simple task.
What I mean by that is that some programs are great at allowing most users to figure most of their features without reading the manual. While other programs require you to read the manual in order to just connect or use its basic features. I don't have a problem with reading manuals, but you know that most people won't use a program if they can't figure it out within several minutes. But don't get me wrong I agree with you guys. I definitely would take an ugly reliable stable program over a pretty program that crashes every ten seconds.
Anyhow, now back on topic. I haven't tried 3.0 yet but I'm going to try to when I get the chance. So how small is the selection really? I know right now the purpose isn't to really to use the program for everyday file sharing, but rather to test it and look for bugs. I was just wondering if there are enough files and people using it to "really" test it.