Hi,

One thing that we can learn from Gnome (from their mistakes) is that some of their ideas are pretty good when you actually understand why they've done them but almost always come across as 'oh no Gnome are stripping out features again - why on earth did they do that?'.

For example when they removed the split-pane view from nautilus i hated it, but if it had been explained why they'd done it & that they'd made the 'create a new tab & tear it off' thing easier to use as a better alternative then I wouldn't have been so annoyed. As it was after a while of using it i did discover that 'tear off a tab' thing and thought it was pretty good - better than split-pane!

Whenever Google make changes to their web apps a pop-up appears saying what's changed. If Gnome had done something to say 'this has changed - here's why it's better and how to use it' then i wouldn't have hated the removal of split-pane from nautilus at all. With the potentially massive changes to System Settings coming WAY in the future is it worth considering having some kind of pop-up/slideshow etc that runs when that application is first launched to show why the new design is so good & how to use it, or a pop-up with a link to a web page saying 'if you want to know more about the changes to System Setting click here'. Gnome have now introduced a 'product tour' thing that launches after first boot to show you how to use Gnome shell and other core Gnome features - it's a bit late, it would have been more use when Gnome shell was first released.

Should we avoid making the same mistake & have something ready to demonstrate the clear benefits of any big changes the moment those changes are actually made??

Isn't it a question of good documentation? Or rather marketing...

Kind of, bit I'm sure that whilst I was thinking 'why have they removed the split-pane from nautilus - what we're they thinking!' it WAS documented somewhere that they'd done it for reason 'X' and it was better because of 'Y'.

I was thinking that it could make big changes less controversial & more easily accepted if we could say upfront 'it has changed but look, this is better because of this, this & this'.

Your suggestion goes in the same direction of what many of us have been advocating for for quite some time now (but never got to actually design and implement it yet).
While an overall tour might not work so well (remember Windows had that in many earlier version, and what people did was usually make it go away as quickly as possible), in-place tours/tutorials which are very small and very specific would make sense.
Actually I've blogged about the topic over a year ago: http://sessellift.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/ad-hoc-tutorials-offer-help-instead-of-warnings/

So, yes, I'm all for providing little ad-hoc tutorials showing people how this new thing can benefit them, but only when they are actually using it.

Colomar,

What i had in mind for massive changes was just a nicely designed screen or two (or animation or video - whatever) that would highlight the advantages of the changes (like if we went from the existing SySe to Anditosan's one), it could say 'look how great it is, you can do this with it now' or 'you can do the same thing in half the time' or something so that people are totally aware of what it's advantages are over the old system & might accept it more.

When other changes come along then smaller, easily digestible pop ups saying this is new would be great as long as there aren't too many.

Several Android apps I've used also have very similar features (primarily launcher/home screen replacement apps, but also a few others that I've used).
The first is that when started the first time they will present a series of slides describing the various features of the app at a high level. They usually have around 3-5 slides (much more than that and you are getting to the end of the user's attention span), can be dismissed easily enough.
The second is that when activating certain features they will provide this sort of mini-tutorial that you describe where the screen is dimmed and they highlight and annotate various elements to show you how it works. Sometimes the app will expect you to walk through the tutorial and actually perform the actions, but I don't think that helps very much.
Either feature may be reused when the app is updated to present any changes made.

I think each feature has its place: the slides provide a high-level overview of various features, and the mini-tutorial provides a more targeted feature demonstration.
I really like the idea of Implementing such as they would provide for very polished experiences and very smooth transitions. It also gives developers/designers the chance to show off new features, possibly demonstrating to the user a new way of doing things that they are now more likely to pick up.

A mere mortal, i.e. end user, steps into the developer's den... with a few random thoughts.

By some strange quirk of fate changes invariably seem to happen at "the worst possible time".
As a user I don't want my work interrupted "right now"; no matter how much benefit there may be... later, more convenient time, that's just fine.
A <insert your expletive> off user, is something you really don't want.
Damage prevention is the order of the day, not damage limitation...
There is no such thing as "an average user", I empathise with the difficult choices developers have to make.

First run of an application in which you wish to draw attention to "the benefits of change"...
Small unobtrusive message window which does not grab focus, remains until dismissed (or simply times out), directing the user to, for example, "Help > 'New Features', ('What's Changed', or some other suitably title.)"
Such a sub-menu below "Help" would remain there as a brief introduction/guide to anything the developers wished to draw attention to.
Then, as a user, when I find my "favourite / best / most used / whatever" feature has changed, at least I would know where to look for an explanation.

There are undoubtedly many other ways of achieving the same thing...
But hey! Boys and girls, don't interrupt my work in the process, keep it subtle, discreet, low-key...

Thanks of course for the effort you all put into development.

metzman wrote:There are undoubtedly many other ways of achieving the same thing...
But hey! Boys and girls, don't interrupt my work in the process, keep it subtle, discreet, low-key...

Thanks of course for the effort you all put into development.

That's true, of course!
Have you seen the AQndroid features mentioned by airdrik in action? If so: Did you find them too obtrusive or discreet enough?

colomar wrote:Have you seen the AQndroid features mentioned by airdrik in action? If so: Did you find them too obtrusive or discreet enough?

No, I've not seen that in action, and reading a description is not the same as actually seeing it...

My (emphasise "my") gut feeling is, too obtrusive. Now this is the problem, I am but one user. Others, will disagree strongly / moderately / not at all, with me.

Interestingly, if somewhat belatedly, I've just read your blog post referred to earlier in this thread. From which I see you are fully aware of the importance of "striking the balance".

One thing I would suggest, if the chosen route is a type of "ad hoc tutorial", which I quite like (in general terms) the idea of; then enabled by default is fine but there should (I'd go as far as say must) be a global option to disable it.

Quoting from the penultimate paragraph of your article...

In a blog article, colomar wrote:... If they removed it on purpose, they probably know what they’re doing and just dismiss the offer to be shown how to get it back. ...

Again, I'm speaking from an entirely personal perspective... yes, I would dismiss the offer, probably accompanied by the odd expletive ...
Yeah, check-box definitely required ... "Show Mini Tutorials"

As with so many things, the bottom line is you're dealing with a hugely diverse range of users...

metzman wrote:

colomar wrote:Have you seen the AQndroid features mentioned by airdrik in action? If so: Did you find them too obtrusive or discreet enough?

No, I've not seen that in action, and reading a description is not the same as actually seeing it...

My (emphasise "my") gut feeling is, too obtrusive. Now this is the problem, I am but one user. Others, will disagree strongly / moderately / not at all, with me.

Of course, but every feedback from users we can get is valuable. That's why I asked

Interestingly, if somewhat belatedly, I've just read your blog post referred to earlier in this thread. From which I see you are fully aware of the importance of "striking the balance".

Of course I am. I'm no amateur at this, you know?

One thing I would suggest, if the chosen route is a type of "ad hoc tutorial", which I quite like (in general terms) the idea of; then enabled by default is fine but there should (I'd go as far as say must) be a global option to disable it.

Quoting from the penultimate paragraph of your article...

In a blog article, colomar wrote:... If they removed it on purpose, they probably know what they’re doing and just dismiss the offer to be shown how to get it back. ...

Again, I'm speaking from an entirely personal perspective... yes, I would dismiss the offer, probably accompanied by the odd expletive ...
Yeah, check-box definitely required ... "Show Mini Tutorials"

As with so many things, the bottom line is you're dealing with a hugely diverse range of users...

A global checkbox probably won't be enough. I am convinced that even for advanced users, those tutorials would be helpful for features they would not have discovered or understood otherwise. The problem is: How do we know whether someone already knows a certain feature? Many users may have found the Windows Tour useful the very first time they ran Windows. However, usually one (re)installs Windows a whole lot of times on several machines, and as early as the second time they see it, that tour is of no value to people.
Therefore maybe a way of telling the system "I already know all applications currently installed on my system with all their features, thank you" could be helpful, which would still show the tutorials on completely new applications or features once they come out.

colomar wrote:Of course I am. I'm no amateur at this, you know?

Oh come on now ... I didn't for one moment think you were... (Yeah I saw the "tongue")

A global checkbox probably won't be enough. I am convinced that even for advanced users, those tutorials would be helpful for features they would not have discovered or understood otherwise.

I'm unable to share your conviction on that ... (my way of thinking) ... For a quick overview an advanced user would probably go for the "Release Notes", coupled with intuitive design and prior knowledge that will likely be more than adequate. More information if then needed, coming from the applications documentation / wiki / website / user group etc.

I see this type of feature being of greatest benefit to the new / casual, and intermediate level users. Having said that, I still learn the occasional new thing about software I've used for some considerable time.

The problem is: How do we know whether someone already knows a certain feature? ... Therefore maybe a way of telling the system "I already know all applications currently installed on my system with all their features, thank you" could be helpful, which would still show the tutorials on completely new applications or features once they come out.

You don't of course, and this is more reason for being particularly careful how anything like this is implemented. What you envisage and intended as a helpful feature mustn't carry the risk of being perceived, wrongly, I hasten to add, as patronising / annoying / whatever... To give an example of that, there are (they will remain nameless) certain Firefox extensions, which, whenever there is even a trivial update 'helpfully' take you to the authors website.
Controllability is of key importance, how that is ultimately best achieved I'm unsure of.

Unfortunately, until such time as more end users, preferably from a wide spectrum of types, give constructive feedback / ideas most developers are left second guessing... To be fair to them, I believe they mostly get it about right. I'm happy to throw in my "2 cents worth", but until you've got a few thousand dollars you'll still be guessing; and generally only know when (from the users viewpoint) you've got it wrong

My original thought was for a massive changes.

Like when Amarok 1.x changed totally when it became Amarok 2.x, from what i remember, that change wasn't very popular, Maybe part of that was that the changes were misunderstood, maybe no-one really appreciated how much of a 'work in progress' it was - either way having a quick, simple way of communicating quickly and easily to all users why the changes were better, where the changes were going or even just 'bear with us - it'll get better' may have reduced the resistance to those changes.

IF System settings does end up being overhauled as is being suggested elsewhere on this part of the forum then that too will be a massive change and the motivation behind my suggestion was to reduce the inevitable resistance by finding a way of communicating with users.

metzman, my thought was more for the really big changes that are likely to be when you install the latest version of your chosen distro, i don't think in that situation 'I wouldn't want my work interupted' is an argument (although it might be with a rolling distro). If there was a massive change to a program (like a completely new workflow) and you didn't know how to use it then wouldn't a pop-up or whatever giving you a rough idea of where to start actually make it easier to get on with stuff than having to search Google to work out what to do??

@ken300
Whilst understanding the points you make, I can only really answer these two from my own perspective. Please take into account that around 90% of the time my PC is used for "work" rather than "play".

ken300 wrote:metzman, my thought was more for the really big changes that are likely to be when you install the latest version of your chosen distro, i don't think in that situation 'I wouldn't want my work interupted' is an argument (although it might be with a rolling distro).

I would never update to the latest (distro) version without having first taken a good look at the final release candidate. If there were "really big changes" then it's very unlikely that I would upgrade until I knew how those changes were (possibly) going to impact upon my work.

If there was a massive change to a program (like a completely new workflow) and you didn't know how to use it then wouldn't a pop-up or whatever giving you a rough idea of where to start actually make it easier to get on with stuff than having to search Google to work out what to do??

Likewise in this scenario. I don't wish to offend anyone here, and as we are discussing a hypothetical application, then what I would say is this. If, " ...a massive change to a program (like a completely new workflow) ... " occurred, then I would seriously doubt whether I should have been using that application in the first place.

On a more general note, a few more thoughts. Personally I believe that users should be directed more towards "self help". It shouldn't be Google that's your friend, surely it's the "F1" key. More use of (Menu) options such as "Getting Started", "What's New". Better use of tool-tips in conjunction with "What's This". Implementation of "Help Levels" perhaps, whereby the user is progressively able to reduce the level of hints / pop-ups / help to better suit their own knowledge level. Couple these with good intuitive design and a well designed GUI and you have the recipe for a satisfied user, be they playing games or earning a living.

Whilst I consider myself to be a fairly advanced user, I'm not beyond requiring help at some point. If of course it's a type of application I've never used, then I too become a "Beginner".

Whilst I don't really like quoting specific applications as examples of the good, bad, and ugly... I'll make an exception, both digiKam and Gimp are complex applications that have been around for some time and had their fair share of changes; both have IMHO a good help system, it's not intrusive, it's there when needed, context sensitive help is particularly good in Gimp.

As I said in an earlier post ... It's not an easy call to make... No matter what you do, someone "ain't gonna like it"...

Drifting off-topic: Personal, "pet hate", "worst thing", "don't do it" ... The use of the preposition "My", as in "My Documents / Pictures / Etc" (Brick Bat to digiKam, following an earlier Boquet)

@metzman: Don't worry: Knowing us at KDE, I'm certain we'd add a "turn off all tutorials" function

What I'd want to avoid, though, is that users for whom the feature is actually useful would turn it off completely just because they are annoyed by the tutorials for one particular application.
That's why I said that a global switch would not be enough. The optimum situation is that each user gets exactly the information they need. If a particular user (you, for example) does not find any tutorials anywhere useful, that user should not get any. An "all or nothing" approach would not get us anywhere close to that situation for all those users whose preferences are somewhere in between.

And of course we also need more and better ways for users to actively seek information. We could do much better on that front. The problem is probably that writing documentation isn't particularly fun for most people. That's why few people do it in KDE, because nobody gets paid for it.
We do have the userbase team, though, and they do a good job. Userbase is just not integrated into most applications, so users have to find that resource first. We have to improve that situation.

colomar wrote:The optimum situation is that each user gets exactly the information they need. If a particular user (you, for example) does not find any tutorials anywhere useful, that user should not get any. An "all or nothing" approach would not get us anywhere close to that situation for all those users whose preferences are somewhere in between.

Yes, I was beginning to head in the same direction... to quote myself from a couple of posts back.
"On a more general note, a few more thoughts. Personally I believe that users should be directed more towards "self help". It shouldn't be Google that's your friend, surely it's the "F1" key. More use of (Menu) options such as "Getting Started", "What's New". Better use of tool-tips in conjunction with "What's This". Implementation of "Help Levels" perhaps, whereby the user is progressively able to reduce the level of hints / pop-ups / help to better suit their own knowledge level. Couple these with good intuitive design and a well designed GUI and you have the recipe for a satisfied user, be they playing games or earning a living. "

The problem is probably that writing documentation isn't particularly fun for most people. That's why few people do it in KDE, because nobody gets paid for it.

Who co-ordinates documentation? (Tentatively raising hand in the air...)
Edit: OK scrub that... Just found it. http://userbase.kde.org/Tasks_and_Tools