Hint: make it easily configurable.
Otherwise, you get to irritate 40-60% of your users.
Hint: make it easily configurable.
Otherwise, you get to irritate 40-60% of your users.
The survey says nothing about how strongly folks hold that preference. I may prefer Schwepps Ginger Ale, but I'm not going to be irritated when offered Canada Dry instead. That "40-60%" number is a ceiling, not a floor.
The reasoning seems sound though. Where there is no strong user preference, consider making it configurable.
The only way you find out how irritated people would be without the option would be to piss them off.
Emacs is nothing like Eclipse. If anything, I would compare Eclipse to Vim: bare bone its useless, with plug-ins its just too big and unstable.
:)
Those users who like the sane defaults can just stick with them. Those users who don't like those defaults can use the configuration options to fine-tune their experience.
IMO sane defaults and extremely detailed configuration go against each other. The detailed configuration makes it impossible to find the option you want.
I don't think one is particularly superior to the other, and every configuration option is another thing to test, making sure everything else window related renders properly. Also every configuration option is another thing to confuse users with.
I would much prefer a single well thought out consistent interface than a "build your own" grab bag.
It's also why I stopped using Gnome (and in fact, Ubuntu all together). But I suspect I was never their target user, and that's OK. If they can make it easier for more typical computer users, good for them, and they should stick to what works.
IOW, the configuration is important even if there is a preferred side.
:)
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/06/gnome-tweak-tool-move-win...
Options are a cost, are the user going to be irritated or just have a few laugh at their muscle memory for a few days (that was my reaction when I switched window control position from gnome to unity)?