Future of configuration usability in TC

[Lefteous]

What will be future of settings and customization in TC? The internal configuration lacks many functions or is hardly usable. For this reasons other developers have created alternatives. But what is next?

1) Internal configuration will be improved
2) TC offers some interfaces for better integration of such addons
3) It stays as it is now forever

What do you think is the best way? What else could be done?

[nsp]

What will be future of settings and customization in TC? The internal configuration lacks many functions or is hardly usable. For this reasons other developers have created alternatives. But what is next?

1) Internal configuration will be improved
2) TC offers some interfaces for better integration of such addons
3) It stays as it is now forever

What do you think is the best way? What else could be done?

I did try to evangelise for TC since many years and most difficult part is the learning curve to have a well configured environment. TC is considered as old school and IT specific tools at first look !
So yes TC should offer some better interface for configuration but the most important is to have more detailed documentation with Template or sample.
// Multi Commander have a nice way to integrate configuration tabs
The missing part is also to have bundle with some pre-configured plugins pack. (Christian Ghisler should manage with plugins author how he can propose/ distribute some plugin pack.) Another solution is to organize it through the forum but TC should propose a pack/bundle management all in one install with icon, menus, tools, plugins... and user commands sample templates

[ghisler(Author)]

Sorry but overloading the configuration with even more options is certainly NOT the solution, especially when you complain that it is already now too complex.

[Lefteous]

2ghisler(Author)

Sorry but overloading the configuration with even more options is certainly NOT the solution

This thread is more about a general direction on how to evolve the way TC is configured - not about how and how many settings are presented to the user.
I don't think anyone would request even more overloading of the settings dialog.

[nsp]

Sorry but overloading the configuration with even more options is certainly NOT the solution, especially when you complain that it is already now too complex.

This is probably too complex because no precise documentation expose ALL the parameters (with use cases) Some interesting features are just hidden in the ini file and not exposed unless you dig a lot in the forum and/or completely analyze the history.

The configuration UI is incomplete and not really easy to use (no search, no tag,...) and the look and feel is not as fancy as newest software.

[j7n]

A search function across the entire Configuration dialog would be great, while keeping the layout of it similar to how it is now. After I have not used the program for a while I tend to forget where the option I need was exactly. Definitely do not reduce the dialog to a boring list or table just because we have search. Use checkboxes and radio buttons where apropriate. Maybe Settings could be enlarged slightly (not to the extent of modern web2.0/metro style), or some pages merged or rearranged.

Mockup of the dialog with search, still with old school look and feel.

And how it's done in Reaper.

We can repeatedly search through the captions of all controls. A red frame zooms in over the control that matches our query. If no more controls match, the Find button changes to a ':(', self explanatory and no need to dismiss a message. On mouse over on a control (regardless of whether a search was performed), a short explanation is provided on the usually blank space at the bottom.

ALL rarely used parameters could be presented as a searchable list, with a short hint explaining what each setting does (if it's not obvious). In this case you don't need to redesign the dialog whenever you add a parameter.

[Hacker]

All,
As Lefteous explained, this thread is about the default settings of TC, not about the settings dialog. (I misunderstood Lefteous there as well.)

Actually I was wrong, nevermind.

Roman

[Lefteous]

It really seems I didn't explain well what what is thread is about. So here is another try.
Over the users (including me) requested better internal ways to configure the program. Christian didn't show too interest in improving the usability of the configuration. These are of course mainly dialogs - sometimes it's just opening a config file in Notepad. So the problems I see are:
1) Not optimal usability through selection of settings. It's not about adding more but about adding the right ones and removing less important.
2) Not optimal usability because of questionable categorization of settings
3) Not optimal usability because of interaction problems. A few examples:
3a) Packer dialog - removing items is not really straight forward
3b) Custom field tooltips - single line instead of list
3c) The worst - Menu editing is just opening the config file.
3d) Button bar config - just weird interaction

But what is this thread about?Well it's about what to do with the fact that configuration usability is not optimal and I'm not sure if this a top priority but I really think something must be done about this.
1) Internal configuration usability will be improved
2) TC offers some interfaces for better integration of configuration addons, like clicking the edit button in menu config opens decent menu editor and after editing TC reloads the menu.
3) It stays as it is now forever


2Hacker
I really don't know why you think that is thread is about default settings

[Hacker]

Lefteous,
Sorry then, I misunderstood again. It was because of this sentence:

This thread is more about a general direction on how to evolve the way TC is configured - not about how and how many settings are presented to the user.

I understood it as "the thread is about how TC is configured [by default], not about any configuration dialogs".

Roman

[Lefteous]

2Hacker
I hope it's clear what I mean now and hopefully others agree that there rooom and need for improvement.

[ghisler(Author)]

So which options do you miss in the main settings dialog?

I don't really want to remove any, this would lead to a lot of negative feedback.

[nsp]

So which options do you miss in the main settings dialog?

I don't really want to remove any, this would lead to a lot of negative feedback.

I miss some advanced option like "SpaceMovesDown", "RestricInterface", "WatchDir"...
I also miss a way to set redirect section more easily and also a way to have more than one usercmd.ini file ...

But the really missing feature is searching/filtering like what you can get in eclipse preference page.

I also miss a way to get direct link between an option and the ini file parameter correspondence in a kind of debug mode. But this is probably out of topic.

[Lefteous]

2ghisler(Author)
I think many settings haven't been added not because they are not important but because they have been added later. So there was no space to squeeze them into the existing pages. I think this is not the right priorization.

Things in the config dialog which don't have to be there:
I think the thumbnail settings are a good example. The operations for packing the database are something that doesn't have to be there. I think moving them to a "clean" menu item would make sense.
Or the zip settings. I imagine something like a list of packers and a configure button. I mean - you can still configure your favorite packer in the packer dialog. Such things are clearly secondary. One primary level page saved.
Another thing is the 'tab' and 'custom column'. If we trade standard and custom views simply as views we could present a list of views and a few general options on one page and configure all view-specific stuff on the view-specific dialog. Another primary level page saved.

So I'm not really voting for removing them but to move some stuff to a lower level or even out of the main dialog.


So for me the right strategy would be (in order to get more settings in the settings dialog without overloading it):
- I think the main settings dialog needs an extended categorization.
- Move secondary settings to secondary screens (see example above)

[Samuel]

IMO there should be a fully flexible and searchable list with several filter options and additional descriptions for each configuration entry.

The list would contain columns like "category", "sub category", "name", "value", "default value". A description could be displayed below the list when an entry is selected. Each configuration entry could be classified as standard or extended configuration entry. Extended configuration entries could be hidden with a checkbox by default.

This would make this many wincmd switches useable for more people. It would also solve the "there is no room for this new and really handy configuration entry"-problem.

[Lefteous]

2Samuel

a fully flexible and searchable list with several filter options

That would be great. For me this would be the replacement of direct ini editing.

It wouldn't solve the current usability issues though.