Future of configuration usability in TC

[ghisler(Author)]

I don't see the appeal, it's just like searching the help file (ini file section), but without all the explanations - if you don't know exactly what you are looking for, you won't find it. You can see this in Firefox about:config - there are many (unexplained) options, and the only time I use it is when I find some instructions on the Web.

[Lefteous]

2ghisler(Author)
I mostly agree about your statement on about:config - so what can be done about the real configuration UI?

[ghisler(Author)]

It's almost impossible to do - I would need a description for each option, and that in all the >30 languages...

[Lefteous]

2ghisler(Author)
I'm not sure if I understood your last statement correctly. I'm talking about a better usability of the configuration. That doesn't imply that all settings need a description.

[ghisler(Author)]

Well, you also talked about a very long list of all the settings. I don't see how this should have any better usability than the current solution, especially with no descriptions or even context.

[Sir_SiLvA]

It's almost impossible to do - I would need a description for each option, and that in all the >30 languages...

Replace the now config with https://sites.google.com/site/ultratceditors/ultra_tc_editors -> Configuration Editor.
Every setting is explained, you can search.
Since years Im ONLY using this to change any config data for my tc.

[Balderstrom]

I'm fairly sure that every option that you can change in Multi-Commander is available in either the
Explorer Panel Settings

• Display
• Layout (of the File Panels)
• Colors (of the File Panels)
• Mouse Configuration

or Core Settings

• Layout (of the main program/window)
• File System
• Logging
• Misc
• Colors (of the main program/window)

I posted screenshots to the TC 9 thread.

You can also EXPORT/IMPORT settnigs directly from those dialogs/panels. Both CORE and PANEL settings can be open at the same time, as the settings/config open in a TAB.

MC also doesn't force every single dialog to be Modal (although there are a few). Find Files is definitely not Modal.

Haven't there been numerous threads about TC's general usability and configuration over the years? There's never been any interest whatsoever in making TC easier to use or setup/config.

Just like this thread.

Well, you also talked about a very long list of all the settings. I don't see how this should have any better usability than the current solution, especially with no descriptions or even context.

So according to Ghisler it is impossible to make TC's configuration easier.

[nsp]

Well, you also talked about a very long list of all the settings. I don't see how this should have any better usability than the current solution, especially with no descriptions or even context.

Dont you maintain a kind of documentation for each setting you parse/read ?

Even if first version is only english and/or german, you will find some volunters to helps you to translate it !

As suggested by Silva, Ultra TC Editor did maintain a list with desciption and default values... Why can't you find an agreement with the author Taher Salem !

[Lefteous]

I want to drive the discussion to a quite important aspect of configuration usability. The categorization of settings can be done in many different ways. I just want to highlight two.

1) Categorize by program area
2) By element type

To give a practical example. There is a category page called 'Icons' which hosts icon settings for different proram areas. In contrast the 'folder tab' category page offers all kind of settings for folder tabs including settings for tab icons. I don't want to criticize the inconsistency here but just ask what do you think is the best way (if any) to do the categorization?

1) Categorize by program area. In this case all icon-related settings would appear on different caetgory pages like Folder tabs, Filelist, Menu, button bar and so on.
2) Categorize by element type. All icon-related settings would appear on the 'Icons' category page (maybe grouped by program area).
3) A mix of both approaches for a meaningful reason

What do you think?

[MVV]

I think that icon settings for tabs should be moved to Icons page, just another groupbox with Show icons on tabs checkbox and button from Folder Tabs page...

[Lefteous]

2MVV

I think that icon settings for tabs should be moved to Icons page, just another groupbox with Show icons on tabs checkbox and button from Folder Tabs page...

Okay but what is the rationale behind this?
What about the icon settings in button bar dialog?

[MVV]

Well, I don't think that it is possible to group completely all settings by these criteria.

However at least icon display options may be grouped together. Buttonbar dialog has only 'icon size' option that we may want to move to icon settings page... but there also is the 'button size' option that is similar...

[XPEHOPE3KA]

2Lefteous
It's not a mutually exclusive choice, some programs really allow to set the same setting in different parts of configuration dialog.

[petermad]

It's not a mutually exclusive choice, some programs really allow to set the same setting in different parts of configuration dialog.

I think this is for a great part the best approach - users think differently and will instinctively look in different places, so to a certain degree it is good to make at least some options available in different contexts.

"There are many ways to Rome"

[Lefteous]

Thanks for all your comments.

For me creating groups like fonts, icons or colors makes sense when these settings are somehow related and are lilely to be made together. The fonts are probably the best example. To ensure the used fonts work great together it's easier to see them on one page.

Providing settings in a redundant seems to be the best of both worlds but also increases overall complexity (which is I guess one of the biggest problem in TC settings). I have seen approaches where links are displayed between pages pointing to related settings. Maybe this could be a good compromise?