[Design] Design + Usability, Useful + Usable

[hank williams]

On Dec 13, 2007 12:37 AM, Davor Cubranic <cubranic at cs.ubc.ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 December 2007 02:00:29 Mimi Yin wrote:
> > My understanding of the question was: Why use a complicated new
> > widget to do what everybody else uses a simple checkbox for? My reply
> > was that the functionality in Chandler isn't the same as the
> > functionality everybody else uses a simple checkbox for. So it's
> > possible our problem has more to do with providing better visual
> > feedback to more effectively communicate what's different about
> > Chandler overlays.
>
> I started up iCal the other day to see what it's like and noticed that
> its calendar sidebar appears to be very similar to Chandler's sidebar:
> multiple calendars (collections) can be overlaid on the screen, but
> only one is "selected" and new events go into it by default. I haven't
> used iCal enough to completely test this, but are there any significant
> differences from Chandler's sidebar? I'm asking because iCal uses
> checkboxes for choosing overlays and a highlight for the active
> selection.
>

This is indeed the $64,000 question. Mimi seems to insist Chandler is
doing something magical and unique in this regard.

I dont see it. As far as I can tell chandler and iCal  have exactly
the same underlying design in this regard. Chandler just makes it more
confusing - almost seemingly with intent.

Also, iCal does another thing which I have said before I think would
be helpful, which is the ability to hide the information panel on the
right to minimize clutter.

Indeed much could be learned from ical.

Hank