Over the next few releases we have committed to spend cycles revisiting Songbird’s UI. I’ve always appreciated and enjoyed the way Alex Faaborg keeps the community in the loop when it comes to UI changes in Firefox. I’m going to make an effort to follow his lead in the hopes that together we can make Songbird’s new UI the best it can be when it ships.
We want to kick off this project with a request for feedback regarding the layout of the application. We’ve reviewed the feedback that we’ve received from the community over the years and identified a few possible directions that we could take. We would love to hear your thoughts - please let us know which option you prefer and for what reasons. Thanks!
Option A - Rhymes with “My Moons”
- Layout of UI elements are similar to a certain popular media player
- Familiar to those who have used Songbird in the past
- All the important controls are at the top of the window
- Songbird looks like a media player with an embedded web browser
Option B - Designed For Songbird
- Navigation (green) and media controls (pink) are separated to minimize any confusion (eg: previous track button and back button)
- Unified navigation elements don’t change much whether browsing through your library or the web
- Location of the back button is consistent with web browsers and OS file managers
- Songbird looks like a media player and web browser hybrid
182 Comments
Subscribeoption B
all the way. less clutter. easier to use. and helps establish songbirds identity.
oh… and i forgot.
keep up the terrific work!
Option B. Very nice.
Option B looks a lot better to me; though I suppose I might change my mind after using it. I always disliked how the browser controls hid in the shadow of the playback controls.
Probably option a, having the controls at the top is something that definately makes sense to after VLC and I-tunes. Though the address bar for web browsing does look a little more squashed. Still controls at top.
Do not use Rubberducky as default feather option B
I like it to always be able to put in an internet adress to change the view and in addition it finally gets a different look to iTunes. Something I have always missed. Songbird is so much better than what it looked like until now
So definitely Option B
I like B.
Using the web browser portion of Songbird always tangled me up slightly, since I’d have to look for the back button and address bar, thinking it was on the top, when it was really lower! But on the other hand, I can’t help but think if Option B would make Songbird look more like a browser than a music player.
I’d personally have to see it in action, but especially since Option B looks “cleaner” and it gives Songbird its own identity, I’d say Option B.
B is nice
I think A is more practical. The primary use of Songbird, especially as it is more widely adopted by non-technically advanced users, is to be a media player. The basic play\pause controls should be on the top of the window where they appear at first glance since they are the most fundamental and probably most frequently used buttons.
Secondly, having an interface that is similar to the primary competitor’s media player makes users more likely to switch to Songbird , allowing it to gain market share. I wouldn’t suggest this if I think it wasn’t the better choice for the interface on it’s own right.
I’m going with option A. Makes more sense, to me at least, to have the controls at the top.
Option B, I find I use the buttons that are nearer the toolbar most of the time.
I vote B
I think its definitely a good thing to get a different look than itunes, just so the first thing said about Songbird isn’t iTunes copy
B actually looks like it could be similar Miro with the media player controls on the bottom. but it might be a could idea for open source, xulrunner based, web media players to have common designs. that and miro has a very well done interface in my opinion.
I prefer option A, makes more sense for me.
Echoing Option B. I think when it’s all said and done, the difference is minor anyway: It’s still a big media controls ‘box’ and it’s either up at the very top or down at the very bottom. Plus Option B would be a simple but dramatic departure from they way My Moons look
Also, I don’t know much anything about programming, however I get that Songbird should ultimately be lean and mean, so would it be impossible to include these options as a simple toggle? “media controller: top or bottom?”
Either way, take it easy and peace y’all.
I would primarily use songbird as a media player rather than a web browser so I’ll have to go with option A as my preferred layout.
Option B
I really like it. Looks a lot more organised, and gives Songbird it’s own identity.
Efficient and beautiful.
Option A
Option B gets my vote too.
Separation of fundamentally different controls plays an important part in usability design.
That, and it doesn’t look like just another My Spoons clone.
Option A - playback at the bottom makes little sense; would you put your web browser’s navigation at the bottom?
Both are good.
It will be easy to use option B for a browser.
However, I do not like the placement of the button of option B for me. I think that I am hard to treat it in the lower left.
I like option A if I think about the placement of the button.
Option B, reminiscent of MediaMonkey which is my other favorite audio player.
Option A. I’m with Collin, “would you put your web browser’s navigation at the bottom?” I think it makes the most sense to have the controls at the top, whether the controls are for a browser or a media player. All of the text-heavy stuff, e.g. the web page or the media library, should go at the bottom under the controls. When you’re talking about a media player, the controls are the important part, and sometimes you’ll want to look at the library and/or web pages.
Seriously, think about it… the window changes sizes depending on the web page / library, so if the controls are on the bottom the controls are moving around all the time. You want the controls to be in a consistent location so that they’re easy to find in a hurry, e.g. if the music is too loud and it must be paused ASAP!
Both cases (controls on top/controls on bottom) are perfectly legitimate when it comes to software. However, in this case, if the reason for putting media controls on the bottom is to make Songbird look like a media player and web browser hybrid, then someone’s got their head in a hole. It doesn’t do that. It looks like a browser with weird media controls at the bottom and an unexplained iTunes source list on the left. It looks like it’s different for the sake of being different. It does not look like a media player.
But Songbird is a media player. And relatively no one is going to give up their primary browser to use Songbird, so would it make sense to demote the media controls to the bottom of the screen to make the browser more ‘integrated’? Blair McBride made the point that “separation of fundamentally different controls plays an important part in usability design.” Very true, and very important. However you should not assume that the only way you can separate them is spatially. You can obtain that separation visually just as effectively.
Another thing to note is that typically a media player with a currently-playing-focus (WMP, Quicktime, etc.) have controls on the bottom and players with a library-content-focus have controls on the top. I think it would be a poor choice to break this convention.
I prefer Option A because it highlights the primary purpose of Songbird - plays media - while still promoting the secondary use of Songbird - finds and plays media online.
There were a couple of comments to the effect that Option B makes Songbird look less like iTunes. Please excuse me, but that is a stupid motivation for UI decisions. Especially when the app you want to resemble less has a brilliant and successfully applied UI. Songbird should not be a proud copy of iTunes’ UI, but can benefit from the familiarity that the similar placement of media controls provides (less differences = less shock for the new user).
Other concerns:
The search bar in Option A is pink (part of the Media Controls), and in Option B it is green (part of Navigation). Is there a reason for this, and does imply any functionality differences (I assume not, but why else have it in two different categories?). As far as I see it applies to Navigation, and should be illustrated as green in both images. That would involve having a green control inside of a pink area for Option A, but I think it is an acceptable discrepancy since it will be clear to the user that the search bar searches for content, and doesn’t apply to the currently playing media.
In Option B where does the view modes button go?
In Option B the navigation buttons (back, forward, reload, etc.) extend all the way to above the source list, but they don’t have any functionality related to the source list. Option B should be modified to extend the source list all the way to the top, moving the navigation bar further right. I would consider this the biggest offense of Option B.
I assume the icons haven’t been created yet, but both illustrations have two different plus sign icon that performs two different functions on separate parts of the UI. The add playlist button and the add tab button should clearly communicate their functions (by either a distinction in the icon, labeling, or visually tying them to the list of playlists/tab bar.
I don’t mind if it is complex or simple, I have got used to both type of things. All I want is lesser utilization of CPU and RAM. Also capable of managing my 200gig library (Though it is very difficult).
Here, of the two options, I go with B.
Finally some good change in the UI from Songbird! As an open source project you must take the chances that Apple and others are afraid to try! Go with the Option B. Also, please get ride of the black!
Option B looks great to me. Now Songbird can be a great player for music and video. All my favorite video software plays from the bottom of the screen. Just don’t make the play controls so large if they are on the bottom ok? When can I see more finished looking pictures?
I definitely like option B. This design is one reason why I like to use media monkey so much.
The ‘bee’ option seems most sensible to me. In A, the visual impression is that the usable workspace is eaten up by the toolbars, while in B, it seems that you have more real estate for your playlist and stuff. This is of course purely visual effect - the actual space occupied is still the same. And then, of course, there is the “Aubergine” effect - you could hear a lot of people arguing that FOSS is not innovative and copies ideas. Consider this a chance to do it another way - but don’t let the user suffer from this for the sake of being different. I personally don’t need a FOSS version of “LooneyToons” - I hate it enough as it is. I need a secure browser that happens to play my stuff from everywhere, or a media player that happens to do browsing. Both are good enough. But don’t compare with the competitors (in terms of UI) - that doesn’t help. Do it creatively - that’s what matters most.
Hi Ethan-
Thank for your well thought out comments. You’ve surfaced many of the points raised during conversations we’ve had internally that convinced us to gather feedback on the topic from the community.
Regarding convention for where the play button is located on desktop media players, which desktop media player other than iTunes puts the play button at the top left of the window?
> In Option B where does the view modes button go?
The button for switching media views appear directly to the left of the search field.
> In Option B the navigation buttons (back, forward, reload, etc.) extend all the
> way to above the source list, but they don’t have any functionality related to
> the source list.
The source pane (aka service pane) highlights the node that is selected. Hitting the back button will update the content in the content pane which will cause the highlight of the service pane to change - there is a relationship between the navigation and the service pane in this way.
I agree that iTunes is a successful desktop application. I think the product turned out to be successful because the creators of the application designed it by concentrating on addressing specific needs that they have identified, by consulting their own business and product roadmaps, and based on the belief that they could make something better than what already exists.
Again, thanks for the feedback. Please keep it coming.
B is much better !
I’m voting for A. It is a convention and I’m not using Songbird as a browser (except for the music sites that have implemented Songbird functions), I use Firefox 3. As some have said, it makes a little sense for the usability design if the music buttons were at the bottom. I switched from iTunes to Songbird because it felt familiar. As a user, I do not hate iTunes, Songbird just works better for me and my computer (because it is fast and can handle my NAS). It would be a pain to search and scroll for the buttons with my eyes. Now I just look at the upper left corner and finds them there.
I like option B. I like having the controls at the bottom, which is why i love the Goose feathers so much. It also feels a bit odd to have to go to a little hidden away area to browse the web, making it feel like the web browser is a bit inferior (which it isn’t, but it just feels a bit like an after-thought). Integrating the web more obviously is a winner!
I like both, though I do agree with a lot of what Ethan said above. Would it not be possible to have both options as different feathers? I’ve already seen one feather with the media controls at the bottom. .
So I’m torn, I like anything that suggests that Songbird is heading in it’s own direction, and maybe putting the controls at the bottom will turn out to be more intuitive and easier to use, but that needs to be thoroughly tested I expect.
So I vote B, give it a go, maybe release it as an incremental update that can be tested by selecting it specifically (i.e. not putting the link to it on the front page to begin with) for those who want to give feedback.
Either way keep up the good work.
p.s. I also want to second what Vivek said above about lesser use of CPU and RAM. Thanks!
Option A. Make it media player first and browser next. Because we use media player often i need this panel on the top. How about making this configurable
I think i am asking for too much. for option B why we need this browser toolbars always ?
For the moment i think A is better, mostly because it puts the focus on the media player. Also i find songbird too slow to use as my main browser. In the future when things get faster i think option B a browser with a player would be better.
going against the crowd here but i prefer a
i hate having the controls on my media players at the bottom.
maybe you could make it interchangeable and have the option in the options dialogue to have the media controls at the top or at the bottom.
then everyone is happy
Option B forces the user to keep flicking back and forth between the very top and very bottom of the window for his/her two most common tasks.
Moving the media controls into the sidebar with a playlist beneath them and moving the sidebar’s content to a horizontal toolbar (i.e. Fx’s bookmarks toolbar, including how it handles folders) would differentiate them from the web controls without having to separate them. But then that’d squish up the playback bar…
The option A is the one I prefer.
i prefer B,
I would choose Option A, because the eyes of the user are always on the height of the top-line of the display (ideally). When the playback-controls are on the bottom, they’re more likely to be overseen. But option A doesn’t strictly separate browser and player (witch I think, wouldn’t be a bad idea), so the searchbar shouldn’t be in the player-section. The searchbar could be moved on top of the playlists, devices, etc.-list on the left (or whatever this is called
).
Additional idea:
Why don’t you just unify the adressbar and the webpage-section? So the tabbar comes directly under the player (like in option a with the library) and put the adressbar and webpage under it? Then the library can easily be shown without the adressbar.
Regards, Markus
Option A makes more sense to me.
I would say A. Mostly because the browser back-forward -buttons above the left sidebar doesn’t make any sense for me above the left panel. Those buttons is there to navigate the content in the content area not in the left side-panel? For me it doesn’t really matter if the play buttons are on the top or bottom of the window though.
From option B I prefer the Library > Music buttons (just above the tabs) if it’s possible to click them to go higher up in the navigation hierarchy. I love how Microsoft have implemented this browsing in Vista (not sure if they were first so please don’t flame me for that).
I’m a bit hesitant about the left sidebar. I know a lot of people like having the complete file tree as in Windows Explorer, but for me the OS X and Gnome way of having some kind favorites in the left bar instead of everything you can click on is better. I guess there are some issues to work out to get away from the side bar though…
Great work! And great initiative to have mock ups available for comments!
Option B *but* with the playback controls in the toolbar next to the back, forward buttons at the top.
I’d prefer Option A
I’ll go with option B because it reminds me of (how come nobody cited it) WMP (Aahhrghh! Heresy! Die fiend!! - Yeah I know…) where the playback functions are at the bottom.
Sorry to say this but WMP is so far, and as far as I’m concerned, the best player I’ve used. I never could get the hang of iTunes and find it unhandy.
I like the “hybrid” concept as Songbird, all in all, is a media player AND a web browser.
Keep it going folks
Option B:
I think in the daily use option B is much better. For example when you are browsing the web, you will not mix up the controls for the music and the web. When you are surfing a music blog, Songbird will show the songs at the bottom of the window, why should then be the music controls at the top? You can navigate the music much more straightforward when they are at the bottom.
Hope this gets implemented
hello,
i prefer option a because :
- putting the media control bar on the bottom, give the result of separate it from the left column whereas the left column is going to include some extensions that will be linked to the media control in term of usability (like playing a playlist)
- this is a standard that is not only from itunes but also from all the media player (vlc, wmp, winamp)…
Option C (hypothesis):
- Give the possibility of a choice during the installation of songbird
- Separate the elements in different windows like the gimp or winamp.
Hope it would help,
you’re doing a really great job !
bye
I vote for B because sometimes I click on Prev button and it was fordward button :S
Keep on good work
A, it’s more intuition in my opinion. Songbird is for music and internet, not for internet and music.
I’m still not convinced with the UI either way… I’m with Ethan on the problems of Option B, but I don’t like Option A, either… the sidebar and footer still make little sense to me, and I have a feeling that they remain like that because FF and iTunes do it that way… I think Songbird is great but it still has a long way to go on finding it’s UI identity…
Option A. Songbird is a music player and should reflect that, the controls should hold the dominant machine. If I was a new user and I loaded up option B it’d just feel like opening Firefox with FoxyTunes running. Having the player controls near where the embedded playlists appear is more intuitive but having small media controls that pop up near the playlists would work as well.
Option A. I see problems in both, but A is better.
I Prefer Option A, but I’ll admit it could use a little refinement and adjustment. I say A because when I’m using my computer All of my applications have all the important stuff at the top of the screen, also when using songbird and I’m just browsing around websites if I then want to quickly adjust music settings I want it to be quick; so, option a is more efficient for my usual needs as I don’t want to drag my mouse all the way to the bottom of the screen just to make a quick adjustment.
That being said I like the principle behind Option B because I get confused between music and web controls on occasion and so having a more separated control bank for the various elements would be somewhat nice.
Keep up the excellent work guys, Songbird just keeps getting better!
big fat A here !
If I was an Itunes user, with no consideration for open source at all (what most people around me are) and I had a look at the current songbird, I’ll say “Oh, a black skin of Itunes” (I’ve already heard it actually), and I’ll find no good reason to switch, since I already like Itunes.
But If I see something which can compete with Itunes in features (obviously) and which can browse the web as well (obviously), then I’ll surely give it a try !
So I am with B !
I’m really split on this one.
On the one hand, I spend a lot more time browsing the web, with my music player minimised to the taskbar (and sometimes the system tray). Option B would then be more practical for me, so long as there was an auto-hide option for the media player controls. Besides, I’m one of those weird people who has the Windows taskbar up the top of my screen.
On the other hand, when I *am* using my media player, it’s nice to have an interface I already know and am used to. Problem is, I’m used to various media players. When I’m using Kubuntu, Amarok is my main player. Option B resembles that more closely. When I’m using Windows, Winamp is currently my main music player (if only to transcode music to my Samsung K3), and Option A resembles that more closely.
And because there are always 3 sides to any story, couldn’t the feathers (or whoever codes them, not me xD) allow playing around with the XUL to create an alternative UI anyway?
Personally, I’d prefer a more modular interface so I can move things around the way I like it, just like the Winamp 5 Modern interface before the Bento skin.
I really like Songbird the way it is, but looking at those diagrams makes the UI look really crammed. Option B is not only easier on the eyes, but it would also make those who aren’t as ______ as some of us less confused.
I prefer B
I like the hierarchy thing it has to it.
I’m not sure about option B, is a little bit confusing for me that music controls stay at the bottom of the screen. But I think that it’s a different idea, that with a more work could be something insteresting. Because in actual state it’s only the same thing just only en the oposite side.
Meanwhile I’m fine with option A.
I’m going with B here.
I’ve never been much of a fan of Your Moons. :p
Option C.
Giving access to web controls within the library looks a bit out of place. Since Songbird plays back the media web, why not find a way to integrate web controls directly within the media controls toolbar and position it at the top of the window (hence giving the media role of the application more importance) ?
I believe Songbird should look more like a media web player and not a full-fledge web or file browser.
Option B is good since it would help define Songbird’s UI identity and make for a more refined user experience. The layout should be the same whether browsing the media library or the web.
My Moons’ UI has some strong points, but it also has it’s limitations. I believe you can come up with an even better solution!
That would mean proposing an option c …
B.
You could even put the main controls on the right (where righthanded useres woul d find the naturally)
Mike
I vote option B. I heard a lot of good ideas from some other users so in no way do i think one is a 100% win but i feel like B is heading in the right direction.
option b, all the way! :p
My vote is absolutely option B! It feels cleaner and simpler. Also, I almost never use the play controls, I just click the track, so controls don’t need to be at top.
I never want to use My Moons, hehe, ever again. Songbird should do its own thing and find its own voice. That means to do things like changing layout if need be. No matter what you do, stop copying.
B’s a bit confusing for new people.. so I’d say A
Definitelly Option B.
Differentiate from “My Moons” and make navigation easier. It’s a win-win.
Option A!
While B might look nicer, all that mouse travel would piss me off :/
Option B!
Whoa - so many comments in so little time. Thank you!
Another point of clarification - in option B, the navigation at the top of the window are not specific to web browsing. The back button, forward button, and the refresh button apply to any type of content that is being displayed in the content pane. For example, hitting the refresh button in context to a podcast would update the podcast. Another example is if you were to navigate from your music library to the Amazon Music Store and then to a playlist, you would be able to click the back button a couple of times to return to your music library.
Just as food for thought - if we were to make the decision to closely resemble a popular media player, what position would Songbird be in if that media player went through a drastic redesign similar to how iMovie and iPhoto were redesigned in a drastic way last summer? Would the UI be effective/timeless enough that it would make no difference or would Songbird’s UI look like yesterday’s news?
I’d go with option A, it doesn’t make sense to have the media player controls at the bottom since songbird is a media player and those buttons are used the most. Also, a similar layout makes migration from other players easier. Maybe some form of firefoxs layout customization could be added.
Option B
Fantastic work, gang. Option B!
Option A for me. Songbird is media player first, so put them on top. That doesn’t mean that some changes couldn’t be made, not that I can think of any off the top of my head. Good work guys.
Option A.
I have been using WMP 11 since it was in public beta and while I initially had no opinions about its UI, I now realize that having the playback controls at the bottom really slows things down. It’s one thing when you’re just playing a single song in mini-mode or something when all you need are prev, pause, and next song buttons, but when you are looking at an entire library, it is very disrupting to have playback controls at the bottom of the screen. In my own opinion, I think that one of the things that Apple gets right is designing simple and intuitive interface designs that anybody can use without any previous experience.
Simply, I think it would be a very unifying design choice if you allowed BOTH layout options. This might require an overhaul of the feathers manager, but it would make both parties on either side of the fence very happy.
I prefer Option A, but Option B is better on the eyes because I often look down, so I don’t have to have my head up to control music.
Option B. Definitely.
Option B and make it toggle-able.
also, if you decide on B then please include a small “minimize”-button so the whole control-bar can be minimized to save screen-space.
maybe also a hotkey that to do that and to temporarily eclipse all other “unnecessary stuff” as well. like the TAB-key in Adobe Photoshop does…
just my 2cts…
I think option B runs the risk of Songbird looking like a browser with a music player bolted on. Putting the media player bit at the bottom implies that it is less important than the browser, in the same way that the status bar in Firefox is less important than the address bar.
I think this means I’m voting for A.
Option B, although I support the suggestion that an option or feather add-on should exist to move the entire media bar to the top for those that prefer it that way around.
Ola Lindberg mentions the Windows Vista file explorer navigation method and removing the left sidebar. If one could navigate the entire hierarchy from the navigation/address bar, wouldn’t the left sidebar become redundant?
Maybe a few extra “home” buttons would be needed to jump people straight to their library, devices or playlists (or else find some other intuitive way to swap between the “address bar” and “naivigation bar” modes). The sidebar could then become optional like in Firefox and the back/forward buttons would be more clearly associated with the main content pane.
option B…but both are good
I like option b, but I don’t like the idea of having the media controls on the bottom of the window. It reminds me too much of WMP (which I don’t hate). Because sometimes you need to resize the window or whatever. I think that a combination of a and b would be best. (Option b with the media controls on the top.) Here’s a picture of it (I just moved some of the elements of option b around using an image editing program) Lets call this Option C: http://beyondosd.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/option-b-20080502-21.png
It would be nice to be able to choose either way. If that’s possible, the question of which would be the default option still stands.
If Option A looks like iTunes, Option B looks like Windows Media Player. It’s impossible not to look like some other media player and both mentioned have significant user bases.
The most valid arguments are based on ease of use and I think Option B is slightly better. Still, I think the browser/navigational buttons should be moved to the right, aligned with the web page(s). Put the search field above the “explorer” tree instead, perhaps?
i vote for a, because it feels more natural wirh the playback controls at the top.
But i think something like the sidecar feather does would be better.
Here you can see a screenshot:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/addon-screenshots.songbirdnest.com/public/screenshots/399/sidecar-20080214.png
Option B.
For some reason, it gives me the sense that the search bar is both for music AND the internet. I also like having the progress bar and controls at the bottom because when i have apps up that aren’t fullscreen, I tend to put them at the top of my screen, which would block those buttons. Also, coming from WMP, I’ve gotten use to controls at the bottom. They don’t seem to steal focus in my opinion, which is good if you’re watching videos.
I like Option B the best. To have the browser and the player options far from each other, makes it more friendly.
Option A. I just like how it looks, sure it may be a rip off of iTunes but really the only thing I like about iTunes is it’s UI.
Option B
After looking at the mockups and reading all these comments I have to say it seems obvious, well to me anyways, that Option B is the right choice for the default look. It’s distinct and functionally interesting, I like how I can have an easy way to navigate between stuff in my library. Since I’m constantly switching playlists I think a nav at the top that would allow this would be handy.
Option A!!!!!!
For sure Option A
Option B !
I couldnt agree with Ethan more.
I prefer ‘A’ all the way.
Ethan has put across my thoughts exactly here http://blog.songbirdnest.com/2008/05/02/request-for-feedback-option-a-or-option-b/#comment-8387
Songbird is first and foremost a Media Player. The controls of which should be up the top of the Library and not hidden underneath.
We shouldn’t be concerned about looking like “my moons”.
This will make it easier to gain market share through ease of migration.
In any case, after some use of Songbird, the differences grow when you realise just how much more Songbird has incorporated over “my moons” not to mention the add-ons!
Craig
Option A
I vote for option B,
My favorite Songbird Feathers are Goose, and that’s pretty similar to Option B, so I’ll go with B. Also, I prefer to have the controls at the bottom.
As an afterthought to my comment above, I’ve always been frustrated by the situation where I’ll go browsing a website, then wanting to change the song that’s playing, I’ll click on one of my playlists, only to realize I’ve lost my web page because the playlist grid took it’s place. If we go with Option B, with the whole concept of wanting to separate media and web functionality, could we also try to address this issue ?
I prefer option A because the botton
Personally, I prefer Option A since I’ve always used Songbird as a media player replacement purely - never for its browsing capabilities.
That said, I understand that Songbird has always wanted to make its own little niche in a hybrid media player/browser market. I recall one of the lead devs referring to iTunes as a “Spreadsheet with music”. If that’s the opinion the dev’s have of iTunes, why are they even contemplating using it’s UI?
Option A, because: “All the important controls are at the top of the window”
Option B for sure!
Although I always liked the Windows Media Player style (that is, more like option B), after reading Ethan’s comments I think A suits Songbird better.
An issue with B that I think was not already brought up is the weird placement of the browser status bar: a status bar is usually at the bottom of the window, but as Songbird’s status bar currently belongs to the browser exclusively (you might want to change that in the future), this common concept doesn’t really make sense. However, the placement in the current wireframes for B makes it look as if the player controls were belonging to another window below the status bar (because status bars symbolise “lower end of window reached”).
A frequent, yet-to-be-solved problem with design A (at least for me) is that the browser arrows (back / forward) look so similar to the music arrows (previous / next). I think what would help would be a clear colour separation between music controls browser and browser controls (make music white and browser black and call it “Piano”).
Option A
B.
Having the media controls at the bottom vs. the top: Alright, sure, fine–but just steps more towards WMP than iTunes, right? What about a movable media controls?
Having the navigation and the location all in the basic section, without it popping out of nowhere just for website tabs: Perfect perfect perfect perfect perfect.
gonna have to go with A b/c songbird is a media player first and a web browser second.
@kberg:
“You could even put the main controls on the right (where righthanded useres woul d find the naturally)”
Right-handed users don’t naturally look to the right for main controls. Right-handedness/left-handedness doesn’t affect screen navigation the same way it would real-world interaction. Where you look on the screen and in what order depends strongly on your culture and what language you speak/read. Western English speakers will begin at the top-left corner naturally, while Arabic speakers will likely begin at the top-right. When looking at an unfamiliar web page people tend to start in one corner and work their way in an X shape from corner to corner. I imagine the same would be true for someone looking at a new application for the first time.
B, but i want the option to change. or try other ways i.e sidebar or having a button to switch between, I guess that the default option should look like a media player.
@komi:
As far as a drastic iTunes redesign, I don’t work for Apple or have any inside knowledge, but I’ll eat my hat if iTunes’ UI goes through a change like iMovie ‘06 to iMovie ‘08. Apple and innumerable other companies have adopted the iTunes layout for other applications, as it is a very simple and thoroughly proven UI. I’m pretty confident that is not something to worry about.
But I don’t think Songbird should look like iTunes, and I don’t think it should look different from iTunes. The point is not whether Songbird looks like iTunes or doesn’t look like iTunes (except for the argument of familiarity for people going to Songbird from iTunes). The UI of any application should be created by thinking about what the application aims to accomplish, what the UI needs are in order to accomplish that, and designing something that fulfills those needs. Nothing new there. So what should be done about Songbird’s UI? Don’t assume all of iTunes UI accomplishes Songbird’s goals. And iTunes UI definitely doesn’t address all of Songbird’s functionality (thus the current differences). So it is not a decision between making Songbird the same layout as iTunes or making it something unique, but rather building something that really accomplishes what Songbird is meant to be. (This is mainly for other commenters, as komi and the Songbird team are definitely already onto this).
Also, please no one say another word about copying iTunes UI. Nothing in this process has anything to do with copying. The issue of copying is rarely a valid concern when it comes to software. When you make software you do what works. It doesn’t matter if someone else has already done it. It’s not copying, it’s doing what works. Hopefully along the way you innovate a little bit (though this is not absolutely necessary in making great software). And if you do, guess what. Someone else is going to come around and “copy” your innovation. Because it works.
Back to the UI:
“> In Option B where does the view modes button go?
The button for switching media views appear directly to the left of the search field.”
Ah. It (appropriately) isn’t in Option B illustration 2. But it is in Option A illustration 2. I assume that it would be disabled unless looking at the library/a playlist.
About the service pane and the navigation controls: I see how they are related now. I suppose it could be either way, but I personally would prefer it side-by-side, since the relationship is kind of loose. Visually it works better the way it is, but organizationally (and for simplicity’s sake) I like side-by-side. Just my thoughts.
Anyway, I would like to see the UI start off with Option A and work it’s way into something more specialized for the different features Songbird offers over iTunes. Maybe the browser in Songbird shouldn’t be thought of in terms of a browser in an application (whi