Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Blog post by soapdog on Sun, 2007-05-06 20:56

The idea today is to compare and comment on popular network preferences apps. I'll pick Mac OS X, Windows, Zeta and Linux and comment on what we can learn from each and think about how can we design a successful network preferences application for Haiku. I will not focus on the eye candy or widgets, the focus is on the user experience and features.

Lots of shots of different OSes and some opinions by yours truly.

Mac OS X - Network Preferences Application

Mac OS X uses an unified preferences application like the one in Zeta. This application is called System Preferences. Mac OS X uses different applications for setting network preferences and setting network services.

Main Status Display

The MacOS X network preferences application starts displaying a window with a summary about your adapters and their status.

Points of interest:

  • Location selector: On the top of the window one can see the Location selector. This is used to create and manage the current profile being used. One can have as many profiles as he wants, this is specially good for users that use mobile computers and need to switch from networks often. Example of use of profiles is storing settings for home, work and school network.
  • Show selector: This allows you to select what is displayed on the unified preferences application window, you can select individual adapters and show their properties for editing. You can also select port configuration that allows you to enable or disable a given adapter (or change their order of importance).
  • Adapter list: This shows a summary about your current network adapters. It shows the adapter name, some useful info on the adapter such as current IP or wifi network that he is a currently connected and a little colored icon (green - working, red - not working, orange - disabled). Double clicking an item on this list will display it's properties for editing or check.
  • Configure button: The same as double clicking an adapter or selecting it thru the Show selector, it changes the window to the property editing one and allows you to manage your stuff. Pretty obvious for power users but normal users actually like buttons like that.
  • Disconnect button: Quick and easy way to disconnect the selected adapter.

The idea of a simple network general status view such as this one is very good for it allows you on a quick glance to understand what is going on, for example check if the IPs are being handled correctly by the DHCP server. As one can see there's a lot of redundancy on this window. The colored icon just supports what is being displayed on the info text on the adapter window. There are three different ways to access the properties for a given adapter (show selector, configure button, double click the adapter), this can lead to confusion, I personally don't like the Show selector.

Ethernet Settings Display

This is the network adapter properties editor window. It can be accessed by double clicking an adapter on the adapter list, selecting it from the Show selector or clicking the Configure button. As you can see the profile manager (Location selector) and the Show selector both keep being displayed and just a portion of the screen changes.

Points of interest:

  • Tab panel: Using tabs for splitting the different family of settings is nothing new but when used correctly can lead to good organization and improve the overall user experience.
  • Configure IPv4 selector: Here you can set if your connection should be set using DHCP, static ip, bootp. Depending on your selection the text fields below become editable or not.
  • Renew DHCP lease button: Quick and dirty way to request a new ip from the DHCP server. This button is hidden if the Configure IPv4 selector is not selected for DHCP. Grouping common needed actions in easy to find and access buttons is a good idea.
  • The fields for editing IP, Gateway, DNS and search domain, all become editable or fixed depending on your previous choices.

MacOS X TCP/IP tab panel is a very elegant and easy to use one. Things are on sane places, I like it but again, advanced users will feel that some features are missing for example editing Hosts info.

Linux (Ubuntu Dapper)

The Ubuntu shots were provided by a friend of mine, my linux box crashed. His linux is localized for portuguese, I'll translate where necessary.

Talking about Linux is always a difficult thing because there are so many ways to do anything. What I will talk about here is the way to set network preferences using the Gnome network preferences app that is bundled in Ubuntu which is a popular Linux distribution that is attracting lots of switchers. Since our focus is on the normal end user experience, this panel is probably the one that new Ubuntu users will meet first.

Gnome Network connections

Just like the case above, the first thing we see is a summary with info about your adapters. Gnome allows you to have different profiles for your network connections, you can select different profiles using the Local selector.

points of interests

  • Local selector: Just like with other popular systems, Gnome allows you to have different profiles, you can manage them by using the buttons next to the selector. I find it strange that the default name is empty in this shot, maybe, if you haven't added more than one profile, the thing is empty, I think that is ugly.
  • Tab panel: Grouped in different tabs are popular network setting families, one for DNS (unique DNS for all adapters?!), general settings, connections (the one being displayed), machines.
  • Property button (propriedades in portuguese): clicking this button pops up the property editor for the selected adapter.

The connections tab (conexões in portuguese) shows a summary on your adapters. It shows the method for configuring the adapter but nothing more, no IP info. I think it could be better. If you want to manage or check the properties for a given adapter, you can simply click the properties button.

Ethernet Settings

Gnome network preferences application will pop a new window for the ethernet settings. You can see the settings are the basic ones, the ones that you actually needs. I think that leaving the IP and gateway fields editable when you select DHCP is bad practice.

I actually don't know what the "roaming mode" does, I know what roaming is, but what this setting does I don't know.

You can see that you have features such as setting the machines on the main tab panel. This is very useful for setting up a home lan IMHO.

I don't like it popping a new window, I like when prefs apps work as a single window unit.

Windows XP

Windows XP uses a centralized place for the user to find and manage his computer settings, this place is known as the control panels. If I start talking about the windows control panel, I'd stay here forever, so let us just focus on the network side of the thing.

This is what you see as soon as you get to the network and internet connection preferences. I find it very confusing. Let us jump to the ethernet status, details and properties.

 

after selecting the desired adapter, Windows XP will pop up a new window with a tab panel displaying some useful info. If you want to change anything you're supposed to click the properties button.

The property window is really non-intuitive and not friendly. I don't want to talk much about windows for this is not the path I plan to choose and I don't think there's nothing on windows control panel that I'd like to use. I've included this on this article just to show how bad implemented preference applications can really spoil the end user experience.

Zeta

Zeta like MacOS X uses a centralized preferences app that groups everything together.

Network profile menu

The first thing Zeta network preferences shows is the profile manager.

points of interest:

  • Profile manager: Zeta offers an easy to use profile editor with the management buttons below the list of profiles, simple and easy.
  • Profile summary: A quick way to learn about your network status with useful info such as IP, Gateway and the like.

The only bit I don't like about Zeta network preferences window is that it gives the profile manager to much real state and that the profile summary is shrunk to the right side of the window. I don't think the profile manager needs that much space and a simple selector plus the needed action buttons would be better, I'd like the network status to be the focus of attention, not the profiles. Clicking Edit will take you to the network settings editor.

Network settings

points of interest:

  • Tab panel: Zeta uses a simple tab panel to group related settings, the basic ones are the default, for power users an advanced tab is provided allowing settings for machines, search domain and the like. Zeta also offers basic services setup in their network preferences application.
  • Basic settings editor: Quick and easy way to edit your network settings, very simple and elegant.

Settings are live in Zeta, changing them is enough, no need to force network to update, this improves the user experience, no such thing as the user saying: "but I changed it." and you replying: "but you clicked apply?".

Plans for Haiku Network Preferences Application

I plan to make our preferences app work with add-ons. Two add-ons are planed from the start, one is the summary add-on and the other the basic settings add-on. The application would provide a simple profile management feature and it would load add-ons on demand. It would launch displaying the summary add-on, this way you'd see your network status like the MacOS X one.

Summary add-on features:

  • List adapters displaying useful info on them like IP, status.
  • Provide quick way to activate or deactivate each adapter

Basic settings add-on features:

  • A simple editor for basic network settings such as configuration method (DHCP, Static), IP, Gateway, Subnet, DNS...
  • All changes are live, you change and the network updates itself.

By using add-ons we can make everything display on a single window without the bad part of managing a monolithic bloated bag of code. By making the preferences app, single window application we get the solid felling that you're seeing all you need. I am trying to avoid the windows control panel fragmented felling, for me it feels as if a completely different team coded each window and didn't talk to each other. I like the user to be able to change his settings easily, not showing stuff that is not related to the task at hand.

I don't plan to put services and advanced features from the start, since we're using add-ons we can simply create such add-ons later.

I am looking into the Data translators preferences app to learn more about add-ons and into ifconfig and networkstatus app for learning more about setting and querying network configuration in Haiku. If anyone that read this far wants to share opinion or point me to source files, please do so!

Well, I think that is all for now, I'll keep updating this blog as I advance this project.
Andre

Comments

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

For me, all those "panel" are the wrong way to see the network config panel. Not that it's bad to compare all of them, it's very good.

The problem is that it focus on making just that, a better configuration panel while the real problem is to find a way to make it easy for the computer user.

The average Joe, and that apply to me in many part when it's about networking, is just filling field with number and choosing pull down menu and check box in a bad way. In essence they just don't know what they do, they do it because they saw it work like that before, made some permutation until it work or simply asked someone what should fill those fields.

I think the easiest way would be to represent the data in a topological representation (a real GUI, not just text file in disguise). The thing could be made to eventually be merged in code base and look and feel with something like cortex. That way, when you fill those field and look at that data it would make a lot more sense, especially if we can put meaningful icons to go along that. For example, a firewall would be so much more easy to explain to my aunts under that form.

In such a way add-on would be seen more like "component", but they would play the same role. And the panel bloat you were talking about could be avoided by some kind of layer addition/subtraction.

I know, this is more a Haiku R2 type of idea, but as it's not much harder to do and is incredibly modular by nature it might be a good idea "right here right now". In any case all this does not break any compatibility as far as i could see.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Hi Andre! Thank you for the comparison.

I'm not sure I understand this correctly: You first wrote that you don't like the OS X "Show" drop-down. Then, you suggest to still use an interface similar to OS X. How will the user switch between network interfaces? Will there be a "Back" button to get back to the summary view (like a web browser)?

What is really important about the summary view, at all? Isn't only the status (connected, error, disconnected, etc.) important? Do we need a separate summary mode, then? What speaks against having the summary next to the interface preferences like here:
http://dev.haiku-os.org/wiki/Networks%20Preferences

Well, the OSX-like UI is indeed more compact. I just don't think it's really necessary to make it so compact because the summary view on its own doesn't provide a lot of information and the interface is slightly less efficient.

Bye,
Waldemar

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Hello Waldemar,

I don´t like the show selector on Mac OS X but I do like the summary and the profile manager. The show selector is redundant because you can access that funcionality by double clicking any adapter or selecting it and clicking the configure button.

About the summary mode, I think it is important if (and only if) it provides useful info and saves time. For example displaying the ip for each adapter in the summary saves time. You´re right when you say that if you´re just displaying if the adapter is connected or not, then you don´t need a separate mode.

Also dividing the preflet in two "views" allows our UI to be more simple and clear. I was thinking about a "back to summary" button. The idea of having the adapters on a list selector next to the editing interface is not a bad one. I think I need to try it out to see which one is better.

thanks for taking your time and reading the post! :-)

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Hi Andre,

Andre wrote:

About the summary mode, I think it is important if (and only if) it provides useful info and saves time. For example displaying the ip for each adapter in the summary saves time. You´re right when you say that if you´re just displaying if the adapter is connected or not, then you don´t need a separate mode.

I'm not sure if the IP address should be made so prominent. IMHO, the network preferences should (at first sight) appear be really simple plug-n-play stuff and not make things more complicated than they are 80% of the time (e.g., most users probably never deal with IP addresses).

Quote:

Also dividing the preflet in two "views" allows our UI to be more simple and clear. I was thinking about a "back to summary" button. The idea of having the adapters on a list selector next to the editing interface is not a bad one. I think I need to try it out to see which one is better.

Yes, let's try that out. I'm not 100% happy with my approach, either. I'd like to have a third design concept which would be a two-layered approach: The preferences dialog would be centered around a list of interfaces and when you select an interface you get a short list of essential preferences and information which even non-technical users understand. All the technical details (IP address, MAC, etc.) should be hidden in the second layer (i.e.: advanced settings). Setting up a network should really appear to be as simple as plug-n-play. If automatic configuration is possible then almost no information should be displayed because the user normally doesn't deal with it, anyway. If user input is required (WiFi, VPN, etc.) the dialog should be limited to the essential preferences and nothing more. If someone needs advanced settings he should go one level deeper. Well, back to the drawing board... :)

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

wkornewald wrote:
Andre wrote:

About the summary mode, I think it is important if (and only if) it provides useful info and saves time. For example displaying the ip for each adapter in the summary saves time. You´re right when you say that if you´re just displaying if the adapter is connected or not, then you don´t need a separate mode.

I'm not sure if the IP address should be made so prominent. IMHO, the network preferences should (at first sight) appear be really simple plug-n-play stuff and not make things more complicated than they are 80% of the time (e.g., most users probably never deal with IP addresses).

It is very arguable that displaying an IP address on a summary window can be confusing. Users with low-to-middle computer literacy level may not know what it is, but it's not like you are asking them to do anything with it.

More importantly perhaps, it is quite unlikely that the kind of user that would find an IP address obscure will venture to try to open the Network pref app anyway. So there is really little point in trying to hide information from users whose likelihood of being exposed to it is very low in the first place, at the expense of those who are more likely to look for this kind of information and find it meaningful (the power user).

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Jorge wrote:

It is very arguable that displaying an IP address on a summary window can be confusing. Users with low-to-middle computer literacy level may not know what it is, but it's not like you are asking them to do anything with it.

More importantly perhaps, it is quite unlikely that the kind of user that would find an IP address obscure will venture to try to open the Network pref app anyway. So there is really little point in trying to hide information from users whose likelihood of being exposed to it is very low in the first place, at the expense of those who are more likely to look for this kind of information and find it meaningful (the power user).

First of all, many non-technical users will have to setup a DSL or modem connection. Also, there will be quite a few users who need VPN (maybe for their WiFi, esp. in universities and at work). So, I don't agree with you that only the technical users will be exposed to the details.

But my actual point is that we should strive for making things appear to be simple. Why should we make the user deal with the details if we could support a seamless "it-just-works" (like a clock or fridge) experience? IMHO, that is the way computers should actually work (and IPv6+ZeroConf is already going in that direction). I think that you make a user less confident in what he is doing if you present lots of stuff he doesn't know (at least, I have that impression because I had to help many people with setting up their Internet connection...).

Anyway, we can discuss the details. For example, I think that IPv6, DNS, etc. should definitely be advanced stuff, but, if presented correctly, very basic IPv4 preferences could be available at the simple level (since they're still useful these days). Although, the router IP could possibly be replaced with a button to get to the router's configuration page (web browser).

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Hi Waldemar,

wkornewald wrote:

First of all, many non-technical users will have to setup a DSL or modem connection. Also, there will be quite a few users who need VPN (maybe for their WiFi, esp. in universities and at work). So, I don't agree with you that only the technical users will be exposed to the details.

I did not say that *only* technical users will be exposed; I said that non-technical users are *less likely* to be exposed to this particular part of the OS. There is a significant difference.

Users who have to configure their networks (in the case that it does not work out of the box) will have to deal with the IP addresses and other settings anyway. Being that the case, there is no point in hiding information that could be useful to many just because it may be (potentially) intimidating to just a few.

wkornewald wrote:

But my actual point is that we should strive for making things appear to be simple. Why should we make the user deal with the details if we could support a seamless "it-just-works" (like a clock or fridge) experience? IMHO, that is the way computers should actually work (and IPv6+ZeroConf is already going in that direction). I think that you make a user less confident in what he is doing if you present lots of stuff he doesn't know (at least, I have that impression because I had to help many people with setting up their Internet connection...).

Making a UI non-intimidating should not be unconditionally equated with removed funcionality or usefulness. It is not so much what information but rather how the information is exposed to the user that will make the difference.

Besides, if something just works, which would be the ideal, then the non-technical user will most likely not even bother with looking at the preferences app in the first place, so your concerns may be a bit exaggerated. :)

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Jorge wrote:

Users who have to configure their networks (in the case that it does not work out of the box) will have to deal with the IP addresses and other settings anyway. Being that the case, there is no point in hiding information that could be useful to many just because it may be (potentially) intimidating to just a few.

I agree here - in fact this is a must for non-technical people as the first thing they're likely to do is call a friend who DOES know how to configure their network, and get help over the phone.

Anyone they contact over the phone is going to need them to locate all the relevant information and set it as easily as possible without having to navigate to "hidden panels".

I see 3 common scenarios:

1. Both technical and non-technical users alike will rely on DHCP or automatic-configuration and will likely not need to view the preferences.

2. Technical people will view the preferences and expect to configure the IMPORTANT settings as quickly and easily as possible (IP address, nameservers, gateway - for wireless SSID, WPA passkey, etc.)

3. Nontechnical people will need to view the preferences and either refer to some documentation they've been given by an administrator/ISP to locate and set the important information, or have a friend on the phone telling them what to locate and set.

Either way, the only reason someone should really need to view the preferences is if they are intending to view/change the configuration for validation purposes. It is highly unlikely that someone is going look at the network preferences and NOT want to see/change the details.

Setting up VPN and dialup connections just has a different set of important details - but those shouldn't be hidden either - and should be easy to quickly verify upon immediate inspection.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Urias wrote:

Setting up VPN and dialup connections just has a different set of important details - but those shouldn't be hidden either - and should be easy to quickly verify upon immediate inspection.

WiFi, VPN, PPPoE, and dialup require far less technical knowledge than Ethernet andm, as you mentioned, you often get some documentation, so even if you don't know exactly what you're doing you merely need to type in the values. I'm primarily concerned with Ethernet and similar networks which require lots of technical knowledge and often provide no documentation (e.g., home networks).

This reminds me, could the local network (esp. 192.168.*) be scanned in the background, so when trying to connect to a machine (e.g., for file transfer or printing) that doesn't have ZeroConf you could at least get a list of available IP addresses? Would that be fast enough (maybe if found IPs are saved, so next time that IP and its neighbors are tried first)? Too bad, ZeroConf isn't widely used, yet.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Quote:

you could at least get a list of available IP addresses?

Technically speaking, you can do that by issuing an ICMP echo request, i.e. ping, to a broadcast address, say 255.255.255.255 or 192.168.255.255. Broadcasts are generally (always?) ignored by routers, so these are "safe" operations: they will only congest the local network segment. This will give you all live IP addresses in the local network pretty fast.

As for being a good default, I don't think so. But you could add a button someplace that says "scan the network for other machines", which would then, by user's request, broadcast an ICMP echo request.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Yep, we need to implement automatic link-local IPv4 address assignment, which only rely on ARP, not ICMP:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3927

ZeroConf is more than just this server-less automatic configuration feature, but even having this feature is a must have these days.

BTW, ZeroConf automatic IP addresses are 169.254.*.*, and if possible a hardware persistant data, like interface MAC address should be use to select a random address to select, claim and defend. And it's recommanded to store it for next times.

PS: Maybe I should add a new ticket about the IPv4 address conflict monitoring, too. I don't think our ARP warn us when he receive an ARP frame with our IPv4 address but from a different MAC address than our!

----
Philippe Houdoin, occasional OpenGL & Networking team leader ;-)

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Hi Jorge,
first of all, just to make clear: I wanted to have three designs for comparison. As you can see I've already created one that doesn't split between "Advanced" and "Basic" settings:
http://dev.haiku-os.org/wiki/Networks%20Preferences

I just want to see if it's possible to simplify the network preferences such that even non-tech-savvy users can setup their Internet connection (i.e.: no IP address, netmask, etc., needed) without calling someone for help.

Jorge wrote:

Users who have to configure their networks (in the case that it does not work out of the box) will have to deal with the IP addresses and other settings anyway. Being that the case, there is no point in hiding information that could be useful to many just because it may be (potentially) intimidating to just a few.

It depends on which preferences you are talking about. Ethernet? Surely you'll need to deal with IP addresses in some cases. But if want to simply create a modem or WiFi connection and you also see those complicated Ethernet preferences you will feel less confident because you don't want to make a mistake. In that regard, I think the summary UI does have the advantage that it hides the Ethernet settings some more (they can't be pre-selected, for example). I just don't want to have highly technical details in the summary because that removes this advantage, again.

Quote:

Making a UI non-intimidating should not be unconditionally equated with removed funcionality or usefulness. It is not so much what information but rather how the information is exposed to the user that will make the difference.

Of course, presentation is very important. That's what this discussion is all about (if you didn't notice ;). I never intended to *remove* information, but to present it differently.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

wkornewald wrote:

first of all, just to make clear: I wanted to have three designs for comparison. As you can see I've already created one that doesn't split between "Advanced" and "Basic" settings:
http://dev.haiku-os.org/wiki/Networks%20Preferences

Interesting... It's the first time I see this document. Has this proposal of yours been shown to the community for feedback or reviewed and approved by the network team or some higher up force? :)

wkornewald wrote:

I just want to see if it's possible to simplify the network preferences such that even non-tech-savvy users can setup their Internet connection (i.e.: no IP address, netmask, etc., needed) without calling someone for help.

I understand your goal, but you are in the wrong context. The Summary window may only display information like IP, DNS, gateway etc. once a network connection has been setup, not before, and the non-techy-savvy user is not likely to use the pref app at this point.

wkornewald wrote:

It depends on which preferences you are talking about. Ethernet? Surely you'll need to deal with IP addresses in some cases. But if want to simply create a modem or WiFi connection and you also see those complicated Ethernet preferences you will feel less confident because you don't want to make a mistake.

It doesn't matter what sort of settings that you will enter to setup a network; the info that you could display in the Summary window is always useful regardless of the hardware and network environment that you use.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

koki wrote:

Interesting... It's the first time I see this document. Has this proposal of yours been shown to the community for feedback or reviewed and approved by the network team or some higher up force? :)

I mentioned that article in the second comment to this article. It has not been discussed, yet. We can do that when we have two or more proposals to work with.

Quote:

I understand your goal, but you are in the wrong context. The Summary window may only display information like IP, DNS, gateway etc. once a network connection has been setup, not before, and the non-techy-savvy user is not likely to use the pref app at this point.

Let's see it from this point of view: will you want to show the IPv6 address, too? Note, many interfaces will probably have multiple IPv6 addresses (two or three) and the addresses are pretty long. Do you want to have multiple cryptic addresses in the summary? Do you want to limit this to IPv4?

Yes, the IP is just a minor detail in the summary (I'm aware of that ;), but I think that it's not a good idea to greet the user with a cryptic IP address (it's like: "Hi, you have no clue what to do here, better call for help!" :).

I just don't want to display that stuff without a *really* good reason. Just saying "experts find this useful" won't convince me. I know they find this useful, but they'd even find the beacon count for WiFi networks useful! Do you think that more than 40% of the network preferences users will need the IP addresses in the summary instead of the interface details?

Don't you normally need the IP of one specific interface instead of all interfaces? Doesn't the Deskbar replicant give you this information much faster than having to open the preferences?

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

What about just a simple panel with an "advanced settings" button for more informations and features ?

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Most users probably never deal with network preferences at all, once correctly configured *and* working. But when they want to check as quick as possible what's the status of their network connection(s), IP address, DHCP leasing/ZeroConfig status, Wifi SSID & signal strenght/bps and protection are one of them.

I'm also a supporter of the network connection(s) summary view, but dislike the "GUI jump feeling" that opening other dialog/shifting central view user will get as soon as he want to dive in evil details behind one connection.

Quote:

a third design concept which would be a two-layered approach: The preferences dialog would be centered around a list of interfaces and when you select an interface you get a short list of essential preferences and information which even non-technical users understand. All the technical details (IP address, MAC, etc.) should be hidden in the second layer (i.e.: advanced settings).

First, don't forget that not all network settings are per device. Some are system wide, like network services, hosts list and whatever (thanks to add-ons) we'll want to add in the future (network file & print services for example).

Second, I agree that a more visually integrated design than the "Show" dropdown will be better. Maybe we could explore a design using an expandable/outline list view to display the network connections, among others network settings?

In unexpanded mode, it will display a connection status summary similar ot OSX one (or my draft preflet "Status" view) but in expanded mode will show the connection extra settings, allowing to edit (live) the ones that could. That would merge in the same - central - list both configuration selector list *and* summary list. A graphical settings tree, with the most userfriendly look and feel at top (icons, summary status string, colorfull tri-state button) and more classic widgets for the sub-items, per connection settings, reusing textfield, radio and checkboxes and the like ?

From this old draft layout of mine at:

http://philippe.houdoin.free.fr/phil/beos/openbeos/network_kit/network_g...

try to imagine these connections summary items now grouped under a common "connections" parent item and with their respective expand button (or whatever expand widget, like the "more" in Media Player info window...) closed by default/in the same state than preflet last run time.
When expanded, all these connection(s) respective settings are exposed to view and editing. Live.

No needs anymore for "Enable" & "Configure" buttons, no needs anymore for the "Show" menufield, as at same "Connections" parent level you'll find also "(inetd) Services", etc. Double-clicking a parent item will be consistent with the classic outlinelistview behavior *and* expose the detailed item settings.

Only the top "Profile" menufield and the "Manage" button, in the center the outline listview, with editable widgets under expandable items.
And that's all. Clean, isn't it?
Oh, yeah, the window should be resizable, that's mandatory. But who will oppose that anyway, since we have the new layout API to help us here?

The order of "settings tree" items may be tricky to set in a smart and persistant way, though. Hardcoding is not a valid option, right?!
;-)

----
Philippe Houdoin, occasional OpenGL & Networking team leader ;-)

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

I much prefer the network interface device list view (I guess summary it's called), giving me an indication if it's enabled/working (or not) status and that I can click or double-click to get to the prefs of that device. There should also be the ability to setup profiles for to add another layer of dynamic presets for the various network devices. YES, the ease of use should be the utmost priority, though adhering to the standard network terminology (OSI model) like IP address, gateway, subnet mask, etc... not some ill-created jargon that will only confuse the user more. The network prefs panel should be so darn easy to use that a wizard utility should not be required. I sure hope a zero-config protocol is added later on for special case networking.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

This may be way beyond the scope of your GSoC work, but here is some additional food for thought:

http://haiku-os.org/blog/koki/2007-05-08/settings_beos_style

Keep up the good work!

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Just a tidbit: whichever route you take, make sure that the user is able to copy information from the status window with the mouse, e.g. by painting and Ctrl-C. Nothing is more frustrating than window components that display textual information relevant to the user and that cannot be copied easily! In other words, don't use a label component, use a disabled textbox.

(I don't remember anymore which version of Windows it was and which application or Control Panel settings window, but it was infuriating. Not because you couldn't do it once, but do it fifty times on different computers.)

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Here is a shot of a Leopard network prefs, i think it's very good.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

I don't like Leopard network prefs because there is no possibility to have more than one logical interface per physical adaptator.

On my laptop, I need One DHCP interface at home and one hard adress at work.(On windowZ, I need to change it every time I move !)

But also, you may need one interface per protocol (IPV4 IPV6...)

and so I'd like to see in the left pane something like this


  • Ethernet 1

    • Interface a
      protocol = IPV4
      Adress = 10.0.0.1
    • Interface b
      protocol = IPV4
      Adress 168.51.12.5
    • Interface c
      protocol = IPV4
      Adress = DHCP
    • Interface d
      protocol = IPV6
  • Ethernet 2

    • Interface e
      protocol = IPV4
      Adress = DHCP
  • Wifi 1

    • Interface f
      protocol = IPV4
      Adress = DHCP

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Quote:

On my laptop, I need One DHCP interface at home and one hard adress at work.(On windowZ, I need to change it every time I move !)

Is that not what "Locations" are for? i.e. you configure different settings for different locations.

Re: Popular Network Preferences applications and comments.

Was he referring to separate profiles to set the configuration mutually-exclusive per interface, or "multi-homed" interfaces with more than one configuration at a time?

It almost sounded like he was asking for both features...

Not seeing what's under the "Advanced" setting of Leopard, I can't tell if it allows you to have multiple IP addresses per interface or not...