Thread: YOUR dream front end

Subscribed.

Originally Posted by Cybix

you should all collaborate on a project, then we'd have the ultimate FE. instead of a handful of un-finished and un-polished ones

problem mostly seems to be that not every dev here will agree on how to tackle anything that has to do with displaying anything... like Jirka said, the only real possibility for collaboration is in code that can be share across all mac FEs

Originally Posted by NeonDev

problem mostly seems to be that not every dev here will agree on how to tackle anything that has to do with displaying anything... like Jirka said, the only real possibility for collaboration is in code that can be share across all mac FEs

Not only that, but organizing a project of the magnitude that a FE should be is no small feat. Especially if there is no pay check involved.

Furthermore, coordinating across time zones and life schedules is not conducive to easy rollout plans.

It's not that it can't be done, it's just a lot of work and has a tendency to strip out most/all of the fun which is what we are in it for. If you look at the most successful OSS projects going on today, they almost all of some kind of corporate sponsorship and staff that don't have to balance another job that puts food on the table with a project they are doing in their free time.

What really needs to happen is for the Mac car community to grow both in users and developers. As that happens, there will be a larger pool of people to focus on the projects that they like the most which will enable them to come into their own like the Windows FEs (and if you look at the Windows folks, they don't just have one FE and they have as many opinions as we do).

The good news is that we are growing (seems like we've at least doubled if not quadrupled the number of active (posts at least once a week) members in the last few years), but we will probably always be a niche group with all the issues associated to it.

The one thing we need to absolutely avoid is having the various projects get into "mine is better than yours" ****ing matches (which hasn't happened to date) since that helps no one. Good natured collaboration (even if it is just ideas) is what all of us need to deliver the best products we can.

-dave

I don't think Neon Boombox looks 'primitive' or unpolished. That's kind of harsh. I think it looks pretty nice. Usable in the car? I'm not so certain about try to drive and drag that dial around at the same time, but I already put my order in for key bindings so you can drive it with a rotary controller.

I think all this arguing about architecture or user interface skirts the main issue - capabilities. Any FE should be first and foremost about [[[[[[helping one drive the car. In the same way that flight management systems are designed to help aircraft crews operate the aircraft easily, an FE should be about making it easier to drive.

Sure, music is number one. The issue is that with a car unit, you have so much music to select from and so many sources you can choose from (mp3, cd, xm, radio) that you need help managing it while driving safely.

I want information about where I am, where I'm going, how far I've either gone, how close the nearest gas station with cheap prices is, what's my average mpg, historical info on car operations, temps, trip speed, estimated time of arrivals, navigation, and so forth. It should be simple to set up, easy to use, and interactive if necessary.

And for heaven's sake, make it skinnable. NOBODY can agree on what the interface should look/sound like.

A dream FE should integrate calculations you have to make in your head while you're driving, inform you of things you didn't know about (temp/wx, traffic conditions, traffic cams, gas prices) do something you couldn't normally do (like transmit your location or read your your emails), and integrate stuff you normally have to fumble about the cabin for -like answering the phone or dialing.

It should help you out, not make your life more difficult. I haven't seen a single FE Windows, Mac, or otherwise that does this. They all fail to consider the driver's position and instead require more mental agility to deal with, not less.

Unlike FMS systems, you can't go 'heads down' in the cockpit in a car. You'll run off the road. A dream FE would anticipate, help out, and integrate, making your trip easier, not harder.

i feel that 2 button presses is acceptable for switching functions (from music to navigation etc). working on a small 800x480 screen that needs controls big enough and spaced enough to read/poke from a small distance doesn't leave enough room half a dozen buttons for function switching IMO.

I agree that mute and other such buttons should be easily accessible but i feel that it should be user definable which/how they are. ie a tray somewhere for "hot controls" or even leave quick access to those as voice commands (i know not everyone has a mic)

as far as audio processing I felt that the audio hardware would be able to handle EQ and other functions. but a core audio solution would be tops, however difficult to implement.

are you going to release your FE for others to use?

Originally Posted by NeonDev

i feel that 2 button presses is acceptable for switching functions (from music to navigation etc). working on a small 800x480 screen that needs controls big enough and spaced enough to read/poke from a small distance doesn't leave enough room half a dozen buttons for function switching IMO.

I believe the reality is somewhere in between ready access to controls (e.g. always visible) and on demand (e.g. auto-hiding toolbar/dock), but I agree that space is at a premium on screens that the "average" car PC will use (e.g. 7" to 8" running some 800xYYY resolution).

I think controls that are specific to a single function (e.g. music player) should only be visible on that functions screen(s). If it shows up elsewhere, it is that much less space that can be used (e.g. the "mythical" navigation maps would be smaller and therefore less useful). On the other hand, functions that are common to most/all features (e.g. volume control/mute) would require one-touch access IMHO.

I also think that many/most features don't need the whole screen as long as the normal/typical view is displaying the "critical" information (e.g. it would be cool to show all the tag info from a MP3, but it would clutter up a small screen to the point where the driver can't get the "critical" information at a glance) which leaves space for "one-touch" functionality.

On the flip side, you will have features like Video and Navigation that would benefit from using the full screen, but care should be taken to make it easy to get out and switch to another feature if needed.

My rule of thumb is that if it takes more than 1 command in a non-full screen feature to get to another common (allowing the user to define what is common), 2 commands from a full screen function, or an additional (e.g. 2 or 3 depending on screen usage) command for non-common functions, then the UI takes too much attention to navigate in the car environment.

-dave