tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post114190719201195011..comments2023-11-05T05:15:29.383-05:00Comments on graphicallyspeaking: To "Install" or not to "Install"?Sree Kotayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01637645734999157782noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-70239641119792841172007-07-03T08:49:00.000-04:002007-07-03T08:49:00.000-04:00Hello. I love your blog, it is very nice. You can ...Hello. I love your blog, it is very nice. You can see pictures of me on <B>http://nudecharm.net</B> - See you soon baby ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-1142283558989257272006-03-13T15:59:00.000-05:002006-03-13T15:59:00.000-05:00Matt: glad you like it :) I think "install" will...Matt: glad you like it :) I think "install" will drive DOWN usage for little (real) benefit to users. But I agree that given the abuse of trust (by companies big and small), I think its the right call... <BR/><BR/>For example, I don't think anyone asked for the "Try AOL" icon on your desktop that AIM puts there upon its installation.Sree Kotayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01637645734999157782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-1142283372904344572006-03-13T15:56:00.000-05:002006-03-13T15:56:00.000-05:00Dan: and what happens the second time you hit the ...Dan: and what happens the second time you hit the button (after you've switched to some other screensaver for a while, and now want the feeds one back?)<BR/><BR/>What I'm getting at is... its goofy. Its *right* (probably and sadly) but goofy :)Sree Kotayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01637645734999157782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-1142261889768913022006-03-13T09:58:00.000-05:002006-03-13T09:58:00.000-05:00This is a good thing to debate in the interest of ...This is a good thing to debate in the interest of consistency. As AOL blurs the line between web and client applications, getting this right is important.<BR/><BR/>When I installed the 1.5 beta (big ups to the AE team...this build has been solid on my machines), and I discovered the install button - it made immediate sense as to what it did: it added a screen saver to my system. <BR/><BR/>Consistency wise, it's a departure from AE 1.1's "Download Desktop Search"..but I think install is a better term. Firefox uses that nomenclature for all of it's plug-ins and it makes sense - installing something changes an aspect of my system, be it an application or the OS. <BR/><BR/>Any way you slice it, after installing the RSS Screen Saver on my office PC - I've had *many* people comment on the coolness of it, and inquire where they could get it :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-1142256928865394892006-03-13T08:35:00.000-05:002006-03-13T08:35:00.000-05:00Just to let you know, it does actually "install" t...Just to let you know, it does actually "install" the screensaver. If you install AOL Explorer, it does not put the screensaver into your system32 directory until you click on the install screensaver button from the feeds panel. It's on your system, but not in a usable state(since it has to be in the windows system32 directory) until you push the button. OK, so maybe after that install is not the right word(though it will copy over :-))Dan O'Connellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17917726556557375382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-1142211685036748152006-03-12T20:01:00.000-05:002006-03-12T20:01:00.000-05:00Right, They do care if it does bad stuff but als...Right,<BR/> They do care if it does bad stuff but also try to remember that we cater to the people who aren't of the highest technical caliber. Perhaps labling the button "Use RSS Screensaver" and then displaying a MsgBox saying "This will set the RSS Screensaver as your default screen saver" to confirm or refuse perhaps would be better.<BR/><BR/>Then again...if you're using the AOL Explorer and take the time to find RSS feeds to use and take the time to click the button, these are all things you probably aren't too concerned about to begin with.<BR/><BR/>Though what you said about EULAs are true. We see this in Knowledge Management. We make things so simple that they become 18 or so steps eventually the member says "Nevermind I'll just call member services". The members way of clicking "Next" in the Technical Support RealmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-1142207254890706782006-03-12T18:47:00.000-05:002006-03-12T18:47:00.000-05:00Yeah, I don't disagree ENTIRELY with the perspecti...Yeah, I don't disagree ENTIRELY with the perspective Shawn (i.e. I think the label is right, given the climate), but I think we're catering to the vocal few. <BR/><BR/>I just don't think the notion of "install" matters to most people - its just software. They don't know if its web based, client based, installing, caching, blah, blah. <BR/><BR/>They *do* care if it does "bad stuff" - either spying stuff or ESPECIALLY changing default passive behaviours (OS settings, default apps, file associations, etc.). So I think we need an explicit action... (I'm NOT saying we would check it by default AT ALL, just as AOL Explorer does <BR/>NOT set itself as default browser without user action).<BR/><BR/>And exposing them to a subtle technical distinction serves what purpose? Other than contibuting to the general purpose "verbal pollution" that a litigious culture (fed by exploitive entrepeneurs - legal and illegal: "hey, if they don't complain, let's push the limits") engenders.<BR/><BR/>What I mean is: its like EULAs (end user license agreement) in software - they're SO long and complex in the name of (ironically) being disambigous and clear that everyone always clicks through because they're noise. If you WANTED to communicate something meaningful, the EULA is the LAST place you'd put it.<BR/><BR/>And I think that thinking is creeping into our software...Sree Kotayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01637645734999157782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21367055.post-1142188085106838012006-03-12T13:28:00.000-05:002006-03-12T13:28:00.000-05:00Sree, I'd have to disagree to a degree, if you al...Sree,<BR/> I'd have to disagree to a degree, if you already "installed" the screen saver then to member perception it is INSTALLED, the fact that you set it as default just appears to a member that you are hiding it...making it in effect spyware. Now if it is just a binary that gets triggered then it is internal to the application and is a part of explorer. <BR/><BR/>Members know these things and assume worse. In member services we fac the same speculation with ACS, Topspeed, and any other "Feature" we include that appears to be "seperate"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com