I think discussions such as these are invaluable for a number of reasons,
many of which are obvious or at least apparent to most. Moreover, I think
that we'd all agree that:
1. LiteStep documentation sucks;
2. Module documentation sucks; and
3. Theme documentation sucks.
Put more politely, it's much like a dog walking on its hind legs: you don't
see it often, and when you do it's not done very well.
The point I'd like to make is that the acid test of any documentation is,
regrettably, someone like PokPok. Despite the general consensus that he is
an Idiot, I can't and won't fault him for having the opinions that he does,
and I'll go so far as to say that I believe we all share the blame when
someone trying out LiteStep for the first time fails to grasp how to setup a
basic configuration.
Some time ago I began writing an AllStepText type of document that
incorporated the material found in the LiteStep documentation and added to
it the documentation for most if not all of the third-party modules
available at that time, as well as any additional or relevant information I
had come across. The single document I ended up with was comprehensive,
cross-referenced and fully indexed and, more important, easy to read. I've
always believed that I could teach anyone's mother to use LiteStep, and if I
do say so myself, someone like PokPok would have little trouble following
any of what I wrote. My hope is that I'll bring it up to date and make it
available for anyone interested.
The reason I mention this is that while there are merits to pursuing various
approaches to make LiteStep or LiteStep themes easier to install and
configure, it inevitably comes down to the documentation provided. I do not
believe in pandering to the lowest common denominator, but if we can't make
any progress in the area of documentation, I don't see any reason for any of
us to hold our collective breath for someone to pull-off a graphical
interface complete with wizards and assistants that will solve all our
problems for us.
The same holds true, I think, for themes. The concept of popping someone's
theme into an existing setup is at best a great idea and at worst, a
holy-grail. I do share the view that a number of improvements could be
made. While the onus is on the user to make it work, I believe that there
is a corresponding onus on the themer to, at the very least, document the
theme (i.e, writing something more than a few parenthetical remarks in the
step.rc.). I can't count how many times I had to add the theme name to
someone's step.rc -- like, duh! There is a utility used in the warez groups
called "NFOgen" that standardizes both the content and the format of the
.nfo files accompanying warez posts. If the chaos of a large warez group
can be simplified and standardized, I don't see any great challenge for
similarly standardizing LiteStep information.
If we all agree that LiteStep's biggest shortcoming is "documentation
documentation documentation," then perhaps it's time we consider addressing
this issue first.
My two rupees, anyway.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joel D. Parker [mailto:rootrider@netzero.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 4:03 AM
To: Litestep Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Litestep] An open letter to the LiteStep Community
I agree with most of what you wrote here. A few comments are interspersed.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Kindorf" <scott_kindorf@eli.net>
Subject: [Litestep] An open letter to the LiteStep Community
: Hello!
:
: I've been sitting on the sidelines of the LiteStep Community for a while
: now - only a few people here know me, so consider this my official
: "Hiya" to the community, as well as some thoughts that have distilled
: over the last year and a half.
Welcome
<snip>
: seen, has come a LONG way from what it was only 1.5 years ago. I'm glad
: to see that things are progressing with it, and that the interest in
: LiteStep is growing; however, the recent debacle concering
: "PokPok/Reychal" and his/her review of LiteStep at MaximumPC.com has
: caused me to come forward with my concerns. Most of them are centered
: around not LiteStep itself, but the people responsible for putting
: different faces on LiteStep - the Themers.
FYI, PokPok wrote the article on PC911. Reychal is the proprietor of the
"Litestep Warning" thread on Napster.com (see the "grr..." email from a day
or two ago).
<snip>
: experience with their PC. Unfortunately, there have been quite a few
: themes that have come out recently that make rather broad assumptions as
: to the configuration and/or existing software load for the "Target
: System" (the system that the user is installing LiteStep and/or the
: related theme). Some are merely cosmetic (the excusion of an Icon if
: pre-built icons or buttons are used in the theme), others can cause
: functionality problems that will hinder the user's ability to get work
: done (i.e. incorrect CLSID information for "Control Panel" or "My
: Computer"), while others are merely brain-dead decisions of the Themer
: (making suppositions that the end-user will have a Hard Drive with the
: letter D: and that Netscape is installed there, or that the user doesn't
: use WinAmp but uses Windows Media Player or Sonique).
The CLSID problem is mainly because of the differences in CLSID's from Win9x
to WinNT(5?). This really isn't the themer's fault most likely.
Now, would your prefer that we *assume* that the user is using Winamp,
only to find out they have Sonique installed? Or maybe that we *assume* that
they are using IE5, when in reality, they prefer Nav4x or Opera? Either way,
you're going to disappoint someone.
What about the people who *do* have a Drive D:? Are we supposed to act
like everyone only has one 3.5" floppy, one hard drive/partition, and one
cd-rom? I'm willing to bet that *atleast* 40% of LS users have more than one
hard drive/partition or cd-rom. I myself have two partitions and two
cd-roms.
<snip>
There are
: some absolutely stunning themes out there, but it would really be a
: shame if LiteStep's reputation was to be lowered if a poorly executed
: theme was to be used in a much more visible review than the one provided
: by PokPok/Reychal (thank goodness the Wired staffer who did the article
: on LiteStep knew where to go and knew who to talk to!).
I agree with you here... Litestep needs to have a better way of distributing
its themes. We got pretty far last fall (Sept, Oct, Nov 1999) with a theme
standardization proposal (with the help of the "late" MorpheusX and
tin_omen), but it never fully materialized. It seems, that for the most
part, it is agreed that themes should include all the modules needed for the
theme... more like a "distro" of LS than a theme. Hopefully this will
change... atleast with the advent of .25.
: So, with my scant bit of experience in the Software world, I'd like to
: make some recommendations to the Themers in the audience, and to anyone
: considering creating any new Themes or updating your existing Themes.
:
: 1) Never make assumptions as to a Target System's hardware configuation
: outside of the following facts
:
: a. They will have an A:\ Drive and a C:\ drive
Doesn't just about everyone have a CD-ROM? About 98% maybe? So, why
shouldn't we assume that they have a D: or E: drive pointing to their
CD-ROM?
: b. All of their programs will be installed on the C:
Fair enough.
: c. If the user's Installed software is on drives and directories other
: than the defaults for those programs, give the user a little help in the
: STEP.RC file by using our friend the ";" to show them where to make
: changes, or make very easy-to-follow docs.
Again, this goes right along with providing good documentation with the
theme.
: 2) Never assume that they will have programs like PhotoShop; if you want
: to give out the .PSD files, do that separately. Assume that the only
: image editing program they have is Paint.exe. If you want, include
: PaintShop Pro in your Theme distribution to allow them to edit their own
: Icons.
Umm... please, don't ever include PSP with a theme. PSP5 is 7mb. PSP6 is
something like 14mb. PSP7 Beta 1 is about 29mb. It takes long enough to
download a theme that's over 1mb... let alone 6 or 7mb.
: 3) Never assume that they are running a Voodoo or an nVidia or BrandXYZ
: Video Card, so don't include items or shortcuts/wharftiles for any
: specific hardware.
:
: 4) Never assume that they are using any particular soundcard. Same as #3
I don't recall anyone ever doing this, with either a video card or a sound
card. Either way, is there even a module that takes advantage of once
certain brand of hardware? I don't think so.
: 5) If your theme includes a Wharf or desktop wth wharf-like featurss
: (including shortcuts), either package as many icons for as many
: applications as you can think of or provide such items as a generic item
: (spreadsheet, database, image editing, etc) - don't try to have
: application-specific items if you can get away from it (i.e. don't
: assume that your customer is going to use 3D-FTP or BulletProof FTP -
: just provide a generic FTP item or consider getting icons for every
: single FTP program that's availavble). If your shorcuts/wharf/hotspots
: are text-based, include a base copy of the shortcut/wharftile/hotspot
: *and* the font you used to help them keep things looking consistent.
Again, this is a *very* good idea. I would hope that every theme atleast
comes with "dumby" icons... so the user can create their own.
<snip>
: 8) Always include a tool that will allow them to go back to the Windows
: Shell (LSEnabler or ShellSwitcher are excellent choices)
I'm not sure this is necessary. Besides, this will only add bloat. If you
want themers to include a shell manager, then they should include the old
shellsw app (shellsw.exe) or explicit instructions for changing between
shells... or they could just point the user to lsfaq.litestep.org :)
: 9) Consider including either LSCP or LSTweaker to help users with their
: configuration - that is if your theme includes a Wharf. If your theme
: doesn't use the Wharf then considr writtin a lengthy HTML doc explaining
: your theme and how to configure it.
Again, isn't bloat any concern of yours? I don't have time to download a
theme with a graphic editor, a shell manager, and a Litestep Config Editor
(especially ones that are so old and out-of-date) along with my chosen
theme. You should also consider that many users already have such utils on
their system. If anything, the themer could include URL's to download these
programs separately... from within the readme.
: 10) Don't be guilty of "Module-Bloat" - one of LiteStep's claims is that
: LiteStep is smaller & faster than SHELL32.DLL - don't make it lie by
: adding way too many modules.
*Now* you're worried about bloat... anyway the number of modules doesn't
necessarily equal the amount of bloat. You could have 4 modules loaded, or
20, and you wouldn't notice a whole lot of difference in how much memory LS
uses. More memory will be used by eye-candy modules such as Aurora, ripple,
and lstransparent. These modules are graphic heavy... These three alone can
probably use more CPU and memory than 8 other bang modules.
: 11) Documentation, Documentation, Documentation!
No complaints here.
<snip>
: same perdicament as Reychal found him/herself in. Using LiteStep should
: liberate a user from SHELL32.DLL while not enslaving them to a
: non-working shell that looked really cool in the screenshot but failed
: to deliver.
I agree that this is a problem. I've seen evidence of this plenty of times
just in the last week with various users on IRC and on the Napster message
boards.
<snip>
: Comments/criticism/flames accepted....Thanks!
Hope this fulfills your request :)
: Scott Kindorf
My main point in this email is to suggest that we can never satisfy the idea
that "we can't assume what the user has on their computer". The best way to
"solve" the problem is to provide e-variables for the paths, and to use
something like bangpath.dll or maybe a script to easily change which text
editor (for example) the user uses. This way, if the user wants to set up
their media player to be Sonique, whereas the themer uses Winamp, all the
new user has to do is change the line that reads something like "mediaplayer
= path_to\sonique.exe"... (p.s. it sure would be nice to be able to do
something like that without using a 3rd party mod... hint, hint dev team :).
--
Joel D. Parker
[ r o o t r i d e r ]
rootrider@netzero.net
_______________________________________________
Why pay for something you could get for free?
NetZero provides FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't Unsubscribe? Check http://desktopian.org/listunsub.html
For more commands, email litestep-help@litestep.ru.ac.za
Get the LS FAQ: http://floach.pimpin.net/lsfaq