Having the "Quick Launch" option in the "Start Install" screen is really bad. The Start Install screen is a screen to summaries what options the user choose in the installer. Please dont have any option in this screen. I still think the best place would be the Component screen: [ ] Mozilla Quick Launch Description: "Quick Launch will enable you to start Mozilla quicker by doing to magic stuff, bla bla bla.."

I second that. When I installed it this morning I totally passed it by, but thought I saw something different there. So I ran the installer again just so I could really see what it was. I also think the component screen is the better place so you can see it right from the start.

This checkbox needs more explanatory text anyway. And Hendikins pointed out to me that the installer also doesn't have a checkbox for whether you want Mozilla to be your default Web browser or e-mail program. Therefore, I suggest a new page be added to the installer, between the page for component selection and the page summarizing your choices. The new page can contain both these options.

That option is probably the neatest way to do it... Wherever it goes, definately not the summary screen...

Lame on all claimed need for verbosity. Extra text is for the manual, or a help button -- let's not write books directly in the UI.

Got a spec from german@netscape.com -- will get to work on it.

where is the spec? can you post it, if it's not available on mozilla.org

German, this basically implements your spec. modulo the gifs and incorporating the text that docs came up with.

The UI spec for the Quick Launch feature is posted at http://mozilla.org/projects/ui/communicator/framework/quicklaunch/, going a bit beyond what's going to go into the next Netscape release.

Missed 0.9.3.

German, all the pictures in your spec are missing.

Syd, aren't you working on this one? marking nsBranch for tracking, remove if I've gotten it wrong.

It'd be better to have ssu review the wizard code changes so I'll limit my comments to: - the "config.ini changes" attachment is the whole file, pretty unreviewable. Please attach a diff of config.it instead. We'll also need to see the commercial diffs somewhere; since that probably only consists of config.ini changes I think it's safe to post those to this bug. - more context in the diffs is better. "cvs diff -u10" for example. some super-reviewers demand -20 for code in areas outside their expertise. - We should scratch "When possible, " from the checkbox option, it's lame and confusing to the user. The main reason for the hedge--inability to work with multiple profiles--is fixed or nearly fixed.

r=ssu for syd's patches (per our conversation). The patch I attached contains fixes to the dialog state logic given the new Quick Launch dialog (from Syd's patches) in the installer. Syd, don't forget to check in ns's version of config.it as well.

I would appreciate if we could go the extra mile here and fix up the UI a bit, to more closely resemble German's spec. We already have an image of the icon in the system tray similar to the one in his spec. There's no need to try to fill the entire panel up if it means adding unsightly vertical spacing.

Blake, the space is there waiting for German to get off his butt and give me the artwork I asked for :-) I figured it would be better to get the code in so we can exercise it; when the art comes along (German: hint hint :-) I will land it.

sr=mscott

a=asa on behalf of drivers

Fix is checked in, keeping open however until I get artwork from German

Reassigning to German. German, can you attach a bmp for me? Then reassign back to me. Thanks.

Why does German need to provide the screenshot of the system tray? I mean, I know it says that at the top of the spec, but it can be obtained easily by running turbo, taking a screenshot, and cropping appropriately. That's what I did for the screenshot I used in the alert you get when you close the last window while running turbo, and in fact, that image is in the tree (well, in the branch right now, soon to be on the trunk), so you can use it. Note that it doesn't use the pretty N icon shown in the spec, but there's another bug on that. Also, still, why is there so much space in the current panel? Per the spec, all of the space in the panel does not have to be filled. The checkbox shouldn't be at the bottom of the panel, but just right under the image. --> syd

Blake, don't interfere :-) I had a discussion with German, he wanted to provide specific artwork (not just a screendump). Reassigning to german.

It doesn't look like we're getting the image soon if it's already been a month and a half, so the image in the tree is the image we're using in the dialog. So I don't understand why we wouldn't go ahead with that image now, since there's nothing wrong with it. Or, I don't understand why we don't just get rid of the giant vertical spacing, since I don't see why we have to 'prepare' for an image that might not come for this release. Usually what happens with these types of bugs is that no one does bother to interfere, something suboptimal gets checked in, and then the bug to bring it up to par with professional quality UI drifts away because 'what we have is good enough'. That's why we get things like oversized pref panels that go through 5 revisions before its UI that you might find in an application like Microsoft Word. My two cents.

I think we should nsbranch- this. Syd ?

Syd - nsbranch- this one per suresh's and blake's comments. pls give it a plus, if you disagree.

Per my comments? No, my comments (since one month ago yesterday) asked that we use the artwork that is already in the tree, that we are using in the exit quicklaunch dialog (and that MSN Messenger and AIM), and that we will continue to use, rather than waiting for airbrushed artwork that is inexplicably better than an exact screenshot of what users will see on their screen. Unless you're referring to my 9/1 comments, where I expressed the opinion that if we didn't use that art, this bug would lay dormant for at least one release, leaving us with a suboptimal UI that refers users to `the icon' in the systray, as if they have just one icon. I also there noted that the bug to fix the UI would drift away because `what we have is good enough', and now we're forced to minus this bug, because what we have is good enough. The irony is stinging.

I feel bad about this too Blake, but triage criteria has to become much more risk-averse as we approach RTM, or nothing would ever ship due to endless changes and resulting regressions. IMO, this bug clearly does not fit the profile that PDT would approve (crash, data loss, major feature broken). nsbranch- to get it off the radar, appeal directly to PDT if you wish.

unsetting target milestone and reassigning to default owner (<german@netscape.com> email bounces so I'm assuming he's not really owning this bug)

isn't this fixed?

Yeah, fixed. We can file separate bugs on other issues, right?

verified fixed