Elements of the ULTIMATE Chess GUI?

[hgm]

I never said it was about taste; I can puke just as well over usability.

Hiding things when there is plenty of space doesn't seem to serve any useful purpose. And it would require me to open them with a separate mouse click when I would actually need them. It should be enough to put them in a group box "advanced configuration", so that people not feeling very advanced would ignore them. This is actually what I proposed above (except using "optional / exceptional" instead of "advanced"). Users that would be foolhardy enough to mess with things in a an "advanced" group box would also press the button needed to open an "advanced" dialog.

Note that there is nothing to gain by hiding stuff in the mentioned dialog; it just would show a lot of ugly empty space. The height of the dialog is dictated by the list box for engine selection on the left anyway.

[Fulvio]

It should be enough to put them in a group box "advanced configuration", so that people not feeling very advanced would ignore them.

You can do it the way you think it's better; but the program should "ask" only the necessary information and let the user "ask" for uncommon options.
The reason is that this is how natural human interactions works; for example when you order at a restaurant the waiter do not ask your preferences about every possible variation, but you can ask him if you want to.

[hgm]

Well, restaurants usually show vegetarian dishes on the same menu card as meat dishes, even though most people do eat meat. If I were a vegetarian I would be pretty annoyed if I had to ask for a separate card after having found out the one I initially got contained nothing for me. And if they have special non-allergenic preparations of the dish, it is often also mentioned.

So it is certainly not unheard of to offer choices that only a minority of the customers would make.

[Sergio Martinez]

I see too many posts and may repeat "desires" of other people, so I will try to be brief and apologize if I repeat some (I have read a few posts but not all):

-All Arena options (it's no secret that I'm a "fan" of this GUI)

-I've seen that people asked to implement Swiss tournament, round robin, and I think K.O. also, I have not seen that anyone ask about implement team tournaments, it would be very useful in my opinion.

-Option to order lists of engines by country, author, etc. and print them.

-Implement some tool like similarity tool, that way maybe we can get results of winboard engines that do not work under "simtool".

-Option to generate rating by engine and automatic modification engine, even add different tittles depend on results (gm, im).

-To distribute the engines by groups (for example if I organize tournaments of round robin to be able to attribute a group or division to a engine, of this way it would be easy after beginning a tournament with that group of engines).

Thank you very much.

[Fulvio]

So it is certainly not unheard of to offer choices that only a minority of the customers would make.

I would like to order a pizza (I would like to install a chess engine)
-Do you want to name it? (Nickname?)
-Which toppings do you want? (where is the the executable?)
-Do you want to add other ingredients? (parameters)
-Do you want the normal dough? (working directory)
-Do you want the small, medium or large size? (Winboard v1, v2, UCI)
-Do you want specific options for the small size, even if you ordered the large one? (Special Winboard options)
....
-Do you really want to order the pizza? (Ok/Cancel)

[Kirk]

One that can teach in natural language. Always like that aspect of CHESSMASTER for beginners. But since that program is dead an updated similar version of that with current top engines would be a nice way to review games.

[hgm]

I would like to order a pizza (I would like to install a chess engine)
-Do you want to name it? (Nickname?)
-Which toppings do you want? (where is the the executable?)
-Do you want to add other ingredients? (parameters)
-Do you want the normal dough? (working directory)
-Do you want the small, medium or large size? (Winboard v1, v2, UCI)
-Do you want specific options for the small size, even if you ordered the large one? (Special Winboard options)
....
-Do you really want to order the pizza? (Ok/Cancel)

Well, that is pretty much how it goes, right? Ever been at the MacDonalds? They invariably ask you if you want small/medium/large when you order a drink. They invariably ask you if you want something to drink if you order a burger. If you order a Coke they want to know if you want ice in it. That is, if they forget to ask you if it should be Diet Coke first. Furthermore, there still seems a subtle difference between asking all these questions verbally, or printing in the menu that you can order small/medium/large and with wheat or rye dough. If the computer was voice-operated, I would certainly be more selective.

If I order a Turkish Pizza ('Lamacun') they invariably ask me if I want 'everything on it' (i.e. including the raw onions, which many people dislike). And then they ask me if I want garlic sauce over it. And then if I also want spicy pepper sauce ('sambal') over it. And then whether I want it 'to go' or 'to eat here'. And then if I want to pay cash or card... In fact it is not very clear to me how you imagine they could give me what I want in any other way.

BTW, from your comparison it seems you misunderstand the purpose of "Special WinBoard options":

-Do you want specific options for the small size, even if you ordered the large one? (Special Winboard options)

(My fault, of course, I understand that.) These are NOT options for CECP engines, they are options for the WinBoard GUI, which you would want to be invoked automatically whenever that particular engine is loaded. Whether it is a UCI or a WB v1/v2 engine doesn't make the slightest difference. UCI engines can also be installed with (the already mentioned) time odds, a particular GUI book tailored to them, etc., whatever special treatment you want the GUI to give them.

So a more fitting (and less ridiculous) comparison would be:

-Do you want want to eat that with silverware, chopsticks or a chainsaw? (Special Winboard options)

For the 'final question' I think "Do you want to pay cash or card" would be more appropriate. And I surely hope you don't want to imply that OK/cancel buttons are a useless bloat of dialogs like this...

[Fulvio]

And I surely hope you don't want to imply that OK/cancel buttons are a useless bloat of dialogs like this...

You are exhausting; let's just try one (last) different approach.

Let's say that I hide *all* the options, and when installing a new engine the "..." button is automatically clicked (the one that let you select the executable).
And that if you press "OK" in the browse window it automatically click "OK" in the engine configuration window; and the same for the "Cancel" button.
Can you list the operations that you can no longer do?
After installing an engine you can always change all its configuration?
Can you install an engine without clicking the "..." button?
The user should be bothered by only one *necessary* question, what is it?
How many engines can be installed by an inexperienced user just answering that one question?

(BTW
This is how Mac Donald works in Italy:
- A Big Mac Menu with coke.
- Ok.
)

[Ras]

I never said it was about taste; I can puke just as well over usability.

That's a nice summary. I remember you wondering why people use Arena despite its bugs - well, because it's the lesser evil compared to the awful user experience that Winboard offers.

Though you are right that the original xboard was even worse, but that was geared at Linux users, so it didn't matter.

[hgm]

Let's say that I hide *all* the options, and when installing a new engine the "..." button is automatically clicked (the one that let you select the executable).
And that if you press "OK" in the browse window it automatically click "OK" in the engine configuration window; and the same for the "Cancel" button.

OK, I understand that this is pretty much how the Tarrasch GUI does it. No real engine-selection dialog.

Can you list the operations that you can no longer do?

Well, for one, it would no longer be possible to install UCI egines. There could be a small chance this would upset some people... (And that would also apply to USI/UCCI engines.) You cannot prevent the engine from being added to the GUI's database of registered engines, and would have to edit that to remove it if you did't want it there. Engines that need command-line options, or adapters/interpreters (java, python, nodejs...) could no longer be used. Each engine would be installed under its true name, making it impossible to distinguish multiple installs of the same engine with different option settings.

And of course you would no longer have the chance to select engines that you already registered before, with a simple click in the listbox, as the listbox would no longer be shown.

After installing an engine you can always change all its configuration?

You can change the engine options in the corresponding Engine Settings dialog. This does not include whether the engine is UCI or not, or whether the GUI should use its book instead of using the engine, because that is a GUI option. Of course you could go to the dialog controlling GUI-book usage, and switch it on or off, but then you would have to do that every time you load the engine. (And in particular you would have to babysit any automatic tournaments to switch on the book every time that engine's turn comes up to play. That does seem slightly inconvenient to me.)

Can you install an engine without clicking the "..." button?

Well, 'can' is a relative notion. If you know how the GUI stores its persistet settings, and you can find that ii file, and hack it by editing the options behind the GUIs back and typing the path name... Yes, then you 'can' do anything you want. This is exactly what no user ever wants, however, and which leads to an avelanche of complains about 20th-century software etc.

The user should be bothered by only one *necessary* question, what is it?

I would say that the most essential question is whether the engine he wants to load is UCI or WB. But since more information than that is virtually always needed, I have to disagree with your basic premise. Otherwise the user would be forced to start hunting through the menus for the other questions that must be answered before he can do what he wants, and I certainly would not consider that an improvement. It is like a waiter that keeps staring blankly at you for everything you say until you have figured out by yourself how much you have to tip him to get him into action.

How many engines can be installed by an inexperienced user just answering that one question?

Certainly not more than one. Because after that he will be an experienced user... The relevant question is how long it will take him to figure out how to install that first engine in a satisfactory way.

This 'one question' doctrine doesn't resonate with me at all. It just seems an obsession. Even in primitive civilizations people can usually count to four. I see absolutely no advantage in forcing people to go through 10 different dialogs to enter the 10 infos that need to be entered, (e.g. to specify a tourney) instead of using two dialogs with 5 controls. It is like a restaurant where you have to queue at the counter, and then can order only one product before you have to go to the back of the queue (or a different one) again for your drink, and then for your salad, and then desert... I like to place the order for my entire meal at once.

(BTW
This is how Mac Donald works in Italy:
- A Big Mac Menu with coke.
- Ok.
)

Well, this is why I love Italy and hate Mac Donalds. But I would not go so far as to think that you can get things done to your satisfaction faster in Italy.