[Pidgin] #562: case for old icons: Advantagous heuristics of differentiated protocol icons

[Pidgin]

#562: case for old icons: Advantagous heuristics of differentiated protocol icons
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  Ash           |       Owner:                
      Type:  defect        |      Status:  closed        
  Priority:  minor         |   Milestone:                
 Component:  pidgin (gtk)  |     Version:  2.0           
Resolution:  duplicate     |    Keywords:  icons protocol
   Pending:  0             |  
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Comment (by elb):

 Replying to [comment:10 merwin]:
 > Replying to [comment:9 elb]:
 > > But you assume that the regular developers do have the spare time to
 write such a plugin, apparently without even any idea of how much time
 that would be?  Interesting logic...
 > The icons already exist for each contact, they are just stuck in a popup
 instead of being displayed on the contact list. Having it display the
 topmost icon in the contact list itself should be very few lines of code,
 since the logic of displaying the icon is already there.

 I see.  As we have said repeatedly, it ''is'' quite trivial -- but that
 does not mean it is something we choose to spend our time on.

 > I would write the damn plugin myself, but I have no experience in GTK,
 and also have no experience developing for Pidgin. Therefore, there is a
 huge learning curve for me to write the small amount of code.

 Any programmer with more than a few thousand lines of real code under
 his/her belt could do it in an afternoon.  I assume, since your employer
 has been paying you to program for many years (or whatever), that you
 qualify.

 > My main point in all of this is this: It seems the developers of Pidgin
 are telling users how they should be using IM, instead of letting the
 users dictate what they want in the application. One thing that I know for
 sure is that developers should not be the ones making usability decisions,
 as the average user thinks completely different.

 The average user doesn't want protocol icons back.  A few noisy users do,
 usually for ill-conceived reasons (as yours turned out to be, of course).
 If we were writing Pidgin for maximum profitability, you are completely
 right, we would have re-added this feature and continued to charge the
 same price for the software, raking in extra profit from that small
 minority of users who cannot stop and think about whether or not they
 ''really'' need protocol icons.  Fortunately, Pidgin is free, and we write
 it in our spare time on a volunteer basis, and as such we can concentrate
 on writing the best software we know how, optimizing for ''our'' needs
 without having to compromise for that last tiny fraction of users, no
 matter what unfounded  assertions about software design and usability are
 made.

 I think we can chalk this subthread up as one more "need" for protocol
 icons which was not a need at all, and move on.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/562#comment:11>
Pidgin <http://pidgin.im>
Pidgin