Deeply Filled Mortician schreef:
> On 18 Dec 2006 05:33:01 -0800, jeremyrh.geo@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >
> >Deeply Filled Mortician schreef:
> >
> >> On 18 Dec 2006 01:50:22 -0800, jeremyrh.geo@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >The iReid schreef:
> >> >
> >> >> On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 21:10:55 +0000,
> >> >> this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.co.uk (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
> >> >> the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >> I'm betting he's already tried that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >And not looked at what happened when he did.
> >> >>
> >> >> "http://www.lawn-mower-man.co.uk/itunes.htm"
> >> >>
> >> >> the add to playlist sub menu gives only the PC playlist, not the ipod
> >> >> one. And I wasnt looking for add to playlist anyway.
> >> >
> >> >Get Info is your friend. You would never have guessed that, as you're
> >> >looking for information about your track, so Get Info would not be the
> >> >intuitive choice.
> >>
> >> He wanted to change the descriptions. Get Info is sure as hell NOT an
> >> intuitive place to put it.
> >>
> >> Properties, File Info, Show Details etc. would be more obvious, as it
> >> suggests you may be able to modify stuff.
> >
> >Really? In what way does "Show details" suggest that you can modify
> >stuff more than "Get Info"?
>
> Knowing Mike's experience, it could have connected to the net to
> download a couple of meg of 'Info'.
>
> Both the words Get and Info are incredibly vague, and I would never
> choose them when a more specific name would have been appropriate.
You seem to be desperately looking for something to criticise. If this
is all you can find then it seems like the UI is doing pretty well.
B;
|