https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=417424
--- Comment #32 from gust...@angulosolido.pt --- (In reply to Nate Graham from comment #28) [...] > > Our explicit goal was in fact to implement this model more naturally, via a > global edit mode. It was intended that when not in the global edit mode, > users would be prevented from accidentally destroying their desktop, because > they would need to enter the global edit mode. > If you are referring to the Customize Layout / Finish Customizing Layout feature, the problem is that it does not prevent the panel from being reconfigured. If this feature also controlled the panel it would be the same as Lock Widgets / Unlock Widgets. And in that case I would not even complain that the name of the feature had changed. >Our model of user behavior was that non-technical users don't tend to right- >click much, so preserving the ability to delete widgets using the context menu >outside of the edit mode was okay as it would mostly be used as an accelerator >for experts. Perhaps this was a flawed assumption, There is a spectrum of technicality from entry level users who are afraid of breaking the system and only click on what they know (a minority) to highly technical users (like the ones discussing here) which are disciplined with clicks and are able to reconfigure whatever they break. Your assumption might be right to the leftmost part of the spectrum. Unfortunately, the majority of the users lies in the middle of the spectrum: they are technical enough to not be afraid to click but not technical enough to put things back as they where. I am talking of non-technical former Windows and OSX users at their peak of non-technical productivity. They will consider that the desktop is bad if they manage to break it accidentally - and I have seem that happen in the past and that is why I am saying we should prevent it with a "Lock widgets" or equivalent feature. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
