Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Isn't it? It's really clean for the basic stuff, but off the top of my head:

- Codec conversion has one of the most opaque interfaces of any program I know.

- Recording, while simple in interface, has a lot of gotchas, and you're likely not to get what you expect.

- Having a separate volume control I'm sure isn't complicated for anyone here, but it's come up several times as an issue with my parents/grandparents.

- There are so many settings, many in very technical language, that there are entire pages whose function is basically a mystery to me.

I love VLC, and I really think they've nailed the basics, but the program at large suffers from kitchen-sink syndrome, and many of the less common features have had very little thought put into making them simple.



>There are so many settings, many in very technical language, that there are entire pages whose function is basically a mystery to me.

Honestly, I love that about VLC. There are plenty of shell commands I have no idea how to use properly, for instance, but knowing that they are there if I ever do need to learn how to use them is great. The modern theme of stripping out functionality in favor of perceived simplicity undermines these great comprehensive tools like VLC. If you don't know what a setting does that shouldn't be a problem; you probably never have to touch it then. Sure, some of the functions seem pretty old school today, but I'd hate to see VLC dumbed down.


I don't at all object to the complexity of the settings. (Or, I do in a more limited way, but that's not the point of my comment.) I'm disagreeing only with the parent's suggestion that all experiences with VLC are very simple.

On your point: I think having many settings, including very technical ones, is great. I think putting no thought into how to present them clearly is not. Documentation does not to my mind excuse poor interface.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: