Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
  • Sign in to follow this  

    Shortcuts Ahoy


    kristus

    SoM updated his pad with the release of a new program. The program which is called Dshorty is an alternative to Doom launchers. It helps automating the creation of Windows shortcuts to Doom source ports, connecting them to IWADs and PWADs.

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Awesome if you want to clutter your Doom folders with tons of needless shortcuts. And still not as straightforward as CDL to use.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Why would you put them in your doom folder? Do you have any other windows shortcuts there? Where do you store any other shortcut? You do realize you can have more than one folder on your hard drive right?

    For instance, there's these things called "start menu" and "desktop" and "quick link bar" and on that you can have folders of shortcuts to different programs and games.

    Do you have all Doom ports in one directory too?

    Jesus man, use your fucking imagination. You CAN have a tidy arrangement on your computer.

    YOU decide WHERE and HOW your windows shortcuts are arranged.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Yes, you can have a tidy arrangement on your computer, and in my opinion having a tidy arrangement means having less useless crap lying around. I have disabled icons from my desktop, I've disabled the quick bar, I prefer to keep my start menu as minimalistic as possible, the only programs that I have visible all the time in task bar are music player and IM programs and I've assigned my keyboard's extra buttons to open programs that I use often - such as the calculator and aforementioned CDL.

    I'm sorry, but the idea of having 83 shortcuts lying around for different wad configurations + playing and recording demos and multiplayer just isn't my idea of "elegant" use of a computer.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Why would you make shortcut for each wad you use? I just make one for the ones I'll often play.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    I'm so glad I don't have Windows, it just sounds like a hassle getting Doom set-up on it. ^_____^

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Reevys said:

    I'm so glad I don't have Windows, it just sounds like a hassle getting Doom set-up on it. ^_____^


    So do I: I use Sawfish and I can make my shortcuts myself easily.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Reevys said:

    I'm so glad I don't have Windows, it just sounds like a hassle getting Doom set-up on it. ^_____^

    Having to use command line is the pinnacle of non-userfriendliness. :P

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    The best thing about the command line is that it's 100% powerful; the interface can't miss anything. The command line can also be enhanced. I have to type very little to run demos on my system, for example.

    Jodwin said:
    the idea of having 83 shortcuts lying around for different wad configurations + playing and recording demos and multiplayer just isn't my idea of "elegant" use of a computer.

    That's not a good example. For regular play (just loading a WAD and starting through the menu) all you need is shortcuts per game (plus maybe per engine, if you use many) If you start adding special arguments, then a launcher, extra shortcuts or the command line make sense.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Why strive for elegance on a desktop? It's not an exhibit in an art museum. I never understood why people wouldn't use the quick launch bar in Windows or the panel in gnome. Is a conveniently placed icon so distracting visually that you would rather use the start menu?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    ducon said:

    So do I: I use Sawfish and I can make my shortcuts myself easily.

    Anyone can make shortcuts easily. The point and original idea of the program is to make it easy for people who doesn't understand how to use the command line.

    Jodwin: And I like having shortcuts to my programs and other things I use frequently. I use the desktop the startmenu and quickbar extensively to reach my programs. And it's lovely. Since I won't have to run across 3 harddrives to open them up. I just hit that link. Does it make my Windows desktop cluttered? No. Because I'm not retarded.
    But you seem to have some issues with imagining something that isn't totalitarian. I don't make shortcuts to everything and nothing. I make shortcuts to the things that I will use reasonably frequently. Otherwise I'll use cmd, or run or whatever else that is suitable for the moment.

    And since you seem to be filled by the idea that this would clutter your doom folder. I am not even sure if you know how to manage shortcuts.

    Behold my messy desktop

    exp(x) said:

    Why strive for elegance on a desktop? It's not an exhibit in an art museum. I never understood why people wouldn't use the quick launch bar in Windows or the panel in gnome. Is a conveniently placed icon so distracting visually that you would rather use the start menu?

    I use a folder on the desktop for games. The quicklink bar for programs and the start menu for programs I use more rarely. All sorted neatly in a way that makes me know exactly where to find it. :)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Since I have a Mac, all I have is the Dock at the bottom. No icons on the desktop, no shortcuts, nothing. I'm with Jodwin in that I like to keep everything organised. I like everything to be arranged neatly, in real life or in games. I like the idea that if someone was to start using my laptop and never knew where anything was, they'd be able to navigate it easily enough and find everything quickly. It's the same reason I organise my bag in a very specific manner in Pokemon, or sort out all my files in my computer extensively.

    When it comes to Doom though, the ZDoom launcher (based on the PrBoom launcher) is incredibly simple and easy to use. Of course, I've never used it to run demos or anything, so I can't really comment on how well that part works. But for loading just a straight forward game, it's awesome.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    I really like this. My only request for a feature would be the ability to select the icon for the shortcut within the program. (the default is neat though).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    exp(x) said:

    Why strive for elegance on a desktop? It's not an exhibit in an art museum. I never understood why people wouldn't use the quick launch bar in Windows or the panel in gnome. Is a conveniently placed icon so distracting visually that you would rather use the start menu?

    By elegance I was referring to using a computer; granted I'll admit that what one person prefers can drastically differ from what someone else prefers depending on usage patterns. Personally I just don't see the point in managing a large group of shortcuts for example Doom if the same functionality can be achieved through more "elegant" means, completely skipping the need of shortcuts in the first place. Which is what I did with Doom: Like I said, I have configured one of keyboard's special buttons to launch a Doom launcher, so when I want to play I press the "WWW"-key which fires the launcher, pick a pwad from the launcher's list and press the start button. Apparently most people would disagree, but IMHO that's a far superior alternative to managing multiple shortcuts for Doom or using a command line.

    Regarding the quick launch bar, although I do find it somewhat distracting, an other reason for disabling it is to maximize the task bar space. Again, I guess personal usage patterns vary here, but I prefer having the task bar space maximized.

    kristus said:

    Jodwin: And I like having shortcuts to my programs and other things I use frequently. I use the desktop the startmenu and quickbar extensively to reach my programs. And it's lovely. Since I won't have to run across 3 harddrives to open them up. I just hit that link. Does it make my Windows desktop cluttered? No. Because I'm not retarded.
    But you seem to have some issues with imagining something that isn't totalitarian. I don't make shortcuts to everything and nothing. I make shortcuts to the things that I will use reasonably frequently. Otherwise I'll use cmd, or run or whatever else that is suitable for the moment.

    And since you seem to be filled by the idea that this would clutter your doom folder. I am not even sure if you know how to manage shortcuts.

    My original comment was regarding people wanting to create separate shortcuts for Doom for different wad/port configurations, playing and recording demos, etc. Comparing that to using "normal" shortcuts is like comparing apples and oranges. Of course I wouldn't put my "normal" shortcuts to my Doom folder, but since the program this thread is about is for Doom shortcuts I originally mentioned the Doom folder.

    Oh and like I said I do have shortcuts in my start menu, although I don't like keeping stuff that I'll use very rarely there, which apparently you do too. So in that sense we actually seem to agree.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    So you think you're too good for shortcuts? Good for you. I myself use them and they do serve their purpose. It's only a mess when you make it a mess. Pop-up submenufolders rule :D

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    leileilol said:

    So you think you're too good for shortcuts? Good for you. I myself use them and they do serve their purpose. It's only a mess when you make it a mess. Pop-up submenufolders rule :D


    He already said he has shortcuts, they're just on his keybord instead of the screen. ^____^

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Jodwin said:

    Having to use command line is the pinnacle of non-userfriendliness. :P


    It IS user friendly, just RTFM, but if you only tried the old MS-DOS, IĀ understand your point of view. :p
    I can even write a script that gives a perfect HTML page with the command-line, thanks to the GNU tools.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    ducon said:

    It IS user friendly, just RTFM, but if you only tried the old MS-DOS, I understand your point of view. :p
    I can even write a script that gives a perfect HTML page with the command-line, thanks to the GNU tools.


    That you can create such a script means that it's powerful, but not that it's user friendly. If it was user friendly the script would already exist instead of needing you to create one yourself. Additionally, user friendliness includes things such as ease of use, simplicity and being intuitive. While command line is powerful, it is hardly easy, simple nor intuitive for those who aren't used to it, especially so if you need to pull the RTFM-card (the most user friendly system is so simple and intuitive that ideally no manual is needed - especially one that has ridiculously elaborate descriptions for the simplest commands).

    In fact often, but not always, sofware that's powerful is not user friendly and vice versa.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Jodwin said:

    Having to use command line is the pinnacle of non-userfriendliness. :P




    You fail it - big time! Even on Windows the command line is a very useful tool - and far more user friendly than many of the crappy workarounds for the typing-impaired.

    Which brings us back to the more or less useless tool this thread is about... :D

    Jodwin said:

    That you can create such a script means that it's powerful, but not that it's user friendly. If it was user friendly the script would already exist instead of needing you to create one yourself.



    Argh! No further comment.



    Additionally, user friendliness includes things such as ease of use, simplicity and being intuitive. While command line is powerful, it is hardly easy, simple nor intuitive for those who aren't used to it,



    There - you pointed out the real problem. People are not used to using the tools at hand! Sometimes learning how to use things may actually be quite beneficial.


    especially so if you need to pull the RTFM-card (the most user friendly system is so simple and intuitive that ideally no manual is needed - especially one that has ridiculously elaborate descriptions for the simplest commands).


    Any tool that offers some actually useful features needs some manual - regardless of the means of distribtion, be it on the WWW, or just a short printout listing command line parameters.


    In fact often, but not always, sofware that's powerful is not user friendly and vice versa.


    Only if you assume that the average user is not willing to learn. May I draw conclusions about you from your contributions to this thread...? :D

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    While personally I tend to use drag-and-drop for playing pwads and batch files for testing my own projects, I can definitely see this tool being useful the next time one of these threads comes up.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Jodwin said:

    If it was user friendly the script would already exist instead of needing you to create one yourself.

    Do you have any idea -- any idea at all -- of the variety of scripts that exist on people's computers and what they do? I have currently absolutely no use for a script that generate HTML pages. The last script I used was one that rename hundreds of image files and iteratively call a program to stitch large groups of them together into single giant images. Do you think most people would ever have a use for that?

    If it were really "user friendly" according to you, an OS would ship with an infinite monkey+typewriter's outputs of scripts, and the friendliness-needing user would have to sift through the vigintillion googolplex scripts in order to find the one they need.

    On the same principle, you could have user-friendly grammar school: rather than teaching kids how to write, you'd give them an infinite amount of already-written text corresponding to everything they might ever need to write, and then they'd just need to chose the appropriate paper out of a mass of them that'd dwarf VY Canis Majoris. User-friendly!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    It's not a matter of usefulness, many people simply do not care to bother writing scripts to launch Doom wads.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Some of you are really dismissing the idea of user-friendliness as pointless. Why?

    I'm pretty sure that any game these days needs some form of it to sell to any great degree. If there was some game that came out that was difficult to set-up for first time users, and didn't come up with any decent alternate launch methods, I simply wouldn't play it, and I know a lot of other people who wouldn't bother either.

    There needs to be some form of accesability for first time players, but a fast and efficient enough way to launch the game for experienced players.

    I know some of you obviously don't mind setting it up the longer way, but I honestly don't see why you're dismissing the idea when it could be helpful to a great deal of others. I for one know I wouldn't play Doom half as much as I do if I had to run it from the command line everytime.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Gnome-Commander:
    Move file selection cursor to wad file, type zdoom, press alt+enter and then just enter.
    You can have a nice and easy interface that works without a mouse, too, just use a 2-panel file manager.
    Uncle Norton for president! ;)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment

    Reevys said:
    Some of you are really dismissing the idea of user-friendliness as pointless.

    It looks more like they're dismissing your idea of user friendliness. Besides, we're talking about personal preferences and setups here. No one's said "delete all launchers forever, everywhere, and ban all launcher users" or anything like that.

    esselfortium said:
    It's not a matter of usefulness, many people simply do not care to bother writing scripts to launch Doom wads.

    Heh, that's what I was thinking in regard to launchers when I was reading some of Jodwin's posts; many people simply do not care to bother writing launchers to launch DOOM wads. I mean, if I were to write my own launcher set up according to what features and arrangements I like, I'd hopefully consider it great and necessary too.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    myk said:

    It looks more like they're dismissing your idea of user friendliness. Besides, we're talking about personal preferences and setups here. No one's said "delete all launchers forever, everywhere, and ban all launcher users" or anything like that.


    Fair enough. I only assumed that launchers were designed to simplify the task of setting up a Doom game, and the first thing that popped into my mind was how a person who had never played Doom before would act when trying to use the command line, and then comparing that with how they would act when faced with a launcher.

    But you can blame that on my college course, it's just the way I've been taught to think.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Reevys said:

    I'm so glad I don't have Windows, it just sounds like a hassle getting Doom set-up on it.

    Not at all; it is very simple and there are many ways to do it. I can quickly and easily get any Doom stuff going in Windows without delay, elaborate preparation or the creation of new files. And I am sure that most competent computer users in most decent operating systems can do likewise.

    You can no more blame an operating system for the messy practices of some of its users than you can blame a pen for someone's shitty handwriting or grammar.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Graf Zahl said:

    You fail it - big time! Even on Windows the command line is a very useful tool - and far more user friendly than many of the crappy workarounds for the typing-impaired.

    Which brings us back to the more or less useless tool this thread is about... :D


    How good or bad most graphical programs are is irrelevant when it comes to how user friendliness of the command line. Yes, there are very non-user friendly graphical programs, such as one Windows accounting program my mother had used in her previous job: It had forms for inputting data bigger than 1024x768 that couldn't be resized, scrolled nor moved around but the monitors were configured for 800x600 resolution, so there was no way to get to input data to those brilliantly hidden fields. User friendly? Yeah right! :D But just by simply rethinking the forms, adding scrolling and other such simple, basic features the whole program could have been made much more user friendly.

    But that's got nothing to do with the command line. That you find it convenient to use means that you are accustomed to using it. Which is just fine of course, but people new to the command line will be left puzzled how the hell they are supposed to do anything. Yes, you may say RTFM, but here's the kicker: Why should anyone bother to learn to use a more complicated tool for a task if they can do the same thing in a much more user friendly manner using an other tool?

    I guess you have your own reasons to keep using the command line. Maybe you have some particular usage patterns for which it fits better, or maybe you are simply so accustomed to using it that anything else feels awkward? I'm sure you've heard all kinds of horror stories of people doing things in very convoluted manners just because that's the way they have been working for years, and all objectively simpler and more user friendly methods are ignored just because. If that works for you or them, fine, but that does not mean that your methods are in fact more user friendly, they are simply methods that you yourself are used to.

    Yes, there are horrible graphical programs, but there are also easier to use graphical programs. A common example would be GIMP vs Photoshop or GIMP vs PSP. Or fitting for Doom, Doom Builder vs the very first map editors. Similarly I'm 100 % certain there are both more horrible and more elegant command line applications as far as user friendliness is concerned. Ultimately though graphical applications have much more potential for being user friendly for new users than command line does.




    And no, I don't have problems with reading manuals myself, but like I said above if I can do a task with a simpler tool that doesn't require learning a new tool just because, I very well will use that simpler tool.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Reevys said:

    Some of you are really dismissing the idea of user-friendliness as pointless. Why?


    I dismiss the idea that user friendliness is having a shitload of scripts, 99.999999999.....% of them will never be of any use to me, already written.

    However, the idea that associating the "wad" and "pk3" filetypes with a certain number of executables which happen to be Doom engine ports, so that I can just right-click on one of them and then open it with my port of choice, among a list... That's 1100000% more user-friendly than what Jodwin argued would be user-friendly.

    Of course, if people don't know about "right-click->open with", which have been around since Win95 at least, then too bad for them. I wouldn't say it's an advanced feature of Windows. People who don't want to learn even the most basic elements of their OS' UI are not users to which you can be very friendly...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment



    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×