Comment 4 for bug 78025

On Sun, 2007-18-02 at 02:35 +0000, Zeth wrote:
> If you want less buttons then why not make stop keep your position?
> Double-clicking stop could then return to zero.
>

Unfortunately, that would lead us to the same problem of people saying
"It took me a while before figuring out that you can double-click stop
to make it return to zero!" or "I accidently double-clicked it instead
of single-clicking it, argh!"

I'd have to say that the single Play/Pause in a single button, what I'll
call the Totem Play/Pause for the sake of simplicity, is still very
informative and beyond sticking to absolute usability theories of "Well,
a single button can't do two things!" I think it would feel much more
intuitive and usable for users than what we currently have, or even
adding a seperate pause button (the HIG Play/Pause). I would have to
say that the only reason you don't have a single Play/Pause button in
real life is that you can't do that on a real life device, while in
software land, it can be done. Actually, I think there is a real life
device that does it, but I'm not entirely sure since I don't own one, an
iPod. I think this was mentioned in the last debate.

So, there is precedent. It is informative. And I don't think we're
encouraging something so horrible to usability by using a Totem
Play/Pause button.

- Jean-Francois Arseneau