Wine download page usability problem

[Dan Kegel]

I got email from a friend who complained how
hard it was to install wine.  Turns out he
assumed he had to go to winehq.org and
follow the download instructions there,
when all he needed to do was do
Applications / Add/Remove and pick Wine.

Can we add in a line at the top saying
"Stable version 1.0.1 of Wine can usually be installed
 just like any other Linux application using your
 package manager (e.g. in Ubuntu, do Applications / Add/Remove,
 select Wine, and click Apply Changes).

If that doesn't work, or if you need a newer version of Wine,
 here's how to get it."
?

I know, that clutters things even more.  Suggestions for
achieving the same thing more concisely would be welcome.

I think we should also move the text
"This endorsement is the primary recognition that CodeWeavers has
requested in exchange for hosting the Wine web site."
to the bottom of the page, and change it to read
"Thanks to CodeWeavers for hosting WineHQ.org".
- Dan

[Austin English]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> I got email from a friend who complained how
> hard it was to install wine.  Turns out he
> assumed he had to go to winehq.org and
> follow the download instructions there,
> when all he needed to do was do
> Applications / Add/Remove and pick Wine.
>
> Can we add in a line at the top saying
> "Stable version 1.0.1 of Wine can usually be installed
>  just like any other Linux application using your
>  package manager (e.g. in Ubuntu, do Applications / Add/Remove,
>  select Wine, and click Apply Changes).

Nitpick, but instead of 'Linux', use 'native'. FreeBSD's ports
contains wine, as well as NetBSD's.
> I think we should also move the text
> "This endorsement is the primary recognition that CodeWeavers has
> requested in exchange for hosting the Wine web site."
> to the bottom of the page, and change it to read
> "Thanks to CodeWeavers for hosting WineHQ.org".

+1

[Jeremy White]

> > I think we should also move the text
> > "This endorsement is the primary recognition that CodeWeavers has
> > requested in exchange for hosting the Wine web site."
> > to the bottom of the page, and change it to read
> > "Thanks to CodeWeavers for hosting WineHQ.org".
>
> +1

To be very honest, that would hurt.

We get an appreciable amount of traffic from that more prominent
location, and that traffic helps to pay our salaries.

I feel that it is reasonable for us to ask for that prominent
placement, given our contributions, particularly since we're
quite honest and clear about it.

Cheers,

Jeremy

[Dan Kegel]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Jeremy White  wrote:
> > > I think we should also move the text
> > > "This endorsement is the primary recognition that CodeWeavers has
> > > requested in exchange for hosting the Wine web site."
> > > to the bottom of the page, and change it to read
> > > "Thanks to CodeWeavers for hosting WineHQ.org".
>
> To be very honest, that would hurt.
>
> We get an appreciable amount of traffic from that more prominent
> location, and that traffic helps to pay our salaries.

I'm not proposing moving the download link, just the
endorsement, which currently isn't a link.
(We should probably turn the endorsement into a link.)
> I feel that it is reasonable for us to ask for that prominent
> placement, given our contributions, particularly since we're
> quite honest and clear about it.

No argument there, but the thing you want prominently placed is the
download link, not the thankyou, right?

[Jeremy White]

> No argument there, but the thing you want prominently placed is the
> download link, not the thankyou, right?

Oh, sorry; I didn't understand.

I was trying to be honorable on this point by clearly revealing why
that prominent placement was given to us; a truth in advertising
sort of thing.

I can see that it consumes vertical white space, and I
can get over myself.  I remove my objection :-/.

Cheers,

Jeremy

[Dan Kegel]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Jeremy White  wrote:
> I can see that it consumes vertical white space, and I
> can get over myself.  I remove my objection :-/.

Thanks!

Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?

Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
I'll fix it up as needed.

I'm kind of excited about this technique for cleaning up install flows...
- Dan

[Daniel Verkamp]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
[...]
> Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
>
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.
>
> I'm kind of excited about this technique for cleaning up install flows...
> - Dan

On Gentoo with www-client/mozilla-firefox (not mozilla-firefox-bin)
the page just detects "unknown distribution Linux".

Thanks,
-- Daniel Verkamp

[Dan Kegel]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Daniel Verkamp  wrote:
> > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> > and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
>
> On Gentoo with www-client/mozilla-firefox (not mozilla-firefox-bin)
> the page just detects "unknown distribution Linux".

Try it now...

[Daniel Verkamp]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Daniel Verkamp  wrote:
> > > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> > > and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> >
> > On Gentoo with www-client/mozilla-firefox (not mozilla-firefox-bin)
> > the page just detects "unknown distribution Linux".
>
> Try it now...

Indeed, works now.  (As a side note, since there are no Gentoo
packages on the download page, maybe it makes sense to point the user
at some appropriate documentation about how to install it.)

[Matt 'Murph' Finnicum]

For me, it got Gentoo just fine.

using: www-client/mozilla-firefox-3.1_beta2-r1

"You're using Firefox 3.1 on Gentoo Linux!"

--Murph

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Daniel Verkamp  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> [...]
> > Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> > put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
> >
> > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> > and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> > I'll fix it up as needed.
> >
> > I'm kind of excited about this technique for cleaning up install flows...
> > - Dan
>
> On Gentoo with www-client/mozilla-firefox (not mozilla-firefox-bin)
> the page just detects "unknown distribution Linux".
>
> Thanks,
> -- Daniel Verkamp

[IneedAname]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:40:28 -0800
Dan Kegel  wrote:
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.

It does not my detect distro version. Can that be done?

[Juan Lang]

> Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?

Can we also have a non-Javascript page, please?  People with
accessibility issues, and crufty old curmudgeons like me who disable
Javascript by default, would appreciate it.
--Juan

[Dan Kegel]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Juan Lang  wrote:
> > Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> > put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
>
> Can we also have a non-Javascript page, please?  People with
> accessibility issues, and crufty old curmudgeons like me who disable
> Javascript by default, would appreciate it.

Of course.  I think we should only have a single page,
and if Javascript is active, it should simply work better.

[Erich Hoover]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Juan Lang  wrote:
> > > Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> > > put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
> >
> > Can we also have a non-Javascript page, please?  People with
> > accessibility issues, and crufty old curmudgeons like me who disable
> > Javascript by default, would appreciate it.
>
> Of course.  I think we should only have a single page,
> and if Javascript is active, it should simply work better.

You could use the HTTP_USER_AGENT environment variable to do a first-order
attempt.  That way for people with Javascript disabled there's at least a
chance you'll detect their distribution.

Erich Hoover
[e-mail]

[Dan Kegel]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Erich Hoover  wrote:
> You could use the HTTP_USER_AGENT environment variable to do a first-order
> attempt.  That way for people with Javascript disabled there's at least a
> chance you'll detect their distribution.

Yeah, we could probably do it all in php instead of javascript.

[David Gerard]

2009/2/20 Dan Kegel :
> Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.

You're running
Mozilla 1.9 on an unknown distribution Windows!

(Actually Firefox 3.1 in Wine on Ubuntu, but there's nothing in the
user-agent that says it's not Windows ;-) )

- d.

[Vít Hrachový]

Hi Dan,
Firefox 3.1b2 on OpenSolaris 2008.11 returns: 'unknown distribution of 
an unknown OS'.
Cheers
Hark

Dan Kegel wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Jeremy White  wrote:
> > I can see that it consumes vertical white space, and I
> > can get over myself.  I remove my objection :-/.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
>
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.
>
> I'm kind of excited about this technique for cleaning up install flows...
> - Dan

[Rosanne DiMesio]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:40:28 -0800
Dan Kegel  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Jeremy White  wrote:
> > I can see that it consumes vertical white space, and I
> > can get over myself.  I remove my objection :-/.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
>
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.
>
> I'm kind of excited about this technique for cleaning up install flows...
> - Dan

You're running

Firefox 3 on an unknown distribution Linux!

(That's for Firefox 3 on openSUSE 10.3).

[Remco]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.

You're running

Firefox 3 on an unknown distribution Linux!

Actually: Epiphany 2.24.1 on Ubuntu 8.10 x86-64

[Rolf Kalbermatter]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html and let me know if it 
> detects your distro properly, I'll fix it up as needed.You're running

Firefox 3 on an unknown distribution Windows an unknown CPU!

Firefox 3.0.6 on Windows XP SP3

userAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.6)
Gecko/2009011913 Firefox/3.0.6

Rolf Kalbermatter

[Marcus Meissner]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:02:16PM +0100, Rolf Kalbermatter wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html and let me know if it 
> > detects your distro properly, I'll fix it up as needed.You're running
>
> Firefox 3 on an unknown distribution Windows an unknown CPU!
>
> Firefox 3.0.6 on Windows XP SP3
>
> userAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.6)
> Gecko/2009011913 Firefox/3.0.6

You're running 
 Konqueror 3.5 on an unknown distribution Linux an unknown CPU!
 Please let Dan Kegel ([e-mail]) know if this isn't accurate. Please include the incorrect output, the correct distro name, and the following information: 
 userAgent Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.5) KHTML/3.5.9 (like Gecko) SUSE

(openSUSE 11.0)

Ciao, Marcus

[Remco]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.

It's probably a more useful test if you also print the reported user
agent string. (By the way, Dan, could you somehow coerce your
colleagues into making a bottom-posting Gmail? ;) )

Remco

[Erich Hoover]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Remco  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> > and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> > I'll fix it up as needed.
>
> It's probably a more useful test if you also print the reported user
> agent string. (By the way, Dan, could you somehow coerce your
> colleagues into making a bottom-posting Gmail? ;) )
>
> Remco

Seconded.  Attached is a simple (read: dumb) "distro finder" in PHP.

Erich Hoover
[e-mail]

[Kai Blin]

> Next idea: why don't we detect the user's distro via javascript, and
> put a targeted link to the 'right' package above the table?
>
> Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> and let me know if it detects your distro properly,
> I'll fix it up as needed.
>
> I'm kind of excited about this technique for cleaning up install flows...
> - Dan

Konqueror 3.5 on an unknown distribution Linux an unknown CPU!
userAgent Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.5; Linux) KHTML/3.5.10 (like 
Gecko) (Kubuntu)

Cheers,
Kai

[Dan Kegel]

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 4:45 AM, Kai Blin  wrote:
> > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
>
> Konqueror 3.5 on an unknown distribution Linux an unknown CPU!
> userAgent Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.5; Linux) KHTML/3.5.10 (like
> Gecko) (Kubuntu)

Yeah, that's https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332339, and rather
unlikely to be fixed unless a lot of people push for it.

I think the upshot of this experiement is that
we should use the useragent info when it's helpful
(which is most of the time, since Firefox on Ubuntu
and several othe distros has the needed info),
and just keep on as we were doing when it's not
(which should only be 20% or so of the time).
- Dan

[Kai Blin]

On Sunday 22 February 2009 15:51:31 Dan Kegel wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 4:45 AM, Kai Blin  wrote:
> > > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
> >
> > Konqueror 3.5 on an unknown distribution Linux an unknown CPU!
> > userAgent Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.5; Linux) KHTML/3.5.10
> > (like Gecko) (Kubuntu)
>
> Yeah, that's https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332339, and rather
> unlikely to be fixed unless a lot of people push for it.

No, it's not. You can see that the userAgent string contains (Kubuntu).

I'm not sure if I turned this on at some point in the past, but it's not 
parsed correctly in any case.
> I think the upshot of this experiement is that
> we should use the useragent info when it's helpful
> (which is most of the time, since Firefox on Ubuntu
> and several othe distros has the needed info),
> and just keep on as we were doing when it's not
> (which should only be 20% or so of the time).

+1

Cheers,
Kai

[Dan Kegel]

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Kai Blin  wrote:
> > > > Please try http://kegel.com/wine/distro.html
>
> You can see that the userAgent string contains (Kubuntu)...

Oh, right, thanks.  I've added a lower-case ubuntu to the list,
can you try again?  (The search should be case-
insensitive, but I haven't bothered to look up how to do that
in Javascript, since we want to do this on the server side
anyway...)
- Dan

[Rosanne DiMesio]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:24:09 -0800
Dan Kegel  wrote:
> Can we add in a line at the top saying
> "Stable version 1.0.1 of Wine can usually be installed
>  just like any other Linux application using your
>  package manager (e.g. in Ubuntu, do Applications / Add/Remove,
>  select Wine, and click Apply Changes).
>
> If that doesn't work, or if you need a newer version of Wine,
>  here's how to get it."
> ?

The problem with the way you've phrased it is that it's simply not true. Ubuntu users have complained on the forum more than once that there are no 1.0.1 packages in their repository. I've also never seen any 1.0.1 packages for openSUSE in any of the repositories or the Sourceforge archive.

Take out the "Stable version 1.0.1 of" and it works.

[Marcus Meissner]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:47:16AM -0600, Rosanne DiMesio wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:24:09 -0800
> Dan Kegel  wrote:
> > Can we add in a line at the top saying
> > "Stable version 1.0.1 of Wine can usually be installed
> >  just like any other Linux application using your
> >  package manager (e.g. in Ubuntu, do Applications / Add/Remove,
> >  select Wine, and click Apply Changes).
> >
> > If that doesn't work, or if you need a newer version of Wine,
> >  here's how to get it."
> > ?
>
> The problem with the way you've phrased it is that it's simply not true. Ubuntu users have complained on the forum more than once that there are no 1.0.1 packages in their repository. I've also never seen any 1.0.1 packages for openSUSE in any of the repositories or the Sourceforge archive.
>
> Take out the "Stable version 1.0.1 of" and it works.

I actually build them, in http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/Emulators:/Wine:/STABLE/<distro>
but up to adding them I never had a single request for the stable version.

I think the regular downloading user might not be interested,
and our regular development releases are stable enough.

Ciao, Marcus

[Scott Ritchie]

Rosanne DiMesio wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:24:09 -0800
> Dan Kegel  wrote:
> > Can we add in a line at the top saying
> > "Stable version 1.0.1 of Wine can usually be installed
> >  just like any other Linux application using your
> >  package manager (e.g. in Ubuntu, do Applications / Add/Remove,
> >  select Wine, and click Apply Changes).
> >
> > If that doesn't work, or if you need a newer version of Wine,
> >  here's how to get it."
> > ?
>
> The problem with the way you've phrased it is that it's simply not true. Ubuntu users have complained on the forum more than once that there are no 1.0.1 packages in their repository. I've also never seen any 1.0.1 packages for openSUSE in any of the repositories or the Sourceforge archive.

1.0.1 is included in Ubuntu 8.10.  8.04 still has 1.0.0 though.  I think
I started a backport a long time ago, but I guess it never finished.

Thanks,
Scott Ritchie

[Ben Klein]

2009/2/21 Dan Kegel :
> Can we add in a line at the top saying
> "Stable version 1.0.1 of Wine can usually be installed
>  just like any other Linux application using your
>  package manager (e.g. in Ubuntu, do Applications / Add/Remove,
>  select Wine, and click Apply Changes).

I know some versions of Ubuntu ship with 1.0.1 in official
repositories, but I don't know of any other distros that do.

Regarding the browser-detection, server-side scripting is the best
way. I'm always against needlessly adding Javascript to pages. What
I'd like to see is some option to view the full list of
distros/sources even when the detection worked. Something like:

"To see download pages for more distributions, click here"

It can be useful to be able to see one system's instructions from
another, especially when doing user support.