Sort CIS task bar using the same method as Windows taskbar [M1172]

1. What actually happened or you saw:
The task bar contains a set of shortcuts which will launch common tasks with a single click. You can add any task you wish to this toolbar.
The current sorting method is not ideal due to the that fact it requires the user to reorganize the whole task bar when making changes.

2. What you wanted to happen or see:
Switching/Sorting tasks should use the same method as the Windows taskbar uses.

For example, let’s say we have a vector of tasks,
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Let’s see what happens when we switch task [1] with task [3]

(currently the ordering would become)
[3] [2] [1] [4] [5]

(However, if this proposed wish is implemented it would become)
[2] [3] [1] [4] [5]

3. Why you think it is desirable:
The overall experience will be more pleasant as users won’t have to arrange the whole task bar again. To better understand how this affects you personally, try re-ordering the tasks so that the first task is now at the end while keeping the rest of the tasks in the same order as they currently are. You will notice that this requires you to move every single task.

If this is implemented finding tasks and sorting them on your task bar won’t be such a hassle to deal with as it will take much less time.

4. Any other information:
While you move a task (click-on-task) there should be an exact instant preview on how the task bar will look, or the tasks could automatically move around the one you are re-ordering.

Thank you for submitting this. Let me play devil’s advocate for a minute. Why does the order of the shortcuts matter. The user just clicks on them anyway, regardless of where they are.

Also, is there a reason that it is preferable for them to be added from left-to-right. Why is it better to have it on the left rather than on the right? I believe these are the questions which other users would as as well. Thus, it’s better to have this discussion now rather than through voting.

Thanks.

  • OCD or OCDish behavior in the user
  • Importance of function or how often you use a function makes for easy sorting and finding
  • Easier to find shortcuts that the user themselves placed and know where the user placed them rather than having to look for it
  • Don’t mess with my sorting…

I see an issue here, sure currently it adds from right to left, or lets just say it simply adds it to the beginning of the shortcuts, this means that if you want it at the end then you have to re-organize all or most shortcuts, so the solution to this was to add it from left to right? Essentially putting them at the end to begin with, although then if you wanted the shortcut at the beginning instead then you still have to re-organize all the shortcuts… However I would personally guess that it is more likely that a user would be adding the shortcuts in a chronological order or chaotic order rather than end to beginning, meaning it’s more likely that the user wants to add the shortcuts to the end of the row if anything, that doesn’t mean it’s always the case though.

I would personally not consider the right-to-left / left-to-right thing the issue in my personal opinion, but rather the way that the shortcuts move when organizing them.
Example:

Lets say you have five shortcuts, [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] - Now lets say you want to move [5] to the beginning, now it would look like this [5] [2] [3] [4] [1] … Meaning you switch place between [5] and [1] rather than simply pushing all of them to the right like [5] [1] [2] [3] [4] This means that in order to move one shortcut to the other end of the row, you need to re-organize pretty much every single shortcut, in contrast to the pushing system where you would only have to move one shortcut, assuming you didn’t want to switch place of two shortcuts…

Iunno…

Sanya IV Litvyak, You are right. Thank you for the very nice explanation. :slight_smile:
Note : OCD = Obsessive–compulsive disorder.

That sums up mostly everything I wanted to say.

Thanks again.

I very much doubt that a wish like this could make it through the voting, and I especially doubt the devs would chagne it from left-to-right as an option.

However, as Sanya brought up

I think that may be the true culprit, and one which I do believe is a good candidate for an enhancement.

qmarius, if the way in which the shortcuts re-organize were altered was changed, would that suffice as well?

Thanks.

No. I think that both should be considered. Sanya IV Litvyak sees a problem in the way it sorts. I see a problem from the point/moment it sorts. Both relate to the same wish/problem.

edit1: I am mainly asking for a modified sorting algorithm- a casual one. The one used now might be more efficient in terms of performance but it is not ideal for usage.
edit2: I will modify my first post to incorporate my ideas more thoroughly. Please wait. Thank you.

OK. It’s better now.

Is the information I provided sufficient ?
Thank you.

I can understand the usefulness of both suggestions. However, as there will be a poll added, the difficulty here is that a user selecting Yes may be selecting yes for one of the two suggestions. There can only be one suggestion for an enhancement per Wish Request.

Thus, please edit the first post of this topic so that it is about only one of the two proposed changes. Then create a second which is for the other. Both can then be forwarded for voting.

Thank you.

It’s actually the same wish- changed title as well.

There are a few minor problems. One is that it is possible for a user to support one of the changes, but not the other. Thus, the votes become more ambiguous. Your one wish has two parts to it. Thus, it makes sense to separate it in two.

The other issue is that when put in the tracker it should be such that it can either be implemented or not implemented. As there are two parts to the implementation of this request, this could leave it as partially implemented, which leaves it in a strange limbo, at least as far as the tracker is currently used.

Also, these two suggestions are such that they could be implemented separately, and help users even if it took longer for the other to be implemented, or perhaps never implemented. By combining them you potentially ask the devs to consider them together. While that sounds good, what may eventually happen is that it will continue to be put off for longer than usual, or even rejected because of part of one. I have seen that happen before.

Thus, all things taken into consideration, I really must ask that these be separated into two pieces. I hope you understand, at least a little.

Thanks.

I will make two requests then.

Is it OK now?

Thank you. I have made some more modifications of the first post, and added a poll. Does everything look correct, or would you like to make some changes?

Thanks.

Yes. It’s correct.

Thank you.

Thank you for submitting this Wish Request. I have now moved this to the WAITING AREA.

Please be sure to vote for your own wish, and for any other wishes you also support. It is also worthwhile to vote against wishes you think would be a waste of resources, as implementing those may slow down the wishes you would really like to see added.

Thanks again.

I’m sorry, but as it has been 6 months since the Wish Request has been submitted, and it has not received the required 15 points, I am forced to move this Wish Request to Rejected. I hope you understand.

Please note that if you wish you are allowed to create a new Wish Request for this same wish as long as you wait at least 1 month since the time it was moved to Rejected. This only applies to Wish Requests which were moved to Rejected because they sat in the Waiting Area for 6 months without receiving the necessary 15 points, and were moved to Rejected only for that reason.

Thank you.