How much the Tor Browser is still a Bundle?
Hi! We usually call Tor's flagship product the “Tor Browser Bundle”. But since Tor Browser 3 and our departure from Vidalia, I'm having a harder time going on calling it a “bundle”. This is really obvious with the Mac OS X version, where users now interact with only a single icon, called “Tor Browser”. One concrete example is the logo and the wording that is visible in the configuration wizard. The logo says “Tor Browser Bundle” and the text right next to it says “Before the Tor Browser Bundle tries…”. Couldn't we just drop the “Bundle” here? For another small unconsistency, the wizard window title is “Tor Network Settings”. (Also, “bundle” is super painful to translate properly in French… but that's a side effect.) -- Lunar <lunar@torproject.org>
Hi, Lunar:
Hi!
We usually call Tor's flagship product the “Tor Browser Bundle”. But since Tor Browser 3 and our departure from Vidalia, I'm having a harder time going on calling it a “bundle”.
that might be true. Nevertheless, it is not just a browser we are shipping. We also ship tor and there are pluggable transports coming.
This is really obvious with the Mac OS X version, where users now interact with only a single icon, called “Tor Browser”.
Yes, they are only interacting with Tor Browser (which is good) which is part of the bundle (containing additionally tor and the pluggable transports as said above).
One concrete example is the logo and the wording that is visible in the configuration wizard. The logo says “Tor Browser Bundle” and the text right next to it says “Before the Tor Browser Bundle tries…”. Couldn't we just drop the “Bundle” here?
I'd say "no" as the Tor Browser is not connecting to the Tor network but rather (presumably) to your local running tor. Maybe omitting "Tor Browser Bundle" and rewording the whole sentence properly might be a better solution, don't know.
For another small unconsistency, the wizard window title is “Tor Network Settings”.
Why not reading it as "Settings to connect to the Tor network". If you read it literally, like "Settings of the Tor Network" then, yes, it does not make much sense. Georg
Georg Koppen:
We usually call Tor's flagship product the “Tor Browser Bundle”. But since Tor Browser 3 and our departure from Vidalia, I'm having a harder time going on calling it a “bundle”.
that might be true. Nevertheless, it is not just a browser we are shipping. We also ship tor and there are pluggable transports coming.
Oh, I agree we ship plenty of things to create the Tor Browser. But users do not care. Regarding pluggable transports for example, the UI says “which type of bridges” do you want to use. Users have no notion that this is provided by additional bundled software. And I don't think they should care. I would probably argue differently if we would support the Tor Browser as a standalone thing, but I don't think it is the case. We don't offer to download a browser on one side and a bundle on the other. Developers in our community can learn all about the components that makes the Tor Browser what it is. They have an interest in that. Our users, not so much.
One concrete example is the logo and the wording that is visible in the configuration wizard. The logo says “Tor Browser Bundle” and the text right next to it says “Before the Tor Browser Bundle tries…”. Couldn't we just drop the “Bundle” here?
I'd say "no" as the Tor Browser is not connecting to the Tor network but rather (presumably) to your local running tor. Maybe omitting "Tor Browser Bundle" and rewording the whole sentence properly might be a better solution, don't know.
I don't understand. My proposal was to replace: Before the Tor Browser Bundle tries… by: Before the Tor Browser tries… How is this related to the local running Tor? Although given that Tails is now using Tor Launcher, not mentioning any specific application here would be the best move. -- Lunar <lunar@torproject.org>
Hi, Lunar wrote (11 Mar 2014 09:51:08 GMT) :
Oh, I agree we ship plenty of things to create the Tor Browser. But users do not care. Regarding pluggable transports for example, the UI says “which type of bridges” do you want to use. Users have no notion that this is provided by additional bundled software. And I don't think they should care.
Fully seconded. I'm pretty sure users need to be talked of the software/UI they can see, directly interact with, and relate to, instead of components acting behind the curtain. But I'm no UI/UX expert at all, so I'm cc'ing sajolida, who might be able to dig some UI/UX guidelines that put this clearly. (Oh, and it's great to have this new tbb-dev list for this kind of discussions :) Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
Lunar:
Georg Koppen:
We usually call Tor's flagship product the “Tor Browser Bundle”. But since Tor Browser 3 and our departure from Vidalia, I'm having a harder time going on calling it a “bundle”.
that might be true. Nevertheless, it is not just a browser we are shipping. We also ship tor and there are pluggable transports coming.
Oh, I agree we ship plenty of things to create the Tor Browser. But users do not care. Regarding pluggable transports for example, the UI says “which type of bridges” do you want to use. Users have no notion that this is provided by additional bundled software. And I don't think they should care.
Ah, I understood the original question to be more a question for developers not one having particular users in mind. While I am inclined to agree on your point that users should not care whether they start the bundle the browser or whatever I'd be a bit cautious as oversimplifying might bite us back. If we only talk about Tor Browser then this might make it harder to pinpoint issues the users have as the dev/support needs to disentangle "Tor Browser". The other thing is: we offer the Tor Browser Bundle for download (and not the Tor Browser). Now, if we everywhere else only talk about the Tor Browser (even though "Tor Browser Bundle" might be the more appropriate term) the users might start asking: "Hey, why do I need to download the Tor Browser Bundle, when the Tor Browser is obviously enough?"
I'd say "no" as the Tor Browser is not connecting to the Tor network but rather (presumably) to your local running tor. Maybe omitting "Tor Browser Bundle" and rewording the whole sentence properly might be a better solution, don't know.
I don't understand. My proposal was to replace:
Before the Tor Browser Bundle tries…
by:
Before the Tor Browser tries…
How is this related to the local running Tor?
The bundle connects you to the Tor network, the browser "only" to your local Tor running (shipped in the bundle). But as I said, I originally read the mail to be from devs for devs. So, for normal users this would be hairsplitting.
Although given that Tails is now using Tor Launcher, not mentioning any specific application here would be the best move.
Yes, that is my "omitting 'Tor Browser Bundle' and rewording the whole sentence" idea. Agreed that it would probably be the best thing to do. Georg
On 3/11/14, 6:30 AM, Georg Koppen wrote:
Ah, I understood the original question to be more a question for developers not one having particular users in mind. While I am inclined to agree on your point that users should not care whether they start the bundle the browser or whatever I'd be a bit cautious as oversimplifying might bite us back. If we only talk about Tor Browser then this might make it harder to pinpoint issues the users have as the dev/support needs to disentangle "Tor Browser". The other thing is: we offer the Tor Browser Bundle for download (and not the Tor Browser). Now, if we everywhere else only talk about the Tor Browser (even though "Tor Browser Bundle" might be the more appropriate term) the users might start asking: "Hey, why do I need to download the Tor Browser Bundle, when the Tor Browser is obviously enough?"
Overall, I agree with Lunar and others that most people do not think about the pieces underneath. But if it is ever possible that end-users will want to talk about "the Tor Browser" separately from "the Tor Browser Bundle" then we should keep the word "bundle" in the name. If not, simpler is better. Currently most of our downloads are described as "bundles" because they all contain tor plus other software. For example, go to this page and then click one of the OS buttons ("Microsoft Windows") to show what is available: https://www.torproject.org/download/download.html.en I guess that is just how things have been done and it is not necessarily an argument for what we should do from now on.
I don't understand. My proposal was to replace:
Before the Tor Browser Bundle tries…
by:
Before the Tor Browser tries…
How is this related to the local running Tor?
The bundle connects you to the Tor network, the browser "only" to your local Tor running (shipped in the bundle). But as I said, I originally read the mail to be from devs for devs. So, for normal users this would be hairsplitting.
Although given that Tails is now using Tor Launcher, not mentioning any specific application here would be the best move.
Yes, that is my "omitting 'Tor Browser Bundle' and rewording the whole sentence" idea. Agreed that it would probably be the best thing to do.
I agree that the term "Tor Browser Bundle" is not good for how Tails is using Tor Launcher. But we also need to make sure users are comfortable with the first screen they see. For TBB we want them to know they are looking at a screen that is part of the software they just downloaded... which is why we branded it "Tor Browser Bundle" via both the logo and the text. We could switch to a more generic Tor branding, e.g., use the onion logo and generic text. But I think for Tor Browser (Bundle) users it would be better to keep the product-specific branding. -- Mark Smith Pearl Crescent http://pearlcrescent.com/
Mark Smith:
On 3/11/14, 6:30 AM, Georg Koppen wrote:
Ah, I understood the original question to be more a question for developers not one having particular users in mind. While I am inclined to agree on your point that users should not care whether they start the bundle the browser or whatever I'd be a bit cautious as oversimplifying might bite us back. If we only talk about Tor Browser then this might make it harder to pinpoint issues the users have as the dev/support needs to disentangle "Tor Browser". The other thing is: we offer the Tor Browser Bundle for download (and not the Tor Browser). Now, if we everywhere else only talk about the Tor Browser (even though "Tor Browser Bundle" might be the more appropriate term) the users might start asking: "Hey, why do I need to download the Tor Browser Bundle, when the Tor Browser is obviously enough?"
Overall, I agree with Lunar and others that most people do not think about the pieces underneath.
But if it is ever possible that end-users will want to talk about "the Tor Browser" separately from "the Tor Browser Bundle" then we should keep the word "bundle" in the name. If not, simpler is better.
Currently most of our downloads are described as "bundles" because they all contain tor plus other software. For example, go to this page and then click one of the OS buttons ("Microsoft Windows") to show what is available:
https://www.torproject.org/download/download.html.en
I guess that is just how things have been done and it is not necessarily an argument for what we should do from now on.
I don't understand. My proposal was to replace:
Before the Tor Browser Bundle tries…
by:
Before the Tor Browser tries…
How is this related to the local running Tor?
The bundle connects you to the Tor network, the browser "only" to your local Tor running (shipped in the bundle). But as I said, I originally read the mail to be from devs for devs. So, for normal users this would be hairsplitting.
Although given that Tails is now using Tor Launcher, not mentioning any specific application here would be the best move.
Yes, that is my "omitting 'Tor Browser Bundle' and rewording the whole sentence" idea. Agreed that it would probably be the best thing to do.
I agree that the term "Tor Browser Bundle" is not good for how Tails is using Tor Launcher. But we also need to make sure users are comfortable with the first screen they see. For TBB we want them to know they are looking at a screen that is part of the software they just downloaded... which is why we branded it "Tor Browser Bundle" via both the logo and the text.
We could switch to a more generic Tor branding, e.g., use the onion logo and generic text. But I think for Tor Browser (Bundle) users it would be better to keep the product-specific branding.
Hrmm. I think that we should keep Tor Browser specific logos, but I actually think it won't hurt things too much to make the actual text more generic, to avoid confusion of Tails, Thunderbird, and Instantbird users. It is easy for other apps using Tor Launcher to switch the logos, but it is not so easy for them to switch localization strings. Luckily, the changes to make the strings generic are minimal. Here's a diff: -<!ENTITY torsettings.prompt "Before the Tor Browser tries to connect to - the Tor network, you need to provide information about this computer's - Internet connection."> +<!ENTITY torsettings.prompt "Before you connect to the Tor network, you + need to provide information about this computer's Internet + connection."> -<!ENTITY torprogress.pleaseWait "The Tor Browser will open after a Tor - network connection is established."> +<!ENTITY torprogress.pleaseWait "Please wait while a Tor network + connection is established."> Does this look OK? -- Mike Perry
On 3/11/14, 1:11 PM, Mike Perry wrote:
Hrmm. I think that we should keep Tor Browser specific logos, but I actually think it won't hurt things too much to make the actual text more generic, to avoid confusion of Tails, Thunderbird, and Instantbird users.
It is easy for other apps using Tor Launcher to switch the logos, but it is not so easy for them to switch localization strings.
I was thinking they could switch the text as well, but that will burden the other projects with more localization work.
Luckily, the changes to make the strings generic are minimal. Here's a diff:
-<!ENTITY torsettings.prompt "Before the Tor Browser tries to connect to - the Tor network, you need to provide information about this computer's - Internet connection."> +<!ENTITY torsettings.prompt "Before you connect to the Tor network, you + need to provide information about this computer's Internet + connection.">
-<!ENTITY torprogress.pleaseWait "The Tor Browser will open after a Tor - network connection is established."> +<!ENTITY torprogress.pleaseWait "Please wait while a Tor network + connection is established.">
Does this look OK?
OK by me. My only suggestion is to consider changing the last one to: "Please wait while a connection to the Tor network is established." For me, this wording emphasizes "Tor network" a little more, which is a term that is familiar to many people. And since we are making changes anyway.... -Mark
Hi, Mark Smith wrote (11 Mar 2014 17:23:58 GMT) :
OK by me. My only suggestion is to consider changing the last one to:
"Please wait while a connection to the Tor network is established."
Just my 2cts: most technical documentation style guides I've read recommend to avoid the passive voice. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
intrigeri:
Hi,
Mark Smith wrote (11 Mar 2014 17:23:58 GMT) :
OK by me. My only suggestion is to consider changing the last one to:
"Please wait while a connection to the Tor network is established."
Just my 2cts: most technical documentation style guides I've read recommend to avoid the passive voice.
Suggestions then? If you've read a large number of style guides, your direct input would be even more valuable than negative feedback by itself. "Please wait while we establish a connection to the Tor network."? Is "we" too unclear to be an active subject? That was my initial estimation, but maybe it is still better than passive. "Please wait while Tor establishes a network connection" is another option. Are either of these acceptable? If not, do you have another suggestion? -- Mike Perry
Mike Perry wrote (11 Mar 2014 18:46:59 GMT) :
Suggestions then?
As noted in another email, I was happy with your proposals :) Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
intrigeri:
Mike Perry wrote (11 Mar 2014 18:46:59 GMT) :
Suggestions then?
As noted in another email, I was happy with your proposals :)
Oh, actually I'm pretty sure my proposal is passive voice too though. Mine:
+<!ENTITY torprogress.pleaseWait "Please wait while a Tor network + connection is established.">
Mark's:
"Please wait while a connection to the Tor network is established."
Both of these are actually passive. In both cases the connection is being established by a mystery agent (because we are trying to avoid mentioning the browser explicitly, which got us into this mess). I think you're right that this is indicitive of a problem with the wording that we should fix. Or maybe it actually means that trying to avoid mentioning the browser is a Really Bad Idea. Here's two that aren't passive that got lost in the trim:
"Please wait while Tor establishes a network connection." "Please wait while we establish a connection to the Tor network."
After thinking about it while rewriting these, I think the last one is best in terms of explaining what is happening, and without passive voice. In particular, Tor isn't mucking with your network connection, or creating a new "network connection" on your computer. Changing strings is fun... -- Mike Perry
Hi, Mike Perry wrote (11 Mar 2014 20:59:58 GMT) :
Oh, actually I'm pretty sure my proposal is passive voice too though.
Yes. I'm sorry for the confusion.
Here's two that aren't passive that got lost in the trim:
"Please wait while Tor establishes a network connection." "Please wait while we establish a connection to the Tor network."
After thinking about it while rewriting these, I think the last one is best in terms of explaining what is happening, and without passive voice. In particular, Tor isn't mucking with your network connection, or creating a new "network connection" on your computer.
Fine with me. Thanks! Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
Hi, Mike Perry wrote (11 Mar 2014 17:11:43 GMT) :
Luckily, the changes to make the strings generic are minimal. Here's a diff:
-<!ENTITY torsettings.prompt "Before the Tor Browser tries to connect to - the Tor network, you need to provide information about this computer's - Internet connection."> +<!ENTITY torsettings.prompt "Before you connect to the Tor network, you + need to provide information about this computer's Internet + connection.">
-<!ENTITY torprogress.pleaseWait "The Tor Browser will open after a Tor - network connection is established."> +<!ENTITY torprogress.pleaseWait "Please wait while a Tor network + connection is established.">
Does this look OK?
Seems good to me. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
participants (5)
-
Georg Koppen -
intrigeri -
Lunar -
Mark Smith -
Mike Perry