Make docs more clear

[kokofixcomputers]

Added up-to-date images and summarized some docs. Still updating

[isaak654]

I don't think this is a good idea, there would be consistency issues with other Sandboxie Control references and Classic users may be disoriented.

It would be better to create a distinction from old to new, for example:

Related Sandboxie Control setting: Sandboxie Control > Sandbox Settings > Appearance

Related Sandboxie Plus setting: Sandbox > Sandbox Options > General Options > Box Options

I would also suggest to restore the Sandboxie Control images you have removed in this PR*** in order to do this:

Sandboxie Classic:

image1

Sandboxie Plus:

image2

but only where you already have the ![](../Media/anyimage.png) tags.

[isaak654]

***More specifically, I think it makes sense to remove the Sandboxie Control images below only after discontinuing Sandboxie Classic, not before. But this decision can only be made by the Sandboxie maintainer.

Media/AlertPrograms.png
Media/AppearanceSettings.png
Media/ForcedProgramsSettings.png
Media/InternetAccessSettings.png
Media/MessagesFromSandboxie.png
Media/ViewMenu.png

[kokofixcomputers]

@DavidXanatos Please review this

[kokofixcomputers]

But this repo focuses on sandboxie plus

…

On Jan 8, 2024 at 9:09 AM -0800, isaak654 ***@***.***>, wrote: @isaak654 commented on this pull request. In Content/AppearanceSettings.md: > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ # Appearance Settings -Sandboxie Control > Sandbox Settings > Appearance: +Sandbox > Sandbox Options > General Options > Box Options ***More specifically, I think it makes sense to remove the Sandboxie Control images below only after discontinuing Sandboxie Classic, not before. But this decision can only be made by the Sandboxie maintainer. Media/AlertPrograms.png Media/AppearanceSettings.png Media/ForcedProgramsSettings.png Media/InternetAccessSettings.png Media/MessagesFromSandboxie.png Media/ViewMenu.png — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[isaak654]

But this repo focuses on sandboxie plus

The main repository sandboxie-plus/Sandboxie still publishes Classic releases. Moreover, currently SbieCtrl.exe is in the Sandboxie Plus installation folder.

I don't think it's the case to drop Sandboxie Classic documentation references given the current state of things.

[typpos]

Sorry, isaak654, but I don't have much time these days to help out. A few opinions based on a brief scan and a look at the Sandbox > Appearance tab:

• Classic needs to be documented so long as it exists
• Keep Classic docs separate to SB+. It's tiresome for users to skip over documentation paragraphs or images that are not relevant to them, and hardly anyone will use SB+ and Classic concurrently.
• Keep as much information as possible in the application itself. For example, explanations for drop-down-list-options in the "Sandbox > ... > Appearance") page can be shown in the dialog itself as a text label.
• Avoid using fluffy filler-phrases, like "... can be conveniently managed ...". I think SB users are fairly technical and tend to go straight to the point.
• Clean up application dialogs before documenting them. For example, "Appearance" tab layout/sizing.
• Document what is important/hidden/difficult to understand, not what is obvious. For example, the "Appearance" tab shows an option to select what to do when the user double-clicks a box name. This turns out to be a drop-down-combo, not a drop-down-list. You can enter any command in there, eg, "cmd.exe", which will then be executed when the user dbl-clicks the name of the box. Is that documented? Should that really be a combo box? How can a user understand this from looking at the app dialog alone without documentation? I think it'd be better as a drop-down list with a separate text field (enabled/disabled depending on drop-down-list state) to let the user enter the command, and the dialog needs some text to make it clear the option exists. All this before documenting it in a separate place.

Again, opinions only. Ignore me!