Authorize registrations?

The Growl forums have moved to Google Groups, this forum is read only.
danieljimenez
Harmless
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 5:55 pm

Authorize registrations?

Postby danieljimenez » Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:36 pm

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember in past versions of Growl that an application required authorization before being able to post notifications. Is it still possible to enable this functionality? It seems like every app these days registers with Growl and sends me pointless notifications. I love Growl and want to keep it useful, which to me is only having five or so apps registered.

Currently, when I receive a notification from an app I don't want; I uncheck the enable box in the Growl preference pane. At the least, I'd prefer it to be the other way. In a perfect world, I would be able to deny registration to applications when they try.

TIA!,
Daniel

User avatar
boredzo
Cocoaforge Admin
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:49 am
Contact:

Re: Authorize registrations?

Postby boredzo » Sun Sep 06, 2009 5:57 am

danieljimenez wrote:I could be wrong, but I seem to remember in past versions of Growl that an application required authorization before being able to post notifications.


No, Growl has never had such a feature.

I love Growl and want to keep it useful, which to me is only having five or so apps registered.

Currently, when I receive a notification from an app I don't want; I uncheck the enable box in the Growl preference pane.


That's the correct solution. Keep in mind that if you delete a registration, Growl no longer knows about the application, so the app will be new to Growl the next time it registers. (This is useful for troubleshooting.)

> At the least, I'd prefer it to be the other way.

The option to have Growl set new registrations as disabled by default could be useful, but I worry that it would confuse other users. We already get plenty of questions from users who aren't seeing notifications for one reason or another; we're reluctant to add another potential reason.

Ultimately, I think we need a whole new UI on the Applications tab. I think we could come up with something that could solve that problem and some others much more effectively. It's just a matter of developer time, since we have many other things (including bugs) to work on first.

danieljimenez
Harmless
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 5:55 pm

Re: Authorize registrations?

Postby danieljimenez » Sun Sep 06, 2009 2:01 pm

No, Growl has never had such a feature.


Not surprising, my mind likes to play tricks on me.

That's the correct solution. Keep in mind that if you delete a registration, Growl no longer knows about the application, so the app will be new to Growl the next time it registers. (This is useful for troubleshooting.)


Understood, and I quickly realized that after removing unwanted apps. I went to the next best solution I could find, which was disabling them; however my worry is that since the application detects Growl it might substitute a standard notification since it assumes Growl could just display it. This speculative situation is really an application issue not a Growl issue, but I just bring it up as food for thought. I'm sure this has already gone through Growl's developers minds.

The option to have Growl set new registrations as disabled by default could be useful, but I worry that it would confuse other users. We already get plenty of questions from users who aren't seeing notifications for one reason or another; we're reluctant to add another potential reason.


I can only imagine this is true, and I'm all for less complication. Especially in an inherently complicated tool such as Growl.

How about a hidden (defaults write …) preference? It could do one of many things:
  • doesn't allow applications to register (would definitely make troubleshooting hard, but I can't imagine someone accidentally enabling this)
  • prompts to confirm registration
  • registers all applications as disabled by default (again need to think about the aforementioned issue with apps assuming the user is getting Growl notifications)

Ultimately, I think we need a whole new UI on the Applications tab. I think we could come up with something that could solve that problem and some others much more effectively. It's just a matter of developer time, since we have many other things (including bugs) to work on first.


A bit off topic, but wasn't that tab just recently redone? I seem to remember it being different in the past and quite clumsy. I find it to be quite functional and useful, with the exception of ten million applications registering with it.

User avatar
boredzo
Cocoaforge Admin
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:49 am
Contact:

Re: Authorize registrations?

Postby boredzo » Sun Sep 06, 2009 5:53 pm

danieljimenez wrote:I went to the next best solution I could find, which was disabling them; however my worry is that since the application detects Growl it might substitute a standard notification since it assumes Growl could just display it.


It's definitely possible for an application to lie to Growl; in fact, growlnotify and the AppleScript support are pretty much built on this. Even so, so far, we've never seen an application pretend to be another.

One countermeasure might be to save a link to the app that registered in the registration ticket (I think we do that already) and provide a control in the UI to reveal it. Registrations from the network would show a dialog box saying that the app registered over the network. So far, though, no such measure has been necessary.

The option to have Growl set new registrations as disabled by default could be useful, but I worry that it would confuse other users. We already get plenty of questions from users who aren't seeing notifications for one reason or another; we're reluctant to add another potential reason.


… How about a hidden (defaults write …) preference?


I use a program called Teleport. It lets me move my mouse pointer from one Mac (A) to another Mac (B), thereby letting me control Mac B using the mouse on Mac A.

When I initially set up Teleport, I turned on an option that enforced a delay before switching, so that I would not end up teleporting to Mac B by accident when I only meant to hit something on or near the edge of the screen on Mac A.

This didn't work. I kept teleporting to the other Mac and having to teleport back.

So then I tried increasing the delay. It still didn't work, and it was even more frustrating. It didn't take me long to realize why: The delay not only didn't keep me from teleporting to the other Mac, it made it take longer to correct the mistake.

Now I work with no delay, so that when I do inevitably teleport by mistake, I can instantly teleport back.

The same lesson applies to your proposal: Better to make it easier to correct the mistake (and to make it) than to make it harder to make it (and to correct it).

  • registers all applications as disabled by default (again need to think about the aforementioned issue with apps assuming the user is getting Growl notifications)


Apps post their notifications unconditionally. The problem is not the app assuming that the notification will go through, but the user. The user's assumption should be well-founded, but a common question is “why isn't Growl showing me notifications?”. (Unfortunately, we generally don't get an answer; the follow-up, when there is one, is along the lines of “I rebooted and it started working”.)

Ultimately, I think we need a whole new UI on the Applications tab. …


A bit off topic, but wasn't that tab just recently redone?[/quote]

Yes. In 1.1, IIRC.

I seem to remember it being different in the past and quite clumsy. I find it to be quite functional and useful, with the exception of ten million applications registering with it.


My opinion is quite the opposite. The original UI worked well; its only problem was lack of room to grow. The new UI has room for all of its current features, but many users have problems finding them. I think most users are only aware of it as a list of applications, nothing more.


Return to “Growl”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users