[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: While were making controversial suggestions... ;)
From:       Michael Matz <matz () ifh ! de>
Date:       2000-04-28 20:56:28
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

On Fri, 28 Apr 2000, Kurt Granroth wrote:
> > With click to focus you can click into the menu bar or the window itself,
> > with focus follow mouse you have no problem at all.
> 
> Click to focus:
> I move the cursor over the window and click on it.  Oop, this just
> moved the cursor in the editor to a place where I did *not* want it.

As I said you can click into the menu bar, and nothing moves. Of course
the correct solution would be that the first activating click is not
handed down to the application, as it has a different purpose having
nothing to do with the application itself, and therefore should not even
noticed by the application.

> Any other style with any focus policy:
> I move the x cursor over to the titlebar.  I click on the bar and drag
> it where I want it.
> 
> LOT'S faster.

Thats correct, but as I said a full title bar has other issues.

> > It is not just a thing which is "fun to show".
> Hey, if the movable titlebars where automatic, then I would think it
> was a really cool feature.  That is, if the titlebar always moved to

In fact I thought exactly this as I wrote my last mail ;)

> Besides, that's another geek feature.  New users won't know anything
> about it.

Then it should be documented. Users usually are not as dumb as developers
think. If you find it acceptable that they learn mac menus, why not this?

> > You seem to be a great lover of fitts "law" ;-)
> Yes.  You are not?

Not if it gets applied to each and every thing as "Totschlagargument" (I
don't know the equivalent english phrase), an argument which nobody can
object against, because either they don't know everything behind it well
enough, or because it's so general, that you can't say anything against
it. Esp. Fitts law was applied in the past in this list to each and
every thing even remotely touching HCI, without making clear _how_ that
should apply. (In the sense of "I think this is best... you know... Fitts
law." and everyone answers: "???... Ahhh yes of course. Fitts laaaw. What
else.")  ;-)

> I used B II extensively for a while back.. but it was simply to

OK. Then sorry for assuming you haven't used it.

> In other words, the entire point of my email was to "bash" B II, not
> to promote my favorites.

Ahh OK. ;) I think that goal was reached :)

> For the record, I think *any* of the other styles should be preferred
> as the default over B II.

Hmm. I think it's not the worst style. But anyway, I have a proposal how
we can reduce all these threads about making this or that default to
/dev/zero.

_Don't provide any defaults at all_

I'm serious. In the beginning wizard, the user can choose some things, and
we provide _no_ default, so he has to make a decision at least one time in
his life. We could even explain why users might want to choose this or
that (talking about pros and cons).

> bigger size grip or longer buttons or anything.  Whatever.  I like
> laptop as it's a cool looking style.

I esp. like the filling of the title bar with the small shaded dots. I had
implemented that for B2, if the title bar would not be so short, that any
dots would be overwritten with the text ;)


Ciao,
Michael.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]