Dave Leigh wrote: > > Steven, you've done an admirable job of trying to make a convincing > point, but in my case at least, it simply doesn't work. I'm not > intending to be argumentative here, so forgive me if it seems that way. > But you did ask for sensible objections elsewhere, and I'm assuming that > such objections would be welcome here as well. Always. And I must say, you've stated the case for the status quo (window menus) admirably. If I gave anyone the impression I was a religious bigot over the issue, I apologise. Yes, I'm more comfortable with screen mode menus, but I also recognise that I can be mistaken about my own working efficiency. If I claim, as I do, that many users are less efficient than they think they are, then I must admit the possibility that the same holds true for myself. > You say quite a lot to undermine your own argument; for instance, "What's > one more thing to learn?" applies equally well to the minority of Mac > users that need to learn that the menu is attached to the window. Of course. And as a Mac user who also uses Windows, I know it doesn't take long to learn. My point was to encourage more efficient practises, although I concede that some will dispute that top of screen menubar is more efficient. > Windows currently enjoys 82% > of the world PC operating systems market, according to the data reported > in this morning's newspaper. They are not all going to defect next year > or the year after. I don't have figures to hand, but lets not forget the developing world, where Linux is expanding at a terrific rate. China alone has the potential to have more new PC users than the rest of the world put together. And since China has banned Windows 2000 in government offices, what OS do you think its going to be? > I think you're being too impatient. Heh, you should talk to some of my *real* Linux evangelist friends :-) > Obviously Apple is not immune to > inconsistencies of either thought or design. Bruce Toganazzi for one believes Apple has lost the plot UI-wise, and I'm inclined to agree. Five minutes with Apple's Quicktime 4 player was enough for me to lose all respect for Apple's current generation of UI misdesigners. Aqua may not be quite as shockingly bad as the Quicktime player, and it has some good features, but it also has some pretty bad ones too. (As an aside, Tog makes some intriging suggestions for future directions in UI design. Does anyone feel brave enough to infringe Apple's patent on "piles"?)  > The remainder of your arguments don't really add a lot to what's already > been discussed and they smack more than a little bit of callousness > ("They just have to learn to live with a certain amount of difference." > is callous I'm sorry, but I disagree. Its realistic. I cannot see how you can possibly expect consistancy between all applications when there are so many different UI models being developed. For instance, KDE has dropped support for draggable menubars. What will people do when they find that their Gnome apps have draggabe menubars, but not KDE apps, and Netscape Navigator completely different menus, and the Gimp doesn't have a visible menubar at all? There is no Interface Police under Linux. Users will just have to cope. > just as is, "If you want Windows, you know where to find it."). OK, I'll give you this one. Perhaps I was a little harsh. Dave, you make a lot of good points, which I won't argue with. Perhaps at this time, we need to hear from the maintainers of KDE, at least regarding the next release. Kurt, you re-opened this can of worms (and don't think it hasn't been fun :-) - have you changed your mind, or are you still in favour of default top-of-screen menubar? I'm sure that, whatever the decision, the issue isn't dead, but perhaps we can put it to bed for a while. -- Steven D'Aprano