scott wrote:
> Anyway, Windows is not Unix, if you port a program from another platform 
> to Windows you should at least have to use the standard Windows GUI 
> controls and keyboard shortcuts.  One thing that is good about *most* 
> Windows apps is that they all work the same way, Ctrl-C is copy, Ctrl-S 
> is save, they all use the same Windows dialog boxes, that makes it 
> *easy* to learn and use. Programs that deliberately don't conform to 
> these standards are just shooting themselves in the foot because users 
> won't like them.

Good.  Now what exactly should be the standard Microsoft shortcuts for 
the following features:
- go to the start of sentence
- go to the end of sentence
- go to the start of paragraph
- go to the end of paragraph
- select following sentence
- select previous sentence
- select following paragraph
- select previous paragraph
- go down into nested scope
- go up from nested scope
- go down into nested scope
...

Yeah, things quickly get out of control when there's so much friggin' 
useful functionality and so few standard shortcuts...

> Look at how many people complain about the UI of Blender and what a 
> steep learning curve it has.  Do you think it would be as bad if the 
> Windows version actually looked and behaved like a proper Windows 
> application?

Funny.  It's an OpenGL application with a single OpenGL custom 
cross-platform graphical interface.  Reminds you of anything?  Yeah, 
that's right!  Most games also use custom interfaces on Windows.  Yet, 
somehow, I don't hear complains about lack of standardized BS.

> Pressing Space to get the context menu and right button to 
> select, using some file open/save mechanism from the DOS ages, using 
> Ctrl-W to save, WTF is that about? - it's a horrendous application 
> running on Windows in terms of the UI.

Why should it use DOS mechanisms when it predates DOS?

The fact is that Blender and Emacs are platforms in themselves.  This is 
good because it right away requires the user to learn it and think in 
the software own terms rather than try to pathetically use it as just 
another underpowered notepad, eternally relying on copy-paste and Ctrl+S 
-- the assembly of text editing -- without knowing any better.

Or the user can simply sigh, turn behind and continue using his lowly 
tools.  I don't think emacs has much to gain anyway from people which 
are just fine in notepad derivatives.

> with no documentation.  A text editor however, you expect to be able to 
> type stuff, copy & paste, load save etc without having to read any 
> documentation because there are OS standardised ways for that stuff for 
> a reason.

Sure, you should know that when you enter the emacs OS. ;)

Post a reply to this message