 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> > You could even 'save' the file in this manner into another open application. For
> > example, a graph program would save a standard vector-graphics file, but if you
> > wanted to use the graph directly you'd just 'save' it staight into your
> > document processor window and it would be inserted at the caret.
>
> Well, you can copy and paste data in this way under Windows. E.g., open
> Excel, select a chart, copy, switch to Word, paste the chart.
Windows does have a system clipboard - something that RISCOS lacked. Then again,
it didn't really need it, given the behaviour I described - you could save any
selection in most apps so I guess the question never arose.
Actually, the thing I miss most from RISCOS was its compact and powerful native
vector graphics format. Every relevant application could read and write it; it
was the standard way to move graphics data around. Even today, there is no
standard OS format on any system I've seen that comes close. I'm still appalled
that Word makes do with that dreadful metafile rubbish - I've never got it to
work for me and have always had to fall back on hires pngs rendered from SVG.
Laborious, wasteful and substandard.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Actually, the thing I miss most from RISCOS was its compact and powerful native
> vector graphics format. I'm still appalled
> that Word makes do with that dreadful metafile rubbish - I've never got it to
> work for me and have always had to fall back on hires pngs rendered from SVG.
> Laborious, wasteful and substandard.
What can I say? Word sucks. :-)
PostScript is very powerful, but designed for use on paper. It's also
rather heavy. (It's a full Turing-complete programming language. It has
a truckload of features that only a printworks would care about.)
SVG could be nice, but seems unpopular for whatever reason.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> What can I say? Word sucks. :-)
I sympathise - Word definitely used to suck a lot, but it is much better.
However, its inability to handle vector graphics puts it firmly next to the
typewriter for me.
> SVG could be nice, but seems unpopular for whatever reason.
It would be great if Word supported it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Darren New schrieb:
>
> > I saw a demo of a drag-and-drop idea I've been lusting after ever since.
> >
> > If you pick something up to drag-and-drop it, then move diagonally over
> > the >
> That'd be cool, indeed.
That's actually quite easy in Windows:
Drag whatever you want to drag onto the target app's taskbar button and that app
will get focus and then drop it in there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Aydan wrote:
> Drag whatever you want to drag onto the target app's taskbar button and that app
> will get focus and then drop it in there.
Oh my. I'll have to try that next time. A new trick. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Windows does have a system clipboard - something that RISCOS lacked. Then again,
> it didn't really need it, given the behaviour I described - you could save any
> selection in most apps so I guess the question never arose.
It sounds more like "RISCOS presented a drag-and-drop UI for the clipboard." :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> What can I say? Word sucks. :-)
Actually, metafile is standard on Windows and is pretty much the same thing
as "PICT" format on Macs. It's a list of the graphics operations/calls it
takes to produce something, so it's basically postscript-like - a list of
resolution-independent instructions. Without being a full-blown language.
You can get a metafile out of any program by printing. That's what the "save
to file" on the print dialog means.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> I sympathise - Word definitely used to suck a lot, but it is much better.
> However, its inability to handle vector graphics puts it firmly next to the
> typewriter for me.
Word has handled vector graphics since OLE days. You're doing it wrong. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> When I minimize, I get a nice mini-screenshot of the window at the
> bottom of the screen.
We call that a task bar, here. ;-)
> Why do people have icons on their desktop?
I only have stuff I'm working on. It bugs me to no end that I'll download
something and it'll get put in some obscure "downloads" directory. No, I'd
like to work on it. I have icons on my desktop just like I have papers and
pens and coffee mugs on my desktop.
I don't put *programs* on my desktop, like so many others do.
If you want really quick access, that's what the "quick start" bar is for.
And honestly I only ever use that at work where it's the same 4 programs I'm
using to do my job over and over.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Aydan wrote:
>> Drag whatever you want to drag onto the target app's taskbar button
>> and that app
>> will get focus and then drop it in there.
>
> Oh my. I'll have to try that next time. A new trick. :-)
>
It is amazing the *new* things you learn from watching other people work :)
BTW don’t try to drop the target on the target app's taskbar button.
Windows whinges like a POM :)
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
