Warp schrieb:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> What I find 
>> irritating is the functionality it has when routed to the desktop. First 
>> because the functionality is pretty much different
> 
>   Not really all that different. You scroll the desktop.

No, you don't scroll it - you "page" it.

>> and secondly because 
>> it may also affect what actually /is/ under the mouse cursor, as the 
>> next turn of the wheel will bring up a different desktop with different 
>> windows at different places. So that if for instance I scroll one 
>> desktop too far, I may not be able to instantly scroll back, and may 
>> have to find some empty desktop space first.
> 
>   Clicking on the same spot on screen doesn't always result in the same
> effect either. It depends on what is there.

Okay, you don't want to get my point. Fine. Just tell me where I can get 
rid of that behavior.

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:29:14 +0100, clipka wrote:

>> KDE4 desktop doesn't support icons anymore. The feature was removed.
> 
> Not really. It just seems to be non-default...

True, it wasn't removed, you have to go into the desktop settings and 
change the type back to "Folder View" and that restores the "classic" 
style.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Invisible schrieb:

> Also, which moron decided that clicking something twice on the task bar 
> should minimize it? I never *ever* want this to happen!

Ah, by the way: Does someone know how to disable that with KDE4? It 
seems full of options, but this one doesn't seem among them.

Post a reply to this message

andrel wrote:
> On 18-11-2009 19:01, Stephen wrote:
>> 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 :)
> 
> Don't know what that acronym means but it is one of those surprising 
> windows things. It known what goes wrong but refuses to behave as expected.
> 
> 
Sorry again Andrel, it is not really an acronym but /strine/ (Australian 
slang) that has passed into British English. The acronym is POHM 
(Prisoner Of His Majesty) and the most common usage is “whinging pommy 
b*st*rd”

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez schrieb:
> 
>>> Why the **** does /no/ graphical user interface provide a way to
>>> rearrange the running programs in taskbar?! I mean, that shouldn't be
>>> /too/ difficult to implement, right?
>> 
>> For KDE, I heard they're working on it... But since the taskbar is just
>> another plasmoid, I think you could "easily" write your own. Even in an
>> interpreted language.
> 
> For KDE, I found out that they actually /do/ have it by now... just need
> to switch off alphabetical sorting...

Wow, they do.

> Heck, how many config options do they have?!? This is frightening :-)

Be glad you didn't try KDE 4.0. There were *so* many options *missing* that 
KDE3.5 did have...

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez schrieb:

>> Heck, how many config options do they have?!? This is frightening :-)
> 
> Be glad you didn't try KDE 4.0. There were *so* many options *missing* that 
> KDE3.5 did have...

Heh, I /am/ talking about KDE4...

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> 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. :-)

Yeah, I've never heard anyone else complain either. But I tried to do something
very specific that I considered trivial, and it couldn't do it. I invested some
time trying to find the "right" way to do it, and the answer seemed cumbersome.
So I threw it out and used something else :)

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:

> Heck, how many config options do they have?!? This is frightening :-)

But the critical question is... Can you configure them all from the GUI? 
Or do you have to edit some 25-mile text file?

Oh, and are any of these things sufficiently *documented*?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible schrieb:
> clipka wrote:
> 
>> Heck, how many config options do they have?!? This is frightening :-)
> 
> But the critical question is... Can you configure them all from the GUI? 
> Or do you have to edit some 25-mile text file?

Well, so far I have looked /only/ at those that can be configured from 
the GUI... who knows what more may be available "below the surface".

> Oh, and are any of these things sufficiently *documented*?

Differs. Most settings dialogs come with a "help" button that works and 
tooltips that do help - a few don't, which is somewhat annoying, 
especially when there is a help button, but all you get from it is an 
error message.

Post a reply to this message

>> Oh, and are any of these things sufficiently *documented*?
> 
> Differs. Most settings dialogs come with a "help" button that works and 
> tooltips that do help - a few don't, which is somewhat annoying, 
> especially when there is a help button, but all you get from it is an 
> error message.

Ooo, I *love* this! Loads of Windows programs have a big help button, 
but when you click it you get absolutely nothing of use.

Sometimes you get a help page for the whole dialog box, containing such 
gems as "Use SCSI encapsulation - Turn this on if you want to use SCSI 
command encapsulation". Well, gee, now it all makes sense!

Sometimes you get an error message. (Oh THAT helps me!)

But, in the vast majority of cases, NOTHING HAPPENS. Absolutely nothing. 
Not even a "sorry, we haven't written the help file yet". Just nothing.

Post a reply to this message