 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> What I really miss in Windows which was the norm on the Acorn GUI was to
> be able to drag-n-drop to *save* a file from an application. Quite
> often I find myself having the explorer window open of some folder deep
> on our network drive and I want to save my document in there. On the
> Acorn you could just click save and drag the file icon to the explorer
> window, but on Windows you have to navigate in the save dialog to the
> folder, copy&paste the path name into the save box, or save to the
> desktop and then move it in explorer.
Mmm, that would, in fact, be rather useful...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] scott com> wrote:
> > I saw a demo of a drag-and-drop idea I've been lusting after ever since.
>
> What I really miss in Windows which was the norm on the Acorn GUI was to be
> able to drag-n-drop to *save* a file from an application. Quite often I
> find myself having the explorer window open of some folder deep on our
> network drive and I want to save my document in there. On the Acorn you
> could just click save and drag the file icon to the explorer window, but on
> Windows you have to navigate in the save dialog to the folder, copy&paste
> the path name into the save box, or save to the desktop and then move it in
> explorer.
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.
In fact, RISCOS's drag-and-drop was standardized and integrated to a degree I've
not seen in any OS GUI since. Any file could be dropped into any filer
window or any application window, or onto the taskbar or the application icon
(obviously it was up to the application to deal with it sensibly - but 99% of
them did). And this was 20 years ago. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> 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.
Today it seems that Copy&Paste between applications has replaced this. I
use Ctrl-C Ctrl-V the whole time for moving things between applications.
> In fact, RISCOS's drag-and-drop was standardized and integrated to a
> degree I've
> not seen in any OS GUI since. Any file could be dropped into any filer
> window or any application window, or onto the taskbar or the application
> icon
> (obviously it was up to the application to deal with it sensibly - but 99%
> of
> them did). And this was 20 years ago. :)
Yeh it's a shame, there were some good ideas there.
Other things that were nice:
Using Right Mouse Button to select an item from the menu left the menu open
after doing the command. This was really useful when you wanted to select
several menu items in succession, especially if they were nested menus.
When you dragged a scroll-bar the pointer was locked to move only in the
direction of the scroll bar, this meant you couldn't "slip" off the edge the
scroll bar and lose the grip.
A window that had gained focus didn't automatically become the top-most
window. This was really useful if you are trying to type something into a
document while looking at something else. Today I find myself fiddling
about with resizing and moving windows unnecessarily so I can type while
seeing some other window.
I'm sure there are other things, I'm going to get my old A3010 from my
parents attic at xmas to see if it will fire up. I hope it does, there's
120MB of retro greatness on it :-D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell 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.
You will say "that's because Excel and Word are the same product - MS
Office". But, weirdly, our specialist mass spectrometer control software
has the exact same feature. And the pasted images show up even if you
open the Word document on a PC that lacks the mass spec software...
> In fact, RISCOS's drag-and-drop was standardized and integrated to a degree I've
> not seen in any OS GUI since. Any file could be dropped into any filer
> window or any application window, or onto the taskbar or the application icon
> (obviously it was up to the application to deal with it sensibly - but 99% of
> them did). And this was 20 years ago. :)
Ah, the glory days of computing... :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> A window that had gained focus didn't automatically become the top-most
> window. This was really useful.
...isn't that what I said in the first place? ;-)
> I'm sure there are other things, I'm going to get my old A3010 from my
> parents attic at xmas to see if it will fire up. I hope it does,
> there's 120MB of retro greatness on it :-D
Heh. Yeah. I need to retire my A1200 at some point - it's taking up too
much space, and I hardly ever turn it on. Trouble is, all my synthesizer
patches are stored on it, and I haven't yet found a PC program that will
capture MIDI SysEx messages...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> What really irritates me is Windows Explorer in this regard. For example,
> if I select a directory from the folder view on the left, and the directory
> contents then open on the right, if I try to scroll the file listing, it
> just scrolls the folder view on the left. And the other way around.
I would have sworn I wrote the exact same thing myself a little earlier
in this thread... ;-)
Annoying, isn't it?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] scottcom> 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.
>
> Today it seems that Copy&Paste between applications has replaced this. I
> use Ctrl-C Ctrl-V the whole time for moving things between applications.
True. In fact, a system clipboard was something RISCOS lacked, although there
was plenty of freeware that implemented it.
> Using Right Mouse Button to select an item from the menu left the menu open
> after doing the command. This was really useful when you wanted to select
> several menu items in succession, especially if they were nested menus.
Yep, I hardly ever left-clicked on anything! That extra mouse button was
incredibly useful.
Also: opening a directory viewer with right-double-click would close the parent
directory viewer (obviously not applicable to current filer browsers!)
Similarly, right-click closing a directory viewer would open the parent.
Incredibly useful for quickly navigating directory trees.
> When you dragged a scroll-bar the pointer was locked to move only in the
> direction of the scroll bar, this meant you couldn't "slip" off the edge the
> scroll bar and lose the grip.
One of my favourites was the right-button scroll-bar dragging - if you had both
horizontal and vertical scrollbars in that window you would then be scrolling
both of them at once - 'panning' in fact.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> A window that had gained focus didn't automatically become the top-most
> window. This was really useful if you are trying to type something into
> a document while looking at something else. Today I find myself
> fiddling about with resizing and moving windows unnecessarily so I can
> type while seeing some other window.
This has been hit upon a few times in this thread, and Windows can do a
stay-on-top thing...if you're using particular skins with WindowBlinds.
Haven't really played with it in a long time, so don't know what
practical things it can do now. Skinning apps was, for me, really just
a passing fad from around the turn o' the century. Nowadays I'm just
concerned with the application space, not what colour the edges and
things are. When the layout is identical, the skin on top hardly
changes much, unless it's something *really* different from the base.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> I saw a demo of a drag-and-drop idea I've been lusting after ever since.
>
> What I really miss in Windows which was the norm on the Acorn GUI was to
> be
> able to drag-n-drop to *save* a file from an application. Quite often I
> find myself having the explorer window open of some folder deep on our
> network drive and I want to save my document in there. On the Acorn you
> could just click save and drag the file icon to the explorer window, but
> on Windows you have to navigate in the save dialog to the folder,
> copy&paste the path name into the save box, or save to the desktop and
> then move it in explorer.
Mac supports that.
Applications that handle "documents" show a document icon in the titlebar.
You can drag it to a Finder window.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
> scott wrote:
>> A window that had gained focus didn't automatically become the top-most
>> window. This was really useful if you are trying to type something into
>> a document while looking at something else. Today I find myself
>> fiddling about with resizing and moving windows unnecessarily so I can
>> type while seeing some other window.
>
> This has been hit upon a few times in this thread, and Windows can do a
> stay-on-top thing...if you're using particular skins with WindowBlinds.
Or with menu addons like PowerMenu.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> Ah, while we're ranting anyway...
>
> 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?
Get Taskix for Windows.
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.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> 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.
KDE4 desktop doesn't support icons anymore. The feature was removed.
Instead, there is a "folder view" plasmoid that you can put anywhere on the
desktop, and shows the contents of an arbitrary folder.
If that folder happens to be ~/Desktop, and the plasmoid is resized to cover
the entire screen, you get quite close to the previous behavior. But who
would want *that*? Now you have way more flexibility!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
> This has been hit upon a few times in this thread, and Windows can do a
> stay-on-top thing...if you're using particular skins with WindowBlinds.
Interestingly, i read about one person's travails with trying to get the Mac
to do this. Apparently, because the Mac application software is written
expecting the window with focus to be the window on top, giving focus to
lower in the stack breaks a number of things like menu accelerators and so
on, because the app's menus aren't initialized unless the app is on top. So
if the app gets a key and looks thru the menus to see if it is a menu
shortcut, it can crash.
--
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 <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> 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." :-)
:D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-11-2009 18:34, Darren New wrote:
> 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.
>
Are you talking about the format where it first rounds the vertices to
the nearest pixel on screen before output or are you talking about
another vector format that I totally missed?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> Are you talking about the format where it first rounds the vertices to
> the nearest pixel on screen before output or are you talking about
> another vector format that I totally missed?
I think it depends how you save it. It's the graphics context recording the
stuff, so it gets rounded to whatever resolution the graphics context is
using, I'd guess. I never really looked into it much past what I already
described here.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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.
> 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.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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...
Heck, how many config options do they have?!? This is frightening :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez schrieb:
> KDE4 desktop doesn't support icons anymore. The feature was removed.
Not really. It just seems to be non-default...
> Instead, there is a "folder view" plasmoid that you can put anywhere on the
> desktop, and shows the contents of an arbitrary folder.
... though it may technically be realized via a "full-screen plasmoid"
of course.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible schrieb:
> Ooo, I *love* this! Loads of Windows programs have a big help button,
> but when you click it you get absolutely nothing of use.
Yes - and it seems to me it's getting more and more common.
> Sometimes you get an error message. (Oh THAT helps me!)
Another variant that gets me into ranting mode is to require internet
access to get help, without an option to install the smash locally.
Which especially sucks if it's a collection of some hundreds of HTML
pages (did I mention that I prefer help formats where you can easily do
a full-text search?)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Sometimes you get an error message. (Oh THAT helps me!)
>
> Another variant that gets me into ranting mode is to require internet
> access to get help, without an option to install the smash locally.
> Which especially sucks if it's a collection of some hundreds of HTML
> pages (did I mention that I prefer help formats where you can easily do
> a full-text search?)
M$ Office seems to favour a "help system" which actually just does a
text search of the online forums. (WTF?)
Remember the days when people used to write *real* documentation?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> 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!
That means one of two things:
1) If you don't know what SCSI encapsulation is, don't touch this.
2) Nobody told the tech writer what it actually does.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent naglams, but unable? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent naglams? Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> Which especially sucks if it's a collection of some hundreds of HTML
> pages
Or DirectFB, where the web site tends to go down for a week at a time.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent naglams, but unable? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent naglams? Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Remember the days when people used to write *real* documentation?
Office has real documentation. They just include the online help as an
update. If you have no internet, you still get help.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent naglams, but unable?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent naglams?
Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> 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!
>
> That means one of two things:
> 1) If you don't know what SCSI encapsulation is, don't touch this.
> 2) Nobody told the tech writer what it actually does.
Indeed.
I expect it's frequently #2 - although these are not mutually-exclusive
alternatives. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> 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...
I don't think you're talking about *4.0*. It really is unusable :P
I use 4.3, and there are already like 3 things I want that people have
assured me were added in 4.4 (which isn't released yet).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez schrieb:
>
>> Get Kate. It uses the same underlying file editing component as KWrite,
>> but supports a lot more features, like opening multiple documents at
>> once.
>
> What - KWrite doesn't? Didn't notice yet, but in that case... yes, I
> probably want Kate...
KWrite supports multiple documents. By opening multiple windows. Maybe in
the same process, unlike Notepad, but visually it's the same.
>> And an embedded terminal (useful for typing the ./povray command ;) ).
>
> Heh, I just noticed the integrated terminal in the Dolphin file manager.
> Which cd's automatically. Now /that/ is a smart idea! :-)
Heck, even Konversation (chat client) has an integrated terminal. All thanks
to the component architecture of KDE. KWrite is a simple app integrating
KatePart and Konsole is a simple-ish app integrating KonsolePart. Kate uses
both KParts. And a lot more code, of course.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:39:33 +0000, Invisible wrote:
> But the critical question is... Can you configure them all from the GUI?
> Or do you have to edit some 25-mile text file?
No more often than Windows settings need to be tweaked in the registry
these days, in my experience.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez schrieb:
>> Heh, I /am/ talking about KDE4...
>
> I don't think you're talking about *4.0*. It really is unusable :P
Ah, ok - yes, you're right, I'm using 4.3 here.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
