Re: window-in-window MDI

["James M. Cape" <jcape jcinteractive com>]

George wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 08:42:05PM +0100, Jaka Mocnik wrote:
> > > So, can we have some discussion of the change, and revert the change
> > > if there isn't a consensus to include it?
> > so, as far as I am concerned, this is a matter of freedom of choice (I
> > hope I don't get shot at an entrance to a clinic - whoops, this was a
> > tasteless one), but as I am in no way emotionally attached to these
> > changes, I can happily revert them if the people of Rome (ah, pardon,
> > GNOME) decide so ;) ...
> 
> I agree with Jaka here.  As long as it's not the default I'm all for it being
> there.  There are many people who like it for some weird reason so those
> people can be happy now and switch their defaults.  I have seen people in my
> lug using this argument as an argument for KDE.  I dunno if that is a good
> technical reason to have it, but I don't see a reason to not have it unless
> it crashes all the time and takes up 20 megs in the library.
> 
> George

Ok, how about it being a poor interface?

We in the Hit Squad are expected to suggest interface improvements, but
we cannot do that if steps backward (like including a mode I have yet to
see a decent arguement for) are constantly being taken. A good interface
should be consistent, and provide the user with the most efficient and
easy-to-deduce means of accomplishing their task. I have yet to find
anyone who can use MDI as efficiently as SDI or Notebook-style MDI, and
that seems reason enough to avoid it -- even if one doesn't buy the
technical- and appearance-based reasons not to (X doesn't support it,
themes are not inheirited, window controls/looks/behaviors don't match,
it forces all windows to further limit the available desktop size,
etc.).

    Jim Cape
    http://www.jcinteractive.com

    "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them
     pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
        -- Winston Churchill