Re: To answer your question about the upcoming Style-Guide..

On Thu, Jul 23, 1998 at 07:40:24PM +0200, Tom Vogt wrote:
> > >- the panel
> > >  basic configuration should be more sane and less windoze/kde like. for
> > >  instance, DO remove the "start button" analogy, every ui knowledgable
> > >  person I know agrees that it's one of the worst things ever.
> > 
> > Microsoft bashing.
> as an aside.

we don't have a start button, we have a menu applet ... it can be
removed if the user so wishes .. .(though it's the only way to change
some panel config)

it's kde/windows/whatever similiarity has beenn there because we haven't thought
of anything better

> true, they figure it out quicker. however, aside from some minor issues of
> confusion and inconsistency (like clicking the start button to shut down),

again .. it's not called start ... and there  is a shutdown applet available
... but it's a menu ... a menu of choices ... not a start menu, not a stop
menu .. it's A menu ...

> it is a major source of unnecessary complication. the structure of the start
> menu is inherently broken. first you have one single point of reference
> where a menu would have allowed you access to the subpoints much faster.
> second, within that menu you have ANOTHER single point of reference (the
> "programs" point) that spawns the exact same problem yet again. some people
> I know have a screen full of items in the "programs" point and I don't mean
> one menu bar from top to bottom, but enough of those to fill the screen.

I don't see how we fit this ... you are bashing windows ... not the gnome panel
... in gnome one can put the submenus on the panel just as well ... I don't really
see your point here ... this is gnome-gui not windows-gui

> in contrast, take a look at the way nextstep works. the dock is basically a
> collection of "start" buttons, but by grouping you avoid a lot of
> unnecessary movement (avg. number of mouse actions to start a windoze
> application is SEVEN! nextstep: four), you also bring a much clearer structure
> into everything. if you have a somewhat sane grouping (say "system, games,
> graphics, misc apps" for someone with a focus on graphics) you will find
> programs MUCH faster than by opening the "programs" menu and gettting
> visually killed by an unsorted list of several dozen programs, some with
> submenus.

the gnome panel allows customization ... the number of actions can be as low
as one ... just put the launcher directly on the panel ... put frequently
used applications into drawers .. put frequently used submenus onto the
panel ... I don't see what we are missing ... it's a single point of entry
ONLY if the user wishes to make it so ...

> the windoze bar as well as the gnome panel take a fixed amount of screen
> real estate anyway, so why not put that to good use?
> the afterstep wharf I use here uses the exact same amount of screen space as
> the gnome panel, but it puts it to a much better use.

you can use a corner widget if you don't want it to take an entire edge of a

you can fill the whitespace with apps .. I don't see a problem there ...

> I don't want every app to be started directly from the panel. :)
> my proposal is moving away from the single-point-of-failure, oops -reference
> philosophy towards multiple groupings. take my above example of four instead
> of one button. instead of going "start->programs->adobe->pagemaker" you
> would go "apps->pagemaker". which one is more intuitive, easier and cleaner?

ok how about menu->appliactions->pagemaker .. this is what it is now in the
panel .. if you use the apps menu often enough, put it directly on the panel

panel is made to be configurable ...

we don't want to force some way on the user ... but make it easy for him
to use whatever he feels comfortable with

> I also suggest every user should be able to easily costumize his starting
> points, adding or removing them if he needs more or less. if you insist on
> having a start button, you can remove everything else, I won't stop you. but
> please allow the rest of the world to enjoy a cleaner, easier and more
> intuitive layout.

that's the way it is now ... it's just that default doesn't fill the panel with
anything but the bare essentials ... but you an configure it just as you said

> and still - if you want it, I am all for allowing you to customize your
> system so everything is on one button. I just ask in return for my ability
> to customize it so that it's not.

that's there already ...


George Lebl <>
  The following implements RSA in perl and is illegal to export from the US:

          #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
          $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]