Re: Start Menu vs. Panel

[Bowie Poag <bjp primenet com>]

> OK, granted, if you want "Settings" to really say "Foobar", you've gotta
> hack, and if you wanna change the order around a little, same bit.
> 
> But why?  GNOME doesn't even allow this yet.

I think the point he was trying to make, was that Win95 should kinda be
avoided, as a frame of reference, when it comes to deciding the
functionality and appearance of the Panel. We're not KDE, remember? :)

> 
> It's a problem in every system, but it should be noted that most start menu
> items include the uninstaller right next to the loader.  That's not
> necessarily a bad thing.

Its not a problem in every system. AmigaDOS handled it fine -- How?
Because of their style guide. The AmigaDOS Style Guide for 2.x dictates
that application installs must conform to an "Installer" script, which
asks the user their level of experience right off the bat. Novice,
Intermediate, or Expert. Installation, and subsequent removal of installed
apps was a breeze.

> 
> (What do y'all think about dual functionality file/folders?)
> 
> >3) Menu actions
> >[Modal displays kill menus, sucks for email]

Agreed. The Mac Human Interface specs more or less advise to avoid modal
displays like the plague. :)