Re: [Usability] How CDE presents workspaces and viewports.

[Brian Crescimanno <darksheer fotographix com>]

On Sun, 2001-12-09 at 18:46, Telsa Gwynne wrote:
> I did this with fvwm2 all the time. Some people loathe it. It's
> clearly a matter of taste. :)

Yeah...well...I'm one of the one's that loathed it. ;)
 
> (Later on, to get round a specific MediaGX bug, I actually *had*
> to use it: I would set the virtual size to be one pixel larger
> so that it would redraw properly (don't ask me why this worked!))

I'd like to hear the details of that bug sometime...

> > This is essentially how viewports work now.  However, instead of
> > creating the scrolling effect, the WM locks you over one section of the
> > desktop at a time, making it easier to work with. [snip]
> > The reason workspaces were such a great advantage over this method was
> > the fact that each one was a non-scrolling screen.  It gave the
> > advantages of having more workspace than your normal resolution desktop
> > would provide without having to deal with the "scrolling" effect.
> 
> I love historical context. It makes things so much easier to 
> follow. I have always wondered why this division occurred. 
> Thanks very much. I think I may finally understand now!

Well, I do what I can to provide some history for everyone. :)  Having
been at this for a while longer than some...I have these hazy memories
of crazy stuff like Virtual Desktop size.

As a side note for everyone, E makes the relationship fairly obvious by
calling it's "viewports" "Virtual Desktops" ;)

B