Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 24th Jun 2007 13:44 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces Federkiel writes: "People working with Apple computers are used to a very consistent user experience. For a large part this stems from the fact that the Lisa type of GUI does not have the fight between MDI and SDI. The question simply never arises, because the Lisa type of GUI does not offer the choice to create either of both; it's something different all along. I usually think of it as 'MDI on steroids unified with a window manager'. It virtually includes all benefits of a SDI and and the benefits of an MDI." Read on for how I feel about this age-old discussion.
Thread beginning with comment 250324
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: other issues
by renox on Sun 24th Jun 2007 20:58 UTC in reply to "other issues"
Member since:


As with the other issue, I would add:
- consistency: for example tab handling is vastly different from one app to another which is annoying.
On Unix, command-line due to history bagage is too different from the GUI: rm should move a file into the trash as the GUI does, there should be a single shortcut sequence for Copy be it in the GUI or in the console, etc.
- Undo-ability: every action should be undoable, now it's nice that we can reopen a closed tab on many application, but we should be able to do the same thing for a closed window.
- Data persistence (related), as much data as possible should be kept all the time. So that in case of failure/error, it is possible to go back quickly to the previous state.
- Responsiveness: applications should be at least as responsive as BeOS apps were.

And let's kill the 'start-up screens', and use instead a start-up window instead which you can iconify, kill (if you started the wrong application by mistake), put behind other window..

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: other issues
by apoclypse on Sun 24th Jun 2007 21:30 in reply to "RE: other issues"
apoclypse Member since:

Well first of all in *nix, each desktop environment handles its trash folder ina different way. Having rm send things to the trash bin means that rm is goign to have to know about every DE out there and what protocol or folder the trash bin is in. What about if you don't use a DE, wher is rm supposed to send the deleted items to. Changing its current behavior would be silly, not to mention break compatibilty with a majority if automake scripts out there. However, maybe writing a script that is named del after the windows function that does what you suggested might work for you.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: other issues
by renox on Mon 25th Jun 2007 09:36 in reply to "RE[2]: other issues"
renox Member since:

>each desktop environment handles its trash folder in a different way.

If this is true, this is stupid IMHO, there is no value added to the user (only pain), this should be fixed by the freedesktop guys..

I doubt that it would break many scripts after all when you remove something, it is removed also to put it in the trash.

Coherency is especially valuable for new users, so adding a del command is much less interesting.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: other issues
by transputer_guy on Mon 25th Jun 2007 01:50 in reply to "RE: other issues"
transputer_guy Member since:

There is one thing I really wish to see the end of and thats the double click to open (or do anything). I could do this 20yrs ago with glee (even triple quad clicks) but now try to avoid them at all costs. I see in Ubuntu a switch to not use them but haven't really explored that yet.

There are just so many issues with each individual OS that I use BeOS, W2K, Ubuntu and probably KDE thats its not worth going over anymore given they can't or won't be fixed. I am curious if XP or Vista seriously changed any of the mouse click feel in Explorer, they look mostly the same to me, just shinier skin over the same core.

Q to any OS X users (and others)

In OS X do files named x1, x2, ,,, x10, x11 get listed in that order or the not quite right order. Do any OSes get this right.

Does OS X always remember the precise x,y coordinates of files arranged manually in a folder as it did in MacOS.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: other issues
by Flatland_Spider on Mon 25th Jun 2007 04:36 in reply to "RE[3]: other issues"
Flatland_Spider Member since:

Windows is still Windows if that's what you're asking. The Explorer experience is not fundamentally different then in Win98. A few new bells and whistles, but still Windows.

I'm pretty sure that since Win98 Explorer can be set to single click mode. I can't think of how to do it in 2000, but it's under Folder Options in XP.

Reply Parent Score: 1