Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 10th Dec 2009 19:52 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces For as long as I can remember, I've been having issues with scrolling in Windows and its applications. When scrolling via dragging the scroll blob, it seemed as if Windows had the annoying habit of randomly resetting your scroll blob to its starting position, which irritated me to no end. It took me a while to figure out, but I finally know when this behaviour occurs - now I just need to know: why?!
Thread beginning with comment 398899
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Darak
by big_gie on Thu 10th Dec 2009 20:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Darak"
big_gie
Member since:
2006-01-04

the problem I have with the scroll-one-page solution is that you end up with a proportional UI element (the blob) inside a non-proportional element (the bar). With jump-to-here, both are proportional, which makes more sense to me (and only me, probably).

I always questioned myself as why the default behaviour was a single "page up/down" instead of the "jump here" I think would be more intuitive. I guess I'm not alone anymore! ;)

On another note, why don't you have your window maximized (at least vertically)? You probably wouldn't have the problem of the top/bottom buffers to small if the window was maximized. Was it only to show the behaviour?
I've never understood why people don't use 100% of their screen estate... you paid for that big screen, use it! Or even worse, on smaller screen (eg. netbook) the space is rare so I want my windows to be not only maximized, but fullscreen. But then even on my 22 inches monitor, everything's maximized, even fullscreen'ed.
This is the reason I don't feel at home on Mac: You loose so much screen estate...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Darak
by Drumhellar on Thu 10th Dec 2009 21:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Darak"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

Not having everything max by default greatly reduces the amount of window re-size operations when you do decide you want two or more windows visible.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Darak
by big_gie on Thu 10th Dec 2009 21:15 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Darak"
big_gie Member since:
2006-01-04

I think _playing_ with window resizing won't reduce the number of operations you do... We should let the window manager resize windows correctly to compare them. For example, in windows 7 the window manager can put two windows side by side easily. I had to play with wmctl to get that feature in kwin two years ago. I would love to see that incorporated directly in kwin...

If need is to compare two windows, the just unmaximize them? We migth be arguing over a window manager issue rather then screen estate maximization...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Darak
by mrAmiga500 on Thu 10th Dec 2009 21:17 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Darak"
mrAmiga500 Member since:
2009-03-20

I've never understood why people don't use 100% of their screen estate... you paid for that big screen, use it! Or even worse, on smaller screen (eg. netbook) the space is rare so I want my windows to be not only maximized, but fullscreen.


I agree. The thing that annoys me most is windows that don't remember your size setting and stupidly open very small with list columns stupidly narrow. So, you open the program, maximize/resize, then manually adjust the list column widths so you can read the damn stuff (because it's too stupid to adjust automatically to the new size). If you close the program and re-open it, you have to do all that again. Microsoft programs are famous for that.

One Amiga (MUI) feature that other operating systems lack is the ability to "snapshot" all window sizes, positions and column sizes. After you snapshot (click the window gadget), the program ALWAYS opens to your preferred size and position. This works for every single Amiga MUI program. (automatic - doesn't depend on program author) You can even back up your preferred settings and use them on another computer.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Darak
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 10th Dec 2009 21:18 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Darak"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I NEVER maximise a window. It's so utterly pointless for 99% of the applications out there - all you gain is extra white space.

I bought my large LCD to be able to see multiple windows at once - not to see the same content but with added useless whitespace.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Darak
by cycoj on Thu 10th Dec 2009 23:17 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Darak"
cycoj Member since:
2007-11-04

"I've never understood why people don't use 100% of their screen estate... you paid for that big screen, use it! Or even worse, on smaller screen (eg. netbook) the space is rare so I want my windows to be not only maximized, but fullscreen.


I agree. The thing that annoys me most is windows that don't remember your size setting and stupidly open very small with list columns stupidly narrow. So, you open the program, maximize/resize, then manually adjust the list column widths so you can read the damn stuff (because it's too stupid to adjust automatically to the new size). If you close the program and re-open it, you have to do all that again. Microsoft programs are famous for that.

One Amiga (MUI) feature that other operating systems lack is the ability to "snapshot" all window sizes, positions and column sizes. After you snapshot (click the window gadget), the program ALWAYS opens to your preferred size and position. This works for every single Amiga MUI program. (automatic - doesn't depend on program author) You can even back up your preferred settings and use them on another computer.
"

Actually not true. I know of at least two windowmanagers which let you remember size,position,virtual desktop and a number of other things, enlightenment e16 and e17. I'm also quite sure that a number of other windowmanagers do have this feature.
One feature I miss in e17 that was available in e16 was the ability to group windows fixing their relative position to each other

Reply Parent Score: 1