Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Opinion: What IBM should change in OS/2
From: hamish@terra.cs.waikato.ac.nz (Hamish Marson)
Date: 1 Jan 1993 12:43:33 +1300
Distribution: world
Organization: Comp Sci, U of Waikato, New Zealand
NNTP-Posting-Host: terra.cs.waikato.ac.nz

In article <1992Dec31.065555.4927@netcom.com> ljensen@netcom.com (Colin Jensen) writes:
|In article <roelle.725743641@uars_mag> roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle) writes:
|>lkawecki@novell.com (Lewis Kawecki) writes:
|>>	It would be nice if the use could decide if they want to change windows
|>>by just moving moving the cursor (like X) or by clicking the mouse.  The user
|>>should also be able to decide if the active window always comes to the fore-
|>>ground or if the title bar has to be clicked on to bring a windows to the fore-
|>>ground.
|>
|>Not forgetting of course the X feature of pushing a window to the back
|>by clicking the right button.
|
|None of these admittedly nice features are in fact features of X.  What
|X has, that PM lacks, is the ability to almost infinitely customize
|the user interface behavior with respect to how the user manipulates
|windows.  In fact, it is possible to make X behave *exactly* as PM does.
|

OK. Lets talk apples and apples here. What you are saying is that the OS/2 
graphics system that the WPS is built on is unable to look like anything but 
the WPS. In a word. Wrong.

X is to (Any damn thing), like PM is to OS/2. A windowing system.
WPS is to OS/2, what Motif or OpenWindows is to X.

|I for one, would like at least a bit of X's versatilty in PM.  For example,
|I don't like click-to-type.  [And yes, I'm sure many of you do like it]
|It would be nice to make click-to-type, and many other UI properties
|*optional* and configurable.
|

That would be a function of the WPS, as it is of the GUI when running over X. 
Its not X-Windows that does that, but the Window Manager. A completely
seperate program that 'controls' the display, using the X-Windows protocol
to talk to the X Server.

|However, I do *not* expect IBM to permit this - and here's why:  If
|you let people customize their UI setup, it becomes hard for an experienced
|OS/2 user to just walk up to an OS/2 machine and use it - because he
|WON'T KNOW which mouse actions will invoke what behavior from PM.
|

You can already do that. FOr instance I prefer the left button to drag an icon.
Not the right like OS/2 defaults to. ALso the mouse buttons can be reversed,
and modified even more (CTRL, ALT's and double clicks etc).

|Moreover WPS is already overbloated and slow as it is.  The OS/2 1.3
|shell makes WPS look like a snail.  I love the features they have added
|(at a cost of speed), but how much speed are we really willing to pay
|for the UI?
|

Maybe when they optimise some things. But you are right about the WPS speed.
And more customisation features for the interface would be great too. As would
multi-threaded message queues. Blocking a system on one flakey window (Even if
the system does eventually detect it) is a crappy idea.

|-- 
|Colin Jensen
|ljensen@netcom.netcom.com	cjensen@ampex.com


-- 
|  Hamish Marson.                  | INTERNET h.marson@waikato.ac.nz |
|  University of Waikato           | PHONE    +64 7 8562889 xt 8181  |
|  New Zealand                     | FAX      +64 7 8384066          |
===========Disclaimer :- Remember. You heard it here first.===========
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc