From: johnsd2@vccnw05.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: IBM Funny
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 20:29:11 GMT

In article <1992Oct03.033319.19328@NeoSoft.com>, peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
|> In article <4jmz7x+@rpi.edu> johnsd2@rpi.edu writes:
|> > In article <1992Oct01.115048.11563@NeoSoft.com>, peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
|> > |> You know... it's possible
|> > |> to consider individual components of a system and discuss their merits
|> > |> separately without getting emotional. At least I hope it is.
|> 
|> > Oh, I very much doubt it! :) I mean, this is an .advocasy group... :)
|> 
|> This is why I hate the name "advocacy". People think it's a synonym for
|> "flame". If you want a flame group, call a spade a spade and make one.

Ahem. Please reread what I said, and particularly note that I took the
trouble to put in not one, but TWO smilies. Could it be that
I was not being so serious? [ps- I call spades shovels, so there! :)]

|> > Anyway, the implementation is what matters. If you want to talk
|> > about a THEORETICAL windows, Fine.
|> 
|> No, I'm talking about a *real* GUI. It's sitton on top of a shitty O/S,
|> but it's really real. Apple could learn a lot from it if they'd try.

Unfortunately, the shitty OS affects teh GUI deeply, in lots of ways.
To get past this, you need to be much more specific about what you
want to argue. Example: standard file dialogs. If you claim Windows has
a better standard file dialog (say), I could complain about 8.3
letter filenames. Of course that's just because of DOS, but you see
what I mean about the underlying OS affecting the UI. So you'd
have to get specific about which aspects of the standard file dialog
were supposed to be so great.

|> > But you'll have to tell us
|> > SPECIFICALLY what you are talking about.
|> 
|> I did. The GUI.

The whole GUI? See above about that. So far you just haven't
gotten anywhere near specific enough to work this thing out.

|> > It isn't clear to me that
|> > the Program Manager isn't included in what you were talking about....
|> 
|> PM is an application. The GUI is the window system: how menys operate,
|> how windows operate: interactions between menys, gadgets, and keyboard
|> shortcuts, and so on.

Then I submit that having the system so compartmentalized is not a good
user interface design. The Macintosh is better, with its unified finder,
but not perfect since you still have a dichotomy between apps.

|> > I suspect that that is (or should be) just plain print, no? On the Macintosh
|> > that's command-P.
|> 
|> OK, now what's "Print Final"?

Command-P. On the macintosh, they are the same thign. You then
get a dialog wherein you can decide  which pages to print,
whether to print in draft mode or whatever (this varies
from printer to printer) etc. You can just press reutnr to use
the defaults.

Last time I checked, Windows worked the same way. Or am I
hallucinating?

|> > Now, the reason for having standard command keys
|> > is to avoid using the menus for certain common commands (quit, save);
|> 
|> But the commands *you* find common aren't the ones *I* find common. In
|> Windows,
|> you automatically learn the hotkeys for the commands *you* do.

I'll dispute this: the commands I find important are "save", "bold", "italic",
"plain", etc, "New" and "Quit", and also "Run" (I use Think C).

In order, thats Command-S, command-B/I/T etc (various styles, you know),
command-N, command-Q, Command-R.

You'll notice that all but the last one were rather generic, and you
no doubt use them too. The last one is NOT standard, its one of
Think-Cs own. I use it all the time anyway, because I have to do it
repeatedly. Similarly Command-Y (I think), for check syntax. (note-
Im not sure of that, it may be Command-K. I use it alot anyway, I
just sometimes have to pull down the menu. But I still cant remember
it exactly. :( That's the problem with keyboard equivalents. Are
you sure I automatically learn the hotkeys for the comands
I do?)

|> For example, a hotkey for "quit" is useless to me. I use "quit" about once
|> a session (by definition, allowing for crashes). I use "Select Italic style"
|> or whatever a whole lot more often.
|> 
|> Quick, what are the hotkeys/shortcuts for "select italic", "begin underline",
|> "quarter note", and "rounded box"? Are there any?
|> 
|> I don't know what they are in Windows, but I do know that I'll know them within
|> 15 minutes of starting an application.
|> 
|> > It isn't. pity. Under windowsm how do you tell just by looking at the
|> > screen, what disks are mounted?
|> 
|> Your point. Of course, I use an Amiga, so I get to see both of those facts.

Well, Im not familiar enough with teh Amiga UI to argue about it.
(feel free to enlighten me anyway, tho)

|> > b) How do you get the menu bar on a Windows app to come down to where
|> > you are? Without shrinking the apps window or moving it down so that
|> > the upper areas of the screen cannot be used?
|> 
|> Well, I generally have 3 or 4 programs running concurrently, and don't overlap
|> them much, when I'm using a screen large enough to make a difference.

But to bring them down to your cursor still requires moving the windows
about. (and no, I dont think this terribly relevant, its just that you
brought it up. Ill just mention that since that part of the post has
been deleted)

|> > Upshot: These hacks aren't needed.
|> 
|> I need them. Particularly the menu handling. Not only can you use Windows
|> without a mouse, but it's even convenient.

I don't. Im surprised you do, but Ill take your word for it. I see no
reason to use the Mac wo/ a mouse, however convinient it could be made.

|> > Some people just like them. Are there
|> > comparable things for Windows, if you dont like the way Windows works?
|> 
|> Yes, but you really don't need to use them that much.

You don't NEED to use them AT ALL. But its often nice to personalize
your system in various ways. Could you get into the gorey details
of this for me? Somebody has already asserted that you CANT do this,
so  Id like to know how you can do it, how common these thigns are,
etc..

-- 
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.