Step 1: Post site showing RC car on slashdot
Step 2: Pay for bandwidth costs from the 4 slashdotters who actually buy your product
Step 3: Demand refund from your host, and find another, yours is way too expensive
Step 4: Profit!
1. teef - I purposely spelled "teeth" wrong for comedic effect, you fucking imbecile.
2. englishman - Your subspecies is not important enough to warrant capitalization!
Yeah "teef" is just hilarius.
Secondly, I'm multilingual, and was educated in a foreign language (to English), what's your excuse?
I'd say prophecy, which is scary and funny, for the same reason: the human race has ultimate power over the earth and everything in it, so what does it do with this great power? fuck itself over.
Guessing game: The cat sat on the [Click for answer]
*click*
Answer: Wrong, the cat sat on the Stop 0x0000001e (c000009a 80123f36 02000000 00000246) Unhandled Kernel exception c000009a from 8123f26 Address 80123f36 has base at 80100000 - ntoskrnl.exe
In a few decades when books have been practically replaced by software, the only education available will be from Microsoft. *Everyone* will be retarded!
Which are also the only reasons why most window managers try to change the initial display of an application. That is, unless the user has saved preferences for that application.
That's the way it should be, but it's not the way it is for most window managers.
So put them inside a workarea if that is really important. For that matter, I have yet to see the Gimp fail in this regardless of the Window manager I use. (you can argue a lot about if user interface of the Gimp is logical and such, that is not the point, the point is that it manages very well to start with its windows nicely grouped together)
A workarea is good, but not always an option, and in my case it's not. Plus, using the GIMP's totally fucking terrible GUI as a positive example of anything isn't gonna persuade me of anything, anyway.
When the window manager is buggy, use another window manager or fix it. Solving this by having your application override the window manager is not the proper solution.
Fix it? I should go to every users house and re-code whatever window manager he is using? seriously WTF are you talking about?
Or you suggest I should force a different window management system on the user? Seems totally contradictory to keeping the user in control.
Overriding the window managers bad judgement, and allowing it control of what it doesn't mess up, still seems the best option available.
THe situation resulting from what you suggest is that this has to be doen for each and every application someone uses. It is definitely better for the user if they can do that in one central place, which happens to be the window manager.
I don't really know how you've drawn this conclusion, I never stated it *has* to be done for every application, only that when it's appropriate for an application to have predefined layout it would be better if the window manager made a better job of following those guidelines, and *only* repositioning windows against the directive if a valid reason to do so (such as being off-screen, obstructing a toolbar, etc) exists.
That your application suggests an initial position and size is good, you know betetr then the end user what woudl work for your application initially.
I don't claim to know better than the user, only the window manager which has very little concept of logic to be able to position an applications widows in context to each other.
That said, whenever I encounter an application that tries to get around the saved window positions that my wm tries to 'enforce', I will start looking for an alternative. I have good reason to size and position windows in a certain way and have the window manager restore them in that way, and I find applications that try to get around that extremely annoying.
I agree with you on that, and never suggested otherwise, so what's your point?
When Windows was relatively new, many applications tried to 'force' their own window sizing and positioning on the user, often by creating a screen sized work area and keepign all their windows in there.
Forced? the window has to be display at some point, be definition any position is forced, if you mean attempting to maintain a window position after the user has moved it, or Window Manager has (but with good reason, which is my point often it does not have good reason), then I've already agreed you shouldn't 'force' a position on a user after that point.
There is a good reason for this, it has been shown again and again and again that users find this behavior extremely annoying and disturbing for doing their work. You really believe you know better then this?
You seem to have a totally inaccurate perception of my views, maybe if you actually read what I've posted instead of drawing your own conclusions on what I think, you would realise that most of the points you've been arguing against are irrelevant.
Your problem is a buggy window manager then. Provided that the window manager does placement properly, the problem you describe does not exist. Hence, I do not see why this is a good argument for your case, it is however a good argument for saying that there are buggy window managers that do not handle this properly.
Jesus F. Christ, this is the good part, you finally get it, tell me you get it, and then proceed to tell me it's not a good argument to my case, when what you just stated *is* my case.
1. Your application has no fucking clue abotu how the user wants their windows displayed
Yes but I'm a human/user and I have a rough idea for a good starting point, after which the user can tweak it however he likes. Also, never heard of usability-testing?
2. Your application has as little clue about what the rest of the display is used for.
If a window placement is impractical then I have no problem with the window manager repositioning it. My problem is when it moves a window to an absurd position when there is no logical reason to do so.
Sorry to say, but if you do not udnerstand this then imo you have not understood what a windowsing system is for.
So because I have a negative opinion about some aspects of some window systems, that somehow relates to me not understanding them? I understand them, but that doesn't change the fact their not perfect.
> It sounds like you're trying to simulate a tiled MDI layout in the absence of MDI
Not really.
> A better solution may be a large window with splitters and/or dock widgets
This works for some designs, but in my opinion unless very carefully implemented, this actually locks in, and frustrates some users further. At the very least the user should have the option to dock and undock the windows, in which case it would be nice to reliably define a default position for undocked windows.
Too bad. That's not your job. It's MY computer, not yours
Yes it's your computer but I'm not forcing you to use my application, am I?
There's no need for you to "reliably" position the windows anywhere
Believe me, if I sent you screenshots of the mess made by some window managers of a perfectly valid layout, you would understand that sometimes there is a need, unless I want to leave it to the user to waste 10 minutes of his life fixing the problem.
You're right: a human (the user) knows better than a computer (specifically your program) what he wants. I want my window manager to ignore your application's requests to stick stuff where you want, and instead put things in a useful location for my use of the program.
I don't disagree with you; you can put the windows where ever you like, but I want to be a able to reliably position them for their initial state, after that you can move them anywhere you like.
I just began developing an GUI-based application for KDE/Gnome, my major obstacle being the window "managers". It goes something like this:
Developer: OK, put this window here. KDE/Kwin: Actually it's better over here. Developer: No! I'll need that space later for another window. Gnome/MetaCity: I know, I know! How about here? Developer: Christ! No not there either. Developer: OK, how about you both put it here? that makes sense. KDE/Kwin: That's great, but I'll just shift up a bit, and flip your directions horizontally. Gnome/MetaCity: Ignore KDE, it's perfect! But I think it would be even more perfect over here. Developer: Jesus Christ!
It's usually possible to get what you want, but often involves hacks, redundant code, and forking.
I realise this is intentional and in the interests of usability and consistency, but more often than not the it's counter productive to the cause, since frequently a human knows better than a computer when it comes to usability.
Our vendors are notorious for demanding superuser access to the boxes that support their applications. To protect our enterprise network from attacks allowed in by well-meaning but less-than-perfectly-competent vendors, we have set up a quarantined network for each vendor.
Slashdot Mirror
Step 1: Post site showing RC car on slashdot
Step 2: Pay for bandwidth costs from the 4 slashdotters who actually buy your product
Step 3: Demand refund from your host, and find another, yours is way too expensive
Step 4: Profit!
I agree. Discussing military ordinance on /. must really take it's affect on you.
I haven't RTFS, or RTFA. But, to answer your question; they taste esquisite.
No
Isn't this what mice do already?
Yeah "teef" is just hilarius.
Secondly, I'm multilingual, and was educated in a foreign language (to English), what's your excuse?
You are truly stupid. Go brush your teef[sic] you stinky englishman[sic].
teef = teeth
englishman = Englishman
Please don't bother, it was a typo!
You truely are an fucking idiot.
So, America owns Mars now, right?
I'd say prophecy, which is scary and funny, for the same reason: the human race has ultimate power over the earth and everything in it, so what does it do with this great power? fuck itself over.
Guessing game: The cat sat on the [Click for answer]
*click*
Answer: Wrong, the cat sat on the Stop 0x0000001e (c000009a 80123f36 02000000 00000246)
Unhandled Kernel exception c000009a from 8123f26
Address 80123f36 has base at 80100000 - ntoskrnl.exe
In a few decades when books have been practically replaced by software, the only education available will be from Microsoft. *Everyone* will be retarded!
Christ! I give up already, I can't persuade you, and vice versa. I think maybe we both could be doing something better with our time.
That's the way it should be, but it's not the way it is for most window managers.
So put them inside a workarea if that is really important. For that matter, I have yet to see the Gimp fail in this regardless of the Window manager I use. (you can argue a lot about if user interface of the Gimp is logical and such, that is not the point, the point is that it manages very well to start with its windows nicely grouped together)
A workarea is good, but not always an option, and in my case it's not. Plus, using the GIMP's totally fucking terrible GUI as a positive example of anything isn't gonna persuade me of anything, anyway.
When the window manager is buggy, use another window manager or fix it. Solving this by having your application override the window manager is not the proper solution.
Fix it? I should go to every users house and re-code whatever window manager he is using? seriously WTF are you talking about?
Or you suggest I should force a different window management system on the user? Seems totally contradictory to keeping the user in control.
Overriding the window managers bad judgement, and allowing it control of what it doesn't mess up, still seems the best option available.
I don't really know how you've drawn this conclusion, I never stated it *has* to be done for every application, only that when it's appropriate for an application to have predefined layout it would be better if the window manager made a better job of following those guidelines, and *only* repositioning windows against the directive if a valid reason to do so (such as being off-screen, obstructing a toolbar, etc) exists.
That your application suggests an initial position and size is good, you know betetr then the end user what woudl work for your application initially.
I don't claim to know better than the user, only the window manager which has very little concept of logic to be able to position an applications widows in context to each other.
That said, whenever I encounter an application that tries to get around the saved window positions that my wm tries to 'enforce', I will start looking for an alternative. I have good reason to size and position windows in a certain way and have the window manager restore them in that way, and I find applications that try to get around that extremely annoying.
I agree with you on that, and never suggested otherwise, so what's your point?
When Windows was relatively new, many applications tried to 'force' their own window sizing and positioning on the user, often by creating a screen sized work area and keepign all their windows in there.
Forced? the window has to be display at some point, be definition any position is forced, if you mean attempting to maintain a window position after the user has moved it, or Window Manager has (but with good reason, which is my point often it does not have good reason), then I've already agreed you shouldn't 'force' a position on a user after that point.
There is a good reason for this, it has been shown again and again and again that users find this behavior extremely annoying and disturbing for doing their work. You really believe you know better then this?
You seem to have a totally inaccurate perception of my views, maybe if you actually read what I've posted instead of drawing your own conclusions on what I think, you would realise that most of the points you've been arguing against are irrelevant.
Your problem is a buggy window manager then. Provided that the window manager does placement properly, the problem you describe does not exist. Hence, I do not see why this is a good argument for your case, it is however a good argument for saying that there are buggy window managers that do not handle this properly.
Jesus F. Christ, this is the good part, you finally get it, tell me you get it, and then proceed to tell me it's not a good argument to my case, when what you just stated *is* my case.
Yes but I'm a human/user and I have a rough idea for a good starting point, after which the user can tweak it however he likes. Also, never heard of usability-testing?
2. Your application has as little clue about what the rest of the display is used for.
If a window placement is impractical then I have no problem with the window manager repositioning it. My problem is when it moves a window to an absurd position when there is no logical reason to do so.
Sorry to say, but if you do not udnerstand this then imo you have not understood what a windowsing system is for.
So because I have a negative opinion about some aspects of some window systems, that somehow relates to me not understanding them? I understand them, but that doesn't change the fact their not perfect.
> It sounds like you're trying to simulate a tiled MDI layout in the absence of MDI
Not really.
> A better solution may be a large window with splitters and/or dock widgets
This works for some designs, but in my opinion unless very carefully implemented, this actually locks in, and frustrates some users further. At the very least the user should have the option to dock and undock the windows, in which case it would be nice to reliably define a default position for undocked windows.
Dozens, but only a few are shown by default. But yours is a straw-man argument, and beside the point.
Yes it's your computer but I'm not forcing you to use my application, am I?
There's no need for you to "reliably" position the windows anywhere
Believe me, if I sent you screenshots of the mess made by some window managers of a perfectly valid layout, you would understand that sometimes there is a need, unless I want to leave it to the user to waste 10 minutes of his life fixing the problem.
I don't disagree with you; you can put the windows where ever you like, but I want to be a able to reliably position them for their initial state, after that you can move them anywhere you like.
I just began developing an GUI-based application for KDE/Gnome, my major obstacle being the window "managers". It goes something like this:
Developer: OK, put this window here.
KDE/Kwin: Actually it's better over here.
Developer: No! I'll need that space later for another window.
Gnome/MetaCity: I know, I know! How about here?
Developer: Christ! No not there either.
Developer: OK, how about you both put it here? that makes sense.
KDE/Kwin: That's great, but I'll just shift up a bit, and flip your directions horizontally.
Gnome/MetaCity: Ignore KDE, it's perfect! But I think it would be even more perfect over here.
Developer: Jesus Christ!
It's usually possible to get what you want, but often involves hacks, redundant code, and forking.
I realise this is intentional and in the interests of usability and consistency, but more often than not the it's counter productive to the cause, since frequently a human knows better than a computer when it comes to usability.
I'd like some "modivation" as well
What can you suggest?
Find some better vendors?
Except maybe the "Peppered Moth" (Google it).