Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3605 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [SLE] FYI: OpenSUSE vs Vista
- From: Doug McGarrett <dmcgarrett@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 21:03:00 -0400
- Message-id: <0J0D00FSQ48JL610@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At 01:41 AM 6/5/2006 +0200, Orn E. Hansen wrote:
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>Sunnudaginn 4 júní 2006 20:55 skrifaði suse@xxxxxx:
>>
>> As a desktop to be gawked at, it's very pretty. Usability? Not so much.
>
> Back in the days, when 640x480 or 800x600 was standard, looking at
maximized
>windows was "maybe" the way to go. I've got a 1440x900 window here, and
>there are those who have a 1600x1000, or better, where having some Firefox
>window maximized is a waste of window space. More to the point, it is a
>waste of the concept of "windowing". Running on maximized windows, is the
>concept of those who never left the good old MS-DOS days, or consoles.
>There's only one thing in the window. The rest of us have many windows
>running, on one screen. We flip between windows ... do one thing in one,
and
>another in the next. Just like now ... what is the point of having KMail
>maximized in a 1440x900 window? You think I'm gonna see it better with all
>the useless space that only shows the background color?
>
> More to the point, dual screen is common today ... and even pivoting of
the
>screen. And a 1900x1200 screens are getting more common as we speak, yeah
>people are even using 24" monitors ... tiled windows or maximized windows.
>That's a waste of the windowing technology.
>
/snip/
What good are multiple windows, if you only see part of the text in each?
And what good are multiple windows if you could see all of the text in
each, but it is shrunk down to 6 point type? I may have multiple windows
"open" but only one will be full-screen, the others will be "behind."
Or do you have a 40 inch screen with the same definition as our 19"
screens? Even if I could afford such, I don't know where I'd put it!
I remember when Windows 3.0 came out, and a few people were trying to
use multiple windows all on screen. Now, I don't know anyone who does.
Maybe you might stick a weather report down in a corner, but that's about
it. BTW--I probably saw dual screen almost as soon as anybody. EEsof
made its early Touchstone RF CAD program capable of dual screen. Maybe
1985? We did it at work. Only one engineer liked it. I hated it.
I would _never_ do that again. (When HP bought EEsof, they replaced a
very useable (1-screen) program with something that was virtually useless,
unless you had the unobtainium hi-def 40 inch monitor. I don't know that it
exists even today, but it certainly didn't exist 7 years ago. And they
wanted twice the price for this NIH junk.)
--dm
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/355 - Release Date: 6/2/2006
--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>Sunnudaginn 4 júní 2006 20:55 skrifaði suse@xxxxxx:
>>
>> As a desktop to be gawked at, it's very pretty. Usability? Not so much.
>
> Back in the days, when 640x480 or 800x600 was standard, looking at
maximized
>windows was "maybe" the way to go. I've got a 1440x900 window here, and
>there are those who have a 1600x1000, or better, where having some Firefox
>window maximized is a waste of window space. More to the point, it is a
>waste of the concept of "windowing". Running on maximized windows, is the
>concept of those who never left the good old MS-DOS days, or consoles.
>There's only one thing in the window. The rest of us have many windows
>running, on one screen. We flip between windows ... do one thing in one,
and
>another in the next. Just like now ... what is the point of having KMail
>maximized in a 1440x900 window? You think I'm gonna see it better with all
>the useless space that only shows the background color?
>
> More to the point, dual screen is common today ... and even pivoting of
the
>screen. And a 1900x1200 screens are getting more common as we speak, yeah
>people are even using 24" monitors ... tiled windows or maximized windows.
>That's a waste of the windowing technology.
>
/snip/
What good are multiple windows, if you only see part of the text in each?
And what good are multiple windows if you could see all of the text in
each, but it is shrunk down to 6 point type? I may have multiple windows
"open" but only one will be full-screen, the others will be "behind."
Or do you have a 40 inch screen with the same definition as our 19"
screens? Even if I could afford such, I don't know where I'd put it!
I remember when Windows 3.0 came out, and a few people were trying to
use multiple windows all on screen. Now, I don't know anyone who does.
Maybe you might stick a weather report down in a corner, but that's about
it. BTW--I probably saw dual screen almost as soon as anybody. EEsof
made its early Touchstone RF CAD program capable of dual screen. Maybe
1985? We did it at work. Only one engineer liked it. I hated it.
I would _never_ do that again. (When HP bought EEsof, they replaced a
very useable (1-screen) program with something that was virtually useless,
unless you had the unobtainium hi-def 40 inch monitor. I don't know that it
exists even today, but it certainly didn't exist 7 years ago. And they
wanted twice the price for this NIH junk.)
--dm
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/355 - Release Date: 6/2/2006
--
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |