On 05/31/2011 09:28 PM, Ed Lin wrote:
GIMP is an awful example :P Its interface is gimped, the WM isn't the
right place to right it.
Do you have any other example where you'd miss auto rise specifically?
What many perceive as a shortcoming of GIMP helps me to work efficiently :p
Yes. I also u
Hello guys,
The essential problem of the global menu is that its behavior is
fixed, unchangeable, locked and non-configurable. This is the first
needed step , before discussing anything about changing the default
settings.
Right now the users have only two options : like it or dislike it.
Th
"Make it configurable" is not the answer to a (poor?) design. Configurability
can be a nightmare, you need to not only make sure that module A works with
module B, but that module A (configured in X, Y, or Z behavior) works with
module B (configured in X, Y, or Z behavior).
Even if everything w
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 09:27, Mark Curtis wrote:
> "Make it configurable" is not the answer to a (poor?) design.
>
On the other hand, when an idealized one-size-fits all utopian design
remains elusive after many months of searching...
--
Jeremy Nickurak -= Email/XMPP: -= jer...@nickurak.ca =-
You are quite right, of course. It would be great if there was a server
button on that tab, or on the icon bar even. But this is just one
example.
You simply cannot say to all developers that they must now consider the
fact that Ubuntu Unity users do not have the menu in view, and so they
must
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 18:27, Mark Curtis wrote:
> "Make it configurable" is not the answer to a (poor?) design.
Configurability is about letting the user adapt the working
environment to his/her particular needs.
> Configurability can be a nightmare, you need to not only make sure that
> modul
6 matches
Mail list logo
