creeping consensus

Discussion in 'Java' started by Roedy Green, Feb 15, 2013.

  1. Roedy Green

    Roedy Green Guest

    I have been reading a couple of books about evolution. It has
    stretched my patience considerably on what I expect a reasonable
    length of time it should take to come to various computer consensuses.

    I have noticed a few things settling:

    Ctrl-Z ctrl-X ctrl-C ctrl-V are pretty well standard in their
    behaviour, though there is still no way to move them to a more
    convenient place for special needs.

    ctrl-F F3 are common for Find/repeat find.

    Use of the X to close a window.

    The use of a green rounded rectangle for downloads.

    The use of menus with one layer of submenu are pretty standard.

    Browsers have a similar layout and the ability to make them look the
    way you like.

    Things I would like to see standard:

    Ability to enter any printable Unicode char from the keyboard with a
    US layout keyboard.

    I would like to be able to say "set my apps up all to use function
    keys and control keys in a consistent "Harvard style", or "Princeton
    style" or if I were willing to go to some work, in the "Roedy" style.

    I would like to see some standard icons for open, save, close,
    print...These icons should appear in standard order. They should be
    easily distinguishable even when rendered as small as 16x16. Even if
    vendors want to decorate their apps with custom indecipherable icons,
    it should be possible with a few keystrokes to insist ALL apps use
    standard Harvard or Princeton icons, or Roedy icons if I am willing to
    do the art work. For many icons a coloured blob would do just fine. I
    can distinguish if with peripheral vision or with cataract-clouded
    lenses. The key is universal consistency.

    I would like an "explorer" that had the concept of current source and
    target directory. Click-copy a file would naturally copy it to the
    target. Ditto click-move. You could move back and forth between
    keying and mousing commands.
    --
    Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
    The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development time.
    The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the development
    time.
    ~ Tom Cargill Ninety-ninety Law
    Roedy Green, Feb 15, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Roedy Green

    markspace Guest

    On 2/15/2013 12:13 AM, Roedy Green wrote:
    > Things I would like to see standard:


    Mostly I agree with you on these points. A little more rigor and
    conformity in designing user interfaces would be useful.

    >
    > Ability to enter any printable Unicode char from the keyboard with a
    > US layout keyboard.


    I think I'd prefer a standard way to enter Unicode with some kind of
    pop-up window. Windows sort of has this, but it's rather clumsy to use.
    A slicker version would be a nice addition.

    >
    > I would like to be able to say "set my apps up all to use function
    > keys and control keys in a consistent "Harvard style", or "Princeton
    > style" or if I were willing to go to some work, in the "Roedy" style.


    Yes.

    >
    > I would like to see some standard icons for open, save, close,
    > print...These icons should appear in standard order. They should be


    I'm not big on icons because they take up relatively large amounts of
    screen real estate. If you're going to have icons there's not reason
    not to standardize them, of course.

    Mostly I'd prefer a standardized set of accelerator keys -- which I
    think we have: cntl-O, cntl-S, cntl-W, cntl-P respectively.

    > I would like an "explorer" that had the concept of current source and
    > target directory.


    If by "explorer" you mean a file browser, then yes x 10. The old Norton
    Commander program did this, why don't modern file browsers do it? I can
    only conclude that Microsoft is incapable of producing anything besides
    cripple ware, and its competitors are incapable of doing anything
    besides blindly copying Microsoft.
    markspace, Feb 15, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On 02/15/2013 04:29 AM, markspace wrote:
    > On 2/15/2013 12:13 AM, Roedy Green wrote:
    >> Things I would like to see standard:

    >
    > Mostly I agree with you on these points. A little more rigor and
    > conformity in designing user interfaces would be useful.
    >
    >>
    >> Ability to enter any printable Unicode char from the keyboard with a
    >> US layout keyboard.

    >
    > I think I'd prefer a standard way to enter Unicode with some kind of
    > pop-up window. Windows sort of has this, but it's rather clumsy to use.
    > A slicker version would be a nice addition.
    >
    >>
    >> I would like to be able to say "set my apps up all to use function
    >> keys and control keys in a consistent "Harvard style", or "Princeton
    >> style" or if I were willing to go to some work, in the "Roedy" style.

    >
    > Yes.
    >
    >>
    >> I would like to see some standard icons for open, save, close,
    >> print...These icons should appear in standard order. They should be

    >
    > I'm not big on icons because they take up relatively large amounts of
    > screen real estate. If you're going to have icons there's not reason
    > not to standardize them, of course.
    >
    > Mostly I'd prefer a standardized set of accelerator keys -- which I
    > think we have: cntl-O, cntl-S, cntl-W, cntl-P respectively.
    >
    >> I would like an "explorer" that had the concept of current source and
    >> target directory.

    >
    > If by "explorer" you mean a file browser, then yes x 10. The old Norton
    > Commander program did this, why don't modern file browsers do it? I can
    > only conclude that Microsoft is incapable of producing anything besides
    > cripple ware, and its competitors are incapable of doing anything
    > besides blindly copying Microsoft.
    >

    Midnight Commander still does this on Linux...it should, since it claims
    some descent from Norton Commander for DOS. There are other file
    browsers that support the "commander" interface; in fact the convention
    of describing file browser style as being either "commander" and/or
    "explorer" is quite common.

    Having said that, any file browser I've used for years on UNIX, Linux,
    or Windows allows for the easy designation of source and target
    directory. You pop 2 explorer windows, one shows the "source", one the
    "target". You can then copy or move files between them as you like.
    Since this takes no more time then navigating in a Norton Commander
    ("commander") style interface, I don't see the problem.

    The discussion is obviously applicable to operations like FTP, SFTP, SCP
    etc. GUIs for those, where they exist on various platforms, seem to have
    persisted the mainstream use of the "commander" interface more than for
    file ops on one FS.

    AHS
    Arved Sandstrom, Feb 15, 2013
    #3
  4. Roedy Green

    Roedy Green Guest

    On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:29:08 -0800, markspace
    <> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
    who said :

    > The old Norton
    >Commander program did this, why don't modern file browsers do it?


    I have forgotten how it works, just that it was faster than what we do
    today.

    It is sad that we have to look back to DOS for NC, QDOS and Lotus
    Magellan for best of breed.

    Magellan indexed files and wrote super fast viewers to you see the
    first page of pretty well any file instantly. It also let you write
    boolean expression on its content indexes to bring up sets of files
    --
    Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
    The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development time.
    The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the development
    time.
    ~ Tom Cargill Ninety-ninety Law
    Roedy Green, Feb 15, 2013
    #4
  5. On 02/15/2013 06:00 AM, Roedy Green wrote:
    > On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:29:08 -0800, markspace
    > <> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
    > who said :
    >
    >> The old Norton
    >> Commander program did this, why don't modern file browsers do it?

    >
    > I have forgotten how it works, just that it was faster than what we do
    > today.
    >
    > It is sad that we have to look back to DOS for NC, QDOS and Lotus
    > Magellan for best of breed.
    >
    > Magellan indexed files and wrote super fast viewers to you see the
    > first page of pretty well any file instantly. It also let you write
    > boolean expression on its content indexes to bring up sets of files
    >

    Mac OS X Spotlight, as one example. It indexes designated directories or
    volumes, brings up matching file sets on a content-based search. Finder
    already handles file preview without actually launching the app per se.

    AHS
    Arved Sandstrom, Feb 15, 2013
    #5
  6. Roedy Green

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 2/15/2013 4:06 AM, Donkey Hottie wrote:
    > 15.02.2013 10:29, markspace kirjoitti:
    >>> I would like an "explorer" that had the concept of current source and
    >>> target directory.

    >>
    >> If by "explorer" you mean a file browser, then yes x 10. The old Norton
    >> Commander program did this, why don't modern file browsers do it? I can
    >> only conclude that Microsoft is incapable of producing anything besides
    >> cripple ware, and its competitors are incapable of doing anything
    >> besides blindly copying Microsoft.
    >>

    >
    > Linux still has Midnight Commander for TUI, and its Gnome version GMC
    > for GUI. Linux is the better alternative for a programmer anyway. At
    > least when we speak about non Microsoft programming technologies like Java.


    Really??

    Is using Eclipse or NetBeans on Linux that much more productive
    than using the same on Windows?

    What features are missing in the Windows versions?

    Arne
    Arne Vajhøj, Feb 24, 2013
    #6
  7. Arne Vajhøj <> wrote:
    > On 2/15/2013 4:06 AM, Donkey Hottie wrote:
    >> Linux is the better alternative for a programmer anyway. At
    >> least when we speak about non Microsoft programming technologies like Java.

    > Is using Eclipse or NetBeans on Linux that much more productive
    > than using the same on Windows?


    On Windows, the scroll-wheel affects the focused component,
    whereas on Linux the scroll-wheel affects whichever component
    is currently under the mouse cursor.

    On Linux (most WMs I've seen so far) you can drag a window
    by pressing alt-Key, pressing left mouse button inside the
    window, and dragging it around. (That helps quickly moving
    windows away - even across the top edge of the desktop.)

    On Linux you can move windows, even while they have a modal dialog
    (like file-save, etc) open.

    On Linux you just select text, and paste it with middle mouse-
    button (besides having the option to do Ctrl-C/V, too.)

    I'm not saying that everyone would care about these differences
    enough to hurry installing Linux on their machines, but for sure,
    the OS environment *is* relevant, even if one was only working
    with a single cross-plattform tool. And these differences are
    only those I most painfully miss when circumstances force me to
    work on a Windows machine.

    PS: most of these features are not strictly Linux-specific but
    rather X11- or just "typical-WM"-specific.
    Andreas Leitgeb, Feb 26, 2013
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mike Meng
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    735
    Dirk Thierbach
    Nov 29, 2004
  2. Mike Meng
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    261
    Mike Meng
    Nov 23, 2004
  3. Brian Beck
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    572
    Brian Beck
    Mar 19, 2006
  4. kj
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    383
    John Nagle
    Feb 13, 2010
  5. Jayaprakash Rudraraju

    Padded position in Consensus sequence

    Jayaprakash Rudraraju, Aug 14, 2003, in forum: Perl Misc
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    75
    Jayaprakash Rudraraju
    Aug 14, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page