sjs@spectral.ctt.bellcore.com (Stan Switzer) (10/27/89)
In article <6685@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: > In article <3581@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> barnett@crdgw1.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett) writes: > > (I don't know what a "poke point" is.) > > SCADA industry terminology for an active area on the screen, like a close > icon on a window border. Oh! A Button. (Actually, "poke point" is a nice term: it's fairly descriptive and unlikely to be confused with other things.) > > 2) Many mouse based editors support single clicks to select a character, > > and multiple clicks to select words, sentences, paragraphs or > > entire documents. Hmmm. A closet SunView user. > This doesn't have to be handled with timing, though. I use such a tool, > and it works by seeing, on each click, whether you're still on the same > character. If so it cycles the scope. This is nice. I assume that since a user coming back from coffee will probably jostle the mouse a bit he won't be confused by an invisible mode (i.e.: have already pressed the mouse twice, next press selects sentence). > > Any other action, like poping up a menu, really slows down the user > > (With the exception of Don Hopkins Pie Menus, which can be > > selected before the menu appears. You can even select an item > > from a nested menu before it appears!) > > I've heard of these. They sound cool. Make no mistake: they are. > That's an implementation detail, then. On the Amiga, for instance, the > menus don't go through the layers system: the screen is frozen while the > menu is up, but because it's so fast the screen isn't frozen for very long. Dubious advantage. > Summary: let the user do whatever she wants, but don't require him to > learn any more than select/perform/menu. I'll buy this. I had a friend in school who only had one arm. You'd be amazed at what a person can do with one hand if they have to. I'm sure he loves mice. I doubt he's a fan of chording. In article <3581@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> barnett@crdgw1.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett) writes: > I just had a flashback. I remember a conversation I had a year ago when > someone was arguing that there was no need for more than one mouse button. > My argument defending multiple mouse buttons is very similar to my defending > chords and multiple clicks. Here's an idea: just put wheels on the keyboard and use the whole thing as a mouse! You'd have plenty of buttons then. :-) :-) A possible argument for the one-button mouse: I just saw the new lap-top Mac. It uses either a trackball or a mouse (comes with both). It is tricky enough to do pull-down menus and other click-drag-release functions when there is only one button (on the lap-Mac, they have a nice BIG thumb-button), on a three-button mouse you'd have to play some ugly games to get this to work right. Stan Switzer sjs@bellcore.com "Standing all in columns, / Waiting to make their pay. Makin' the nature scene, / Waiting for the day, There is no resistance to / the signs along the way."
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (10/28/89)
In article <18063@bellcore.bellcore.com> sjs@bellcore.com (Stan Switzer) writes: > In article <6685@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: > > This doesn't have to be handled with timing, though. I use such a tool, > > and it works by seeing, on each click, whether you're still on the same > > character. If so it cycles the scope. > This is nice. I assume that since a user coming back from coffee will > probably jostle the mouse a bit he won't be confused by an invisible > mode (i.e.: have already pressed the mouse twice, next press selects > sentence). Well, since the current scope is highlighted, it's not an invisible mode. > > That's an implementation detail, then. On the Amiga, for instance, the > > menus don't go through the layers system: the screen is frozen while the > > menu is up, but because it's so fast the screen isn't frozen for very long. > Dubious advantage. Well, it's a tradeoff. The biggest overhead in windowing seems to be managing the clipping lists rather than actually copying bits around. For something that's guaranteed to be short duration (unless you replace your mouse buttons with toggle switches :->) it's an OK tradeoff. > Here's an idea: just put wheels on the keyboard and use the whole > thing as a mouse! You'd have plenty of buttons then. :-) :-) I've seen things like this on synth keyboards: big sliding bars sitting in front of the keyboard for you to move with the palm of your hand. > A possible argument for the one-button mouse: I just saw the new > lap-top Mac. It uses either a trackball or a mouse (comes with both). > It is tricky enough to do pull-down menus and other click-drag-release > functions when there is only one button (on the lap-Mac, they have a > nice BIG thumb-button), on a three-button mouse you'd have to play > some ugly games to get this to work right. This is a case where falling back on two hands is reasonable. And another reason not to use shift-clicking. Stick the buttons somewhere you can get them with the left hand. -- `-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. 'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180. "That particular mistake will not be repeated. There are plenty of mistakes left that have not yet been used." -- Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)
barnett@crdgw1.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett) (11/09/89)
In article <18063@bellcore.bellcore.com>, sjs@spectral (Stan Switzer) writes: >Hmmm. A closet SunView user. I confess. I use several window systems, with perhaps most of my experience with SunView. But OpenLook/Xview also supports this. >This is nice. I assume that since a user coming back from coffee will >probably jostle the mouse a bit he won't be confused by an invisible >mode (i.e.: have already pressed the mouse twice, next press selects >sentence). It is a mode - yes it is true. And as Peter pointed out, you see the selection. The only time this is a problem is when the machine is bogged down and you mouse ahead. You can lose track of the number of clicks. I think an important to note is that the multiple-clicks does change the state of the selection service communicating between windows, but this is a passive servant until you ask it something like cut, copy or paste. That is, if you multiple click to select text - it doesn't hurt or change anything. > >> > Any other action, like poping up a menu, really slows down the user >> > (With the exception of Don Hopkins Pie Menus, which can be >> > selected before the menu appears. You can even select an item >> > from a nested menu before it appears!) >> >> I've heard of these. They sound cool. > >Make no mistake: they are. I just started looking at Don Hopkin's PSIberspace - his NeWS window system debugger. Now THAT is something!! I would love to see him use it in action. Let me see if I can summerize it in a few words: It is a purely NeWS based program - written in NeWS, (no compiling, resides 100% in the window server). It has a debugger to NeWS of course. Mouse based. You can display all of the data types. Each type gets a different display. Dictionaries can be opened, classes browsed. You can edit any item. There are special buttons that let you do the C equivalent of x++ or x =* 2; Each item type has it's own editor. You can use the mouse to select/move the structures around dragging objects from one dictionary to another. As PostScript is meta-circular, (you can define PostScript in PostScript). Don has included a NeWS interpreter that can single-step code. His system uses pie menus - of course. His windows also have tabs off them that stick out. You can expose/move windows around by using the tabs. And if that wasn't enough to display the information in a nice table/graph structure - he allows you to view data using the right side of the brain - which lets you see the entire structure at once! Each object is a different shape, with strings being lines and the length of the string corresponding to the size. You can still browse/edit the data using this view. The dictionaries are actually round windows that you can open up! There is no doubt in my mind that NeWS (or X11/NeWS) is the most flexible, powerful window system around. All other window systems look so rigid and boring in comparison. I must thank the Net Gods for people like Don Hopkins and Stan Switzer for showing us what REAL window systems can do. -- Bruce G. Barnett <barnett@crd.ge.com> uunet!crdgw1!barnett
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (11/09/89)
(Now more than ever, lusting after NeWS) How do I get NeWS on a commodity computer? (commodity computer: one that costs no more than the down-payment on a family car, i.e. ordinary folks don't need a secured loan to afford one) -- `-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. 'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180. "*Real* wizards don't whine about how they paid their dues" -- Quentin Johnson quent@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu