Re: Anyone who can watch Jobs' Keynote and not be impressed...

In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
"Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:

> "flip" <flippo@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:flippo-EDBFAC.07192006072003@news.central.cox.net...
> > In article <vgg0k6no71v1bc@news.supernews.com>,
> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> > > It's less direct: you have to go through the application.
> >
> > No, you don't. You right click on the icon on the task bar.
>
> MacOS X does not have a task bar. You have to go through
> the application's icon in the dock, unless that application is
> already front most. Then you can use the Window menu.
>
> Either way is awkward, compared to the task bar.
>
> > > This means it is less easy to get a particular window
> > > to the front, and it also makes it less useful as a way to
> > > see what windows you have open.
> >
> > No, it merely shows that you're STILL refusing to learn how the Dock
> > works.
>
> You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
> this problem years ago.

And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
"tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
this into Longboar?

SD

> > > > Particularly when you have 20 or so files open?
> > >
> > > I do not think this would much challenge the taskbar:
> > > if it were 4 rows tall, there'd be only 5 buttons per row.
> >
> > Why not make the task bar 20 rows tall?
>
> Cuz my screen isn't that big.
>
> > And have 20 windows on the
> > screen, each of them with their own menu bar?
>
> Well, if you did that you'd hardly be touching your
> 20 row tall taskbar, would you?
>
> > If you have a 45" diagonal screen, you might be able to get away with it.
>
> The taskbar does start to break down if you have hundreds
> of windows, but I doubt Expose will be able to deal with
> that very well either.
>
> [snip]
> > > > Right. The problem is that the taskbar stinks.
> > >
> > > MacOS X does not have a taskbar.
> >
> > That's what I said.
>
> You did? Missed that. I would suggest that the taskbar
> is not one of MacOS X's problems, since it does not
> have one.
>
> > > The problem is that there's no UI element that provides
> > > you with direct access to obscured or hidden windows;
> >
> > Other than right clicking on the dock, you mean.
>
> No, that's not really so direct. That's going through
> menus.
>
> > > Expose fixes this by making the windows become briefly
> > > unobscured.
> >
> > Exactly. Expose is the first UI element that does this. Thanks for
> > admitting it (finally).
>
> First UI element on the Mac, anyway.
>
> > > BTW, does anyone know if it shows hidden windows, or
> > > windows in the dock? If it does not, then it's still not going
> > > to do as much as the taskbar, though it may be a welcome
> > > improvement.
> >
> > Reports here say that it does both.
>
> Good.
>
>

"StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
news:Liberty-C45209.12514406072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
> In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
> "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> > You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
> > this problem years ago.
>
> And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
> "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
> would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
> this into Longboar?

I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect
they never will. It solves a problem Windows does not
have. What they might do is gussy up the taskbar with
QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
QE to use for that.

But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue;
I mean to suggest that this is a form of catch up.

No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows,
so that in this respect MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear
to me that they will manage it with this Expose feature.

[snip]

In article <vgh30i1hl3hod3@news.supernews.com>,
"Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:

> > And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
> > "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
> > would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates" this
> > into Longboar?
>
> I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect they never will.
> It solves a problem Windows does not have. What they might do is gussy up
> the taskbar with QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
> QE to use for that.
>
> But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue; I mean to
> suggest that this is a form of catch up.
>
> No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows, so that in this respect
> MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear to me that they will manage it with
> this Expose feature.

Of course they can't leapfrog over Windows equivalent of Exposé - Windows
doesn't have a equivalent.

--
Sandman[.net]

In article <vgh30i1hl3hod3@news.supernews.com>,
"Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:

> "StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
> news:Liberty-C45209.12514406072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
> > In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> > > You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
> > > this problem years ago.
> >
> > And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
> > "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
> > would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
> > this into Longboar?
>
> I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect
> they never will. It solves a problem Windows does not
> have. What they might do is gussy up the taskbar with
> QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
> QE to use for that.
>
> But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue;
> I mean to suggest that this is a form of catch up.
>
> No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows,
> so that in this respect MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear
> to me that they will manage it with this Expose feature.

I had a chance to play around with Panther a bit the other day. Exposé,
with its window shrinking function assigned to a mouse button under the
thumb, is by far the most natural window switching mechanism I've ever
experienced. Seriously. It's so good that I think Apple should stick a
thumb button on the standard mouse, just for this.

When you head for the Dock or the Taskbar to pull up a window, it's a
disruptive process -- you stop whatever you're doing and go into window
hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching to.

(Mayor won't like this post)

--
"First, let me make it very clear, poor people aren't necessarily killers. Just
because you happen to be not rich doesn't mean you're willing to kill."
-- George W. Bush in Washington, D.C. on May 19, 2003

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 22:07:23 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:

>In article <vgh30i1hl3hod3@news.supernews.com>,
> "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
>
>> "StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
>> news:Liberty-C45209.12514406072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
>> > In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
>> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
>> > > You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
>> > > this problem years ago.
>> >
>> > And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
>> > "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
>> > would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
>> > this into Longboar?
>>
>> I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect
>> they never will. It solves a problem Windows does not
>> have. What they might do is gussy up the taskbar with
>> QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
>> QE to use for that.
>>
>> But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue;
>> I mean to suggest that this is a form of catch up.
>>
>> No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows,
>> so that in this respect MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear
>> to me that they will manage it with this Expose feature.
>
>I had a chance to play around with Panther a bit the other day. Exposé,
>with its window shrinking function assigned to a mouse button under the
>thumb, is by far the most natural window switching mechanism I've ever
>experienced. Seriously. It's so good that I think Apple should stick a
>thumb button on the standard mouse, just for this.

It sounds very good. Time for a mouse upgrade.

>When you head for the Dock or the Taskbar to pull up a window, it's a
>disruptive process -- you stop whatever you're doing and go into window
>hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
>'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching to.
>(Mayor won't like this post)

(Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 22:07:23 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> chose to
bless us with the following wisdom:

>In article <vgh30i1hl3hod3@news.supernews.com>,
> "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
>
>> "StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
>> news:Liberty-C45209.12514406072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
>> > In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
>> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
>> > > You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
>> > > this problem years ago.
>> >
>> > And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
>> > "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
>> > would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
>> > this into Longboar?
>>
>> I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect
>> they never will. It solves a problem Windows does not
>> have. What they might do is gussy up the taskbar with
>> QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
>> QE to use for that.
>>
>> But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue;
>> I mean to suggest that this is a form of catch up.
>>
>> No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows,
>> so that in this respect MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear
>> to me that they will manage it with this Expose feature.
>
>I had a chance to play around with Panther a bit the other day. Exposé,
>with its window shrinking function assigned to a mouse button under the
>thumb, is by far the most natural window switching mechanism I've ever
>experienced. Seriously. It's so good that I think Apple should stick a
>thumb button on the standard mouse, just for this.
>
>When you head for the Dock or the Taskbar to pull up a window, it's a
>disruptive process -- you stop whatever you're doing and go into window
>hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
>'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching to.
>
>(Mayor won't like this post)

Why would it bother me? I already know that you're a major Macbigot.
Apple could have fixed it so you have to run around your house three
times to use the feature and you'd have still declared it better and
more intuitive than anything else.


--

"Whoever is advising them [Democrats] on gun control
should be shot."

Blaine Rummel, spokesman for the Coalition to
Stop Gun Violence.

In article <vgh30i1hl3hod3@news.supernews.com>,
"Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:

> "StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
> news:Liberty-C45209.12514406072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
> > In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> > > You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
> > > this problem years ago.
> >
> > And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
> > "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
> > would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
> > this into Longboar?
>
> I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect
> they never will. It solves a problem Windows does not
> have. What they might do is gussy up the taskbar with
> QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
> QE to use for that.

Sour grapes. Run through the quicktime video on apple's website, win has
nothing like it. I agree MS needs better control of the hardware to
even get close in functionality.

SD

> But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue;
> I mean to suggest that this is a form of catch up.
>
> No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows,
> so that in this respect MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear
> to me that they will manage it with this Expose feature.
>
> [snip]
>
>

In article <ngmhgv83vmt5rachtjruif00jvs6u7unff@4ax.com>,
foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 22:07:23 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <vgh30i1hl3hod3@news.supernews.com>,
> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
> >> news:Liberty-C45209.12514406072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
> >> > In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
> >> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> >> > > You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
> >> > > this problem years ago.
> >> >
> >> > And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
> >> > "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
> >> > would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
> >> > this into Longboar?
> >>
> >> I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect
> >> they never will. It solves a problem Windows does not
> >> have. What they might do is gussy up the taskbar with
> >> QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
> >> QE to use for that.
> >>
> >> But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue;
> >> I mean to suggest that this is a form of catch up.
> >>
> >> No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows,
> >> so that in this respect MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear
> >> to me that they will manage it with this Expose feature.
> >
> >I had a chance to play around with Panther a bit the other day. Exposé,
> >with its window shrinking function assigned to a mouse button under the
> >thumb, is by far the most natural window switching mechanism I've ever
> >experienced. Seriously. It's so good that I think Apple should stick a
> >thumb button on the standard mouse, just for this.
>
> It sounds very good. Time for a mouse upgrade.
>
> >When you head for the Dock or the Taskbar to pull up a window, it's a
> >disruptive process -- you stop whatever you're doing and go into window
> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching to.
> >(Mayor won't like this post)
>
> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)

That's not a bad idea, but I don't think it would achieve the sort of
fluid, natural feel that Exposé does.

--
"First, let me make it very clear, poor people aren't necessarily killers. Just
because you happen to be not rich doesn't mean you're willing to kill."
-- George W. Bush in Washington, D.C. on May 19, 2003

In article <tuvigv0onru3ea81ka2qkrfgfkn979igh7@4ax.com>,
foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 03:27:48 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>
> >> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
> >> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching to.
> >> >(Mayor won't like this post)
> >>
> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
> >
> >That's not a bad idea, but I don't think it would achieve the sort of
> >fluid, natural feel that Exposé does.
>
> Well of course not - there's no Apple logo on it!

Uh, no. It wouldn't achieve the same sort of fluid, natural feel because
there wouldn't be the same continuous visual flow that there is with
Exposé.

--
"First, let me make it very clear, poor people aren't necessarily killers. Just
because you happen to be not rich doesn't mean you're willing to kill."
-- George W. Bush in Washington, D.C. on May 19, 2003

In article <0e6jgvkolajhd9uiq7bn87ifmrg1htilib@4ax.com>,
foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:52:43 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <tuvigv0onru3ea81ka2qkrfgfkn979igh7@4ax.com>,
> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 03:27:48 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
> >> >> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching
> >> >> >to.
> >> >> >(Mayor won't like this post)
> >> >>
> >> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
> >> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
> >> >
> >> >That's not a bad idea, but I don't think it would achieve the sort of
> >> >fluid, natural feel that Exposé does.
> >>
> >> Well of course not - there's no Apple logo on it!
> >
> >Uh, no. It wouldn't achieve the same sort of fluid, natural feel because
> >there wouldn't be the same continuous visual flow that there is with
> >Exposé.
>
>
> ...whatever that means.

It means exactly what it says. What's the problem? Visual flow is hardly
some obscure or ill-defined concept.

Oh, but I forget myself. The Windows fans in this group don't appear to
be capable of comprehending anything except benchmarks, specifications
and feature lists.

--
"First, let me make it very clear, poor people aren't necessarily killers. Just
because you happen to be not rich doesn't mean you're willing to kill."
-- George W. Bush in Washington, D.C. on May 19, 2003

In article <ngmhgv83vmt5rachtjruif00jvs6u7unff@4ax.com>,
foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 22:07:23 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <vgh30i1hl3hod3@news.supernews.com>,
> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
> >> news:Liberty-C45209.12514406072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
> >> > In article <vggu39crkd2eed@news.supernews.com>,
> >> > "Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@vzavenue.net> wrote:
> >> > > You just can't deal with the simple fact that MS addressed
> >> > > this problem years ago.
> >> >
> >> > And MS is still using their "years ago" solution, including the DOS era
> >> > "tile windows". Without Apple attempting to advance GUI design there
> >> > would be no development in that area. How long before MS "innovates"
> >> > this into Longboar?
> >>
> >> I think that depends on whether it is popular; but I expect
> >> they never will. It solves a problem Windows does not
> >> have. What they might do is gussy up the taskbar with
> >> QE-style visual effects, once they have a technology like
> >> QE to use for that.
> >>
> >> But I do not mean to criticize Apple for addressing this issue;
> >> I mean to suggest that this is a form of catch up.
> >>
> >> No doubt Apple would like to leapfrog over Windows,
> >> so that in this respect MacOS X is better; it's not at all clear
> >> to me that they will manage it with this Expose feature.
> >
> >I had a chance to play around with Panther a bit the other day. Exposé,
> >with its window shrinking function assigned to a mouse button under the
> >thumb, is by far the most natural window switching mechanism I've ever
> >experienced. Seriously. It's so good that I think Apple should stick a
> >thumb button on the standard mouse, just for this.
>
> It sounds very good. Time for a mouse upgrade.
>
> >When you head for the Dock or the Taskbar to pull up a window, it's a
> >disruptive process -- you stop whatever you're doing and go into window
> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching to.
> >(Mayor won't like this post)
>
> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)

Win 3.1 had a very nice, very usable tasklist that MS removed in favor
of their current...uh...solution. I think Apple's moving in the right
direction with GUI development.

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:42:18 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:

>In article <0e6jgvkolajhd9uiq7bn87ifmrg1htilib@4ax.com>,
> foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:52:43 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <tuvigv0onru3ea81ka2qkrfgfkn979igh7@4ax.com>,
>> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 03:27:48 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
>> >> >> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're switching
>> >> >> >to.
>> >> >> >(Mayor won't like this post)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
>> >> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
>> >> >
>> >> >That's not a bad idea, but I don't think it would achieve the sort of
>> >> >fluid, natural feel that Exposé does.
>> >>
>> >> Well of course not - there's no Apple logo on it!
>> >
>> >Uh, no. It wouldn't achieve the same sort of fluid, natural feel because
>> >there wouldn't be the same continuous visual flow that there is with
>> >Exposé.
>>
>>
>> ...whatever that means.
>
>It means exactly what it says. What's the problem? Visual flow is hardly
>some obscure or ill-defined concept.
>
>Oh, but I forget myself. The Windows fans in this group don't appear to
>be capable of comprehending anything except benchmarks, specifications
>and feature lists.

Expose is nice - I'm not suggesting it's not. I think my main
annoyance with this thread is some people's (not necesssarily yours)
inability to acknowledge that it's clearly based on prior knowledge,
including getting something from the tile command in Windows.

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:19:13 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
wrote:

>> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
>> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
>
>Win 3.1 had a very nice, very usable tasklist that MS removed in favor
>of their current...uh...solution. I think Apple's moving in the right
>direction with GUI development.

Can you tell me what you missed from 3.1?

In article <2fgjgvgifv8j5dshjmftitanm3f6ucp19h@4ax.com>,
foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:19:13 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
> >
> >Win 3.1 had a very nice, very usable tasklist that MS removed in favor
> >of their current...uh...solution. I think Apple's moving in the right
> >direction with GUI development.
>
> Can you tell me what you missed from 3.1?

THE TASK LIST!!!!!!!

Plus DOS compatibility.

SD

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:26:59 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
wrote:

>In article <fcgjgvo0p8gqalnbm6qtbrckdu34kdgcua@4ax.com>,
> foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:42:18 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <0e6jgvkolajhd9uiq7bn87ifmrg1htilib@4ax.com>,
>> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:52:43 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <tuvigv0onru3ea81ka2qkrfgfkn979igh7@4ax.com>,
>> >> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 03:27:48 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort of
>> >> >> >> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're
>> >> >> >> >switching
>> >> >> >> >to.
>> >> >> >> >(Mayor won't like this post)
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running
>> >> >> >> tasks
>> >> >> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >That's not a bad idea, but I don't think it would achieve the sort of
>> >> >> >fluid, natural feel that Exposé does.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Well of course not - there's no Apple logo on it!
>> >> >
>> >> >Uh, no. It wouldn't achieve the same sort of fluid, natural feel because
>> >> >there wouldn't be the same continuous visual flow that there is with
>> >> >Exposé.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ...whatever that means.
>> >
>> >It means exactly what it says. What's the problem? Visual flow is hardly
>> >some obscure or ill-defined concept.
>> >
>> >Oh, but I forget myself. The Windows fans in this group don't appear to
>> >be capable of comprehending anything except benchmarks, specifications
>> >and feature lists.
>>
>> Expose is nice - I'm not suggesting it's not. I think my main
>> annoyance with this thread is some people's (not necesssarily yours)
>> inability to acknowledge that it's clearly based on prior knowledge,
>> including getting something from the tile command in Windows.
>
>Well BFG! prior knowledge...wow! Window management is a problem in any
>windowing system...duh! Can you win-types not recognize the limitations
>of _all_ current solutions and admit development in this area is a good
>thing?? Or is the (crappy) windows solution the be all and end all,
>good through the next century, final word on the issue?
>
>SD
>
>P.S sorry about the word "crappy"

Others have argued that Expose is something new and unique. It isn't.

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:29:16 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
wrote:

>In article <2fgjgvgifv8j5dshjmftitanm3f6ucp19h@4ax.com>,
> foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:19:13 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
>> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
>> >
>> >Win 3.1 had a very nice, very usable tasklist that MS removed in favor
>> >of their current...uh...solution. I think Apple's moving in the right
>> >direction with GUI development.
>>
>> Can you tell me what you missed from 3.1?
>
>THE TASK LIST!!!!!!!

You can get a task list from XP.

>Plus DOS compatibility.

XP has this.

>SD

In article <ptkjgvs2svh148n4jaai705us76lj0o6og@4ax.com>,
foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:26:59 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <fcgjgvo0p8gqalnbm6qtbrckdu34kdgcua@4ax.com>,
> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:42:18 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <0e6jgvkolajhd9uiq7bn87ifmrg1htilib@4ax.com>,
> >> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:52:43 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >In article <tuvigv0onru3ea81ka2qkrfgfkn979igh7@4ax.com>,
> >> >> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 03:27:48 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort
> >> >> >> >> >of
> >> >> >> >> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're
> >> >> >> >> >switching
> >> >> >> >> >to.
> >> >> >> >> >(Mayor won't like this post)
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running
> >> >> >> >> tasks
> >> >> >> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >That's not a bad idea, but I don't think it would achieve the sort
> >> >> >> >of
> >> >> >> >fluid, natural feel that Exposé does.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Well of course not - there's no Apple logo on it!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Uh, no. It wouldn't achieve the same sort of fluid, natural feel
> >> >> >because
> >> >> >there wouldn't be the same continuous visual flow that there is with
> >> >> >Exposé.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ...whatever that means.
> >> >
> >> >It means exactly what it says. What's the problem? Visual flow is hardly
> >> >some obscure or ill-defined concept.
> >> >
> >> >Oh, but I forget myself. The Windows fans in this group don't appear to
> >> >be capable of comprehending anything except benchmarks, specifications
> >> >and feature lists.
> >>
> >> Expose is nice - I'm not suggesting it's not. I think my main
> >> annoyance with this thread is some people's (not necesssarily yours)
> >> inability to acknowledge that it's clearly based on prior knowledge,
> >> including getting something from the tile command in Windows.
> >
> >Well BFG! prior knowledge...wow! Window management is a problem in any
> >windowing system...duh! Can you win-types not recognize the limitations
> >of _all_ current solutions and admit development in this area is a good
> >thing?? Or is the (crappy) windows solution the be all and end all,
> >good through the next century, final word on the issue?
> >
> >SD
> >
> >P.S sorry about the word "crappy"
>
> Others have argued that Expose is something new and unique. It isn't.

This is a new solution to an old problem, made possible by a well tuned
graphics subsystem..it is new.

No other system manages windows as does Expose...it's unique.

You're welcome to give up any time.

SD

In article <kvkjgvkvrpb92c9f1pe6og8tlb7i868u1u@4ax.com>,
foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:29:16 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <2fgjgvgifv8j5dshjmftitanm3f6ucp19h@4ax.com>,
> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:19:13 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
> >> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
> >> >
> >> >Win 3.1 had a very nice, very usable tasklist that MS removed in favor
> >> >of their current...uh...solution. I think Apple's moving in the right
> >> >direction with GUI development.
> >>
> >> Can you tell me what you missed from 3.1?
> >
> >THE TASK LIST!!!!!!!
>
> You can get a task list from XP.

Oh did MS put it back? They took it out for 95, 98 and NT (the last
versions of windows I will probably "use")

> >Plus DOS compatibility.
>
> XP has this.

Probably not as good as OS/2's DOS compatibility was (remember, we
couldn't switch from win 3.1 to XP way back when)

> >SD
>

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:27:55 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
wrote:

>In article <ptkjgvs2svh148n4jaai705us76lj0o6og@4ax.com>,
> foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:26:59 -0700, StormDrain <Liberty@MS-Free.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <fcgjgvo0p8gqalnbm6qtbrckdu34kdgcua@4ax.com>,
>> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:42:18 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <0e6jgvkolajhd9uiq7bn87ifmrg1htilib@4ax.com>,
>> >> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:52:43 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article <tuvigv0onru3ea81ka2qkrfgfkn979igh7@4ax.com>,
>> >> >> > foo <foo@bar.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 03:27:48 -0400, ZnU <znu@acedsl.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >hunting mode. Exposé isn't like that at all. Your attention sort
>> >> >> >> >> >of
>> >> >> >> >> >'flows' directly from the current window to the one you're
>> >> >> >> >> >switching
>> >> >> >> >> >to.
>> >> >> >> >> >(Mayor won't like this post)
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running
>> >> >> >> >> tasks
>> >> >> >> >> in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >That's not a bad idea, but I don't think it would achieve the sort
>> >> >> >> >of
>> >> >> >> >fluid, natural feel that Exposé does.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Well of course not - there's no Apple logo on it!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Uh, no. It wouldn't achieve the same sort of fluid, natural feel
>> >> >> >because
>> >> >> >there wouldn't be the same continuous visual flow that there is with
>> >> >> >Exposé.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ...whatever that means.
>> >> >
>> >> >It means exactly what it says. What's the problem? Visual flow is hardly
>> >> >some obscure or ill-defined concept.
>> >> >
>> >> >Oh, but I forget myself. The Windows fans in this group don't appear to
>> >> >be capable of comprehending anything except benchmarks, specifications
>> >> >and feature lists.
>> >>
>> >> Expose is nice - I'm not suggesting it's not. I think my main
>> >> annoyance with this thread is some people's (not necesssarily yours)
>> >> inability to acknowledge that it's clearly based on prior knowledge,
>> >> including getting something from the tile command in Windows.
>> >
>> >Well BFG! prior knowledge...wow! Window management is a problem in any
>> >windowing system...duh! Can you win-types not recognize the limitations
>> >of _all_ current solutions and admit development in this area is a good
>> >thing?? Or is the (crappy) windows solution the be all and end all,
>> >good through the next century, final word on the issue?
>> >
>> >SD
>> >
>> >P.S sorry about the word "crappy"
>>
>> Others have argued that Expose is something new and unique. It isn't.
>
>This is a new solution to an old problem, made possible by a well tuned
>graphics subsystem..it is new.
>
>No other system manages windows as does Expose...it's unique.
>
>You're welcome to give up any time.
>
>SD

It's a (better) ripoff of tile windows.

"StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in message
news:Liberty-957AA6.11191307072003@cnews.newsguy.com...
> > (Nevermind a mousebutton could easily bring up a list of running tasks
> > in XP with a bit of creative mousebutton programming....)
>
> Win 3.1 had a very nice, very usable tasklist that MS removed in favor
> of their current...uh...solution. I think Apple's moving in the right
> direction with GUI development.

I'm curious to know what was better about the Win3 task list compared
to the XP version of the same, now called the "Task Manager".