[haiku] Re: Suggestions to change double click on window title behaviour

  • From: Dave Osbourne <super_dooper_dave_osbourne@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: haiku@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:16:54 -0800 (PST)

Just create a wonderful clone of the spaces tool in OS X :)They have done a 
great job of it already, and works great.I'd love to see it in Haiku for window 
--- On Sun, 11/1/09, Jonas Sundström <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Jonas Sundström <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [haiku] Re: Suggestions to change double click on window title  
To: haiku@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 9:02 AM

Johan Aires Rastén <johan@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ari, Maxime and Truls:
> If you think double click on title to minimize/hide is good,
> please add some reasons why you think it is. If you don't,
> you're only expressing your personal taste and not arguing
> your point.

15 years of collective taste!

As an aside, send-to-back (by right-clicking the window tab)
lessens the need to minimize windows, as you don't necessarily
have to minimize a window in the foreground to reveal windows
covered by it.

There are many ways to reveal covered windows, including Ctrl/
Alt-Tab, using Deskbar, or dbl-clicking. Especially Deskbar 
should be a no-brainer even for newcomers. It's just a matter 
of getting used to not having a minimize widget on window tabs.

I wonder if not this "one visible button per action" concept is
soon old school usability. With multitouch there's going to be
a whole new world of hidden functionality.

> @Maxime:
> You appear to consider a narrow tab very important. Why do 
> you think those 5mm you gain more important than improved
> usability?

When stacking windows, having narrow tabs allows for more 
windows to be stacked and still have their full window 
titles show.

> From a pure user point of view, is there really such a big
> difference between a hidden application and a non-running
> application?

Maybe not in a fully document- or task-centric system.
Which Haiku clearly is not, IMO. (In spite of what was 
claimed for BeOS.)

> Would a system that instantly restores any application be
> considered "ideal", and how close to this could we get in
> reality?

That's an interesting question, but I think the constant-on 
computer usage we're seeing these days lessens the need to
come up with elaborate session management and app state saving.



Other related posts: