On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Clarence Verge wrote:
> > Here's a screenshot of Netscape 3.04 taken from
> > 9wm, which has no title bars or title bar buttons.
> > http://wizard.dyndns.org/9wm_ns3.png
> > This is the same way it would appear without any
> > wm at all, so you can see, it's the wm which controls
> > the look of your buttons.
> > Now here's a screenshot of the exact same browser,
> > but taken from icewm (infidel2 theme, overloaded style)
> > http://wizard.dyndns.org/ice_ns3.png
>
> Um. They both look the same to me - and NEITHER resembles NS3.04
> on W3.11 in any way. Are you sure those are the correct shots ?
The NS in the first shot has no title bar. The second
shot has an overly busy title bar, with 7, yes, count 'em,
SEVEN function buttons.
Yes, Linux Netscape 3.04 does have some cosmetic
differences from the Windoze 95 version, such as the
pink URL window, and maybe the way certain things are
sized, or which features are defaultly enabled, but I
assure you, that is Netscape 3.04. I wonder how much
difference there is between the look of Win3.11 NS3.x
and Win95 NS3.x.
> Strangely, your shots showing Arachne look like Arachne.
"Strangely," huh. ;-)
> Yes, the cntrlALT+/- work for me to change my display mode, but
> that wasn't what I was getting at. Seems there should be a button
> to make the app go fullscreen but *I* can't find it.
I've never run across any app with such a button.
When you can control every aspect of the geometry
of the application itself, and also control what
resolution you use on the fly, the idea of "full-
screen" becomes a bit fuzzy.
The one place this isn't true is with GGI apps
such as Arachne, where the size is set to 800x600.
I believe this is hard-coded.
With GGI apps, you can't just click on a border
and drag to resize it as you can with normal X
applications.
> I don't think in terms of multi-user capabilities so I would have
> voted for the simpler single user method.
> I doubt I will ever get into multi-tasking with Linux.
I used to say, "I can only do one thing at a time
anyway, so what do I need multi-tasking for?"
Imagine you're writing a web page, so you have the
html file opened in an xterm pico. You also have
Netscape 3.04, Amaya 4.3-1, and Arachne opened on the
same desktop. You have some nested tables, and they
just don't look right in Arachne or Amaya, and Netscape
just shows a blank. You open the structure window
in Amaya to discover where the bad nesting is, edit
the file in pico, and hit CTRL-O to save the change.
Then click reload on each of the browsers, and voila!
It's beautiful in all of them.
Now make 14 more changes to the web page in similar
fashion.
Doing the same thing in a single-tasking environment,
you'd have spent more time opening and closing apps
than you would editing.
Or how about you're in the middle of burning a music
CD, and a friend drops over for a boot floppy. Yes,
you can 'dd' the floppy (similar to rawrite) while the
CD is burning. You don't have to wait around for the
CD to finish.
Maybe you'll never do these exact things, but once
you discover the power and convenience of multitasking,
you'll wonder how you ever got along without it. Kinda
like a microwave oven. ;-)
> Now to see what X has for me today. ;-)
Whatever you can imagine. ;-)
--
Steve
$ uptime
8:37pm up 34 days, 12:39, 20 users, load average: 0.99, 0.98, 0.99
