On Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:35:00PM +1000, Speedy wrote:
> To start the ball rolling, I like the ideas that give the most choice to
> those who aren't 100% on how the system works. How else are we supposed to
> get people to change to a superior WM if they don't understand it?
Why would I care if other people change to blackbox? I don't think
it should be an argument. Everyone should just use what suits them, for
a lot of people that won't be blackbox. So what?
> I like the close button on torn menus.
I don't, it's just more visual clutter to me. (But I'm someone who likes
his desktop extremely boring ;)
> Or if possible, the idea that a torn menu can be closed by clicking on the
> parent menu where it's supposed to be. What if you lost the torn menu?
That seems pretty difficult to do IMHO. The menu's are always on top and
stay visible in every workspace. I tried to push one of the screen to be
completely gone. Wouldn't work there's always some pixels left. If there's
to much stuff in one workspace to see you're menus immediately, why not
just switch to an empty one?
> And then maybe to indicate on the parent menu that a child is torn, a
> different symbol. Instead of an arrow, how about an "!" or "*", just to
> remind you "hey doofus, you've torn this off. And now you can't find it,
> right?", and then you can hunt for it, or just re-click on that menu item to
> re-spawn it in it's proper place.
The submenu not appearing is a pretty good indication to me... ;)
> Now please, no more arguing over the semantics, let's just find out what
> people want.
I really think blackbox is pretty much perfect the way it is. Well,
sometimes Netscape crashes and takes blackbox with it... But apart from
that I really, really don't need any changes.
Gtz
Ward
