................................. To leave Commie, hyper to http://commie.oy.com/commie_leaving.html .................................
>One stupid thing about windows is that when setting the "Open all folders >in one >window"-option on (which I do because the desktop and the menu bar get so >cluttered otherwise) you can not open a folder into a new window, even >through the right click menu (In contrary to internet explorer). At least in Windows 2000, there is a shortcut for this: CTRL+click. (... which is copied from Macintosh, where the sort-of equivalent is "option+click". In Macintosh, the meaning is opposite, though: "close the parent folder, when opening the new folder" ... and no idea, whether this works in OS X or not.) >Actually I think the best place for the start menu would be to the pixel >nearest >to the mouse, which is the active pixel where the mouse is. Placing the start >menu on the drop down menu you get on the right click would make things a lot >easier. Hmmm... might be. Then again, you probably expect to find task-related menus by right-clicking something. That's a convention already. Then again, the start menu could be further away in the contextual dropdown menus. Task-related things first and general purpose shortcuts next. If the contextual menus were circular, this could maybe work. The main problem with current Start menu is the clutter. Although Windows 2000 hides not-so-frequently used programs there by default, methinks it makes the situation worse: The programs in the menu change their location all the time. And the computer doesn't seem to understand that if I don't use some program so often, it doesn't mean that I don't use it at all. Hey, btw, I noticed a couple of weeks ago, that Windows remembers icon locations in folders nowadays. WHee, it's almost like using a Mac. :) >By the way,the idea of the force feedback mouse does not sound at all as >stupid >as it.. well.. sounds. Applying that with a slight touch of local gravity >would work perhaps quite nicely. The tactile sensations of the user interface >could prove to be a very big usability issue in the future. Heh, yeah, it doesn't sound as stupid as it sounds. I mean.. well, I hope you understand what I mean. Whatever. :) Darn! What a hangover! ---> 1012
