Hi, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Meek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 7:23 PM Subject: Interface design
> TAction's ImageIndex at each click of the button. But should the glyph > seen > at anytime reflect the current style that the interface is set to OR > should > it reflect what the style will be IF the user clicks it? I've seen > programs ---------- I'd choose the second one, so it should reflect the style which will be activated IF it is clicked. I'd expect this behavior in general, since the actual style is in front of my eyes, since I'm looking at it... Or am I wrong? ---------- > Now some might argue that the more common use of multiple monitors > can provide a great and positive quality that we as programmers can use in > the design of our applications to better the way in which we evaluate and > interact with the information being presented , and that by means of > stacking and/or row banking we can allow for a lot more leeway in the > design > of visual presentations then they yet have. However the ONLY way that can > be true is if the boundary edges of aligned monitors are first made > visually > inconsequential! Then the total working area and it's overall width and > height could make it possible to substantially alter > presentation...especially when that presentation may call for more than > one form in view! --------------- In some cases having more monitors is a life saver. (See below), but if you design your interface think of people who has only one. --------------- > But as it is now, the apparent edges of tangent monitors > causes such distraction to the eye that any value gained is just as > immediately lost! And that doesn't even take into account the > requirements > of keeping each monitor in "phase" with each other so that slight > differences in contrast, acuity, and image centering do not further the > visual disjunction that can so easily occur! > Taking these things into account it's easy to see that under ANY > circumstances one singular monitor is by far much better than any multiple > setup possible. And if one agrees with this, then it's also apparent that ----------- I disagree with this. As long as you don't want the multiple monitors to see only one virtual monitor (just like windows does it with "extend desktop" function) definitely not. Treat the extra monitors as extra monitors, and than it's OK to use. I give some examples: 1. You are a programmer, and you have to debug an app., on monitor A you see your debugging IDE (may be Delphi ;)) on monitor B you see your app.'s output window. 2. In most of my time I do video editing work, and it's very nice to have the currently edited video's preview in fullscreen on monitor B, while I can see the editor (different controls, timline, etc.) on monitor A. So the key is that the "more than one" monitor should not to "want to look like one monitor". In this case we can benefit from having multiple monitors. ------------ All these above are just my honest opinion, the truth may differ. ;) By(t)e Laca www.kovacslt.fw.hu mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________________________________ Delphi-Talk mailing list -> [email protected] http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/delphi-talk
