> Mike was talking about the *left* pane in Explorer (The tree-view), which
> *is* single-click in NT (as in all versions of Win32). The difference
> between Windows Explorer and Protel Explorer, though, is that Protel
> Explorer shows the actual documents in the tree view, while Win Explorer
> does not.
>
> On NT, it is possible to enable the single-clicking of documents, but you
> have to have Active Desktop installed. Active Desktop comes with Internet
> Explorer 4 (And NOT with IE5 AFAIK). The ONLY redeeming feature of Active
> Desktop is the little mini-icons/mini-app-launcher you get to the
immediate
> right of the Start Button. I had tremendous trouble to get this to display
> on my install of NT at home; here's how I eventually did it:
>
> * Un-install IE5/5.5 or whatever you have;
> * Install IE4, enabling Active Desktop (You can turn off all the options
if
> you want, but you can't get the little row of icons (it's more of a
> mini-app-launcher, since you can drag new icons there);
> * Re-install IE5 over the top of IE4.
>
> Note that you can't download IE4 from MS anymore, since the Active Desktop
> apparently breaks something to do with DOJ and all of that.
>
> Of course, it's probably just easier to buy/install Win2k, which has AD by
> default...
>
> MvdW
As someone who has used Windows since version 3.1 (pre Win 95 era), my
personal preference, as a consequence of this, is for the "one click to
highlight/focus, two clicks to open" paradigm.
That said, I am well aware that this is no longer the only paradigm
available, and that some people have a preference for the "one click to
open" paradigm. (I have also heard/read claims that double-clicking is not
intuitive to those using PCs for the first time, and as such, this is a
shortcoming of the "classic" paradigm.)
However, my understanding is that the "one click to open" paradigm is
supposed to be accompanied by the provision of data/details when the cursor
is moved over an icon/file/symbol. This data can be in the form of (pop-up)
"bubble" help, or data on a Status Bar, but replaces, in a sense, what a
*single* click achieved with the classic paradigm (similar to how a single
click with the new paradigm replaces a double click with the classic
paradigm).
It would be one thing if moving the cursor over some item in the left hand
pane (of Protel 99 SE) gave some indication that the protocol of the classic
paradigm is not being used (which is the case because the file is opened
with a single click rather than with just a double click), as that would
alert/warn/remind the user that a single click will subsequently open the
file. The absense of such feedback can result in users "forgetting" that a
single click will open the file, and hence the current round of
complaints...
There is something to be said for Protel's software to use the same paradigm
that the user has selected for their PC, so that Protel's behaviour matches
that of the PC's OS (and other applications). However, whenever the newer
paradigm is used (either when the user has selected this for their OS, or
otherwise under all circumstances), moving the cursor over a particular file
should provide *some* indication that the classic paradigm is not being
used.
Regards,
Geoff Harland.
-----------------------------
E-Mail Disclaimer
The Information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this
e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended
recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken
or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be
unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this e-mail are
confidential and not for public display.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html
* - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
