Ben Bucksch wrote:
>
> Matthew Thomas wrote:
> >
> > Nonsense. I shouldn't have to switch to a non-free browser just
> > because I am one of those millions of users who switches between the
> > Web and e-mail (or instant messaging) frequently, and who uses a
> > display which is too small for a decently-sized biff icon in any
> > place not covered by browser windows.
>
> Web and email are completely different applications (which just happen
> to be both provided by Mozilla).
Sure. The Mail and Chat buttons would not be hard-coded to Messenger and
Jabberzilla, but to your chosen mailer and chat client. (The biff
effects would probably only work if you were using the Mozilla apps, though.)
> Switching between them is a task of
> the OS, not Mozilla.
In an ideal world, yes. But you seem to have ignored both the points
which I made above.
<...
> > Nonsense. I shouldn't have to switch to a non-free browser just
> > because I am one of those millions of users who switches between the
> > Web and e-mail (or instant messaging) frequently,
Whether or not they are provided by the same application, the Web and
e-mail are often used at the same time. mailto: links are given in Web
pages. URLs are provided in e-mail messages. And other information
provided in one application is copied by users for use in the other. The
same applies, albeit to a lesser extent, for instant messaging.
The OSes used by the majority of users -- that is, Windows and Mac OS --
do not provide an easy method of launching the other program once the
first is running. In Windows, you have to fight your way through the
Start > Programs hierarchy, which suffers from the various UI problems
of menus in Windows generally, and which (thanks to egotistical
installers) is usually rather uselessly categorized by vendor rather
than by program type. And on Mac OS, you have to switch to the Launcher
(itself a separate app) and click on the appropriate app category before
clicking the button for the app. Alternatively in either OS, if you have
a shortcut to the app on your desktop, you have to remember how to hide
all the current windows so that you can *see* your desktop, and then
open the shortcut.
> > and who uses a
> > display which is too small for a decently-sized biff icon in any
> > place not covered by browser windows.
Most users maximize their browser windows (which is unfortunate for the
rest of us, who have to put up with Web authors assuming that we are
using a maximized window). This is largely because the vast majority of
monitors are still really really small (less than 20 inches), and normal
monitor resolution is still really really low (96 dpi or lower).
So any always-on-top application switcher provided by the OS -- such as
the Application Switcher in Mac OS 8/9, or the taskbar in Windows 9x --
has to be (and is) too small for comfortable use in order to be small
enough to be out of the way. (Both Windows and Mac OS make this problem
worse by not taking advantage of the edge of the screen to dramatically
increase the target area.)
>...
> If the OS' taskbar doesn't provide any way to show a decently sized
> icon, that's the OS' fault.
If you think anyone is going to see that Mozilla doesn't provide the
option of a Mail button on its toolbar, and think `oh! silly me! I must
start using a different OS!', rather than just using a different
browser, you're on the wrong planet.
> GNOME's taskbar is large enough (64px high
> by default, IIRC)
Probably because a large proportion of GNOME users have monitors big
enough (and/or resolutions high enough) to handle a large taskbar.
> and MacOS X' one is too, IIRC.
One of the reasons why the Mac OS X GUI is such a joke, given that
they're expecting Mac OS X to be used on today's tiny monitors.
> Dunno about MacOS 9.
> On Windows, it worked OK in 4.x (which did use the Windows taskbar for
> biff).
That's nice, but it's very small, which makes it annoyingly difficult to click.
--
Matthew `mpt' Thomas, Mozilla user interface QA
