In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: :> :>Fred Gerlach wrote::> :>Simple only to a complex mind that can remember after creating or :>migrating a new profile with no bookmarks where to look or even whether :>to look and what to look for and where to look for it in order to edit a :>file on disk, when most commonly used prefs have a UI built into the :>app. Simple, not. The problem is not so much whether you or I know. The :>bigger problem is a user new to Mozilla. :>
Not really an issue... Most people who are new to mozilla will more than likely have used Internet exploder, Opera or something of that ilk which already have menus following pointers. The people that want to click at everything under the sun can learn to make the change themselves, or argue with the UI developers... I follow several of the mozilla newsgroups, and this is the only one where I have even seen an argument over this feature taking place. It seems to be a very small number of people that have an issue with it to begin with. :>I use windoze only enough to get infuriated by such stupidity as chasing :>menus. Linux is no less guilty. You just wait till your mouse hand is :>constantly crippled and irritated by arthritis and see how much you like :>having to go back to the beginning several times before reaching a third :>or deeper menu or bookmarks level. Much of the time I do happen to have extreme difficulty flexing my right hand because of pain and lack of joint mobility. As I indicated previously in the thread, I find it much less painful only having to click twice rather than ten times to get to a bookmark nested several levels deep. I can move the mouse without using the wrist or hand, but there is no way to avoid having to use several joints/muscles to click the mouse, of which I am painfully reminded more often than I'd like. My experience obviously differs from yours. As for the windows and linux bashing... Keep in mind that the behavior of menus following pointers was around long before windoze "introduced" it. It's really tiring when people keep trying to make their arguments by suggesting that something is bad merely "because its what <platform X> does". It's not a freaking religious issue. :>More often cross-platform is a choice. Some people find one platform :>sufficient, and find it rude that people want to kill what makes it so :>by changing it to be like something else that isn't clearly better. Well, I was more referring to an workplace environment where several people using different plaforms do need to use some of the same tools on occasion. Trying to support users when the same program behaves differently on different platforms is a nightmare. I don't care if the behaviour is in line with the platform's standards, it's not acceptable from a support standpoint. You seem to be refering to the single user environment Even so, particularly at this stage in the life of OS/2, cross-platform needs are less and less about choice and more about (lack of) availability of needed tools. :> :>> with, consistency of the tools used to get the job done were far more :> :>That's all well and good if the features themselves consistently :>superior. This particular feature has been an abomination since its :>inception. Another subjective assessment... Given the very small number of people who seem to find the behavior undesireable, or even problematic, I would say that the default behaviour is seen as acceptable, perhaps even superior. :> :>> important than the platform. It's pointless to subvert the functionality of :>> an application simply because the platform hasn't caught up with modern :>> accessibility and usability concerns. :> :>Chasing menus is not anything remotely resembling better that getting :>what you want and only what you want by having selected only what you :>affirmatively choose. That is your opinion, mine is is that I wonder why in the hell I should have to affirmatively choose something with ten mouse clicks when I could just as easily do it with two.
