Re: [Ayatana] Design problem: Menus hidden by default in Unity

[Grant Willey <grantovius@xxxxxxxxx>]

One possible option is to split the desktop into 9 sections (rule of thirds) and use combinations of those sections as the only size options available.

This would allow easy modulation of existing windows and would be largely backward-compatible with existing software. Browser windows usually already take up an area that would be about a 4 block square when we use them on a typical desktop. GIMP could even rotate one palette to horizontal and fit the canvas into the upper 4x4 square and the palettes into the 3x1 and 1x2 spaces left over

Or you could have the option to split one box into 9 boxes if needed, providing 81 possible boxes. This would allow GIMP to remain in its current default window config. 

Resizing isn't dead, it is definitely useful, we just want to drastically reduce the amount of time we spend doing it. Modularized window sizes and positions would limit your choices drastically, and make choosing a window size and position no longer a time-wasting task as well as be visually more pleasing, based on an already known rule of composition.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 7:08 AM, Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Vishnoo wrote on 19/03/11 04:31:
>
> On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 16:24 +0000, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
>>
>> I think the Gnome Shell designers are badly underestimating the use
>> cases for minimize.
>
> No, they havent.
> I take it you havent read Owen's Mail on the Shell ML.. :-)

I had. He listed some use cases for minimize but not all, he identified
workspaces as an arguable substitute for some of those use cases, his
user data was from two geeks at work, and he was honest in admitting
that he didn't really know whether it was a good idea.

>...
>>  And anyone who thinks dragging is a replacement for
>> a maximize button probably hasn't done any user testing recently.
>
> "Maximize" is not a feature we should be encouraging, *anywhere* !
> It is a workaround for a broken window management.
> Why in the world does the *user* need to constantly maximize/restore?

Nobody is suggesting that.

> Apps need to open the windows with the right size.
> And any app which requires the user to constantly resize is broken.

Sure, but I don't see how that's relevant. Maximization and constant
resizing are very different things.

> For apps requiring a maximum size, window should just open so.
> Right now, for any alternate *custom* size one would require to either:
> 1- restore a maximized window and - then resize to custom size
> or
> 2- resize a window from the normal state to custom size
>
> Maximize just makes it harder to get to custom sizes. Why even have it

Because the lack of maximize (or something like it) would make it harder
to focus complete attention on something.

> ? (I hope maximize just gets killed, only then will apps fix at their
> end. ;p)

Do you have a specific suggestion? What should a text editor program do,
for example?

> I seriously dont understand why this fascination for resizing/resize
> grips exists.
> I'm not saying that resize feature should not even exist, but Resize is
> something user should not even care about, and should spend less time
> doing.

Resizing grips are not the only way of allocating screen space between
tasks. Tiling is another well-known mechanism, but it is less visually
stable and requires a greater investment of time.

- --
mpt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2IkUsACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecqJRwCgozTllk3DawsxHV3Nz8mh4r8e
ilIAnjfdI8Z2ks8PbMZff2pLh3dsab6J
=ikoJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to     : ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp