@Adam,
Yes, indeed I like Amiga retro and never liked NeXTStep. With NeXT
if I use 10 Apps, and I do this often in my hacking sessions, then
I've 10 windows for the Apps + 10 floating menus for each Apps, that
are shown everytime I click on the window of the relative App. This
means I also have to take care about positioning the floating menus
as well as the App Window, each time that I click on that window and
the relative menus appears, overlaps another window which probably I
need to read; not so comfortably in my point of view. This is quite
horrible for me, messy and inconsistent, floating menus everywhere!
Il 29/11/2015 15:51, Adam S ha scritto:
@Nikolaus ... Yeah I'd agree with that. You can evoke
retro without necessarily looking outdated in the negative
sense.
On Nov 29, 2015 2:48 PM, "H. Nikolaus
Schaller" < hns@dhns.de> wrote:
Am 29.11.2015 um 15:16 schrieb Riccardo Mottola <riccardo.mottola@libero.it>:
> Hi,
>
> Gregory Casamento wrote:
>>> I absolutely want "our" menus, they are
distinctive and useful and if I were
>>> >to make a reference distribution, I'd want to
retain that.
>> They are OLD. More important than their usefulness
is what they
>> invoke and that is they make people think that we are
NeXTSTEP and
>> OPENSTEP only. Like it or not our old look is part
of our problem.
>> I'm sorry you don't like this fact, but it is based
on tons of first
>> hand observation over the last ten years.
>
> I'm sorry you mix look and with interface design. Facts
and factoids.
>
> Actually, our menus are NEW, they are newer than
in-window menus and one-menu-bar on the top which came from
Mac and Motif/OS2/Windows. They have close parents and
predecessors (e.g. SGI menus, Amiga menus) but NeXT made them
consistent.
>
> The interaction with our menus makes NeXT & GNUstep
distinctive and as trying to port applications back and forth
it allows for a unique interaction. It allows, for example to
have very smooth document based applications which are
impossible to achieve (as still the latest office suite of a
big software company proves) with in-window menus.
> It offers the same functionality as a top menu bar, but
is more flexible and works well with big screens or
multiple-screens. We do not need to invent things like
"tearable menus" and even "palettes" are not strictly
necessary.
>
> Thus, playing the same song is of no good for anybody.
That is IMHO all correct about being distinctive, unique and
consistent over multiple screens, but you don't see that in a
screenshot. There you only get the look, not the feel.
Imagine, someone from outside our community successfully
installs GNUstep, is happy about how applications work and
writes a blog entry, he/she will add screen shots which indeed
looks old fashioned to his/her readers. This spreads a
negative touch (except for fans of retro look). Unless some
default theme looks "modern" or "vivid" or "up-to-date".
Just my 2 cts.
BR,
Nikolaus
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
Alex.
|