Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x.motif:2354 comp.windows.open-look:1055 comp.windows.x:34655 comp.windows.misc:1898 comp.unix.misc:1219 news.misc:6371
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!midway!quads.uchicago.edu!bkc2
From: bkc2@quads.uchicago.edu (Benjamin Clardy)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x.motif,comp.windows.open-look,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.misc,comp.unix.misc,news.misc
Subject: Re: Question for net.views column in UNIX Today!
Message-ID: <1991Apr1.055516.12726@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 1 Apr 91 05:55:16 GMT
References: <9103311549.AA20101@presto.ig.com>
Sender: bkc2@midway.uchicago.edu (Benjamin Clardy)
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 87

In article <9103311549.AA20101@presto.ig.com> presto.ig.com!dow@uunet.UU.NET (Christopher Dow) writes:
>In article <1991Mar29.195953.2421@utoday.com> you write:
>>
>>	*******************
>>	*   QUESTION #2	  *
>>	*******************
>>
>>	Is a single GUI standard really necessary?
>>
>>
---Misc. Deleted---
>
>
>	 I think it would be useful, although I'm not sure how useful.
>The Mac originally had a standard interface, which has evolved over
>the years.  Mac programs today have a lot more GUI features than they
>did six years ago.  I say this because I don't think a GUI standard
>would stagnate user interfaces.  The basic point is, some of the
>things should be standardized, but most should be left up to the
>descretion of the GUI designers.
>	Things that should be standardized:
>
>	Window Manipulation: Resize, move, iconify, maximize, etc.
>	Placement of Menus:  File, Edit, Help.
>	Desktop environmetn.
>
>	Basically, this will provide the means to get started on
>anything, without preventing the designers from putting needed
>functionality in their programs.  Most of what I've suggested already
>exists, if you look at Windows, PM, Motif, and OpenLook.
>
>	An interesting experiment would be to post another question
>asking what GUI people use, then cross-reference it with the original
>answers. 
>
>	
>-- 
>Chris Dow                             IntelliGenetics
>Software Engineer                     700 East El Camino Real
>icbmnet: 37 22' 39" N, 122 3' 32" W   Mountain View, Ca. 94040
>dow@presto.ig.com                     (415) 962-7320

Since there are now toolkits that allow simultaneous devleopment of Motif and
Openlook applications, I do not feel that the existence of these two standards
prevents a problem from the programming point anyway.  With regard to the user,
I would like to see some standardization between the two.  This, however, is 
not so dependent upon the GUI, but upon the industry and the individual 
programmer.  I agree that a standard menu setting of FILE, EDIT, and HELP with
similar functions be established.  I still believe that the Mac has the best
most consistent interface, and to a large extent this is due to a almost 
fascist Apple Corp.  I find it ironic that I have a SPARCstation at work 
running OpenWindows, but I recently bought an Macintosh Classic for home.  
The simple fact of the matter is that I find it easier to do "simple" tasks
on the Mac (word processing, finances, etc.) than on the Sun (not because I
am Unix illiterate-I administer the Suns at work).  

Although OpenWindows provides some improvements over the Mac interface 
including:
	1. Resizing windows from any corner.
	2. Greater Customization, e.g. scrollbars on left or right. 

OpenWindows (and Motif?) needs addition features:
	1. Keyboard shortcuts.  These should be standardized like they are on
	   the Mac, i.e. COMMAND-X for cut, COMMAND-V for paste, etc.
	2. A button for quiting applications, in addition to closing them.
	   This would be must faster than quiting from the menu bar. 
	3. Real on line help to help novices, e.g. Textedit.
	4. The ability for an application to display on icon without being 
	   loaded into memory.  I think the drag and drop metaphor is makes
	   sense, but I don't always want an application in memory to do 
	   that, e.g. having Pageview loaded all the time to view a PostScript
	   file.  How about dynamic starting of the application in this case?
	5. Font Menus.  Why can't I have OpenWindows, or OW applications, 
	   change or resize the font on command, instead of just at startup.

Windows and PM are a wash from a programming standpoint.  From a users 
standpoint, however, I think it would worthwhile to have the same user 
interface.

bkc2@midway.uchicago.edu
312.702.5792
 

-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
bkc2@midway.uchicago.edu                                       benjamin clardy
______________________________________________________________________________