Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!husc6!mit-eddie!think!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!CORY.BERKELEY.EDU!dillon
From: dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Better Windows? (LONG)
Message-ID: <8705121953.AA05310@cory.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Tue, 12-May-87 15:53:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: cory.8705121953.AA05310
Posted: Tue May 12 15:53:53 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 15-May-87 02:32:28 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 62

>	- most icon systems put too much emphasis on graphics for my
>	  taste.  Text has it's own special advantages:

	Which is one reason I like the Amiga... you don't have to use the
icon oriented workbench if you don't want to.

>	- the windowing concept doesn't seem to be efficient; there
>	  are lots of things the user can do that he doesn't need, and
>	  these extra features take a lot of compute power.  I'm sure

	If you don't like them, don't use them.  As long as the 'extra' 
features don't effect anything else, if you don't use them, it's as if they
didn't exist.

>		- What use is a window that is half-hidden?  Why would
>		  anyone want to see only the left half of a document?

	Extremely useful.  You are generalizing that a user will always want 
to see the entire window he is working in, which is completely and totally
wrong.  Many times I have a window or windows that I'm working in that I 
*want* half hidden.  But again, there is a solution if you don't like half
hidden windows, you can always use one of the several Freeware programs to
automatically put the selected window up front (and other things...)

>		- Do we need to move windows arbitrarily like pieces
>		  of paper?  What difference does it make whether a
>		  window is a few pixels to the left or right?

	It makes a big difference to me!

>	- At the same time, current window systems don't really
>	  use the potential of these machines.  These computers can
>	  simulate arbitrary universes; we confine them to a mildly
>	  mutated desktop.  I guess I am attacking the desktop
>	  metaphor; just because it's familiar doesn't mean it's good.

	This would be a problem with the workbench.  The developer can easily
opt for SuperBitmap windows (a window into a larger universe) when he writes
his software.

>I think a good user interface ought to concentrate the available power
>on productive, often used functions (like a RISC chip :-)).  One
>shouldn't spend programmer time and computer time adding bells and
>whistles that let the user do useless things.  Of course we also need

	I agree, but you have to be careful on your definition of "useless".
If a hundred thousand people like it, it isn't "useless".

>The fundamental question is, how can we make the important stuff
>available at the right time, without cluttering the display with
>leftovers and without forcing the user to clean up after us?
>
>I realize I've been long-winded, but I feel that the hardware is just
>sitting there begging to be used, and when the software catches up
>we're really gonna see what these damn machines can do.

	That's one big question.  Obviously there is no single correct
answer.  If you have an idea, by all means voice your opinion.  (Me, I
usually voice my opinion quite loudly, but also make an attempt to 
implement the idea to backup my opinion)

			-Matt