4 ms·
In that link they really don't actually go into the 'why' they just say they thought about it and show us a snapshot of a white board that says nothing as far a
by andrewvc 17y ago
In that link they really don't actually go into the 'why' they just say they thought about it and show us a snapshot of a white board that says nothing as far as rationale.
The most telling part of the article parent linked to is: "Is it better or worse? It is quite hard to tell." If that's what they think, then why change it?
Additionally, the author says: " I have had it running on my machine with the buttons in this order since before the Portland sprint (first week of February?) and I am quite used to it". That sounds like it conferred no benefit whatsoever.
- jasonlotito 17y agoSorry. I didn't mean to suggest that the article was entirely complete. Only that you might have missed it, and it might go further in explaining things you seemed interested in. =)
- andrewvc 17y agoSorry if I sounded offended, I actually did miss that link, and I up voted your comment when I read it.
- pyre 17y agoThough I have to agree with his final thoughts: Personally, I would have the max and min on the left and close on the right. Why they chose against this idea (with the title centered) is not explained. Personally, I think that his blog post poses more questions than it answers.