4 ms·
> Having my window open in my 3rd monitor - and having to go back to the 1st monitor every time I have to use a menu item - seems like a kafkaesque nightmare to
by lloeki 8y ago
> Having my window open in my 3rd monitor - and having to go back to the 1st monitor every time I have to use a menu item - seems like a kafkaesque nightmare to me.
Indeed, I had to suffer that experience on macOS at some point, and it just kills all the benefits of Fitts's law. There were glorious hacks of apps dedicated to restoring sanity by making the menubar present on all screens, until the feature went native. Nonetheless it does not detract from the fact that I find the menubar concept insanely good compared to per window menus as Windows and Linux had (although this was a configurable in KDE, the implementation was disastrous).
- mariusmg 8y agoMenubar concept never made sense to me. If i have a window on the bottom right of the screen, why should i have to go to top left side of the screen to interact with its menu ? This is literally the same issue with monitors but on a smaller scale.
- gaius 8y agoHistorically it’s from a time when mice were new and the idea was you could always just push to the top of the screen and never miss the menu (source: HCI lecturer at college) and of course screens being small having only one menu bar saved space too
- lloeki 8y agoAs I said, this is Fitt's law[0], and it's a very valid thing that goes well, well beyond HCI. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts's_law
- lloeki 8y agoThis is because macOS uses a document-centric model, in which case the window is a document, as opposed to Windows where the window is the application. In the former case it is therefore perfectly possible for the application to be running when no document (hence no window) is opened.