3 ms·

So all of that toolbars+toolchests+doorknobs stuff was nothing more than the old "I don't like the menus at the top, and I get confused when applications don't

by bonaldi 17y ago

So all of that toolbars+toolchests+doorknobs stuff was nothing more than the old "I don't like the menus at the top, and I get confused when applications don't quit when I close the last open window" trope? Blimey. Menubar-at-top vs in-window is a well-rehearsed religious bit, and I'm sure everyone else here knows the score. I don't think we'll get anywhere productive hashing it out further. Enough to say that it has advantages I think you overlook (including Fitt's Law), and the Gods of Usability are, like many Gods, on nobody's side but their own. I'm sorry Apple offended you. (Oh: You haven't been making the mistake since 1984, btw: MultiFinder didn't come out until 1998, and wasn't default until System 7, so there weren't any other open apps. And AmigaOS uses the same menu-at-top system, for apps that run inside Workbench).

elblanco 17y ago
I'm glad you brought up Fitt's Law. It only goes to prove that click targets should be close to what you are working on. A decoupled menubar does not achieve this unless what you are working on happens to be at the top of the screen. Everybody seems to assume that "oh, Apple is the usability expert" that everything they do is some kind of gospel. But they screw up sometimes also. In my case it was a deal breaker, in your case you take it as God's own truth. I stand corrected regarding dates and Workbench. :)
- blasdel 17y ago
  You don't understand Fitt's Law. The edges of the screen are infinitely big targets in one dimension, and the corners in both dimensions -- you can't overshoot them, unlike local context menus.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    But you can undershoot them in 2-dimensions. Your point?
elblanco 17y ago
http://db.tidbits.com/article/10624 http://db.tidbits.com/article/10624 FTA "In the end, the main thing that I've noticed in the last few days is that it is much easier for me to concentrate on a single task when I can quickly hide all unrelated applications and show just the one or two that I need right now. I'm finding that this method works better for me than Spaces, and I am a big fan of Spaces."

by bonaldi 17y ago

elblanco 17y ago

I'm glad you brought up Fitt's Law. It only goes to prove that click targets should be close to what you are working on. A decoupled menubar does not achieve this unless what you are working on happens to be at the top of the screen. Everybody seems to assume that "oh, Apple is the usability expert" that everything they do is some kind of gospel. But they screw up sometimes also. In my case it was a deal breaker, in your case you take it as God's own truth. I stand corrected regarding dates and Workbench. :)

blasdel 17y ago
You don't understand Fitt's Law. The edges of the screen are infinitely big targets in one dimension, and the corners in both dimensions -- you can't overshoot them, unlike local context menus.
- elblanco 17y ago
  But you can undershoot them in 2-dimensions. Your point?

elblanco 17y ago

http://db.tidbits.com/article/10624 http://db.tidbits.com/article/10624 FTA "In the end, the main thing that I've noticed in the last few days is that it is much easier for me to concentrate on a single task when I can quickly hide all unrelated applications and show just the one or two that I need right now. I'm finding that this method works better for me than Spaces, and I am a big fan of Spaces."