From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,578bd4d051bc4686
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-25 06:41:12 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsrout1.ntli.net!news.ntli.net!newspeer1-win.server.ntli.net!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: chris <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040208)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: OT: GUI [was:]Ann: TeXCAD 4.1
References: <c3bv60$kcj$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
	<mailman.106.1079609883.327.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
	<c3ccek$eb6$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
	<slrnc5jfm3.aaf.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
	<c3cl75$9mf$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
	<Btf8c.1014$7f4.318@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>
	<slrnc6325g.77k.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
	<cUj8c.1032$7f4.263@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>
	<slrnc652rp.30r.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
	<KfB8c.1098$7f4.833@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>
 <mailman.129.1080222793.327.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.129.1080222793.327.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <ccC8c.1100$7f4.742@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 14:42:33 +0000
NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.107.63.68
X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com
X-Trace: newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net 1080225672 81.107.63.68 (Thu,
 25 Mar 2004 14:41:12 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 14:41:12 GMT
Organization: ntl Cablemodem News Service
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6510
Date: 2004-03-25T14:42:33+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Preben Randhol wrote:
> chris <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com> wrote on 25/03/2004 (14:50) :
> 
>>Better is good, but is it Windows?  Does it behave like Windows people 
>>will expect?
> 
> What does windows people expect except that the application should crash?

I use Linux every day for work and use Free Software everday and X 
crashes or hangs more than Windows ever did IME... that said it isn't 
*that* often.  Windows applications do not crash so much users expect it 
to happen.  In fact on my system no application has crashed in a long 
while, and windows 2k never has - 98 did but things have come along way 
since then and my box is well administered IMHO.  Anyway you know fine 
well I was talking about the look and feel behaviour of Windows in UI 
terms... it's very clear from the context of the message.  The fact that 
windows crashes or doesn't crash is irrelevant to UI behaviour.


>>A(n?) usability experiment.  I want to see if people find Pie Menus more 
>>productive in practice.
> 
> Thought you wanted Window L&F

Yes, but the Pie Menu is an experiment to determine if it increases 
productivity - as they are publicised to.  Linear menus will be the 
default, but Pie Menus are a possible option.


Chris