Prefs and window positions

["M . Thielker" <balsa t-data com>]

Hi,

 some people work dirfferent than others do. There is absolutely no way to
make one program fit everyones need, except through preference settings.

Visual aspects of a day-to-day working tool like an email clients are very
important, as they can be very annoying if you don't like them.

Windows do _not_ appear in incorrect _viewports_, there is nothing wrong
with the configuration. They appear on incorrect _physical screens_, of
which this system has three.

Most window managers today aren't aware of multi-headed X servers, this is
also true for sawfish.
I really don't know how the WM can possibly save all window sizes because
it really doesn't know which ones it should save, or, if it does, how?
Where is the code to tell it to save the size and position of a compose
window, or a message window? On my system, all Balsa windows pop up in some
randomly chosen position with default sizes.

As far as I know, Sawfish doesn't support setting preferences for
application windows individually, so a user is stuck with what the
programmers think is best for her.

If Linux / Gnome is ever going to give Microsoft a run for the money, we
must be at least as good, hopefully better. Having a situation where a
program is not really usable, but at the same time rejecting attempts to
change it because having windows appear in inconvenient places is the unix
way will not help here.

As I see it, Linux has reached a point where it can actually start taking
normal home and business users away from Windows, as long as the available
applications will give them the same level of comfort and a similar look
and feel. Both qt and gtk have the means to satisfy these requirements. Qt
is very windows-ish and gtk is, well gtk-ish, but they both do support all
the user interface elements needed for modern graphical applications. Used
properly, they both allow programs to be written that have superior
functionality compared to theit windows counterparts, yet still have a much
smaller footprint, more reusable code and less processing overhead. When
you speak of "bloat", you are proposing a barebones software solution that
will probably be very efficient and straightforward, developers will love
it. Users won't!
Users want to customize, make the software fit their needs, not vice-versa.
I have been a commercial programmer for nearly 20 years, and I've collected
quite some impressive data on user behavior and user wishes. Software that
they have to adjust to is not on the list.
What's needed is a flat learning curve. If someone who has formerly used
windows and has customized his toolbar wants to have the compose new button
on the far left, there should be a prefs setting that lets her do that. If
there isn't she'd say: "what a piece of shit program" and go back to
windows or lok for another email client.
It's not only about elegant software anymore, but about day-to-day
usability in changing environments, by user of different skill levels and
working methods.
Again: you can't have enough settings in prefs. Some may need to be hidden
behind "Advanced..." buttons, providing such sensible defaults that 90% of
the users will never touch them, not even know they're there. But the other
10% desperately need these options.
On a triple-headed X server most applications fail miserably because window
placement is not very practical. When I start XChat the main window will
appear on the far right monitor while the channel list is on the middle one
sometimes, on top of the main window at other times.
But XChat has an option to set the main window's position manually, for a
good reason: when there are 10 windows open and you open a new one, you'll
never know where it ends up. They all look pretty much alike and 3 screens
is a lot of real estate to search.
Once you set that option, every window will appear in that one particular
spot and can then be moved to whereever the _user_ wants it.
Users need to decide such things, not window managers!

Do you want to stick to abstact ideals, or make usable software? It's one
or the other. Sometimes the two can be combined, most of the time they
can't.

I have a personal stake in this, of course: Not only am I one of the users
suffering from balsa's inability to correctly handle multi-headed displays,
but I also want to get a working email client that I can do my everyday
work with. It's the unix way to get to it and help make one instead of
carping about it. That's what I'm doing here. I never liked Micorosofts
policies and I really dislike system crashes, but I did like the
comfortable features of their software. I do not see any reason why this
cannot be made part of Linux.

The L in Linux may stand for "Less bloat", but the X is "eXtended
functionality" to me...

So, I say, bring on the prefs!

Melanie