[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/06/24]
On 24 Jun 2006, at 9:28 AM, Peter da Silva wrote: > cdevers@xxxxx.xxx (Chris Devers): >>> Surely someone's written a Haxie (err, APE plugin) to require CMD-Q >>> CMD-Q within double-click-time? No? Damn, I don't have time... > >> Better still, someone found a way to do it without requiring Haxies. > > (example that only works with Safari) Well, yes, but fixing just that one example removed, say, 80% of my own frustration over that particular behavior. It's still bad elsewhere, but if say Mail goes away because of cmd+q instead of cmd+w, getting back to where I had been is much easier & less painful to manage... > Software that makes applications have different behaviour for basic > user > interface actions is hateful. I don't care whether it's GNU > Readline or > OCDEV Taboo or gtk+ or the lowly "alias rm rm -i", it's hateful. But applications already behave differently. Throwing up a "are you sure you meant to quit" dialog before imploding seems much less hateful than simply allowing it to happen, and other applications -- Terminal, to pick just one -- already have this capability built in, where it won't allow you to quit if you have processes running unless you tell it to do so. >> (To steal a phrase, if the problem is UI stupidity, and the answer >> seems to be a haxie, you don't have a solution, you have two >> problems.) > > Calling the frobber that changes the UI behaviour a "Haxie" or a > "Plugin" > doesn't change the fact that it's a second problem. If the plugin > makes > different applications behave differently, it's a third problem. Well, right. I was more getting at the fact that, in my experience with my own computer and with helping other people with theirs, installing APE to run Haxies is a sure way to destabilize an otherwise working computer. -- Chris DeversThere's stuff above here
Generated at 20:01 on 27 Jun 2006 by mariachi 0.52