Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 26, 2007 20:59 UTC (Fri) by louie (guest, #3285)
Parent article: Metisse: you thought you knew what 3D was...

I have to say some of the demos here are quite nice- the birdseye view in particular looks like an improvement over the very slick but nearly useless beryl/compiz/etc. cubes. Ditto the folding copy/paste. This makes me actually want some 3d love in my desktop.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 26, 2007 21:20 UTC (Fri) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] (38 responses)

It's nice, but... the copy&paste is not a big win over my icewm setup, where the focus follows the mouse, it's still a two click operation. The "increase depth" is a good idea, but I have two monitors at my workplace, so it's not needed there. I don't see what's good is in that bird's eye view - I know what's on my virtual desktops. And the mirroring of the windows is simple eye candy. What I'd like to see is more hot keys and mouse gestures - to throw a window to an other virtual desktop with a mouse gesture or a hot key, for example.

Bye,NAR

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 26, 2007 22:52 UTC (Fri) by fcrozat (subscriber, #175) [Link] (34 responses)

The rolling technique used by metisse still have one advantage versus classic follow-mouse focus : it will restack target window when selection is finished, allowing easier pasting, compared to follow-mouse focus.

But I agree I forgot to mention it when I did the copy-paste screencast ;)

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 26, 2007 23:16 UTC (Fri) by pflugstad (subscriber, #224) [Link] (33 responses)

I don't see how this is different then focus-follows-mouse + auto-raise -
in this case, auto-raise basically has the window folding eye-candy.

X11 Window Managers have been doing focus-follows-mouse + auto-raise for YEARS - it's still my preferred way to operate. See FVWM docs for example. I'm sure TWM did it too.

Granted, I don't see much of the point to the whole 3D desktop either, other than eye candy.

Pete

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 26, 2007 23:31 UTC (Fri) by Tara_Li (guest, #26706) [Link] (30 responses)

> Granted, I don't see much of the point to the whole 3D desktop either,
> other than eye candy.

I'm with you on this - I haven't seen any *REAL* productivity enhancement items coming from all the hype of 3D desktops - just prettier eye candy.

Cut&Paste with just two clicks? I regularly do it in Enlightenment - select, then paste into the terminal window next to the window I'm selecting from. That neat roll-up thingy that the window did? Enlightenment has "Shade/Unshade Window" to roll the window up into the title bar - not hard to set it up to trigger when you move out of that window, and back into it...

Ultimately, until we actually *HAVE* 3D display volumes, not display panels, and perhaps a 3D input device (and the WiiMote is looking pretty good as an example of this!), all of this 3D Desktop stuff is going to be pretty much just eye candy.

The GUI allowed lassoing files, rather than wildcard globbing - much easier for collecting dissimilar filenames. The GUI makes most graphical applications easier to work with. So ultimately, I'd agree that the GUI was a actual change in the way we work with the computer, though not necessarily *better* way - it all depends on the particular job.

This coming wave of 3D desktops - eyecandy. No real new ways of interacting. Wobbly windows do not make a new mode of interaction. Enlightenment still has the Ripples and Waves special effects available on its menus.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 0:14 UTC (Sat) by TRauMa (guest, #16483) [Link] (12 responses)

Good for you. But most people don't use Enlightenment or FVWM or whatnot - because those WMs and DEs aren't exactly easy to grok and friendly to users, they do things different in non-obvious ways. 3D now has the possibility to show people _what_ is going on, _why_ windows are moved somewhere else, they use far richer visual cues. If you always know what window is on which desktop, fine, if you think it's not too hard too set your WM up to do roll up/down automatically, more power to you, but most users don't pray to their desktop and invest hours in configuring and tweaking, they use it like might an elevator.

Now you can see through windows, see what's going on behind your terminal and still be able to read the text (cause the actual text is opaque). When you change desktops while doing a demo people watching you actually grok what's going on. You don't have to _explain_ to computer newbies where their windows went, they instantly realize. Windows that don't respond go greyscale so the user _knows_ they're frozen and somethings wrong, they don't click ten times into a dead window, with altered levels of frustration because they get absolutely no feedback. It's so many details and niceties, and in ten years people will smirk when they see todays desktop and the obvious usability issues they have (want to read a 90 degree turned scan on your monitor? Better turn your head, because your WM wont turn the window).

It's so expected that the "old schoolers" and "wm wizards" dismiss this whole thing with some handwaving and theories about how they _could_ set up their desktop to do the same. It's really like when GUIs came up and many many people always claimed that they can do anything on console just as fine, thank you, no biggie, what's all the fuss about. You focus on the current manifestations and some short videos and really believe they give you a feeling for what it's like to use them?

Sorry for the rant, but this irks me for some time now ;-). And, among us, it's not "just eye candy". There never is "just eye candy". It really helps to look good.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 10:12 UTC (Sat) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] (5 responses)

If you always know what window is on which desktop, fine,

Why wouldn't I know? I mean I use the computer, not just play around the with windows. Nearly everyone I see using virtual desktops creates a system: the mailer is on desktop 1, the browser is on desktop 2, the editor is on desktop 3, etc. Most of my collagues use CDE on Solaris, they even name their desktops about these tasks so even if they'd forget, they just look at the panel and know which window is where.

if you think it's not too hard too set your WM up to do roll up/down automatically, more power to you, but most users don't pray to their desktop and invest hours in configuring and tweaking, they use it like might an elevator.

I strongly disagree with you. A window manager is a tool like any other - if someone wants to use it, she has to learn how to use it. That one time investment of hours of configuring and tweaking really pays back through the years of usage. And if you say that the only difference between Metisse and a 2D window manager is that the former has default settings that better suit your needs, then we are definitely not talking about revolutionary changes.

When you change desktops while doing a demo people watching you actually grok what's going on.

But then are you using your window manager to work with it daily, or to demo things to people who haven't seen a window manager yet?

You don't have to _explain_ to computer newbies where their windows went, they instantly realize.

But the same newbie will be really bothered with the eye candy after 20 minutes, because it's just slow.

want to read a 90 degree turned scan on your monitor? Better turn your head, because your WM wont turn the window

Why the heck would I want my window manager to do such things? It's the job of the scanner software or the image displayer, it has nothing to do with the window manager.

It's really like when GUIs came up and many many people always claimed that they can do anything on console just as fine, thank you, no biggie, what's all the fuss about.

Well, actually, what's the fuss about it. At my office desktop I have about 15 xterms on my desktop, 4 browser windows, an acroread, an openoffice and a couple of gvim windows. If I got the documentation in plain text instead of .doc or .pdf, and the web tools didn't need JavaScript, I wouldn't really need X.

Bye,NAR

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 11:08 UTC (Sat) by oak (guest, #2786) [Link] (1 responses)

That works fine when you have only a few windows or virtual desktops,
but when you need to have dozen(s) of them open (with each Browser window
of course having at least half a dozen tabs open in them), you will start
to getting lost and them this visual stuff starts helping.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 15:48 UTC (Sat) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link]

I thought the reason why virtual desktops exists is to not have more than 10 windows on the same desktop. Most of my desktops have less than 5 windows, the toolbar gets cluttered with anything more. With 6 virtual desktop it's still 30 windows which is usually enough for me. What use case needs dozens of open windows on the same desktop or a dozen virtual desktop?

Bye,NAR

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 1, 2007 11:28 UTC (Thu) by rossburton (subscriber, #7254) [Link] (1 responses)

> I strongly disagree with you. A window manager is a tool like any other
> - if someone wants to use it, she has to learn how to use it. That one
> time investment of hours of configuring and tweaking really pays back
> through the years of usage. And if you say that the only difference between
> Metisse and a 2D window manager is that the former has default settings
> that better suit your needs, then we are definitely not talking about
> revolutionary changes.

If you compare your window manager to, say, a car, you are a mechanic or possibly a racing driver. They know in intimate detail how their car works, and best to use it to get the best performance from it.

Now think about the millions of people who just use a car to drive to work and back. They don't want a sportcar that takes a hours to get used to, they want something they can get into and start using.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 1, 2007 15:18 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link]

"they want something they can get into and start using"

In most, if not all, countries where cars have become commonplace items, before they ever "get into" their cars "and start using" them, there's the little matter* of passing a test. Even legs, the most natural and intuitive mode of transport around, come with a learning curve.

There's no such thing as "instant usability" - it's principally a combination of familiarity and predictability - and in time, customisability, so that you can bridge the gap between how it does work and how your mind persists in believing it should.

_____
* I say "little" - I'm confident that I don't stand a chance of passing the damn thing.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 6, 2007 5:22 UTC (Tue) by TRauMa (guest, #16483) [Link]

Nearly everyone I see using virtual desktops creates a system: the mailer is on desktop 1, the browser is on desktop 2, the editor is on desktop 3, etc. Most of my collagues use CDE on Solaris, they even name their desktops about these tasks so even if they'd forget, they just look at the panel and know which window is where.

Been there, done that (icewm). And then you open xmms, quick, where do you put it? Eclipse? Any app that doesnt fit your scheme? Apps with more than one window? (Rumors have it they exist).

I strongly disagree with you. A window manager is a tool like any other - if someone wants to use it, she has to learn how to use it.

Like an elevator. I see. Well, I never read about the futurama suicide cabine before I saw it on TV, but I instantly knew how to use it.

people who haven't seen a window manager yet?

Uhm, honestly having trouble envisioning that.

But the same newbie will be really bothered with the eye candy after 20 minutes, because it's just slow.

Presumption. That was my concern, too, but I tried it and some things even run faster (everythings double buffered).

Why the heck would I want my window manager to do such things? It's the job of the scanner software or the image displayer, it has nothing to do with the window manager.

Yes. Duplicate functionality everywhere. OpenOffice, Mozilla, heck, everything that displays something, they all need their own smooth zoom.

Bah, you're just making excuses, a real power user would hex edit a live assembly kernel to display this page. :-) Documentation, you say? Of simple things, that never can use an image or two, for explanation? ;-)

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 16:28 UTC (Sat) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] (1 responses)

Sorry for the rant, but this irks me for some time now ;-). And, among us, it's not "just eye candy". There never is "just eye candy".

I think you're fooling yourself here. You've got something that interests you, which is fine, but now you're trying to pretend that it's useful, and it's not clear that it is. I'd have to use it for a while to be sure, but based on the demos I suspect that I would quickly find it more annoying that useful.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 6, 2007 4:58 UTC (Tue) by TRauMa (guest, #16483) [Link]

But it is! You didn't try it! :-) The Demos didn't excite me, too.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 30, 2007 8:29 UTC (Tue) by tyhik (guest, #14747) [Link] (3 responses)

You know, the thing with these "old schoolers" and "wm wizards" is that they have tried all this (ok, with less eyecandy) earlier and reverted back to the minimal set of features that indeed matter. All these half-transparent/rolling-unrolling/jumping/dancing windows are cool at first glance but suck when you work. Every unnecessarily moving object on screen distracts. Any half-transparent window is less easy to read than a non-transparent one, at least after a few hours of coding. You know, it is not some weird stance of old schoolers being disgusted at eye candy. It is just that those guys have had much more time to develop their best practices.

Newbies will probably always love eyecandy. It'd be interesting to hear what todays newbies think when they turn old-schoolers in 10 years.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 1, 2007 12:21 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (1 responses)

They'll be sneering at full-immersion holographic window managers ;)

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 9, 2007 16:11 UTC (Fri) by alext (guest, #7589) [Link]

You are in the right direction. It makes me wonder if the right thing is to step in another dimension (sense!) of sound. Not practical for a busy shared office perhaps but I'm reminded of the recent IBM Developer works thing on speaking commands to your PC.

My useful vision. All applications are on the surface of a great (effectively infinite sphere so at close quarters there is no bending horizon effect). I then just say "focus window one" or "focus web browser" enabling me to work without taking my hands form the keyboard as much. Where "window one" is a defined view into which you pack multiple apps that you use together.

Pushing you mouse to a corner or edge and saying "scroll" zooms you out and rotates your sphere that way. But there is no point or need for this.

I suppose picture in a picture might be useful so I can look at a PIP half size version of another desktop?

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 6, 2007 5:22 UTC (Tue) by TRauMa (guest, #16483) [Link]

You know, the thing with these "old schoolers" and "wm wizards" is that they have tried all this (ok, with less eyecandy)

Args, that killed me. There never was something like that back in the 80s. I have it on authority ;-).

Any half-transparent window is less easy to read than a non-transparent one, at least after a few hours of coding.

Why use X at all, if you only use one window? And who said things have to move if you dont want them to? Did you ever try something like Beryl? No! How do I know? What you say just is not true. Fake transparency makes text harder to read, bad animations (try beryls defaults) distract. Some of this stuff is usefull.

And what gives you the impression I'm a newbie? I started with Linux 2.0, icewm was my eye candy. And I'm glad we (that's the 99% I'm talking about) moved away from text file configured application menus. And the switch wasn't easy, I missed some things, others were there but different, and I had to set up some sortcuts. But I could do it without reading a man page.

You, too, could try something new, once in a while. It wouldn't kill you, I promise. :-D

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 3:04 UTC (Sat) by error27 (subscriber, #8346) [Link] (16 responses)

The only problem with is that focus follows mouse sucks.

The cut and paste was really cool. I wasn't as impressed with the other demos but I did like the cut and paste one.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 7:43 UTC (Sat) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582) [Link] (9 responses)

The only problem with is that focus follows mouse sucks.

Thank you for saying that. It's already annoying enough to have unwanted mouseclicks because the touchpad interprets tapping as a click. To change focus every time my hand accidentally brushes the touchpad would be maddening.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 8:30 UTC (Sat) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link] (8 responses)

The best is when your mouse moves itself because of energy stored in a bent mousecord and your active flow of keystrokes suddenly transitions to another program. That's some great Humane Interface right there.

Bonus points if you've got autoraise and the program you were using disappears from view.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 10:22 UTC (Sat) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] (6 responses)

The best is when your mouse moves itself because of energy stored in a bent mousecord and your active flow of keystrokes suddenly transitions to another program.

I've used "focus follows mouse" for years and it never happened to me even though I usually switch between windows with the keyboard, so it's not that rare that the mouse cursor is not above the focused window. I guess IceWM protects me from this event - the focus does not change for any mouse movement, only for those which enter a window.

Bye,NAR

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 29, 2007 0:35 UTC (Mon) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link] (5 responses)

The situation I decribe was nearly always the result of the mouse cursor leaving the current window, as it is my habit to position the mouse at the edge of the window (over the scrollbar usually) when reading a long, scrollable document. This is to keep the mouse cursor object from distracting me from the document display.

While later using the keyboard (cursors, pgup/dn, etc), the mouse would wander off the window, and some terminal or other would obscure the document I was reading. It was quite predictable.

It's possible to tweak FFM into some kind of setup which works for users, but it requires tweaks and conformance both. This is pretty low on the usability index, although perhaps can do well on efficiency.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 29, 2007 16:54 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (4 responses)

Only two changes are needed to make f-f-m usable.

1) Switch focus only when the mouse enters a window which is *not* the root window, and only when that entry has not happened as a result of a virtual desktop switch (v-d switches should restore focus to the window that was focused in that desktop last time it was active)

2) Vanish the mouse pointer when a key-down event is received and no mouse or server grab is active

Combine both of those and f-f-m is better than any alternatives, for me at least.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 31, 2007 12:35 UTC (Wed) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link] (3 responses)

How depressing. The problems I gave in the post you responded to are not addressed by the suggestions you provide.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 31, 2007 17:29 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

Sure. If the mouse pointer disappears when you type, you won't need to hover it near the edge of the window, so it's less likely to screw up your focus. In theory. :)

Right now the pointer is obscuring part of what I'm typing right now and, as an ex-Mac user, it's driving me nuts!! Of all the features to go into X.org 7.2, auto-configuration would be tops, and hiding the mouse pointer when it's over a text field and I'm typing would be second.

I tried "unclutter -keystroke" a few years ago but it screwed up some games. I guess I'll try it again and see if anything has improved.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 1, 2007 12:24 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (1 responses)

They are. If focus switches only on window transitions to a non-root window triggered by explicit mouse movement, then you can hover the mouse near the edge of a window floating atop the root (the common case) without fear of a jiggle switching focus; and if the mouse pointer vanishes on keydown events, then you can put the mouse pointer in the middle of the window without fear of its obscuring anything (at least if you're going to be typing in that window).

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 2, 2007 12:10 UTC (Fri) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link]

Your common case is my exceptional case. My windows are almost always overlapping.

Sloppyfocus does not address the issue.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 1, 2007 15:21 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link]

"energy stored in a bent mousecord"

And here was me assuming that would just be a dodgy connection...

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 16:48 UTC (Sat) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] (5 responses)

The only problem with [?] is that focus follows mouse sucks.

Focus follows mouse pointer is the way God intended computers to be used. ;-)

It takes some getting used to, but I work faster that way. Lack of this feature one of the reasons why I find the Windows UI to be such a chore to use.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 18:27 UTC (Sat) by ahvezda (guest, #19657) [Link] (1 responses)

I too have become totally addicted to "focus follows mouse" and autoraise. When I have to use w32 XP, I install TweakUI (first hit in google). TweakUI lets me enable "X-Mouse" which gives me "focus follows mouse" and optionally autoraise. Been using that for years and so far has worked like a charm. -Ales

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 28, 2007 21:08 UTC (Sun) by macc (guest, #510) [Link]

I absolutely dislike autoraise.

no autorase and "Sloppy" focus follows mouse ( i.e. focus changes
only if you realy move into another window )

With a lot of stuff I do I type into a nearly obscured xterm
and want to see what happens on a lot of other windows.

Windows gets my nerves because anything you do to a window makes
it raise on top ( and all those windows that raise themselves without
being told to.)

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 29, 2007 13:18 UTC (Mon) by Seegras (guest, #20463) [Link] (1 responses)

I use sloppy focus & autoraise since about 1995 when I switched to Linux. I can manage with only sloppy focus, but click-to-focus is impossible to work with.

Also impossible to work with: cut&paste with only mousebuttons not working.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 30, 2007 4:43 UTC (Tue) by Mithrandir (guest, #3031) [Link]

I use sloppy focus and no autoraise. Having no autoraise is awesome when you want to copy from a partially obscured window and paste into your current one. This combined with alt-click to raise so you don't have to click on the title bar to raise, alt-click (drag) to move windows, and alt-middle click (drag) to resize, are my musts.

That and virtual desktops, ctrl-alt-left -right -up -down to switch, ctrl-alt-shift-left -right -up -down to move windows between desktops.

I get very grumpy on Windows. Soooo clumsy!

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 31, 2007 1:02 UTC (Wed) by mikov (guest, #33179) [Link]

Mu-ha-ha-ha-ha. Keyboard is how God intended for computers to be used. I was a little surprised to read the discussion above about the number of clicks it takes to do a copy & paste. It takes me ZERO clicks, because I use the keyboard for it :-)

That said, I pretty much think that there is no universally better way. If person X is signficantly faster than person Y when using X's preferred desktop settings, it is likely that X will ultimately also be faster than Y when using Y's preferred settings (after some getting used to, of course, and provided that neither of them is a complete idiot with absurd settings).

twm

Posted Jan 28, 2007 17:27 UTC (Sun) by sanjoy (guest, #5026) [Link]

twm has been my window manager for most of the 22 years that I've been using X10/X11 (I used uwm before twm came out); my .twmrc grows maybe logarithmically with time as I learn new tricks.

twm has focus-follows-mouse and autoraise. I don't use autoraise because I often want to look at or type into a partially obscured window without its coming to the fore. I don't use multiple desktops, and vanilla twm doesn't have them anyway, but the twm variant ctwm does have them.

Instead, in the .twmrc I bind keyboard shortcuts so that I can switch to and from my most used windows. My favorite bindings are:

"F1" = : all : f.raiselower
"F2" = : all : f.iconify
"F3" = : all : f.exec "xrdb .Xdefaults"
"F4" = : all : f.refresh
"F5" = : all : f.restart
"F7" = : all : f.exec "rxvt -n skye -T skye -e ssh workmachine &"
"F8" = : all : f.exec "rxvt &"
"F9" = : all : f.warpto "emacs@"
"F9" = s : all : f.warpto "skye"
"F9" = c : all : f.warpto "Xpdf: notes/notes.pdf"
"F10" = : all : f.warpto "root"
"F10" = s : all : f.exec "rxvt -n root -T root -e su &"
"F11" = : all : f.warpto "lynx"
"F11" = s : all : f.warpto "galeon"
"F11" = c : all : f.exec "galeon -w http://www.google.com &"
"F11" = m : all : f.exec "firefox -new-window &"
"F12" =   : all : f.warpto "xclock"

My most-used shortcut is F9, which takes me to my emacs, which is probably my de facto window manager. The current one has 475 buffers, including programs, directories, documents, and compilation buffers. I switch between buffers using the built-in keyboard shortcut C-x b. Emacs mostly guesses the right default for the buffer to which I want to switch.

After F9 in popularity comes shift-F9, which brings up the window with the ssh connection to my work desktop machine (where I read email, in emacs using its mh interface).

I bind control-F9 to bring up whatever large document I'm working on at the moment. Right now it's textbook chapters for a course, so it brings back its xpdf window. When I want to change that binding, I edit the .twmrc and restart twm with F5. Probably I should instead use xpdf's remote-control options, naming the session currentdoc or something like that, and just leave control-F9 bound to xpdf -raise -remote currentdoc -reload. Then no need to restart twm, which uniconifies all my windows as a silly side effect.

I read most webpages in lynx, and F11 takes me to its window. I use its history cache ('V' from the keyboard) as another sort of window manager, one also easy to navigate with the keyboard. It has all the sites that I've been to in this X login, which usually means "between the laptop hanging on S3 suspend/resume", which happens maybe once a month. The current lynx has 400+ pages in its history, and they are automatically saved for offline viewing by the wwwoffle proxy cache.

For pages that lynx doesn't handle well, like LWN's comments with the nesting, I make a fresh galeon window with control-F11, a fresh firefox window with alt-F11, or just go to an previous galeon window with shift-F11 and make a new tab with there with control-T. I use lynx or galeon if a webserver doesn't get confused by the wwwoffle proxy cache on my laptop, and I use firefox for other sites.

To go to uniconified windows with no shortcut, I cycle among them with F1. Windows that I don't want to think about for a while get the F2 (iconify) treatment, and they disappear rather than cluttering the desktop, thanks to the line

NoIconManagers

in the .twmrc. The list of all windows, iconified and uniconified, I get by clicking the right mouse button (on the root window), due to this .twmrc line:

Button3 = : root : f.menu "TwmWindows"

I have lots of other bindings to minimize mouse use, but the preceding ones are the most useful ones that I've found, and maybe other rat-phobics can benefit from them.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 28, 2007 19:43 UTC (Sun) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

"" Granted, I don't see much of the point to the whole 3D desktop either, other than eye candy. ""

That's the big pertinent question. Isnt there anything that a 3D desk can improve, other than eye candy, over a 2 D relative ?

I belive there is. PERCEPTION !... perception can help a lot. Even only shadows, "bump mapping" and transparency can be a productivity enhancement over a simple flat interface. It makes all "objects" on the screen much more readable. Add to this, movement along a "Z" axis, and we have a very natural integrated zoom facility.

Beyond this, and as stated that "metisse" isn't a 3D desk but a HCI proposition, we can see its possibilities in http://insitu.lri.fr/~roussel/videos/metisse/facades/uifa...

After that movie i belive anyone can see productivity enhancements all over in *facades*, to the point of making application static interfaces almost irrelevant (a bit of wishful thinking...).

It ill bear close resemblances with the defunct Apple OpenDock proposition, if any document we store in the hard disk could be made of parts of different applications, editable "in situ".

That is, any document will be an editable object by itself, a "facade" of many different applications partaking of the "freedesktop.org standards"; http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Standards ; and stored in a universal format, with many different output possibilities, rendered by something like "Cairo" ; http://cairographics.org/ !

Meanwhile it be very helpful if we can store a "file" as a facade of OpenOffice or Gimp or... that is, with only the needed or relevant editing functions on it's interface.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 30, 2007 23:28 UTC (Tue) by hazelsct (guest, #3659) [Link] (2 responses)

> I don't see what's good is in that bird's eye view - I know what's on my virtual desktops.

Oh really? So you "know" when a new email arrives? And you "know" when a long job finishes, so you can examine its results and start another one? And you "know" when an interesting IRC message arrives? And you "know" exactly where you were in a document you stopped editing yesterday afternoon (and which you worked on in a dream last night, but didn't realize that wasn't reality)? Cool! I thought telepaths were only sci-fi.

With your psychic powers you may not need the ability to zoom out and interact with a much larger space simultaneously. But for the rest of us mundanes, it's a welcome change.

E16 went part of the way there with thumbnail views which allow one to move windows around -- and live updates in the current workspace. But the non-current workspace thumbnails were never updated, and of course one could not interact with the thumbnails. This has all of that.

Arbitrary rescale is also really nice, as shrinking applications is better than scaling fonts. And the perspective view rescales in one direction, while preserving aspect ratios and angles in the mind's perception (where simple squishing would lose both of these).

So sure, you *could* do everything in a vt100 terminal, with ASCII art for drawings, and keyboard shortcuts from here to the moon. But for those of us mundanes whose experience is enhanced by visual cues -- particularly for off-screen events -- all of this so-called "eye candy" is actually usefull, and Matisse is a welcome development.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 31, 2007 8:27 UTC (Wed) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] (1 responses)

So you "know" when a new email arrives?

Actually yes, icewm has a small mail icon on the tray which turns green if I have new mail.

And you "know" when a long job finishes, so you can examine its results and start another one?

Nowadays I don't start such long jobs, but couple of years ago I used to put an "; echo -e '\a'" after the command, so I got feedback when it finished. For shorter jobs, it's just an Alt-Ctrl-3 to check, and Alt-Ctrl-Down to go back to the previous desktop. Much faster then the zoom-out, zoom-in procedure.

And you "know" when an interesting IRC message arrives?

I thought we're talking about working, not wasting time. But both gaim and skype has an icon on the tray that shows if a collague wants to talk to me.

And you "know" exactly where you were in a document you stopped editing yesterday afternoon

The cursor is still there, so I don't really understand your problem.

Bye,NAR

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Feb 2, 2007 0:27 UTC (Fri) by hazelsct (guest, #3659) [Link]

>> And you "know" when a long job finishes, so you can examine its results and start another one?

> Nowadays I don't start such long jobs, but couple of years ago I used to put an "; echo -e '\a'" after the command, so I got feedback when it finished. For shorter jobs, it's just an Alt-Ctrl-3 to check, and Alt-Ctrl-Down to go back to the previous desktop. Much faster then the zoom-out, zoom-in procedure.

Great, so put "; echo -e '\a'" at the end of a grip/SoundJuicer oggenc run -- d'oh! can't do that without reprogramming it. Or put it at the end of a batch job on a remote machine or cluster, or if I happen to be out grabbing a snack when it completes -- d'oh! can't hear that.

>> And you "know" exactly where you were in a document you stopped editing yesterday afternoon

> The cursor is still there, so I don't really understand your problem.

Okay, I may be a bit odd, but about once a month the "finished it in a dream" thing happens to me. So I work happily the next morning on something else, then someone asks me, "Did you finish the document?" "Yes, here it ... wait... d'oh!"

Point being: there are lots of situations where it's nice to have an indication of what apps on other desktops are doing, without having to reprogram them to signal me in the notification area -- and without having to be a telepath.

Metisse: you though you knew what 3D was...

Posted Jan 27, 2007 4:20 UTC (Sat) by NCunningham (guest, #6457) [Link]

Beryl has an alternative to the cube too, which does something like the Metisse demo. It's called 'Desktop Plane'.