🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990Jun6.190840.23732@cbnewsl.att.com>,
rubin@cbnewsl.att.com (Mike Rubin) writes:
> Well, X-Windows has a call to "warp" (as in warp drive) the mouse pointer.
> Most X-based user interfaces think that if you put up a modal dialog box,
> you should move the mouse pointer into the dialog (probably over the
> default button) and restore its old position after the dialog goes away.
> 
> This is a religious question and should really be user-settable behavior.
> (Hmm... it could probably be coded as an INIT, but it's beyond my skill.
> Any takers?)
> The Mac OS was designed for a small screen where one swipe of the mouse
> could always get you to a dialog box in the middle of the screen.
> X was designed for big displays where moving across the screen is
> more tedious.

I regularly use both Mac and X. When I first started using X, I found
warping very confusing - I often lost the cursor - but you get used to
anything. I think it would be a mistake to have both alternatives in 1
system. My alternative for large screens would be to warp objects of
interest to the cursor, which is more in keeping with the Mac philosophy
of putting the user in control. Some examples:

Instead of "beep" when you click outside a modal dialog, the dialog warps
to the cursor. Instead of having to find the menu bar from the bottom of
the screen, COMMAND-click jumps the menu bar to the cursor (I've got
an idea of how this could be done without too much screen clutter - ask
if interested, but no, I'm not going to program it).

Maybe the detail needs some work, but I like the general idea.

I'm not arguing whether Mac is better or worse than X (please don't set
me off on that). I'm arguing for maintaining a consistent interface.

Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu