Article View: gnu.epoch.misc
Article #1093Re: save the separate minibuffer! (not!)
From: Jeff Putnam
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1993 15:48
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1993 15:48
44 lines
2953 bytes
2953 bytes
In article <9302262151.AA00473@banach.math.ep.utexas.edu> jerry@math.ep.utexas.EDU (Jerry Graves) writes: >I won't say that those who prefer a separate minibuffer don't deserve >a choice, but it would be my guess the Jamie and fellow coders at >Lucid would have less of a headache by eliminating a seldom used >option. If it makes any difference, when I upgraded Epoch from 3.2 to >4.0, everyone here was very pleased that this orphan minibuffer had >finally returned home. >In fact, I completely disabled the separate minibuffer even as an >option, because observation of users familiar with ordinary Emacs made >it clear they could never quite figure out where it was or what it was >doing. I think if the minibuffer had not been separate to begin with >(in Epoch), there would have been so few requests for it that it would >have never been implemented, but I am not in a position to back this >claim with any hard evidence, since for all I know, it was implemented >_because_ of user requests which happened before I joined this mailing >list two years ago. I disagree with this post in two ways. First, I very much like the separate minibuffer. Mine sits at the bottom of my screen and I know where to look for it automatically. I must admit that for the first couple of days I was confused, but since then I've tried Epoch without the separate minibuffer and found it very annoying. Second, (and without meaning to flame) I find the attitude of 'I know whats best for the users at my site, so I'll just "disable [...] even as an option"' to be more than annoying. Vendors and system managers fall into this all too often. This attitude is not only patronizing, it is usually wrong. I dont consider myself particularly a "power user" or anything, but I want to be able to make up my own mind about options - and 95% of the time when someone else makes such determination it turns out to be wrong for _someone_. Options should be optional. Leave them that way. -- jefu <=> Jeff Putnam - New Mexico Tech <=> jefu@nmt.edu "Daffodils go Ping! and Oink! // They Really are alarming I'm scared of big geraniums // And I'm sure that Lilac's harming" (Dr. Bertram X. Fegg)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Feb27.154818.22149@nmt.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!mimbres.cs.unm.edu!nmt.edu!jefuReferences:
<9302251813.AA20673@simba.Eng.Sun.COM> <9302262151.AA00473@banach.math.ep.utexas.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fc7ee,6e300946f9a3edb7 X-Google-Attributes: gidfc7ee,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1993-02-27 07:48:18 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!mimbres.cs.unm.edu!nmt.edu!jefu From: jefu@nmt.edu (Jeff Putnam) Newsgroups: gnu.epoch.misc Subject: Re: save the separate minibuffer! (not!) Message-ID: <1993Feb27.154818.22149@nmt.edu> Date: 27 Feb 93 15:48:18 GMT Article-I.D.: nmt.1993Feb27.154818.22149 References: <9302251813.AA20673@simba.Eng.Sun.COM> <9302262151.AA00473@banach.math.ep.utexas.edu> Distribution: gnu Organization: The Museum of Differential Geometry Lines: 44