🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #1007

Re: Virtual TWM desktop and Solbourne

#1007
From: SILL D E
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 1990 15:26
43 lines
2713 bytes
In article <26010@bellcore.bellcore.com> mo@bellcore.com writes:
>
>The same thing as the Amiga screen-stretcher has been around
>for years on the Mac as well, I *think* even before X11 appeared,
>and probably before Solbourne was even founded.

As I already pointed out in comp.windows.x, I think what Solbourne's
trying to protect is not the concept of a virtual screen larger than
the physical screen, but rather the way their `virtual desktop' allows
one to move windows into, out of, and around in the scale model of the
virtual screen.

I've seen lots of windowing, and even non-windowing systems that have
the virtual screen concept, but I've never seen anything like
Solbourne's method.  It's clever, unique, intuitive, *but not obvious*. 

For those who're not familiar with it, I'll try to explain it.  But to
appreciate it, you really have to try it out yourself.  Imagine your
typical X setup with the addition of a 2"x2" window in the upper right
hand corner of the screen.  In the window is a small-scale
representation of your virtual root window, which is maybe 20-30 times
larger than your physical screen.  Windows are represented by dark
outlines.  The visible portion of the virtual root is represented by a
light outline.  You can move windows around by dragging them, and you
can also move the display viewport to a different area of the virtual
root.  But the neat part is that you can grab one of those little
window outlines and drag it right out of the virtual desktop onto your
real root window.  When your pointer leaves the virtual desktop
window, the window you're dragging becomes full sized.  The inverse 
works too: moving a full-sized window into the virtual desktop window
causes it to shrink to scale.

Anyway, it's unfortunate Solbourne is taking the `threaten the little
guy with legal action' approach here.  I mean, they *are* a hardware
manufacturer.  Do they honestly think that by preventing others from
implementing this feature that people are going to buy Solbournes
instead of DECs and Suns?  I'd think they'd be more harmed by the `ill
will' their actions will generate.

-- 
Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)		These are my opinions.
Martin Marietta Energy Systems
Workstation Support
Technical Details
Message-ID: <9008101526.AA28431@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!decwrl!ucbvax!STC06.CTD.ORNL.GOV!de5
References: <26010@bellcore.bellcore.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!decwrl!ucbvax!STC06.CTD.ORNL.GOV!de5
From: de5@STC06.CTD.ORNL.GOV (SILL D E)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Virtual TWM desktop and Solbourne
Message-ID: <9008101526.AA28431@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV>
Date: 10 Aug 90 15:26:30 GMT
References: <26010@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab
Lines: 43