Just annotations of little "how to's", so I know I can find how to do something I've already done when I need to do it again, in case I don't remember anymore, which is not unlikely. Hopefully they can be useful to others, but I can't guarantee that it will work, or that it won't even make things worse.
KDE/QT dialogs in GTK/Gnome, or, "that's a good question".
Quote:
October 12, 2008 at 17:09
Well now Qt uses GTK dialogs in GNOME. Why can’t Gtk “repay the debt” and use KDE dialogs in KDE?
http://blog.qt.io/blog/2008/10/01/na...logs-in-gnome/
Well now Qt uses GTK dialogs in GNOME. Why can’t Gtk “repay the debt” and use KDE dialogs in KDE?
http://blog.qt.io/blog/2008/10/01/na...logs-in-gnome/
How nice would it be if it was reciprocal.
I simply don't understand some UI developers philosophies. Like "lets not have an input field to directly type the full path, requiring a control+whatever keypress in order to enable it", "let's ignore $PATH". Sometimes it seems that it derives from some pet theories of what things probably are, without much consideration to empirical facts. The least one could do then would to allow for more customization/chose existing alternatives. I recall having read the explanation for the play rate steps in Youtube, it was something about psychology studies and whatnot... but the reality is that people speaking on different videos will have their own speech tempos and one can more easily reach an ideal match to the preferred "listening" tempo if there was a play rate slider like in older versions, or at least more steps of a .25 acceleration/decceleration rather than the jumps according to the theory.
And I could also rant for hours about special-effects "coolness" versus functionality, like "infinite scroll" versus easily-finding-things-on-a-given-page-rather-than-having-them-be-lost-forever-in-the-internet-limbo.
Total Comments 0