[squeak-dev] Re: Simple Frame Adornments - default value (was: unsaved changes indicator)

radoslav hodnicak rh at 4096.sk
Wed Mar 3 23:21:00 UTC 2010

I do not care whether a feature is ugly as long as it's practical and 
making it less ugly means making it less practical. I also do not care if 
a feature is counterintuitive to newcomers, if making it less 
counterintuitive means making it less practical too.

Sure a red frame is not very pretty aesthetically speaking (although I'd 
be hard pressed to rate an orange rectangle in the corner as a dramatic 
improvement), but it provides a very clear visual clue that is accessible 
*immediately*, without focusing on a window corner with my eyes.

Substance > Style

That said, as long as it's a preference, I don't mind what the default 
value is.

I'd like to ask all folks messing with the user interface to always add 
preferences for the the changes you do - in other words: add features and 
keep the old ones. Don't replace. I'm open to trying out new things 
and see if they speed up my workflow, but chances are they won't.


On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Igor Stasenko wrote:

> Chris,
> i add -1 to red outline too. This is a counterintuitive and ugly.
> I still remember when i first opened squeak and i were unable to
> figure out what this red herring means. :)
> On 4 March 2010 00:22, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok, thanks for speaking up, I just didn't know whether there was any
>> voice at all for the new look.
>> And please don't get me wrong, I am *all for* better form.  And I even
>> agree, this one "looks" better, artistically.  It's just that some of
>> the 3.11 improvements to form have come at a cost to function, and
>> THAT, in itself, can sometimes detracts from form somewhat (i.e.,
>> greater function has implicitly better form).  Perhaps we considered
>> making the ugly solid-line red-frame simply look better, like with
>> three progressively-more translucent rectangles, each inset one pixel
>> of the outer?  Or maybe a combination of the two looks, one
>> (translucent?) line combined with the new (corner) look.
>> Since your -1 is big and fat, I consider it the winner of the vote and
>> I'll adjust my own Preference file accordingly.  Going forward, if we
>> can find ways to have our cake and eat it too, it would be better than
>> having introduce a yet another Preference that forces one to choose
>> between form and function.
>>  - Chris
>> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> On 3/3/2010 12:40 PM, Chris Muller wrote:
>>>> Thanks for adding the preference, but unfortunately the default is
>>>> false such that the new way still presses in for each new image.
>>>> In the original thread, there were two people who expressed this was a
>>>> "step backward" for them, but there were no proponents for the change
>>>> voiced.  Therefore, unless there are strong objectors who can make
>>>> some arguments for, I'd like to put the default value for this to
>>>> restore the default functionality that has been there for years.
>>>> 3.11 has suffered several usability degradations over 3.9 in terms of
>>>> the UI.  I would like to begin addressing them, starting with this
>>>> one.
>>> A big fat -1 from me. From my perspective the rectangular frame is ugly.
>>> Simple as that. It's visually unpleasant and in conflict with the rest of
>>> the window and the default shouldn't be that. If the new cue is too subtle
>>> to be of use for you personally, that's what we got preferences for, but I
>>> think we should at least *try* to get a teenie weenie bit less heinous in
>>> the default L&F.
>>> Cheers,
>>>  - Andreas
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list