At 9:35 PM -0700 4/18/02, Ned Konz wrote:
>I don't understand Martin's complaints about the alternative scrollbar
>look (or is he talking about the flop-out scrollbar?). They're the
>same size, shape, and behavior as the non-alternative ones, just a
>different color.

I was confused here: I hadn't noticed that the shape changed when 
moving them inboard until Doug pointed it out (quoted below).

>
>I'd say for scrolling:
>
>alternative scroll bar look (looks much better than the grey/blue)
>inboard scrollbars
>not narrow
>with menu button (for the mac people, I guess)
>on right

Agreed. I actually prefer the grey/blue because of better visibility, 
but I do think that the matching color looks better overall, so I'm 
happy enough to put off finer color tweaks (for windows and for 
scrollbars) until next release.


At 12:44 AM -0400 4/19/02, Doug Way wrote:
>
>
>>>(alternativeScrollbarLook true)
>>
>>This one is a personal preference, but I can't imagine the majority 
>>of newcomers disagreeing. The alternative scrollbars are just too 
>>hard to 1) see what they mean and 2) do what you want. Positioning 
>>the menu under the up arrow is part of the problem, but not all of 
>>it. I've had experienced computer users who are new to Squeak take 
>>one look and say "What's that thing there? How do I use this?" I 
>>used these scrollbars daily from the time they came out until just 
>>a few weeks ago, so I feel like I gave them a fair chance, but I'm 
>>glad I finally ditched them.
>
>Actually, it turns out that if you turn off the inboardScrollbars in 
>the current 3.2gamma, it will also turn off the rounded (a.k.a. 
>"sausage") scrollbar look and put the menu button back on top, 
>although it will keep the matched colors.  (A slightly cheesy 
>compromise I suppose.)

Ah, thanks, I hadn't noticed that combination.

>So, I think just changing the first two preferences you mention (and 
>not this one) will be sufficient for what you want...?

Yes, you are correct.

-Martin