Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #8595 > unrolled thread

Another UI anti-pattern

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Another UI anti-pattern Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-09-06 23:39 +1000
    Re: Another UI anti-pattern Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2015-09-06 14:35 +0000
      Re: Another UI anti-pattern RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2015-09-07 08:31 +0300
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-09-09 12:50 +0200
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-10 14:46 -0700
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-10 15:38 -0700
            Re: Another UI anti-pattern Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-10 16:13 -0700
              Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-10 16:32 -0700
                Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-10 21:18 -0700
                  Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-11 03:12 -0700
                Re: Another UI anti-pattern Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-11 14:13 -0700
                  Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-13 09:10 -0700
                    Re: Another UI anti-pattern Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-13 16:16 +0000
                      Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-13 10:29 -0700
                    Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-13 10:30 -0700
                      Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-13 11:04 -0700
                        Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-13 11:56 -0700
                          Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-14 05:39 -0700
                            Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-14 08:42 -0700
                              Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-14 13:08 -0700
                              Re: Another UI anti-pattern Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-15 08:17 +0000
      Re: Another UI anti-pattern Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-07 09:09 +0000
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-07 04:30 -0700
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-07 16:55 +0000
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-09-08 11:40 +1000
            Re: Another UI anti-pattern Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2015-09-09 04:24 -0700
              Re: Another UI anti-pattern Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-09-10 13:42 +1000
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-09-08 01:24 +0200
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2015-09-08 16:56 +0000
      Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 10:35 -0700
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-07 19:00 +0000
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-07 14:40 -0700
            Re: Another UI anti-pattern Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 19:51 -0500
              Re: Another UI anti-pattern Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2015-09-09 04:24 -0700
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-08 02:18 -0300
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-08 08:31 +0000
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 02:08 -0700
            Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-08 03:32 -0700
              Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 05:14 -0700
            Re: Another UI anti-pattern Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-08 15:45 -0300
              Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 12:50 -0700
                Re: Another UI anti-pattern Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-08 19:46 -0300
                  Re: Another UI anti-pattern fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 15:56 -0700
            Re: Another UI anti-pattern Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-09-09 12:39 +0200
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-08 03:08 -0700
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-09-08 12:40 +0000
            Re: Another UI anti-pattern Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-08 15:36 -0300
    Re: Another UI anti-pattern Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-09-07 23:30 +1000
      Re: Another UI anti-pattern Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2015-09-07 11:04 -0700
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-09-08 11:37 +1000
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-10 09:44 +0100
      Re: Another UI anti-pattern Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-08 02:06 -0300
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-08 08:30 +0000
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-08 15:19 -0300
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-09-09 12:32 +0200
      Re: Another UI anti-pattern Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-09-09 11:46 +0200
    Re: Another UI anti-pattern Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2015-09-09 21:26 +0300
      Re: Another UI anti-pattern Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-09-10 12:59 +1000
        Re: Another UI anti-pattern Andy Burns <usenet.feb2014@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2015-09-10 08:14 +0100
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-09-10 19:06 +1000
          Re: Another UI anti-pattern     wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) - 2015-09-10 03:10 -0700

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#8630

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 8:47:29 PM UTC+2, Mike Spencer wrote:
> fmassei@gmail.com writes:
> 
> > On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 7:19:43 AM UTC+2, Mike Spencer wrote:
> >
> >> If you're thinking of buying a new ACME rocket sled, go to the ACME
> >> web site and try to find info on an ACME product in current use or in use
> >> a couple of years ago.  If that search is easy to, then consider the
> >> new ACME sled. If it's a can of worms, forget ACME.
> >> 
> > 
> > People don't direct their browsers to acme.com, they type "ACME" in the
> > browser bar...
> 
> Oh, dang.  I forgot about "people".
> 

Yeah, right? I always forget about them too. Nowadays I try to take them in
consideration only to stop the annoying flow of shady characters that comes
to my desk with pie-charts asking to change my software designs.

> > You may build a nice website, with just what the users want, but
> > nobody will ever find out. In fact, the web is full of these kind of
> > websites, but think about the last time that you actually visited
> > one.
> 
> These days, when ordinary, non-PHB and non-hackerish mortals want to
> create a web page, they go to one of the on-line interactive services.
> Those services tend to impose all the fvyyl-fuvg bells and whistles on
> their otherwise typically simple material.
> 

That was true in the '00 with geocities, in '05 with blogspot, in '10 with
tumblr, flickr or similar, but today, in 2015, unless you open a facebook
page which name is exactly equal to the query string you want to target
(which, of course, it probably is already taken by ACMF.com) you have no
chance to appear to the general public.

Ciao!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8632

fmassei@gmail.com writes:

> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 8:47:29 PM UTC+2, Mike Spencer wrote:
<
>> These days, when ordinary, non-PHB and non-hackerish mortals want to
>> create a web page, they go to one of the on-line interactive services.
>> Those services tend to impose all the fvyyl-fuvg bells and whistles on
>> their otherwise typically simple material.
>> 
> 
> That was true in the '00 with geocities, in '05 with blogspot, in '10 with
> tumblr, flickr or similar, but today, in 2015, unless you open a facebook
> page which name is exactly equal to the query string you want to target
> (which, of course, it probably is already taken by ACMF.com) you have no
> chance to appear to the general public.

Interesting. I had surmised something of the sort but hadn't noticed
myself that it was so.  So far, I've managed to have a life without
visiting FB more than once.  (Fellow blacksmiths typically have non-FB
web pages but a recent newcomer to the craft -- 3 decades younger than
my cohort but no teeny-bopper herself -- presents her work on FB.)


-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8633

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 12:47:55 AM UTC+2, Mike Spencer wrote:
> fmassei@gmail.com writes:
> >> These days, when ordinary, non-PHB and non-hackerish mortals want to
> >> create a web page, they go to one of the on-line interactive services.
> >> Those services tend to impose all the fvyyl-fuvg bells and whistles on
> >> their otherwise typically simple material.
> >> 
> > 
> > That was true in the '00 with geocities, in '05 with blogspot, in '10 with
> > tumblr, flickr or similar, but today, in 2015, unless you open a facebook
> > page which name is exactly equal to the query string you want to target
> > (which, of course, it probably is already taken by ACMF.com) you have no
> > chance to appear to the general public.
> 
> Interesting. I had surmised something of the sort but hadn't noticed
> myself that it was so.  So far, I've managed to have a life without
> visiting FB more than once.  (Fellow blacksmiths typically have non-FB
> web pages but a recent newcomer to the craft -- 3 decades younger than
> my cohort but no teeny-bopper herself -- presents her work on FB.)
> 

Nice sarcasm, but as I have already written today in reply to "Bill Evans",
we are not statistically significant. You can choose not to acknowledge the
reality, but if you don't just look out of your window, but also on random
peoples' smartphones, you'll notice how the IT world goes.

Ciao!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8636

On 2015-09-08, fmassei@gmail.com <fmassei@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> People don't direct their browsers to acme.com, they type "ACME" in the
> browser bar, it calls google, which will return the most relevant results
> (where "relevant" refers for their pockets, of course, this is how they make
> money). Chances are that acme.com doesn't even show up in the first page,
> which is filled with ads and links of re-sellers and their bloated websites
> optimized for getting those first places instead of giving the user a decent
> experience.

I was amazed a couple of years ago when an official I was dealing with
wasn't using any kind of telephone directory of commonly used numbers,
she instead went straight to Google.

> You may build a nice website, with just what the users want, but nobody will
> ever find out. In fact, the web is full of these kind of websites, but think
> about the last time that you actually visited one.

It does rather put into question all the fuss that the domain name
sellers have made about new top level domain names :-)

-- 
It's definitely not paranoia when we can all pull out log files full of
people out to get us.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8619

Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>                If it's a can of worms, forget ACME.

Then again, perhaps poorly designed web pages can be
considered a good source of protein, with a smaller carbon
footprint than, say, beef.

-- 
Bill Evans / Box 1224 / Mariposa, CA 95338 / (209)742-4720
Mail-To: wje@acm.org   -- PGP encrypted mail preferred. --
pgpkey.mariposabill.com for public key.    Key #: 8D8B521B
PGPprint: 0A9C 3545 8FFF 7501 6265 1519 40FF 76F9 8D8B 521B

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8622

Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:

> fmassei@gmail.com writes:

> > On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 4:35:42 PM UTC+2, Whiskers wrote:
> >
> >> That sort of thing is all over the web.  What is so wrong with having a
> >> 'search box' that is always visible and always in the same place?  If
> >> 'there is not enough room' then perhaps there's too much going on.
> >> 
> > 
> > Or, speaking about the vast majority of the web, there would be enough room
> > if it wasn't already taken by thousand of things that are completely useless
> > for the user.

> Why is it that people who want to actually *sell* you something create
> a pathogenic exfoliation of fulminating special effects and
> interlocking twisty little passages, impenetrable, circularly
> connected, burdened with megabytes of irrelevant code and animations
> while people who have a few, perhaps useful or enlightening things to say
> and expect little reader response present some simple text and maybe a
> few pics?

Because the 'people who want to ... sell you something' have marketing
departments.  And it is the 'marketers' who think they need the latest
jumpy, jiggly, shaking, moving, whatever to catch your eye lest you go
buy something else.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8627

Rich <rich@example.invalid> writes:

> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
> 
>> Why is it that people who want to actually *sell* you something create
>> a pathogenic exfoliation of fulminating special effects and
>> interlocking twisty little passages, impenetrable, circularly
>> connected, burdened with megabytes of irrelevant code and animations
>> while people who have a few, perhaps useful or enlightening things to say
>> and expect little reader response present some simple text and maybe a
>> few pics?
> 
> Because the 'people who want to ... sell you something' have marketing
> departments.  And it is the 'marketers' who think they need the latest
> jumpy, jiggly, shaking, moving, whatever to catch your eye lest you go
> buy something else.

Ah, well, yes.  I guess it was a rhetorical question.  I should have
remembered, from a relatively brief stint creating graphics for
eduware -- training material for nascent HVAC techs -- that the PHBs
who had to sign off on the results had no notion of what the ultimate
user (student HVAC tech) faced in learning what they had to learn.
The PHBs liked stuff that was roughly homologous to material *selling*
the HVAC gear to other PHBs; something like TV ads superimposed on the
old "teaching machine" concept.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8603

On 7/09/2015 10:24 PM, Stefan Ram wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:
>> If you want to search something, you click on the magnifying glass
>
>    (Here a general UI rant is following that is not directly
>    related to your specific complaint.)
>
>    Sorry when I interrupt here, but this already is a major
>    anti-pattern for /me/: Having to /click/, that is having to
>    /use the mouse/, not being able to use the keyboard for
>    something!
>
>    I do not bother to care for single »UI anti-pattern«s
>    anymore because there is such a disaster in the UIs today
>    that all the details do not matter to me.
>
>    To explain what I refer to: In the 90s on Windows, there was
>    a standard UI, where the program menu was the default means
>    to trigger an action.
>
>    A program menu has advantages compared to both text commands
>    entered via the keyboard and symbols clicked by the mouse.
>
>    An advantage compared to text commands is that a menu is its
>    own help manual. One does not need to learn or lookup the
>    commands, they are all there in the program menu! Both
>    keyboard and mouse users can use program menus because they
>    are accessibly both with the keyboard and with the mouse.
>
>    Program menus are better than symbols because the symbols
>    often are not accessible via the keyboard. Moreover, often
>    symbols are displayed continuously taking aways screen real
>    estate, which is precious on small portable device, while
>    menus are small and hidden when not used.
>
>    In the 90s, many programs (including the Microsoft® Windows
>    Explorer and Microsoft® Office) had program menus. So one
>    immediately felt home in every application with program menus.
>
>    Nowadays, every application invents its own UI system.
>    Program menus are not a standard anymore. One has to learn
>    the UI system of every program anew. Sometimes this means
>    that one really is required to use the slow mouse input
>    instead of the keyboard.
>

Only hackers use keyboards now - don't you watch CSI Cyber?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8607

On 9/7/2015 6:30 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
...
> Only hackers use keyboards now - don't you watch CSI Cyber?

Clicky keyboard types? I don't watch that series. I do watch Mr. Robot. :)
-- 
"The sun's just a big glass, we're all ants, I LOVE YOU." --"Magnified" 
song by the Failure band
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.
    /\___/\         Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
   / /\ /\ \                Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
  | |o   o| |
     \ _ /        If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
      ( )              Chop ANT from its address if e-mailing privately.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8611

On 8/09/2015 4:04 AM, Ant wrote:
> On 9/7/2015 6:30 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> ...
>> Only hackers use keyboards now - don't you watch CSI Cyber?
>
> Clicky keyboard types? I don't watch that series.

It can be amusing, though one does have to be willing to suspend quite a 
lot of disbelief.

Most of the time they avoid the "any system can be cracked at will" 
paradigm, though when push comes to shove they will use it.

They even deny that any image can be enlarged at will without loss of 
resolution, though I dare say that position will be reversed the moment 
it becomes convenient for the plot.

I do watch Mr. Robot. :)

Don't know that one - may be it's not shown here (Australia).

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8646

On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 15:49:57 +0100, Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de>  
wrote:

> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:
>> They even deny that any image can be enlarged at will without loss of
>> resolution
>
>   Sony now has created a CMOS-Sensor with 19580 × 12600 pixels
>   and says that one can use this to make a video of an
>   airplane that is flying at a distance of 18 kilometers and
>   then read the name of the airline from the video.
>
You'd need a pretty steady hand to do that!

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8613

Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:

> Only hackers use keyboards now,,,

OM$DIETY, I've been promoted from wannabe or something like that to
hacker?  When I wasn't looking?  How nice.

> ... - Don't you watch CSI Cyber?

Didn't even know there *was* a CSI Cyber.  I haven't watched any TV
since the last episode of Xena, precious little before that.  I liked
The Prisoner.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

The command line is like Language.
The GUI is like Shopping,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8616

On 2015-09-08, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:
>
>> Only hackers use keyboards now,,,
>
> OM$DIETY, I've been promoted from wannabe or something like that to
> hacker?  When I wasn't looking?  How nice.

Me too. But then, I started with punched cards.

>> ... - Don't you watch CSI Cyber?
>
> Didn't even know there *was* a CSI Cyber.  I haven't watched any TV
> since the last episode of Xena, precious little before that.  I liked
> The Prisoner.

Which one? Please don't say the remake.


-- 
Today is Sweetmorn, the 32nd day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3181
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8626

Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:

> On 2015-09-08, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>>
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:
>>
>>> Only hackers use keyboards now,,,
>>
>> OM$DIETY, I've been promoted from wannabe or something like that to
>> hacker?  When I wasn't looking?  How nice.
> 
> Me too. But then, I started with punched cards.

AOL, IBM 1620, albeit there was a hiatus of 16 years between that very
first, tiny program (Fortran) and the next (Basic), then another
7-year hiatus before I had my own computer, went through larval mode
learning C, Z80 assembler etc.  Clinging desperately to keyboard
insofar as possible ever since.  There have been some regrettable
episodes of Fenestral Syndrome from which, however, I've been fully
recovered since 1999.

>>> ... - Don't you watch CSI Cyber?
>>
>> Didn't even know there *was* a CSI Cyber.  I haven't watched any TV
>> since the last episode of Xena, precious little before that.  I liked
>> The Prisoner.
> 
> Which one? Please don't say the remake.

Remake? [tikki-tikki-spop-dit....] Oh, right.  Nah, watched sometime in
the late 60s.  You're welcome.

I think I may have caught a re-run (not remake) episode during a
boring evening in a motel some time in the 90s.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8635

On 2015-09-08, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2015-09-08, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>>
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:
>>
>>> Only hackers use keyboards now,,,
>>
>> OM$DIETY, I've been promoted from wannabe or something like that to
>> hacker?  When I wasn't looking?  How nice.
>
> Me too. But then, I started with punched cards.

Me too, ditto with the punched cards.  I was glad to see the back of
those.

>>> ... - Don't you watch CSI Cyber?
>>
>> Didn't even know there *was* a CSI Cyber.  I haven't watched any TV
>> since the last episode of Xena, precious little before that.  I liked
>> The Prisoner.
>
> Which one? Please don't say the remake.

My parents presumably preferred something which clashed with the
original series of The Prisoner (a one-telly household, which I think
most were in those days), my first chance of watching the series all the
way through came circa 2012 via repeats.

-- 
It's definitely not paranoia when we can all pull out log files full of
people out to get us.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8634

On 2015-09-07, Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>
> Only hackers use keyboards now - don't you watch CSI Cyber?

Eek, I must be a hacker then.  I didn't know that.

But I haven't watched telly for about 3 years now; my cable company sent
me a new set top box which didn't work with the poor cable signal I had,
and I realised I really didn't miss telly that much.

-- 
It's definitely not paranoia when we can all pull out log files full of
people out to get us.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8640

Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:

> Example here
>
> http://developer.android.com/reference/android/content/Intent.html
>
> If you want to search something, you click on the magnifying glass,
> and the field expands to the left, pushing the Developer Console
> button to the left as well.

For me it's enough to put the mouse cursor over the magnifying glass and
I can start typing the search terms. A quick look at the source also
reveals that the slash key / can be used for search as well. I believe
someone complained about the lack of a keyboard shortcut...

I also think Google search does a pretty good job on finding stuff from
the Android developer docs too but I haven't done that in a while.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8643

On 10/09/2015 4:26 AM, Anssi Saari wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> writes:
>
>> Example here
>>
>> http://developer.android.com/reference/android/content/Intent.html
>>
>> If you want to search something, you click on the magnifying glass,
>> and the field expands to the left, pushing the Developer Console
>> button to the left as well.
>
> For me it's enough to put the mouse cursor over the magnifying glass and
> I can start typing the search terms. A quick look at the source also
> reveals that the slash key / can be used for search as well. I believe
> someone complained about the lack of a keyboard shortcut...

The behaviour is a bit browser specific. I'm using Firefox, and the 
search box doesn't get the keyboard focus until it's clicked on. IE 
works better in this respect.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8645

Sylvia Else wrote:

> Anssi Saari wrote:
>
>> For me it's enough to put the mouse cursor over the magnifying glass and
>> I can start typing the search terms. A quick look at the source also
>> reveals that the slash key / can be used for search as well.
>
> The behaviour is a bit browser specific. I'm using Firefox, and the
> search box doesn't get the keyboard focus until it's clicked on. IE
> works better in this respect.

I'm with firefox, and hovering over the magnifying glass does expand the 
search field for me and set focus to it ready for typing (clicking works 
too).

Also I object slightly to sites that "steal" the slash key to search 
their website, because firefox's default is to use slash to search 
within the current page (yes I can use ctrl-F to get to that, but my 
fingers are trained to use slash for search).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8648

On 10/09/2015 5:14 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>> Anssi Saari wrote:
>>
>>> For me it's enough to put the mouse cursor over the magnifying glass and
>>> I can start typing the search terms. A quick look at the source also
>>> reveals that the slash key / can be used for search as well.
>>
>> The behaviour is a bit browser specific. I'm using Firefox, and the
>> search box doesn't get the keyboard focus until it's clicked on. IE
>> works better in this respect.
>
> I'm with firefox, and hovering over the magnifying glass does expand the
> search field for me and set focus to it ready for typing (clicking works
> too).

Seems to be working for me now, too. I think the reason it didn't seem 
to earlier was because I'd tried the / approach, which had diverted the 
focus to Firefox's search field (at the opposite corner of the screen, 
hence I didn't see it).

So now all I need to do is train myself to stop trying to clicking on it 
the field and I won't end up at the developer's console. Of course, that 
negates 20 years of GUI acclimatisation which says that one clicks on a 
field to give it the focus.


Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web