Frank Steinmetzger posted on Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:34:58 +0200 as excerpted: > See how tastes differ. *I* found this a bad idea and it was among the > things I always disable right after installation, because I wanted the > window's [X] to be in the corner where it belongs so I can quickly reach > it by mouse. It's the same reason for which I can't understand why > people use top panels. But that's the user world -- to each his own, and > the dev's can't accommodate everyone. The fact that they don't include > (or, as you say, even remove) the option is sadly another story.
Just noting the multi-monitor case, with monitors logically stacked and kwin set to maximize to a single monitor. That's actually the case here, with the further condition that altho three monitors are logically stacked, only the bottom two are actually physically stacked due to space constraints (they're actually 42-inch TVs that stack to cover an entire wall, with the third logically stacked on top to preserve the logical rectangular desktop, but physically off to the side where I have room for it). In that case, a top panel covering essentially all of the top monitor, my "system status dashboard", graphing user/system/nice/wait CPU usage separately for six cores, app/buffer/cache memory, various system temps, voltage and power usage, and fan speeds, network usage, and listing top applications by memory and cpu usage, etc, along with last 20 or so syslog entries, all in a custom superkaramba theme, makes sense, particularly since that monitor is physically separated from the others even if it's logically stacked on top of them. In any multi-monitor situation, unless the app's at the correct location on the correct monitor, that X button you mentioned isn't going to be in the "infinite corner" in any case. Since in my layout my working monitors are the two (logically) lower ones, I /never/ have windows in that "magic" location anyway, so having the status superkaramba theme occupying that space isn't a big deal. ... Thus demonstrating your point about "the user world -- to each his own" rather forcefully indeed. Absolutely, the devs can't accommodate everyone by default, but I long ago stopped expecting defaults that matched my usage. Instead, I don't care much about the defaults; I just want to have the configurability to sanely setup a configuration I'm comfortable with. And kde is renowned for that sort of flexible configurability, a big part of why I use it, for much the same "big part of" reason that I use both Gentoo and Linux in general -- the configurability. Too bad in this case kde had it, but removed it! =:^( -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman ___________________________________________________ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
