Rufus wrote:
IMO, the buttons need to be sized so that they appear no smaller than
1/2 the width of the former oblong buttons, or of a diameter that is
equal to the height of the former oblong buttons.
They also need to be placed far enough from the dialog box edge such
that a user doesn't risk
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
IMO, the buttons need to be sized so that they appear no smaller than
1/2 the width of the former oblong buttons, or of a diameter that is
equal to the height of the former oblong buttons.
They also need to be placed far enough from the dialog box edge such
Rufus wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
IMO, the buttons need to be sized so that they appear no smaller than
1/2 the width of the former oblong buttons, or of a diameter that is
equal to the height of the former oblong buttons.
They also need to be placed far enough from the dialog
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Why are you so adamant on keeping your crap over other people's crap
when you don't even use the
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Why are you so adamant on keeping your crap over other people's crap
when
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Why are you so adamant on keeping your crap over other people's crap
when
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Why are you so adamant on keeping your crap over
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:17:11 -0800, Rufus wrote:
IMO, the buttons need to be sized so that they appear no smaller than
1/2 the width of the former oblong buttons, or of a diameter that is
equal to the height of the former oblong buttons.
They also need to be placed far enough from the
Philip Chee wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:17:11 -0800, Rufus wrote:
IMO, the buttons need to be sized so that they appear no smaller than
1/2 the width of the former oblong buttons, or of a diameter that is
equal to the height of the former oblong buttons.
They also need to be placed far
Rufus wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Rufus a écrit :
...what's wrong with nicely shaped, user and hardware accessible,
generic buttons? It's a browser suite, not a floor show...
That's absolutely my point! I fund the current ones fit all those
criteria. Others don't. It doesn't mean I'm right,
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Benoit Renard wrote:
Everyone suggested to bring the regular buttons back, as everyone agrees
that that is better than tiny round buttons stashed to the right.
Wrong. EOM.
No, it's not wrong. Everyone who dislikes the new progress dialog agrees.
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Why are you so adamant on keeping your crap over other people's crap
when you don't even use the thing?
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Why are you so adamant on keeping your crap over other people's crap
when you don't even use
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Benoit Renard wrote:
Everyone suggested to bring the regular buttons back, as everyone agrees
that that is better than tiny round buttons stashed to the right.
Wrong. EOM.
No, it's not wrong. Everyone who dislikes the new progress dialog agrees.
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Rufus a écrit :
...what's wrong with nicely shaped, user and hardware accessible,
generic buttons? It's a browser suite, not a floor show...
That's absolutely my point! I fund the current ones fit all those
criteria. Others don't. It
Rufus wrote:
As far as the Download Manager went
We're talking about progress windows here, not the download manager.
Robert Kaiser
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Benoit Renard wrote:
Everyone suggested to bring the regular buttons back, as everyone agrees
that that is better than tiny round buttons stashed to the right.
Wrong. EOM.
Robert Kaiser
EOM ???
Please speak like a user instead of an Engineer or Developer.
--
Phillip M.
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Do NOT kill the progress windows!
I agree, even if I personally don't use them, I see why some people like
them and really want to give those an experience that is functional,
useful and well-designed at the same time. I just miss ideas on how to
achieve
Phillip Jones wrote:
EOM ???
End Of Message.
Robert Kaiser
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
So what? It worked!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
Graham wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
So what? It worked!
Here is some suggested icons:
http://www.phillipmjones.net/Browser.png
Phillip Jones a écrit :
At least they don't look so cartoonish looking
To me, they do. Plus, the stamp is very US-centric.
S.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
Phillip Jones wrote:
Graham wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
So what? It worked!
Here is some suggested icons:
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Phillip Jones a écrit :
At least they don't look so cartoonish looking
To me, they do. Plus, the stamp is very US-centric.
S.
Don't have to use the us stamp jum could put a solid block in place of
the stamp.
at least they don't exactly look like a 4 year old
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Phillip Jones a écrit :
At least they don't look so cartoonish looking
To me, they do. Plus, the stamp is very US-centric.
S.
changed the stamp to just a Green block with no markings.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it
Phillip Jones a écrit :
Don't have to use the us stamp jum could put a solid block in place of
the stamp.
at least they don't exactly look like a 4 year old designed them. Just
suggestions anyway
Agreed! My point was more along the line of beauty/funtionality/looks
being in the eye of the
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
As far as the Download Manager went
We're talking about progress windows here, not the download manager.
Robert Kaiser
Download Manager progress, progress-progress...it seems to me it's an
endemic implementation that needs to be addressed and corrected.
Graham wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
So what? It worked!
...and if it worked, that means it wasn't bad in any way shape or
form. So why
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Phillip Jones a écrit :
Don't have to use the us stamp jum could put a solid block in place of
the stamp.
at least they don't exactly look like a 4 year old designed them. Just
suggestions anyway
Agreed! My point was more along the line of beauty/funtionality/looks
being
Rufus a écrit :
...what's wrong with nicely shaped, user and hardware accessible,
generic buttons? It's a browser suite, not a floor show...
That's absolutely my point! I fund the current ones fit all those
criteria. Others don't. It doesn't mean I'm right, just that I prefer
something
S. Beaulieu wrote:
Rufus a écrit :
...what's wrong with nicely shaped, user and hardware accessible,
generic buttons? It's a browser suite, not a floor show...
That's absolutely my point! I fund the current ones fit all those
criteria. Others don't. It doesn't mean I'm right, just that I
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:01:02 -0800, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid or unpaid) working on
this project.
...how about some
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:58:14 -0800, Rufus wrote:
I thought they wanted (and deserve...) feedback when they get it wrong?
The itty-bitty buttons on the new Download panes are pretty clearly
wrong. Particularly for laptop users. It was right before...make it
right again. That seems like
NoOp wrote:
On 12/07/2009 04:43 PM, Phillip Jones wrote:
Martin Freitag wrote:
...
In that case, my space-bar is requesting profit sharing from you ;-P
...
Most *support* Groups prefer no snipping what so ever so that threading
can be maintained, to determine what steps in solving a problem
Philip Chee wrote:
And then write up a cogent summary of why the mini buttons are wrong,
wrong, wrong.
That doesn't really help. What would help is a suggestion how to make it
_really_ better. We all know that the current design isn't really good
(though I am convinced it's better than the
Philip Chee wrote, On 12/8/2009 10:31 AM:
And then write up a cogent summary of why the mini buttons are wrong,
wrong, wrong. Almost all the SeaMonkey developers are actually against
the mini buttons. The only person in favour of the mini buttons is,
unfortunately, KaiRo, the project
Phillip Jones wrote:
This is a subject that has been gone over from time to time. In most
groups sniping is recommended.
Don't shoot me!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
Philip Chee wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:01:02 -0800, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid or unpaid) working on
this project.
...how
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
And then write up a cogent summary of why the mini buttons are wrong,
wrong, wrong.
That doesn't really help. What would help is a suggestion how to make it
_really_ better. We all know that the current design isn't really good
(though I am convinced
dominique wrote:
Philip Chee wrote, On 12/8/2009 10:31 AM:
And then write up a cogent summary of why the mini buttons are wrong,
wrong, wrong. Almost all the SeaMonkey developers are actually against
the mini buttons. The only person in favour of the mini buttons is,
unfortunately, KaiRo, the
Benoit Renard wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
And then write up a cogent summary of why the mini buttons are wrong,
wrong, wrong.
That doesn't really help. What would help is a suggestion how to make
it _really_ better.
Everyone suggested to bring the regular buttons back,
Benoit Renard wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
This is a subject that has been gone over from time to time. In most
groups sniping is recommended.
Don't shoot me!
...I'll pass you some ammo!
--
- Rufus
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
Benoit Renard wrote:
Everyone suggested to bring the regular buttons back, as everyone agrees
that that is better than tiny round buttons stashed to the right.
Wrong. EOM.
Robert Kaiser
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
Rufus wrote:
Do NOT kill the progress windows!
I agree, even if I personally don't use them, I see why some people like
them and really want to give those an experience that is functional,
useful and well-designed at the same time. I just miss ideas on how to
achieve that.
All they need
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Do NOT kill the progress windows!
I agree, even if I personally don't use them, I see why some people like
them and really want to give those an experience that is functional,
useful and well-designed at the same time. I just miss ideas on how to
achieve
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Robert Kaiser
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Just bring back what was - that was a good design.
In fact it was probably the worst piece of crap I've ever seen in my
life, design-wise.
Robert Kaiser
...then you haven't seen much.
As far as the Download Manager went, and the the dialog boxes that
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Found the problem go to about:cofig
the following line should be:
default userset browser.download.manager.showWhenStarting;true
despite being set properly in preferences you will see:
*userset*
Martin Freitag:
PS: Dudes, delete the uncecessary quotes when answering (pleeeaaase),
this is a mess here reading half a book on every post!
On the other hand it saves time. When you have decided to skip such
monsters instead of reading them. :)
Hartmut
Hartmut Figge schrieb:
Martin Freitag:
PS: Dudes, delete the uncecessary quotes when answering (pleeeaaase),
this is a mess here reading half a book on every post!
On the other hand it saves time. When you have decided to skip such
monsters instead of reading them. :)
In that case, my
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid or unpaid) working on
this project.
Phil
...how about some common sense, then?
--
- Rufus
On 12/7/2009 12:01 PM, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid or unpaid) working on
this project.
Phil
...how about some common
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:01 PM, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid or unpaid) working on
this project.
Phil
...how about
On 12/7/2009 12:23 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:01 PM, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid or unpaid) working on
Martin Freitag wrote:
Hartmut Figge schrieb:
Martin Freitag:
PS: Dudes, delete the unnecessary quotes when answering (pleeeaaase),
this is a mess here reading half a book on every post!
On the other hand it saves time. When you have decided to skip such
monsters instead of reading them. :)
On 12/07/2009 04:43 PM, Phillip Jones wrote:
Martin Freitag wrote:
...
In that case, my space-bar is requesting profit sharing from you ;-P
...
Most *support* Groups prefer no snipping what so ever so that threading
can be maintained, to determine what steps in solving a problem have
been
Phillip Jones wrote:
Martin Freitag wrote:
Hartmut Figge schrieb:
Martin Freitag:
/snip/
Most *support* Groups prefer no snipping what so ever so that threading
can be maintained, to determine what steps in solving a problem have
been tried. If its in a groups where conversation is going on
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:23 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:01 PM, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid
On 12/7/2009 5:58 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:23 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:01 PM, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike
On 12/7/2009 7:05 PM, Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 5:58 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:23 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:01 PM, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 5:58 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:23 PM, Rufus wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 12/7/2009 12:01 PM, Rufus wrote:
Philip Chee wrote:
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this
Phillip Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your statement is the other way round,
think about that). The
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your statement is the other way round,
think about
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your statement is the other way
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are
Phillip Jones wrote:
... in 1.1.18 and below if something was
started to download the Download Manager would come to the Front if you
had to show Download Manager in preferences.
This is not my experience. If download manager is not already open, then it is
opened and comes to the front.
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know
Phillip Jones schrieb:
in SM2 Download Manager does *not* come up regardless of what
is set. It has to be manually opened.
In my 2.0.1pre builds, it always comes up (or is flashed to get
attention when it is already open). I was under the impression that this
is our default, and it should
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Phillip Jones wrote:
Rufus wrote:
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:11:35 -0800, Rufus wrote:
too...what's up with the interface guys working this project?..
Unlike Firefox we don't have any UX guys (paid or unpaid) working on
this project.
Phil
--
Philip Chee phi...@aleytys.pc.my, philip.c...@gmail.com
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/
I kept wondering why the download manager didn't kick in and come to
front when you start a download. well I had to change this setting:
browser.download.manager.focusWhenStarting;true
It originally set to false which means you don't know you've even
started a download until you actually open
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your statement is the other way round,
think about that). The Download Manager is used by almost everybody,
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your statement is the other way round,
think about that). The Download Manager is used by
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Oh, and I was under the impression that this pref is set to true by
default, but I might be wrong, like every so often.
No it's not:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/comm-1.9.1/source/suite/browser/browser-prefs.js#103
One could get that impression, though, because the checkbox
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your statement is the other way round,
think about that). The Download Manager is used by
Leonidas Jones wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Phillip Jones schrieb:
Shows the people designing the program don't even use it.
Shows you don't know what you are talking about (sorry if it sounds
offensive, but not any more than your statement is the other way round,
think about that). The
80 matches
Mail list logo
