Windows stack
Alexander Ausserstorfer
there is a way to integrate or use a "thirth dimension" of the
desktop.
There are some tools so you can switch between different desktops with
different windows. But what about to have the desktops not on side but
in the depth? You may found a small bar at the right or left side of
the desktop screen. When you open windows you will find them all on
one layer - but it may be possible to have more as one layer at one
time. Means: You will need another button of the window to move a
window a layer back or to the front. With the bar at the left or right
side you could switch rapidly between this layers with all in them
placed windows.
Not so much time yet why I have to stop. Maybe I will explain it more
carefully later.
Alex'
Martin Wuerthner
ups.com>
Alexander Ausserstorfer <bavari...@chiemgau-net.de>
wrote:
> Hi, thinking about the windows stack of RISC OS or in general I think
> there is a way to integrate or use a "thirth dimension" of the
> desktop.
> There are some tools so you can switch between different desktops with
> different windows. But what about to have the desktops not on side but
> in the depth? You may found a small bar at the right or left side of
> the desktop screen. When you open windows you will find them all on
> one layer - but it may be possible to have more as one layer at one
> time. Means: You will need another button of the window to move a
> window a layer back or to the front. With the bar at the left or right
> side you could switch rapidly between this layers with all in them
> placed windows.
So far, this sounds like the effect is exactly the same as switching
between different desktops. What would make your approach different?
Martin
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Wuerthner MW Software http://www.mw-software.com/
ArtWorks 2 -- Designing stunning graphics has never been easier
spam...@mw-software.com [replace "spamtrap" by "info" to reply]
Theo Markettos
> So far, this sounds like the effect is exactly the same as switching
> between different desktops. What would make your approach different?
I can only see a difference in the layout of desktops, in other words:
123456789
rather than
123
456
789
But it seems to me the 2d surface is more expressive than the 1d stack.
It might be made more interesting, though, with extra mouse buttons. For
example button 4+close icon means 'put to desktop in front' while button
5+close means 'put to desktop behind'. That's easier to do in a 1d stack
than a 2d surface.
Theo
Alexander Ausserstorfer
wrote:
> Martin Wuerthner <spamt...@mw-software.com> wrote:
> > So far, this sounds like the effect is exactly the same as switching
> > between different desktops. What would make your approach different?
>
> I can only see a difference in the layout of desktops, in other words:
>
> 123456789
>
> rather than
>
> 123
> 456
> 789
>
> But it seems to me the 2d surface is more expressive than the 1d stack.
It's more obvious to the user.
> It might be made more interesting, though, with extra mouse buttons. For
> example button 4+close icon means 'put to desktop in front' while button
> 5+close means 'put to desktop behind'. That's easier to do in a 1d stack
> than a 2d surface.
It's much faster to switch between different desktops. (It is the main
reason why I never liked the idea with the surfaces.) While as, I
didn't write that you can keep different layers on the same desktop at
the same time. It will need a while to work everything out to explain
the idea more in detail but the main gain is an overkill productivity
in comparison to the 2d surface.
Alex'
Martin Wuerthner
> On 28 Okt., 12:29, Theo Markettos <theom+n...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
> wrote:
>> Martin Wuerthner <spamt...@mw-software.com> wrote:
>>> So far, this sounds like the effect is exactly the same as switching
>>> between different desktops. What would make your approach different?
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> But it seems to me the 2d surface is more expressive than the 1d stack.
> It's more obvious to the user.
How is that? You do not see the other desktops anyway, just the one
that is active. It is up to you to imagine whatever you want about the
ones that you do not currently see. With all existing solutions you
can still imagine they are layers behind your current desktop.
>> It might be made more interesting, though, with extra mouse buttons. For
>> example button 4+close icon means 'put to desktop in front' while button
>> 5+close means 'put to desktop behind'. That's easier to do in a 1d stack
>> than a 2d surface.
> It's much faster to switch between different desktops. (It is the main
> reason why I never liked the idea with the surfaces.)
It cannot be much faster than pressing a key combination, which is
what desktop managers usually offer. Nobody forces you to use both
dimensions that are offered by existing multi-desktop managers. If you
prefer a one-dimensional layout simply create a single row or a single
column of desktops.
Alexander Ausserstorfer
> In message <69a51750-acbb-4129-9eca-da95a6582...@s31g2000yqs.googlegro
> ups.com>
[...]
> >> It might be made more interesting, though, with extra mouse buttons. For
> >> example button 4+close icon means 'put to desktop in front' while button
> >> 5+close means 'put to desktop behind'. That's easier to do in a 1d stack
> >> than a 2d surface.
> > It's much faster to switch between different desktops. (It is the main
> > reason why I never liked the idea with the surfaces.)
>
> It cannot be much faster than pressing a key combination, which is
> what desktop managers usually offer.
Can someone name one (or two) desktop managers for RISC OS which work
in this way, please? The only desktop managers I know use a small
window, where you can switch between different desktops (four or six?)
by a mouse click - but this means you have to
1. make or keep one window open, something what wastes space on the
screen
2. and you have to drive a far, far way with the mouse what costs a
lot of time
> Nobody forces you to use both
> dimensions that are offered by existing multi-desktop managers. If you
> prefer a one-dimensional layout simply create a single row or a single
> column of desktops.
Here you are lost.
Alex'
Tim Hill
<c9d2370c-3e6c-4edc...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
Alexander Ausserstorfer <bavari...@chiemgau-net.de> wrote:
> On 29 Okt., 09:59, Martin Wuerthner <spamt...@mw-software.com> wrote:
> > In message
> > <69a51750-acbb-4129-9eca-da95a6582...@s31g2000yqs.googlegro ups.com>
[Snip]
> Can someone name one (or two) desktop managers for RISC OS which work
> in this way, please? The only desktop managers I know use a small
> window, where you can switch between different desktops (four or six?)
> by a mouse click - but this means you have to
> 1. make or keep one window open, something what wastes space on the
> screen 2. and you have to drive a far, far way with the mouse what
> costs a lot of time
ISTR that one multi-desktop display used to allow a click on its iconbar
icon which was divided into nine. Perhaps someone has already made a 1D
multi desktop by having a row of tabs at the top of the screen. With the
facility of being able to drag a window to the tab relating to the
desktop you want that could be quite useful. :-)
> > Nobody forces you to use both dimensions that are offered by existing
> > multi-desktop managers. If you prefer a one-dimensional layout simply
> > create a single row or a single column of desktops.
> Here you are lost.
Lost? How? It's easy enough to quickly visit all the desktops in any
manager to see what you may have 'lost'.
T'
Brian Jordan
<c9d2370c-3e6c-4edc...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
Alexander Ausserstorfer <bavari...@chiemgau-net.de> wrote:
[Snip]
> > It cannot be much faster than pressing a key combination, which is
> > what desktop managers usually offer.
> Can someone name one (or two) desktop managers for RISC OS which work
> in this way, please?
[Snip]
Unless I misunderstand you, !MoreDesk from 7th software, does exactly
what you are describing. <Tab> + appropriate arrow keys move me around my
6 desktops perfectly well. I happen to use a flat concept of 3x2 desktops
but I could have a matrix of 7x1 and then only use the up and down arrows
wih <Tab> for the navigation.
--
______________________________________________________________________
Brian Jordan
From somewhere in North Hampshire. England. UK.
______________________________________________________________________
druck
> ISTR that one multi-desktop display used to allow a click on its iconbar
> icon which was divided into nine.
Or six if it's my !WorkSpace from http://www.armclub.org.uk/free/
---druck
Ste (news)
Brian Jordan <brian....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Unless I misunderstand you, !MoreDesk from 7th software, does exactly
> what you are describing. <Tab> + appropriate arrow keys move me around my
> 6 desktops perfectly well. I happen to use a flat concept of 3x2 desktops
> but I could have a matrix of 7x1 and then only use the up and down arrows
> wih <Tab> for the navigation.
MoreDesk can have up to seven desktops in either vertical or horizontal
directions. If you combine the two, you can have up to 49 desktops in a grid
arrangement (which is a bit excessive, IMHO!).
There are many ways to move between desktops in MoreDesk:
* alt + cursor key (or ctrl + alt depending upon configuration)
* hold alt and move mouse pointer off appropriate edge of screen
* open the main window and select a desktop from there (in various ways)
* right click iconbar icon and select desktop from the 'micro' window
* alt + tab to open a 'switcher' window (as per Windows, Linux, etc)
* third party programs can cause MoreDesk to switch desktop
The demo at http://www.7thsoftware.com/moredesk/ will give you an idea of
how this works, but is limited just two desktops.
Ta,
Steve
--
Steve Revill @ Home
Note: All opinions expressed herein are my own.