Java Jive wrote:

> Etc, etc. Keyboard shortcuts are well worth learning, because often
> they are more efficient, sometimes dramatically so.

Many users feel comfortable using the mouse so they don't have to
memorize a lot of keyboard combinations, especially those rarely used.
They were weaned on computers always having mice. That's their comfort
zone. They didn't grow up on DOS, or earlier, when there wasn't a GUI
in which to use mice. Used to be every menu item had a key shortcut.
Not anymore. So, to a degree, age is relevant regarding on what
hardware you grew up with or were trained on.

I first started driving cars with clutches (i.e., manual transmission)
some 50 years ago. It's been around 30 years since I moved to an
automatic. I still occasionally instinctively try to use my left on a
clutch pedal that isn't there. I learned how to touchtype back in
highschool (and on mechanical typewriters), so my finger memory knows
the QWERTY layout without having to look down at the keyboard, but I'd
be just as clumsy as other users doing the hunt-and-peck method with 2
fingers while looking down at the keyboard on a Dvorak layout. Me being
inept on a Dvorak keyboard is similar to how mouse-engrained users would
be inept using a keyboard other than for text. Even for a well-trained
QWERTY touch typist, everyone of those key combos you mention require me
to take my eyes off the screen to look down at the keyboard, because my
index fingers would no longer be on the home keys as anchors for touch
typing.

On 21/03/2022 15:51, VanguardLH wrote:
>
> Even for a well-trained
> QWERTY touch typist, everyone of those key combos you mention require me
> to take my eyes off the screen to look down at the keyboard, because my
> index fingers would no longer be on the home keys as anchors for touch
> typing.

I'm not a well-trained touch typist, but most of keystrokes either don't
require me to look away from the screen, or else I'd have to look away
from the screen anyway to move my hand over to work the mouse
alternative, so not really an argument. I learnt those key combinations
for one reason and one reason only, they're quicker, sometimes
significantly so.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Java Jive wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Even for a well-trained
>> QWERTY touch typist, everyone of those key combos you mention require me
>> to take my eyes off the screen to look down at the keyboard, because my
>> index fingers would no longer be on the home keys as anchors for touch
>> typing.
>
> I'm not a well-trained touch typist, but most of keystrokes either
> don't require me to look away from the screen, or else I'd have to
> look away from the screen anyway to move my hand over to work the
> mouse alternative, so not really an argument.

Yes, it is. I never have to look away from the screen to find the
mouse. My peripheral vision is excellent, and my sense of touch works,
and the mouse is mostly in the same spot. Having to take my hand off
the keyboard to do the key combos (I'm not on the home keys, anymore) or
take my hand off to grab the mouse seems about the same effort, to me.

My mouse is along the left edge of my keyboard, not some distance away.
I don't know what is your setup. I do like larger mice, so I'm not
fumbling trying to find a tiny one. I want the mouse to fill my palm,
and not require much curling of my fingers. Small mice are
uncomfortable, to me.

> I learnt those key combinations for one reason and one reason only,
> they're quicker, sometimes significantly so.

For you, maybe. For others, maybe not.

I'm right handed, but I have the mouse on the left of the keyboard where
my arm can be oriented more straight forward. On the right-side of the
keyboard, the mouse would be further out at an angle due to the arrow
and number pads extending out the right edge of the keyboard.
Right-handed but mouse on left is more ergonomic, for me. Most
right-handed users have the mouse on the right. My hand isn't jumping
way over the arrow and number pads to reach the mouse on the right. My
mouse is just alongside the left of the keyboard for a short hop. With
the mouse on the left, and more straight forward, it's easier to see
while still focused on the screen than a mouse on the right that is much
farther out.

To each their own.

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 21/03/2022 15:51, VanguardLH wrote:
> >
> > Even for a well-trained
> > QWERTY touch typist, everyone of those key combos you mention require me
> > to take my eyes off the screen to look down at the keyboard, because my
> > index fingers would no longer be on the home keys as anchors for touch
> > typing.
>
> I'm not a well-trained touch typist, but most of keystrokes either don't
> require me to look away from the screen, or else I'd have to look away
> from the screen anyway to move my hand over to work the mouse
> alternative, so not really an argument. I learnt those key combinations
> for one reason and one reason only, they're quicker, sometimes
> significantly so.

Indeed. It's often worth one's while to learn key combinations for
operations which one uses frequently, or which are rather awkward with a
'mouse'.

Insisting on either 'mouse' or keyboard is silly. They both have
their uses and advantages/disadvantages, depending on the software,
task at hand, etc., etc..

A simple example reading/browsing (new) e-mail messages in
Thunderbird's Inbox. I open the oldest/bottom message in its own message
window. When I want to go to the next/newer message, why on earth would
I grab my mouse, move to the 'Go' menu, open it, move to 'Previous'
(my messages are sorted newest first), move to 'Message' and click it,
when I can just press the 'B'(ack) key?

So while, I mostly use the 'mouse' in Thunderbird, I do the frequent/
awkward operations with the keyboard.

Moral: 'X is better than Y' is hardly ever - if ever - true/correct.

"Java Jive" <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote

| You're totally missing the point, which has nothing to do with age, but
| speed and convenience. To do what you prefer, you have to move your
| hand from the keyboard to the mouse, move the pointer to the address
| bar, and click in it, whereas pressing <Alt-D> is simply *quicker*!
|

My finger is not on the keyboard.

Except for actually writing, I do nearly all things with the
mouse. The point is ot that the world must do as you say.
The point is that people have their own preferences, and
it's not for you to say they can't or shouldn't. Welcome to
the outside world, Gramps. :)

"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:qqv4t95bemyh$.dlg@v.nguard.lh...
| Java Jive wrote:
| | > VanguardLH wrote:
| >
| >> Even for a well-trained
| >> QWERTY touch typist, everyone of those key combos you mention require
me
| >> to take my eyes off the screen to look down at the keyboard,

| My mouse is along the left edge of my keyboard, not some distance away.

I've actually used a trackball for many years. So my arm is
typically resting on my chair's armrest, with my hand on the
trackball. Less shoulder tension that way. I typically only
lift it when I actually need to write something. Folder and file
operations, browsing online, graphic editing... those are all done
while sitting back with my hand on the trackball.

| To each their own.

Praise the Lord!

"Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote

| A simple example reading/browsing (new) e-mail messages in
| Thunderbird's Inbox. I open the oldest/bottom message in its own message
| window. When I want to go to the next/newer message, why on earth would
| I grab my mouse, move to the 'Go' menu, open it, move to 'Previous'
| (my messages are sorted newest first), move to 'Message' and click it,
| when I can just press the 'B'(ack) key?
|

In all these years I've never noticed the Go menu.
I go to Get Messages and check email for my various
addresses. If there's new mail I click that account to show
that message list. Then I doubleclick each bolded (new)
message in turn, reading it in a popup window. There's
never any reason for my hand to leave my trackball.

Before you tell people they're doing it wrong it might
make sense to understand how they're doing it. This is
a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
to GUI.

Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> "Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote
>
> | A simple example reading/browsing (new) e-mail messages in
> | Thunderbird's Inbox. I open the oldest/bottom message in its own message
> | window. When I want to go to the next/newer message, why on earth would
> | I grab my mouse, move to the 'Go' menu, open it, move to 'Previous'
> | (my messages are sorted newest first), move to 'Message' and click it,
> | when I can just press the 'B'(ack) key?
> |
>
> In all these years I've never noticed the Go menu.
> I go to Get Messages and check email for my various
> addresses. If there's new mail I click that account to show
> that message list. Then I doubleclick each bolded (new)
> message in turn, reading it in a popup window. There's
> never any reason for my hand to leave my trackball.

That's another example of different strokes for different folks. That
method is convenient for you because you use a trackball and probably a
large screen. I use a touchpad and a 15.6" laptop screen. If I use your
method, my popup window hides the message list or is off center, which
both are inconvenient. So you use what's best for you and I use what's
best for me.

BTW, you have to close each message window after reading a message,
don't you? (My method uses the same window for the next message.)

> Before you tell people they're doing it wrong it might
> make sense to understand how they're doing it.

Before you put words in people's mouth it might make sense to read
what they *actually* said.

> This is
> a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
> in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
> learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
> works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
> used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
> to GUI.

Don't pretend to know what people did/do and why! It's presumptious
and most of the time wrong.

In my case, it's also wrong. I already used GUIs (yes, also with
trackballs) before (Microsoft) Windows even existed and my first private
computer came with Windows (1.0). So there you go! I'm just not so
closed-minded that I *have* to use one or the other.

On 22/03/2022 12:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>
>> This is
>> a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
>> in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
>> learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
>> works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
>> used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
>> to GUI.
>
> Don't pretend to know what people did/do and why! It's presumptious
> and most of the time wrong.

+1

Age has SFA to do with it. Contrary to another of Mayayana's bigoted
assumptions up thread, I spent a number of years in frontline support,
and have never observed a tendency for older people not to be able to
use a mouse, though I have noticed an opposite tendency for people who
have only ever used a GUI to struggle when it comes to using a command-line.

The reason I bother still to learn what may seem to others as obscure
new keystroke combinations is that they can save a lot of time in the
long run.

To take up your other example, why, when using Thunderbird, would I
bother to move my hand over to my mouse, scroll down a list of posts in
a newsgroup - most of which I've already read - to find the next
unread one, and click on that to read it, when simply typing 'N' brings
up the next unread newsgroup post and displays it in the bottom frame?
The worst that can happen is that the next unread mail is in another ng,
so I have to confirm at the prompt thrown up that I want to go to that
ng. My only gripe is that 'N' doesn't work when the parent server is
selected in the LH navigation window, surely something of an oversight!

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 22/03/2022 01:58, Mayayana wrote:
>
> "Java Jive" <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote
>>
> | You're totally missing the point, which has nothing to do with age, but
> | speed and convenience. To do what you prefer, you have to move your
> | hand from the keyboard to the mouse, move the pointer to the address
> | bar, and click in it, whereas pressing <Alt-D> is simply *quicker*!
> |
>
> My finger is not on the keyboard.

So you are using voice recognition software to write this?

> Except for actually writing, I do nearly all things with the
> mouse.

Ah! No you aren't using voice recognition, so your fingers *are* on the
keyboard, and yet here in this same thread replying to someone
discussing Thunderbird, a program the very purpose of which is to write
stuff, you still make the same bigoted assumption that I and others who
have found a quicker way to do some things must be old farts who have
never learnt to use a mouse properly.

I wonder just how in your bigoted world view having cleaned up hundreds
of photos from my family's albums in Paint Shop Pro squares with not
being able to use a mouse properly?

> The point is ot that the world must do as you say.

The point is also not that everyone who does things differently from you
must be somehow incompetent and old.

> The point is that people have their own preferences, and
> it's not for you to say they can't or shouldn't.

I never said anything about should or shouldn't, I said using the
keyboard is often quicker, sometimes significantly so, and you have said
nothing worthwhile and convincing in reply to suggest otherwise.

> Welcome to
> the outside world, Gramps. :)

Arsehole.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

"Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote

| > In all these years I've never noticed the Go menu.
| > I go to Get Messages and check email for my various
| > addresses. If there's new mail I click that account to show
| > that message list. Then I doubleclick each bolded (new)
| > message in turn, reading it in a popup window. There's
| > never any reason for my hand to leave my trackball.
| | That's another example of different strokes for different folks. That
| method is convenient for you because you use a trackball and probably a
| large screen. I use a touchpad and a 15.6" laptop screen. If I use your
| method, my popup window hides the message list or is off center, which
| both are inconvenient. So you use what's best for you and I use what's
| best for me.
|

You can still use a mouse wiith a laptop. I would never
use a touchpad. It's a design for survival, not function.
But yes, the window I'm reading pops up in front of the
messages. So what? I'm reading an email. Why do I
need to see the message list? when I'm done I'll click the X
in the top right of the message popup. Or I can also toggle
the "Message Pane" button under the menu... All with
the mouse. I don't do any differently with a laptop.

| BTW, you have to close each message window after reading a message,
| don't you? (My method uses the same window for the next message.)
|

I don't see any
problem with your method. It's like the way I look up my
paper list of phone numbers rather than program them into
my landline. I'm used to that method. I've never entirely
got used to looking up a number on the phone. Not a problem.
But if I then went to great lengths to rationalize how my
method is better than yours... well, I'd be like you! My method
is not better. I have to go find my phone # list when I want
to make a call.

You really just haven't learned a mouse/GUI optimized
computer. That's OK. But it's not heroic to struggle on with
keyboard shortcuts. It's just comfortable habit.

| > This is
| > a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
| > in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
| > learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
| > works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
| > used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
| > to GUI.
| | Don't pretend to know what people did/do and why! It's presumptious
| and most of the time wrong.
|

I know what and why because you told me. You detailed
a very awkward, roundabout method that you thought you'd
have to use to read an email if you didn't use keyboard. That
tells me that you really don't know how to use a mouse to
best advantage. Of course you sometimes use a mouse. But
you're using it as someone who sees the computer as a
keyboard-based system. You haven't updated to the ubiquity
of click, double-click, drag/drop, etc.

"Java Jive" <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote

| > My finger is not on the keyboard.
| | So you are using voice recognition software to write this?
| | > Except for actually writing, I do nearly all things with the
| > mouse.
| | Ah! No you aren't using voice recognition, so your fingers *are* on the
| keyboard

You're not understanding how it works to primarily use
mouse. I read two emails before coming here. Then I
read some posts here. Next I'll go read the news. Answering
posts, as I'm doing now, is the only part of that where I'll
be using the keyboard. So I'll be sitting back, elbow on
armrest, hand on trackball, and often with one foot up,
off to the side, to stretch my back muscles.

You don't get that because you're assuming people have
to use the keyboard to use the computer. You're a keyboard
user who uses a mouse when necessary. I'm the opposite.
I use keyboard only when mouse can't do it.

In your original post you told me to use Alt+D to show the file
path in Win10 Explorer. It turned out that all I needed to do
was to click that text field. Apparently you didn't know that.
You've gone to great lengths to learn obscure key combinations
because you don't see the modern GUI as a mouse-oriented system.

You're using it like a blind person -- deftly but with unnecessary
effort. I used to have a blind friend. It was only when I helped
him that I realized there were keyboard equivalents for nearly
everything. I'd never needed to learn that. My friend could do
almost anything quickly, though not all software is keyboard-
friendly. Those skinned music players are a pain because the
controls are not windowed. The software just measures the
location when a click happens in order to determine what the
person clicked. Ironically, one of the worst problems for him was
a website that provvides free audio for the blind. Each item in
the webpage had a dropdown menu to choose format, but arrowing
down the menu didn't work. So he couldn't download the audio
without help!

On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 at 16:58:00, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
>"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>
>| To navigate backward through folders, hasn't the Backspace key been the
>| go-to keyboard method for eons?
>
> Beats me. I came to computers in late '98. A mouse
>was already standard and DOS wasn't generally needed,
>so I never really learned the old-fashioned methods.
>
>
Using keyboard shortcuts is not analogous to DOS or age; sometimes
(especially if your hands are on your keyboard anyway, but _not_ *just*
in that situation) they _can_ save considerable time.

One example, for example, is when you _are_ doing something with the
mouse (such as image-related tasks), and don't want to move it.

Both UIs have their advantages - and they vary between
individuals/situations.

My most painful experience of watching a mouse-addict is when they're
filling in a web-form that has many text fields that need to be filled
in: they click in one, type the necessary text, click in the next, type,
and so on, finally clicking on the OK (or similar) button when they're
finished. Whereas using tab to move between fields and enter when
finished would be so much quicker. And I really have seen people do
that.

I'm sure you can think of equivalent cases where it'd be painful to
watch a keyboard-addict - almost certainly anything to do with image
manipulation where areas need to be marked, but _some_ text-based things
are also quicker with a mouse - selecting a block of text, for example,
_if_ you (and your mouse) are _accurate_. (I put that in because
selecting one too many/few lines/characters, and then correcting it,
_can_ take longer than the - slower - process of doing it with the arrow
keys.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The thing about smut is it harms no one and it's rarely cruel. Besides, it's a
gleeful rejection of the dreary and the "correct".
- Alison Graham, RT 2014/10/25-31

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 at 09:23:49, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
[]
> You can still use a mouse wiith a laptop. I would never
>use a touchpad. It's a design for survival, not function.

Interesting. (By "survival", I presume you mean you think the
manufacturers thought they had to provide something to survive.)

Touchpads vs. mice has at times got as heated as mice vs. keyboards (and
probably as pointless).

When I got my first laptop with a 'pad (come to think of it, it was my
first PC-era laptop altogether), I thought I'd never get used to it - I
_think_ I used it with a mouse, and thought I'd never get on with the
'pad. But within a fairly short time, I was using the pad in preference
to the mouse, and eventually stopped plugging the latter in.

There _are_ things it's easier to do with a mouse (some almost
impossible to do with a 'pad). Conversely, there are some things a 'pad
does better. (Some of this may depend on how well your fingers work.
[This is not a criticism of anyone.]) I like tap-hold for click, for
example, and miss it when using a mouse.

Your situation - layout - may also affect what's convenient. For
example, I'm sitting on my sofa, laptop to my left on the sofa, external
keyboard on my lap (same would apply if I had laptop actually on my lap
using its own keyboard) - nowhere convenient to _put_ a mouse. If you
are using a laptop on a desk, with mousemat beside, things are
different.
[]
> I don't see any
>problem with your method. It's like the way I look up my
>paper list of phone numbers rather than program them into
>my landline. I'm used to that method. I've never entirely
>got used to looking up a number on the phone. Not a problem.
>But if I then went to great lengths to rationalize how my
>method is better than yours... well, I'd be like you! My method
>is not better. I have to go find my phone # list when I want
>to make a call.

Now that shows you as sensible, and acknowledging we all have ways that
suit us better ...
>
> You really just haven't learned a mouse/GUI optimized
>computer. That's OK. But it's not heroic to struggle on with
>keyboard shortcuts. It's just comfortable habit.

.... But that doesn't )-:. (Phrases like "haven't learnt" and "struggle
on" are needlessly provocative. I/we could just as easily say you
"haven't learnt" some convenient keyboard shortcuts, and are "struggling
on with the mouse.)
[]
>keyboard-based system. You haven't updated to the ubiquity
>of click, double-click, drag/drop, etc.
>
I know about, and use, all of those.
>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The thing about smut is it harms no one and it's rarely cruel. Besides, it's a
gleeful rejection of the dreary and the "correct".
- Alison Graham, RT 2014/10/25-31

Warning - general rambling. Nothing to do with original title (-:
(I thought of changing the title, but too many posts and I'd not use
exactly the same words each time!)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 at 10:35:46, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote
(my responses usually FOLLOW):
>On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 16:17:38 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[]
>>I never actually owned them, but having played with them in shops and
>>helped others with them, I thought Vista and 8 were actually backward
>>steps. (In usability - basically, hardware requirement - for Vista, and
>>UI for 8.)
>
>
>
>I agree with you about 8 (note that I said "with an occasional
>exception"; that's the main exception to me), but not about Vista.
>Yes, I know that many people share your view about Vista, but I never
>had any problems with it.
>
I don't think Vista was in the shops long enough for me to play with it
there much (I think 7 came along quite soon). My main experience with 7
was helping someone with a laptop that had been "up"graded to it, so the
extra hardware demands made it very slow. Arguably, that wasn't Vista's
fault. Other than the painful slowness, I didn't see any real _problem_
with it - though little _advantage_ either.
[]
>>>Yes. But it was easy to go back to what was much like the old GUI
>>>using Start 8 or something similar.
>>>
>>Which many called "stardate" of course (-:
>
>
>Interesting. I had never seen or heard it called that.
>
I think the overlap between trekkies and computer users is quite large
(-:
[]
>My wife has Classic Shell on her machine, running 10. No problems. I
>offered to upgrade her to Start 10, but she didn't want me to.
>
Maybe I'll put CS on my friend's 10 machine next time I visit. Almost
certainly not, though, as she's probably learnt 10 by now (OK, with the
OS start menu, but she doesn't use the start menu much anyway, I think),
and it's probably better in the long run for her to learn that as
anything future (such as 11) is going to be more like 10 than anything
earlier. (She's blind, by the way.)
[]
>>>I never did. I preferred the new task bar which was sort of a
>>>combination task bar/quick launch bar.
>>>
>>I think you're referring to "pinning" things to the task bar.
>
>
>Yes.
>
>
>>I use both
>>- I have a quick-launch bar because it has tiny icons, so I can get more
>>of them in,
>
>
>You can change the size of the task bar icons. I keep my task bar on
>the left side of the screen not on the bottom, and the icons are small
>and have no text, except for the running programs.

I do still have it in the conventional bottom place, though
double-height.
>
>>but I have a few things that I use a lot pinned - IIRR
>>(can't tell when they're actually open)
>
>
>As I said above, only open programs have text next to them, so it's
>easy for me to tell. Can you do that in 7? Sorry, I don't remember.
>
No, I meant when they're open, I cant tell whether they would be pinned
if they weren't open - a running pinned prog. Looks the same as a
running non-pinned one, i. e. has text next to it.
[]
>>>>- turn on file extensions and hidden files in File Explorer
[]
>>I think it might go back to 9x, or even 3.x. It was sensible - or, at

The hiding extensions, that is - not sure about hidden files. (Certainly
the _concept_ of hidden files goes back to DOS, but whether all GUIs
actually hid them by default, I'm not sure.)

>>least, understandable
>
>
>Understandable, yes. Sensible, no--not to me.
>
>>- when first introduced, as newcomers to computing
>>didn't need to see what files were
>
>
>Not showing them because newcomers didn't usually *need* to see that
>is understandable. But you never know when somebody (even a newcomer)
>might need or want to see it. In my opinion, there has never been any
>real advantage to anybody in not showing them. And there's often a
>disadvantage.
>
Well, one advantage might be screen real estate - we didn't always have
the huge monitors we do now. (Or rather huge resolutions.) [And -
another hobby-horse of mine - not everyone always works with full-screen
(maximised) windows, and it irritates me when people assume they do.]
But I certainly always show extensions, and change the system of anyone
I'm helping so that it does so, and have never had anyone complain (or,
I think, in most cases, even notice).
[]
>>Indeed. And I think OE was overly criticised: I know a lot of people
[]
>>It _did_ encourage top-posting, but
>>that's the disease of the 21st century, not unique to OE.
>
>
>My belief is that Microsoft invented (or, if not invented, defaulted
>to it in all its popular programs) top-posting and almost everyone
>else copied them. It became "the disease of the 21st century" because
>of Microsoft.
>
I did once read the suggestion that putting the cursor at the start of a
reply _wasn't_ to encourage top-posting, but interposting with snipping;
however, it sort of coincided with people starting to use email without
any guidance (or even resenting such guidance), so that's when the rot
set in. Of course also putting the signature before the quoted text
stymied that.
[]
>>Me too. Though I can see having something included is easier for
>>beginners
>
>
>Yes. That's why most beginners need help in getting them started. Many
>beginners (and alas, even some people who are not beginners) think
>they need to use whatever comes with Windows, and all third-party
>programs are not as good, dangerous, and need to be avoided. They are
>completely wrong, as far as I'm concerned.
>
Well, not _all_ third-party software is good, and - at one time - using
the MS-provided meant a _certain_ standard (of robustness in operation,
not necessarily _how_ it worked), whereas it was possible to use
third-party stuff that was _bad_ (either dangerous, overpriced, or just
did the same). Not that I wouldn't always use 3P stuff, but the beginner
needs guidance - like (a _very_ long time ago!) "nobody ever got fired
for buying IBM". [I don't know if that _ever_ was actually _true_, but
YKWIM - guidance on how to _choose_ was something people wanted.]
[]
>>>>Outlook (the Office application rather than the email domain - which bozo
>>>>decided to confuse those two things)
>>>
>>>
>>>When it comes to nomenclature, Microsoft is *terrible*.
>>>
>>Seconded. Starting (if not before that) by calling Internet Explorer and
>>File Explorer both something ending in Explorer (and not infrequently
>>using just "Explorer" to refer to them).
>
>
>Yes.
>
Not infrequently _transposing_ terms from how everyone else used them.
[]
>Alas, they've copied what Microsoft does. As far as I'm concerned, the
>registry should be used only for Windows itself. All other programs

Or at least _common_ settings shared by several.

>should have their own "registries."
>
Yes. And they should be human-readable, whatever form they take.

I think the main reason the registry took off was antipiracy efforts,
mostly by MS (though everyone else joined in when they saw it worked);
subsequently, I think not a little deliberate obfuscation was added to
the reason too (settings they don't _want_ users changing). As opposed
to DLL hell, where I think there was a genuine desire to have common
code that many could share (and thus keep sizes down - and development
time), though that broke.
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The thing about smut is it harms no one and it's rarely cruel. Besides, it's a
gleeful rejection of the dreary and the "correct".
- Alison Graham, RT 2014/10/25-31

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 at 05:57:58, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote (my
responses usually FOLLOW):
>On 3/20/2022 4:50 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 16:17:38 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>>> <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>>> I never actually owned them, but having played with them in shops
>>>>
>>>> helped others with them, I thought Vista and 8 were actually backward
>>>> steps. (In usability - basically, hardware requirement - for Vista, and
>>>> UI for 8.)
>>>
>>> I agree with you about 8 (note that I said "with an occasional
>>> exception"; that's the main exception to me), but not about Vista.
>>> Yes, I know that many people share your view about Vista, but I never
>>> had any problems with it.
>> People who had/have problems with Vista or/and 8 are wimps who
>>should
>> be forced to use - and pay for - a Mac!
>> [...]
>>
>
>"Open the Pod Bay doors, Hal"
>
>"Hal, open the Pod Bay doors."
>
>[Dave Bowman, just before he bought a Mac.]
>
> Paul

"Alexa ...

oh, and tell Bomb to get back in the bay."
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Illinc fui et illud feci, habe tunicam?

On 22/03/2022 13:43, Mayayana wrote:
>
> "Java Jive" <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote
>
> | > My finger is not on the keyboard.
> |
> | So you are using voice recognition software to write this?
> |
> | > Except for actually writing, I do nearly all things with the
> | > mouse.
> |
> | Ah! No you aren't using voice recognition, so your fingers *are* on the
> | keyboard
>
> You're not understanding how it works to primarily use
> mouse. I read two emails before coming here. Then I
> read some posts here. Next I'll go read the news. Answering
> posts, as I'm doing now, is the only part of that where I'll
> be using the keyboard. So I'll be sitting back, elbow on
> armrest, hand on trackball, and often with one foot up,
> off to the side, to stretch my back muscles.
>
> You don't get that because you're assuming people have
> to use the keyboard to use the computer. You're a keyboard
> user who uses a mouse when necessary. I'm the opposite.
> I use keyboard only when mouse can't do it.

I get that some jobs are easier with a mouse, and some easier with a
keyboard, and that is has SFA to do with age.

> In your original post you told me to use Alt+D to show the file
> path in Win10 Explorer. It turned out that all I needed to do
> was to click that text field. Apparently you didn't know that.

Again an erroneous assumption based on self-serving bigotry. Of course
I knew that, but to do it I'd have to take my hand off the keyboard,
move the mouse to the address bar and click in it, and then return my
hand to the keyboard to type something in it or to copy it, whereas
<Alt-D> can be done in a fraction of the time.

> You've gone to great lengths to learn obscure key combinations
> because you don't see the modern GUI as a mouse-oriented system.
>
> You're using it like a blind person -- deftly but with unnecessary
> effort. I used to have a blind friend. It was only when I helped
> him that I realized there were keyboard equivalents for nearly
> everything. I'd never needed to learn that. My friend could do
> almost anything quickly, though not all software is keyboard-
> friendly. Those skinned music players are a pain because the
> controls are not windowed. The software just measures the
> location when a click happens in order to determine what the
> person clicked. Ironically, one of the worst problems for him was
> a website that provvides free audio for the blind. Each item in
> the webpage had a dropdown menu to choose format, but arrowing
> down the menu didn't work. So he couldn't download the audio
> without help!

More arrogant arsehole presumptions. As others have pointed out, I
could just as well claim that you've gone to great lengths to learn how
to do things more slowly using a mouse because you've never learnt to
use a keyboard properly. As I have already said, I am by no means a
touch typist, I'm far too inaccurate for that, but nevertheless the
keystroke combinations I have learnt I have learnt precisely because
they are *quicker*, as in fewer hand and finger movements required to do
them.

One of the 'features' of recent versions of Explorer that frequently
irritates me is the broken auto scrolling of the navigation pane, so
that when you use a mouse to expand down folder levels, the pane often,
but not always, scrolls down so that the most recently selected folder
is right at the bottom, whereas most comfortably you want it at eye
level, and further when you paste a path into the address bar, the
navigation pane no longer expands that folder branch as it did in older
versions like XP, and arguably still should do. So the navigation pane
scrolls when it shouldn't and doesn't expand and scroll when it should.
This is why I learnt the keystroke I have given up thread, because I was
finding it tedious to open up each navigation pane level using the
mouse, readjusting the scroll position each time along the way.

To prove this point to yourself (for this purpose we will ignore
movements of the hand between keyboard and mouse), launch a new instance
of Explorer, and copy and paste, by all means using a mouse, the
following address into the address bar, then, using a mouse, count how
many individual hand and finger movements you have to make to open up
all the parent directories in the left hand navigation pane one by one
until you reach the bottom level, then close down that instance and
launch another, and repaste the folder address, and do <Ctrl-Shift-E> on
the keyboard. I make it a minimum of 8 mouse movement interspersed by 8
clicks, as opposed to a single keystroke combo, which does the job, but,
as explained above, the result may be off-screen, which arguably is not
quite what is required, but which if necessary can be corrected by
<Shift-Tab><Up><Down><Tab>, so at very worst case analysis that's 16 for
the mouse as opposed to just 5 with the keyboard, a third of the effort.

C:\Windows\System32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\Modules\TroubleshootingPack\en-US

Amplified over many such things during a day, I am certain that the
keystroke combinations I've learnt add up to a significant saving of
time over using a mouse.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 14:52:07 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>Warning - general rambling. Nothing to do with original title (-:
>(I thought of changing the title, but too many posts and I'd not use
>exactly the same words each time!)
>
>On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 at 10:35:46, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote
>(my responses usually FOLLOW):
>>On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 16:17:38 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>><G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>[]
>>>I never actually owned them, but having played with them in shops and
>>>helped others with them, I thought Vista and 8 were actually backward
>>>steps. (In usability - basically, hardware requirement - for Vista, and
>>>UI for 8.)
>>
>>
>>
>>I agree with you about 8 (note that I said "with an occasional
>>exception"; that's the main exception to me), but not about Vista.
>>Yes, I know that many people share your view about Vista, but I never
>>had any problems with it.
>>
>I don't think Vista was in the shops long enough for me to play with it
>there much (I think 7 came along quite soon).

Yes, I ran Vista only between the times it and 7 were released.

> My main experience with 7
>was helping someone with a laptop that had been "up"graded to it, so the
>extra hardware demands made it very slow.

I ran Vista on a new computer, so I had no such issues with it.

>Arguably, that wasn't Vista's
>fault. Other than the painful slowness, I didn't see any real _problem_
>with it - though little _advantage_ either.
>[]
>>>>Yes. But it was easy to go back to what was much like the old GUI
>>>>using Start 8 or something similar.
>>>>
>>>Which many called "stardate" of course (-:
>>
>>
>>Interesting. I had never seen or heard it called that.
>>
>I think the overlap between trekkies and computer users is quite large

Probably. I've never been a trekkie and I don't think I ever knew any,
either.

>>My wife has Classic Shell on her machine, running 10. No problems. I
>>offered to upgrade her to Start 10, but she didn't want me to.
>>
>Maybe I'll put CS on my friend's 10 machine next time I visit. Almost
>certainly not, though, as she's probably learnt 10 by now (OK, with the
>OS start menu, but she doesn't use the start menu much anyway, I think),
>and it's probably better in the long run for her to learn that as
>anything future (such as 11) is going to be more like 10 than anything
>earlier. (She's blind, by the way.)
>[]
>>>>I never did. I preferred the new task bar which was sort of a
>>>>combination task bar/quick launch bar.
>>>>
>>>I think you're referring to "pinning" things to the task bar.
>>
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>
>>>I use both
>>>- I have a quick-launch bar because it has tiny icons, so I can get more
>>>of them in,
>>
>>
>>You can change the size of the task bar icons. I keep my task bar on
>>the left side of the screen not on the bottom, and the icons are small
>>and have no text, except for the running programs.
>
>I do still have it in the conventional bottom place, though
>double-height.

Not conventional as much as the default. Most people don't even know
that it's a choice

With today's wide-screen monitors, I think having it on a side makes
much better use of screen real estate. Especially if you keep it on
the bottom double height, it takes up a lot of space.

>>>but I have a few things that I use a lot pinned - IIRR
>>>(can't tell when they're actually open)
>>
>>
>>As I said above, only open programs have text next to them, so it's
>>easy for me to tell. Can you do that in 7? Sorry, I don't remember.
>>
>No, I meant when they're open, I cant tell whether they would be pinned
>if they weren't open - a running pinned prog. Looks the same as a
>running non-pinned one, i. e. has text next to it.

OK, sorry to have misunderstood you.

>>>>>- turn on file extensions and hidden files in File Explorer
>[]
>>>I think it might go back to 9x, or even 3.x. It was sensible - or, at
>
>The hiding extensions, that is - not sure about hidden files. (Certainly
>the _concept_ of hidden files goes back to DOS, but whether all GUIs
>actually hid them by default, I'm not sure.)
>
>>>least, understandable
>>
>>
>>Understandable, yes. Sensible, no--not to me.
>>
>>>- when first introduced, as newcomers to computing
>>>didn't need to see what files were
>>
>>
>>Not showing them because newcomers didn't usually *need* to see that
>>is understandable. But you never know when somebody (even a newcomer)
>>might need or want to see it. In my opinion, there has never been any
>>real advantage to anybody in not showing them. And there's often a
>>disadvantage.
>>
>Well, one advantage might be screen real estate - we didn't always have
>the huge monitors we do now.

My first monitor was in 1987. B&W, 13".

Today I have two 24" monitors.

>(Or rather huge resolutions.)

The higher the resolution, the smaller everything is. Many people
don't realize that.

> [And -
>another hobby-horse of mine - not everyone always works with full-screen
>(maximised) windows,

I don't. I almost never maximize anything. I use overlapping
Windows--usually three on each monitor-- nearly full screen, with at
least a corner showing. I use the corners to click on to choose what
comes to the foreground.

>and it irritates me when people assume they do.]

Interesting. I don't know anyone who assumes I do.

>But I certainly always show extensions,

Me too.

>and change the system of anyone
>I'm helping so that it does so,

Me too.

>and have never had anyone complain (or,
>I think, in most cases, even notice).

Me too.

>>>Indeed. And I think OE was overly criticised: I know a lot of people
>[]
>>>It _did_ encourage top-posting, but
>>>that's the disease of the 21st century, not unique to OE.
>>
>>
>>My belief is that Microsoft invented (or, if not invented, defaulted
>>to it in all its popular programs) top-posting and almost everyone
>>else copied them. It became "the disease of the 21st century" because
>>of Microsoft.
>>
>I did once read the suggestion that putting the cursor at the start of a
>reply _wasn't_ to encourage top-posting, but interposting with snipping;

I don't believe that.

>however, it sort of coincided with people starting to use email without
>any guidance (or even resenting such guidance), so that's when the rot
>set in. Of course also putting the signature before the quoted text

And that's the reason I don't believe it. Also, every e-mail message
I've ever gotten from someone at Microsoft has been top-posted, not
interposted.

>stymied that.
[]
>>>Me too. Though I can see having something included is easier for
>>>beginners
>>
>>
>>Yes. That's why most beginners need help in getting them started. Many
>>beginners (and alas, even some people who are not beginners) think
>>they need to use whatever comes with Windows, and all third-party
>>programs are not as good, dangerous, and need to be avoided. They are
>>completely wrong, as far as I'm concerned.
>>
>Well, not _all_ third-party software is good,

No, of course not. I didn't mean to suggest that it was. It's not all
good and it's not all safe (no registry cleaner is, for example). Far
too many people use something third-party because they believe what
their ads say. But with a little research and a little trial and
error, and a little guidance, it's easy to find out what's good and
what's safe. Just don't choose something blindly.

> and - at one time - using
>the MS-provided meant a _certain_ standard (of robustness in operation,
>not necessarily _how_ it worked), whereas it was possible to use
>third-party stuff that was _bad_ (either dangerous, overpriced, or just
>did the same). Not that I wouldn't always use 3P stuff, but the beginner
>needs guidance

Yes, beginners need guidance, not just in what software they use, but
in almost everything.

I started using a PC in 1987 (an IBM XT clone, running MSDOS 3.0). I
wasn't a beginner with computers; I had 25 years of experience, but on
mainframes, so I was a beginner with PCs. I got lots of guidance from
my son, who had significant PC experience.

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 13:58:11 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 at 16:58:00, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
>wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
>>"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>>
>>| To navigate backward through folders, hasn't the Backspace key been the
>>| go-to keyboard method for eons?
>>
>> Beats me. I came to computers in late '98. A mouse
>>was already standard and DOS wasn't generally needed,
>>so I never really learned the old-fashioned methods.
>>
>>
>Using keyboard shortcuts is not analogous to DOS or age; sometimes
>(especially if your hands are on your keyboard anyway, but _not_ *just*
>in that situation) they _can_ save considerable time.

Yes sometimes. But although I remember some keyboard shortcuts, I've
forgotten others so I sometimes use the mouse when it would have been
faster to us a shortcut.

>One example, for example, is when you _are_ doing something with the
>mouse (such as image-related tasks), and don't want to move it.
>
>Both UIs have their advantages

Interesting that you say "both UIs." To me, both are part of the same,
single UI.

> - and they vary between
>individuals/situations.
>
>My most painful experience of watching a mouse-addict is when they're
>filling in a web-form that has many text fields that need to be filled
>in: they click in one, type the necessary text, click in the next, type,
>and so on, finally clicking on the OK (or similar) button when they're
>finished. Whereas using tab to move between fields and enter when
>finished would be so much quicker. And I really have seen people do
>that.

I hadn't realized you knew my wife.

>I'm sure you can think of equivalent cases where it'd be painful to
>watch a keyboard-addict - almost certainly anything to do with image
>manipulation where areas need to be marked, but _some_ text-based things
>are also quicker with a mouse - selecting a block of text, for example,
>_if_ you (and your mouse) are _accurate_. (I put that in because
>selecting one too many/few lines/characters, and then correcting it,
>_can_ take longer than the - slower - process of doing it with the arrow
>keys.)

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 at 09:32:05, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote
(my responses usually FOLLOW):
>On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 14:52:07 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[]
>>I think the overlap between trekkies and computer users is quite large
>
>
>
>Probably. I've never been a trekkie and I don't think I ever knew any,
>either.
>
It was a pleasant form of escapism for many of us (-:
[]
>>I do still have it in the conventional bottom place, though
>>double-height.
>
>
>Not conventional as much as the default. Most people don't even know
>that it's a choice
>
>With today's wide-screen monitors, I think having it on a side makes
>much better use of screen real estate. Especially if you keep it on
>the bottom double height, it takes up a lot of space.
>
Agreed. Of course, I think shortscreen is another Bad Move; when it was
introduced, I think very few people actually watched movies on their PCs
(which I think was the main reason given for it); for general-purpose
computing, 4:3 is much better suited (and for word-processing, even
3:4). But it came in, and we're stuck with it.

Yes, side _would_ be better. I just can't get used to it.
[]
>>the huge monitors we do now.
>
>
>My first monitor was in 1987. B&W, 13".
>
>Today I have two 24" monitors.
>
>
>>(Or rather huge resolutions.)
>
>
>The higher the resolution, the smaller everything is. Many people
>don't realize that.
>
I do; I just added that qualifier in case any phone-addict pops up.
>
>> [And -
>>another hobby-horse of mine - not everyone always works with full-screen
>>(maximised) windows,
>
>
>I don't. I almost never maximize anything. I use overlapping
>Windows--usually three on each monitor-- nearly full screen, with at
>least a corner showing. I use the corners to click on to choose what
>comes to the foreground.
>
>
>>and it irritates me when people assume they do.]
>
>
>Interesting. I don't know anyone who assumes I do.
>
Web-page designers are the worst these days. HTML _intrinsically_
auto-wraps, so it takes deliberate action to turn it off - but they do.
And general age layout generally assumes you have a huge display - OK, I
suppose it isn't _actually_ assuming you are operating full-screen, but
the assumption you are viewing their page in a big window often
_implies_ it. I was mainly talking about programmers when I said that -
web-page design is a form of programming, but other software too -
often, various parts of the screen (such as some control buttons) aren't
visible if you don't operate maximised, not infrequently without it
being obvious.
[]
>And that's the reason I don't believe it. Also, every e-mail message
>I've ever gotten from someone at Microsoft has been top-posted, not
>interposted.
>
Interposting - and snipping generally - is a fast-disappearing skill.
(Top=posting encourages both of those, of course.)
[]
>>Well, not _all_ third-party software is good,
[]
>No, of course not. I didn't mean to suggest that it was. It's not all
>good and it's not all safe (no registry cleaner is, for example). Far
>too many people use something third-party because they believe what
>their ads say. But with a little research and a little trial and
>error, and a little guidance, it's easy to find out what's good and
>what's safe. Just don't choose something blindly.
>
Many people aren't _capable_ of that sort of research. This is not a
criticism of them: it just requires a certain type of mind, which you
and I have. Such people have skills we don't.
[]
>Yes, beginners need guidance, not just in what software they use, but
>in almost everything.

As in most aspects of life (-:
[]
>DEE-OH-ESS in those days. When I started with PCs and DOS was always
>pronounced DOSS, it sounded weird to me.
>
These days it can also mean a denial-of-service (attack), of course.
[]
>On my last job before I retired, for a while I was in charge of
>personal computers and support for them. My boss insisted that I buy
>nothing but IBM PS/2s. Why? I didn't know for sure, but I suspected
>that he got a kickback from our IBM salesman.
>
I know nothing about the PS/2 other than that it originated a connector
used for the keyboard and mouse for quite a while.
[]
>>I think the main reason the registry took off was antipiracy efforts,
>>mostly by MS
>
>
>Maybe. I had never thought about that before.
>
It may have just been coincidence. The move towards the registry and
away from .ini files (and similar) _coincided_, to me, with the
tightening of antipiracy measures, but may not have been _connected_.
[]
>Fortunately, not everyone. There are still a few programs that have
>their own configuration files.
>
Yes, but it's sufficient of an exception that it's always a nice
surprise when I discover it.
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the
presence of those who think they've found it. TERRY PRATCHETT

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:35:43 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>On 22/03/2022 12:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>> Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is
>>> a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
>>> in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
>>> learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
>>> works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
>>> used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
>>> to GUI.
>>
>> Don't pretend to know what people did/do and why! It's presumptious
>> and most of the time wrong.
>
>+1
>
>Age has SFA to do with it

I give up. What does "SFA" stand for? A quick search didn't find it.

>Contrary to another of Mayayana's bigoted
>assumptions up thread, I spent a number of years in frontline support,
>and have never observed a tendency for older people not to be able to
>use a mouse,

"Tendency" might be too strong a word, but I've know several older
people who didn't use it if they could avoid it.

> though I have noticed an opposite tendency for people who
>have only ever used a GUI to struggle when it comes to using a command-line.
>
>The reason I bother still to learn what may seem to others as obscure
>new keystroke combinations is that they can save a lot of time in the
>long run.
>
>To take up your other example, why, when using Thunderbird, would I
>bother to move my hand over to my mouse, scroll down a list of posts in
>a newsgroup - most of which I've already read - to find the next
>unread one, and click on that to read it, when simply typing 'N' brings
>up the next unread newsgroup post and displays it in the bottom frame?
>The worst that can happen is that the next unread mail is in another ng,
>so I have to confirm at the prompt thrown up that I want to go to that
>ng. My only gripe is that 'N' doesn't work when the parent server is
>selected in the LH navigation window, surely something of an oversight!

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:28:51 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 at 09:32:05, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote
>(my responses usually FOLLOW):
>>On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 14:52:07 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>><G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>[]
>>>I think the overlap between trekkies and computer users is quite large
>>
>>
>>
>>Probably. I've never been a trekkie and I don't think I ever knew any,
>>either.
>>
>It was a pleasant form of escapism for many of us (-:
>[]
>>>I do still have it in the conventional bottom place, though
>>>double-height.
>>
>>
>>Not conventional as much as the default. Most people don't even know
>>that it's a choice
>>
>>With today's wide-screen monitors, I think having it on a side makes
>>much better use of screen real estate. Especially if you keep it on
>>the bottom double height, it takes up a lot of space.
>>
>Agreed. Of course, I think shortscreen is another Bad Move; when it was
>introduced, I think very few people actually watched movies on their PCs
>(which I think was the main reason given for it); for general-purpose
>computing, 4:3 is much better suited (and for word-processing, even
>3:4). But it came in, and we're stuck with it.
>
>Yes, side _would_ be better. I just can't get used to it.

Yes, you could. :-) Just change it and you'll be used to it in a
couple of days.

>[]
>>>the huge monitors we do now.
>>
>>
>>My first monitor was in 1987. B&W, 13".
>>
>>Today I have two 24" monitors.
>>
>>
>>>(Or rather huge resolutions.)
>>
>>
>>The higher the resolution, the smaller everything is. Many people
>>don't realize that.
>>
>I do;

I was sure you did. I mentioned that only for someone else who read
what you wrote and might misinterpret it.

>I just added that qualifier in case any phone-addict pops up.
>>
>>> [And -
>>>another hobby-horse of mine - not everyone always works with full-screen
>>>(maximised) windows,
>>
>>
>>I don't. I almost never maximize anything. I use overlapping
>>Windows--usually three on each monitor-- nearly full screen, with at
>>least a corner showing. I use the corners to click on to choose what
>>comes to the foreground.
>>
>>
>>>and it irritates me when people assume they do.]
>>
>>
>>Interesting. I don't know anyone who assumes I do.
>>
>Web-page designers are the worst these days. HTML _intrinsically_
>auto-wraps, so it takes deliberate action to turn it off - but they do.
>And general age layout generally assumes you have a huge display - OK, I
>suppose it isn't _actually_ assuming you are operating full-screen, but
>the assumption you are viewing their page in a big window often
>_implies_ it. I was mainly talking about programmers when I said that -
>web-page design is a form of programming, but other software too -
>often, various parts of the screen (such as some control buttons) aren't
>visible if you don't operate maximised, not infrequently without it
>being obvious.
>[]
>>And that's the reason I don't believe it. Also, every e-mail message
>>I've ever gotten from someone at Microsoft has been top-posted, not
>>interposted.
>>
>Interposting - and snipping generally - is a fast-disappearing skill.
>(Top=posting encourages both of those, of course.)

Yes, and yes.

>>>Well, not _all_ third-party software is good,
>[]
>>No, of course not. I didn't mean to suggest that it was. It's not all
>>good and it's not all safe (no registry cleaner is, for example). Far
>>too many people use something third-party because they believe what
>>their ads say. But with a little research and a little trial and
>>error, and a little guidance, it's easy to find out what's good and
>>what's safe. Just don't choose something blindly.
>>
>Many people aren't _capable_ of that sort of research.

Then they need some guidance.

>This is not a
>criticism of them: it just requires a certain type of mind, which you
>and I have. Such people have skills we don't.
>[]
>>Yes, beginners need guidance, not just in what software they use, but
>>in almost everything.
>
>As in most aspects of life (-:
>[]
>>DEE-OH-ESS in those days. When I started with PCs and DOS was always
>>pronounced DOSS, it sounded weird to me.
>>
>These days it can also mean a denial-of-service (attack), of course.
>[]
>>On my last job before I retired, for a while I was in charge of
>>personal computers and support for them. My boss insisted that I buy
>>nothing but IBM PS/2s. Why? I didn't know for sure, but I suspected
>>that he got a kickback from our IBM salesman.
>>
>I know nothing about the PS/2 other than that it originated a connector
>used for the keyboard and mouse for quite a while.
>[]
>>>I think the main reason the registry took off was antipiracy efforts,
>>>mostly by MS
>>
>>
>>Maybe. I had never thought about that before.
>>
>It may have just been coincidence. The move towards the registry and
>away from .ini files (and similar) _coincided_, to me, with the
>tightening of antipiracy measures, but may not have been _connected_.
>[]
>>Fortunately, not everyone. There are still a few programs that have
>>their own configuration files.
>>
>Yes, but it's sufficient of an exception that it's always a nice
>surprise when I discover it.
>[]

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

On 22/03/2022 19:53, Ken Blake wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:35:43 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 22/03/2022 12:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>
>>> Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is
>>>> a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
>>>> in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
>>>> learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
>>>> works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
>>>> used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
>>>> to GUI.
>>>
>>> Don't pretend to know what people did/do and why! It's presumptious
>>> and most of the time wrong.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Age has SFA to do with it
>
> I give up. What does "SFA" stand for? A quick search didn't find it.

SFA = Sweet Fanny Adams = Sweet Fuck All!

Sorry I thought every native English speaker knew that.

>> Contrary to another of Mayayana's bigoted
>> assumptions up thread, I spent a number of years in frontline support,
>> and have never observed a tendency for older people not to be able to
>> use a mouse,
>
> "Tendency" might be too strong a word, but I've know several older
> people who didn't use it if they could avoid it.

But were they any happier at using a keyboard to do tasks that would
normally be done with a mouse?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 21:02:54 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>On 22/03/2022 19:53, Ken Blake wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:35:43 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22/03/2022 12:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is
>>>>> a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
>>>>> in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
>>>>> learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
>>>>> works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
>>>>> used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
>>>>> to GUI.
>>>>
>>>> Don't pretend to know what people did/do and why! It's presumptious
>>>> and most of the time wrong.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Age has SFA to do with it
>>
>> I give up. What does "SFA" stand for? A quick search didn't find it.
>
>SFA = Sweet Fanny Adams = Sweet Fuck All!
>
>Sorry I thought every native English speaker knew that.

Nope, not me. I've never heard "Sweet Fanny Adams," and although I've
heard "Fuck All" (mostly by Brits, not USAns), I've never heard "Sweet
Fuck All."

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

Ken Blake graced us with on 3/22/2022 3:54 PM:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 21:02:54 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 22/03/2022 19:53, Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:35:43 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 22/03/2022 12:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>>> Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>>>>> This is
>>>>>> a tendency I see in a lot of people who knew computers
>>>>>> in the days of DOS and keyboard. They've never entirely
>>>>>> learned to use mouse and GUI optimally. That's fine if it
>>>>>> works for you, but it's only optimal for you because you're
>>>>>> used to constant keyboarding and not fully acclimated
>>>>>> to GUI.
>>>>> Don't pretend to know what people did/do and why! It's presumptious
>>>>> and most of the time wrong.
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Age has SFA to do with it
>>> I give up. What does "SFA" stand for? A quick search didn't find it.
>> SFA = Sweet Fanny Adams = Sweet Fuck All!
>>
>> Sorry I thought every native English speaker knew that.
>
>
> Nope, not me. I've never heard "Sweet Fanny Adams," and although I've
> heard "Fuck All" (mostly by Brits, not USAns), I've never heard "Sweet
> Fuck All."
>
#WTF! :-)

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg