12 Apr
2007
12 Apr
'07
8:25 a.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 11 Apr 2007 at 23:07, Joost van de Griek wrote:
Maybe we are, but I hardly think that's relevant.
On 4/11/07 9:35 PM, Chris M wrote:
Excuse me, but we're talking about two different things, aren't we?
Or is my age showing again? I really don't think it's realistic to
operate a modern computer w/a
non-windowed environment these days. Many will disagree, and that's their
prerogative, someone said something about eye-candy, but I think it comes down
to cheating yourself of functionality.
You give up some functionality, gain other functionality. Like almost
everything, a GUI is a trade-off. Unless I've got my wires crossed (again),
"windowing" and "GUI" have
very little to do with another. That is, you can have text-mode
winodws and windowless graphics, no?
A windowed environment is a GUI, yes?
So what's meant here?
What's meant here is that the Chris M has a point: you *do* cheat yourself of some
functionality when using a non-windowed environment "these days". However, you
also cheat yourself of functionality exactly by using a windows environment. There
are things that are much more efficient if you don't have to wrestle the
point-and-click interface. Look at *real* power users, even on windowed systems.
They hardly touch the mouse. It's all keyboard shortcuts, and it's *way* faster.
The downside is having to master all those cryptic gestures and key combinations.
,xtG
tsooJ