Another New Trick Under Windows 7/8

In ,
Char Jackson typed:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:14:07 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

On 1/21/2014 1:16 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 05:19:26 -0600, wrote:

On 1/19/2014 8:58 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 13:32:52 -0600,
wrote: I've always been able to focus on the thing that I'm
working on. It doesn't bother me a bit to have pieces of other
windows partially showing behind the active window. I don't 'see'
that while I'm working. (Wolf K. probably knows what I mean by
that.)

I don't get confused with tons of windows opened. Its that I like
tons of desktop real estate. And virtual desktops is a very
practical way of getting an unlimited amount of it. And some
applications are better with the window using as much space as you
can get. Things like browsers, spreadsheets, drawing applications,
videos, etc.

I still don't see the advantage of virtual desktops. Using a single
desktop, I can stack as many windows as I want on top of each
other, with only the topmost window visible and able to be worked
on/in. Having to switch desktops would only slow me down.

Actually clicking on a corner window or clicking on another desktop
takes the same amount of time. So nothing lost or gained.

That may be true after you've taken the time to position your app
windows on the multiple virtual desktops, but I don't have to waste
time on that task, so I'm ahead of the game and you're behind.

Apparently you don't understand. I don't have to position anything. And
when I do things like you do (which I do when I am not running virtual
desktops), your way, say I click on my newsreader and I am also reading
posts in a second window (using two windows at the same time). Your way
I have to click twice, one to bring up the reader and a second time to
bring up the post window. Under virtual desktops, I only click once to
bring up both at the same time.

You know, I see Windows 8 having a feature called "Show Windows
Stacked" when I right click on the Taskbar. I believe I have seen
this with Windows 7 too. Is this how you arrange your windows
manually?

I'm not sure what you're implying. I don't actually "arrange" any
windows. I simply click on the app (in the Taskbar) that I want to
work on and its window pops to the top, ready for input. I don't
arrange anything, and I certainly don't waste any time putting
different apps on different virtual desktops. Computers are supposed
to make things easier, not harder.

Yes I know now how you work. You made it sound like you were clicking on
different windows to bring them up. But you are not, you are using the
taskbar. That is how I normal do things too.

And you had stated that you don't understand the advantage of virtual
desktops? Well maybe we use our computers differently. Because I see
a ton of advantages. Although when I don't have a lot of windows open
(like you) I may not have a virtual desktop running.

I don't remember saying (in this thread, anyway) how many windows I
typically have open.

I seem to remember you stating and it was something less than ten from
what I recall.

Also with MS Desktops v2, it operates differently than most other
virtual desktops. As it opens multiple Windows Shells. And one of the
benefits for me is that one can have the Aston v2 Desktop and another
has the stock Windows Desktop. Very, very cool! And with another
virtual desktop, I can have many virtual desktops within a single
virtual desktop. What a concept!

I lost my fascination with "cool concepts" when I sold my last Amiga
in about 1987. Since then, computers have become tools and very
little more. I have no time or interest in "concepts", however cool,
that only use more of my time.

Ah... I am not that way. I am curious and I need to explorer. I need to
learn everything. That is what makes live exciting. Doing otherwise
would bore me to death.
I was also one of those teenagers that installed those extra instrument
panels in my cars that told you what everything else was doing. Those
idiot lights don't tell you anything at all until it was too late. I
also use gauges to tell me what my computers are doing today.

If one prefers to minimize and restore applications, virtual
desktop is a very fast way to this. And it is great for those
pesky windows that pop up that you can't close unless you click
ok or reboot or something. And there is no need to minimize
anything. Just switch to another desktop.

I don't remember ever seeing a window that I couldn't close.

Oh I run into them now and then. The majority of them pop up and
wants your immediate attention and often is a window that is
always on top of other windows and you can't hide it.

Windows 8 has a new one like that. Although instead of a window,
it is a blue horizontal bar and the rest of the screen dims. It
stated that I had to upgrade Windows 8 to 8.1 right now. And it
wouldn't allow me to do anything else until I hit proceed or
whatever it wanted. So I was forced to start the upgrade and then
I could abort and get control of my machine back.

Mine had a "Later" button that would put it to sleep for a day or
two. I think Esc also dismisses it. Besides, that's not a 'window'.

There are lots of special key I use all of the time. For example,
this Logitech K400r has Windows 8 hotkeys. So no need to use the
mouse to do many things. But no matter what the OS version, I still
use a lot of these special feature keys. Like the later button (like
you), vol (up/down), mute, play/pause, etc.

"Later" was one of the on-screen buttons on the blue band that
reminded me to upgrade to 8.1. It's not a Windows hotkey so it's not
on your keyboard.

Oh ok, I thought you were talking about Sleep mode.

You don't use any of the Windows hotkeys? Not even Win+E or Win+R?

The only Windows hotkey that I use regularly is Win+L to lock my
workstation.

Wow! Do you even use a file manager or ever run on command at all?

I honestly have no idea how you managed to jump from "I don't use
Windows hotkeys (except one)" to "do you even use a file manager or
run a command at all"? What's the connection between those two random
things?

Ah anybody who using Windows should see the connection. Whenever I want
to launch the Explorer or run a typed in command, I use Windows hotkeys
to do it. Sure you could click on the Start button and o some more
clicking, but that takes longer.

Heck just yesterday I found an easy command to instantly pop up the
Windows 8 Send To folder "shell:sendto". Might work under Windows 7
too, I haven't checked yet.

I believe that worked with XP and may have also worked with 98. My
memory doesn't go farther back than that, but it wouldn't surprise me
if it also worked with 95.

Something that I never used and I wished I knew about it earlier.

--
Bill
Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM
Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:17:21 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:

On 1/21/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:11:10 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Char
Jackson writes:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 05:19:26 -0600, BillW50
wrote: []
Windows 8 has a new one like that. Although instead of a window,
it is a blue horizontal bar and the rest of the screen dims. It
stated that I had to upgrade Windows 8 to 8.1 right now. And it
wouldn't allow me to do anything else until I hit proceed or
whatever it wanted. So I was forced to start the upgrade and then
I could abort and get control of my machine back.

Mine had a "Later" button that would put it to sleep for a day or
two. I think Esc also dismisses it. Besides, that's not a 'window'.
[]
For practical purposes it is, in how we think of it.

Huh? In what way was that a window, and who is "we"?

IMHO, it had nothing to do with, and nothing in common with, what I
call a window.

If you ever tried Windows software development, you would be surprised
to learn what is a window...

Hint: everything.

I did software development in VB6 for about 16 months in a previous life,
but apparently that didn't count.

--

Char Jackson

On 1/22/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:17:21 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:

On 1/21/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:11:10 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Char
Jackson writes:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 05:19:26 -0600, BillW50
wrote: []
Windows 8 has a new one like that. Although instead of a window,
it is a blue horizontal bar and the rest of the screen dims. It
stated that I had to upgrade Windows 8 to 8.1 right now. And it
wouldn't allow me to do anything else until I hit proceed or
whatever it wanted. So I was forced to start the upgrade and
then I could abort and get control of my machine back.

Mine had a "Later" button that would put it to sleep for a day or
two. I think Esc also dismisses it. Besides, that's not a
'window'.
[]
For practical purposes it is, in how we think of it.
Huh? In what way was that a window, and who is "we"?
IMHO, it had nothing to do with, and nothing in common with, what I
call a window.

If you ever tried Windows software development, you would be
surprised to learn what is a window...

Hint: everything.

I did software development in VB6 for about 16 months in a previous
life, but apparently that didn't count.

It might *not* have counted, in the (rather limited) sense that a
particular terminology peculiarity might not have been emphasized :-)

In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized that
everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that window
are all considered to be windows as well. They are windows within
windows within windows...

Reminds me of a piece of music by Arvo Pärt that I dislike, called
Spiegel im Spiegel, or Mirror in the Mirror.

(I do like some other pieces by him.)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 19:11:14 -0600, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
Char Jackson typed:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:14:07 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

On 1/21/2014 1:16 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 05:19:26 -0600, wrote:

On 1/19/2014 8:58 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 13:32:52 -0600,
wrote: I've always been able to focus on the thing that I'm
working on. It doesn't bother me a bit to have pieces of other
windows partially showing behind the active window. I don't 'see'
that while I'm working. (Wolf K. probably knows what I mean by
that.)

I don't get confused with tons of windows opened. Its that I like
tons of desktop real estate. And virtual desktops is a very
practical way of getting an unlimited amount of it. And some
applications are better with the window using as much space as you
can get. Things like browsers, spreadsheets, drawing applications,
videos, etc.

I still don't see the advantage of virtual desktops. Using a single
desktop, I can stack as many windows as I want on top of each
other, with only the topmost window visible and able to be worked
on/in. Having to switch desktops would only slow me down.

Actually clicking on a corner window or clicking on another desktop
takes the same amount of time. So nothing lost or gained.

That may be true after you've taken the time to position your app
windows on the multiple virtual desktops, but I don't have to waste
time on that task, so I'm ahead of the game and you're behind.

Apparently you don't understand. I don't have to position anything. And
when I do things like you do (which I do when I am not running virtual
desktops), your way, say I click on my newsreader and I am also reading
posts in a second window (using two windows at the same time). Your way
I have to click twice, one to bring up the reader and a second time to
bring up the post window. Under virtual desktops, I only click once to
bring up both at the same time.

You're right, I don't understand. First, I don't understand how your various
apps find themselves on different virtual desktops unless someone puts them
there, and second, why do you need a separate Usenet reader and Usenet post
window?

And you had stated that you don't understand the advantage of virtual
desktops? Well maybe we use our computers differently. Because I see
a ton of advantages. Although when I don't have a lot of windows open
(like you) I may not have a virtual desktop running.

I don't remember saying (in this thread, anyway) how many windows I
typically have open.

I seem to remember you stating and it was something less than ten from
what I recall.

Probably someone else. There would typically be two times that I have less
than 10 windows open: shortly after I've rebooted and as I'm shutting down.

Also with MS Desktops v2, it operates differently than most other
virtual desktops. As it opens multiple Windows Shells. And one of the
benefits for me is that one can have the Aston v2 Desktop and another
has the stock Windows Desktop. Very, very cool! And with another
virtual desktop, I can have many virtual desktops within a single
virtual desktop. What a concept!

I lost my fascination with "cool concepts" when I sold my last Amiga
in about 1987. Since then, computers have become tools and very
little more. I have no time or interest in "concepts", however cool,
that only use more of my time.

Ah... I am not that way. I am curious and I need to explorer. I need to
learn everything. That is what makes live exciting. Doing otherwise
would bore me to death.

I'm happy for you, but you've moved the goalposts. You started by claiming
that virtual desktops were more efficient. Now that we've established that
they're not, you've moved on to being curious. Being curious is good, but
it's not where we started.

"Later" was one of the on-screen buttons on the blue band that
reminded me to upgrade to 8.1. It's not a Windows hotkey so it's not
on your keyboard.

Oh ok, I thought you were talking about Sleep mode.

Sleep mode? That doesn't even compute. Sleep mode isn't a window.

You don't use any of the Windows hotkeys? Not even Win+E or Win+R?

The only Windows hotkey that I use regularly is Win+L to lock my
workstation.

Wow! Do you even use a file manager or ever run on command at all?

I honestly have no idea how you managed to jump from "I don't use
Windows hotkeys (except one)" to "do you even use a file manager or
run a command at all"? What's the connection between those two random
things?

Ah anybody who using Windows should see the connection. Whenever I want
to launch the Explorer or run a typed in command, I use Windows hotkeys
to do it. Sure you could click on the Start button and o some more
clicking, but that takes longer.

On my systems, Windows Explorer is pinned to the Taskbar. I can launch it by
clicking on it one time, or I can press F11. How is that any less efficient
than Win+E? Who said anything about clicking the Start button and rummaging
about in the menu?

--

Char Jackson

BillW50 wrote:
In ,
Char Jackson typed:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:14:07 -0600, BillW50 wrote:

On 1/21/2014 1:16 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 05:19:26 -0600, wrote:

On 1/19/2014 8:58 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
You don't use any of the Windows hotkeys? Not even Win+E or Win+R?

The only Windows hotkey that I use regularly is Win+L to lock my
workstation.

Wow! Do you even use a file manager or ever run on command at all?

I honestly have no idea how you managed to jump from "I don't use
Windows hotkeys (except one)" to "do you even use a file manager or
run a command at all"? What's the connection between those two random
things?

He used Win+E and Win+R in the run-up to his jump, which should be a bit
of a clue.

Ah anybody who using Windows should see the connection. Whenever I want
to launch the Explorer or run a typed in command, I use Windows hotkeys
to do it. Sure you could click on the Start button and o some more
clicking, but that takes longer.

Speaking for myself, I use the mouse to launch the file manager on my PC
because it's pinned to my taskbar and invariably I'm going to be using a
mouse *in* the file manager. However on other people's PCs I go straight
to Win+E rather than trying to find a button somewhere.

For a command window it's always Win+R because I'm invariably going to
be typing *in* the the command window. Not that I do it at all many months.

--
Mike Barnes

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized that
everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that window
are all considered to be windows as well. They are windows within
windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes, drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than icons,
are not usually considered to be Windows either.

On 1/23/2014, Ken Blake posted:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized that
everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that window
are all considered to be windows as well. They are windows within
windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes, drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than
icons, are not usually considered to be Windows either.

In the old Windows development environment, they were all called and
treated as windows, so in that environment, it was consistent with the
jargon and the API to think of them as such.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized that
everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that window
are all considered to be windows as well. They are windows within
windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes, drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than icons,
are not usually considered to be Windows either.

Ditto!

--

Char Jackson

On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized
that everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well
phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that
window are all considered to be windows as well. They are windows
within windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes, drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than
icons, are not usually considered to be Windows either.

Ditto!

But you guys are civilians...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

In ,
Gene E. Bloch typed:
On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized
that everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well
phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that
window are all considered to be windows as well. They are windows
within windows within windows...

I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes, drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than
icons, are not usually considered to be Windows either.

Ditto!

But you guys are civilians...

Oops! They are not going to like hearing that one. ;-)

--
Bill
Asus EeePC 701 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows 2000 SP5 - OE6 - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2

On 1/24/2014, Gene E. Bloch posted:
On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized
that everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well
phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that
window are all considered to be windows as well. They are
windows within windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with
who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the
task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes,
drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than
icons, are not usually considered to be Windows either.

Ditto!

But you guys are civilians...

And now I'll have recourse to the horse's mouth:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...=vs.85%29.aspx

From that page, not even very far down:
"If you are new to Windows programming, it may surprise you that UI
controls, such as buttons and edit boxes, are themselves windows."

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 1/24/2014, BillW50 posted:
In ,
Gene E. Bloch typed:
On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized
that everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well
phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that
window are all considered to be windows as well. They are
windows within windows within windows...

I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with
who's using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that
statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the
task bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes,
drop-down lists, error messages, etc. although much more
window-like than icons, are not usually considered to be Windows
either.
Ditto!

But you guys are civilians...

Oops! They are not going to like hearing that one. ;-)

You are no doubt correct, but life is tough all around :-)

But this time I provided some documentation for my claim in the new
reply (to my own post) that I made just a few seconds ago :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:49:06 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:

On 1/24/2014, Gene E. Bloch posted:
On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized
that everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well
phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that
window are all considered to be windows as well. They are
windows within windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with
who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the
task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes,
drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than
icons, are not usually considered to be Windows either.

Ditto!

But you guys are civilians...

Seriously? You had to drop the C-word? ;-)


And now I'll have recourse to the horse's mouth:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...=vs.85%29.aspx

From that page, not even very far down:
"If you are new to Windows programming, it may surprise you that UI
controls, such as buttons and edit boxes, are themselves windows."

Yeah, well, what do you expect Microsoft to say? When the toolbox only
contains a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Out here in the real world, we know the difference.

--

Char Jackson

On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:49:06 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:

On 1/24/2014, Gene E. Bloch posted:
On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized
that everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well
phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that
window are all considered to be windows as well. They are
windows within windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with
who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the
task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes,
drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than
icons, are not usually considered to be Windows either.
Ditto!

But you guys are civilians...

Seriously? You had to drop the C-word? ;-)


And now I'll have recourse to the horse's mouth:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...=vs.85%29.aspx

From that page, not even very far down:
"If you are new to Windows programming, it may surprise you that UI
controls, such as buttons and edit boxes, are themselves windows."

Yeah, well, what do you expect Microsoft to say? When the toolbox
only contains a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Out here in the real world, we know the difference.

Writing code is a real activity, believe it or not.

If one didn't know how things worked, he'd have trouble writing code to
the API.

Of course, it's true that if one *did* know how things worked, he'd
*still* have trouble writing code to the API. The voice of experience
speaks :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:45:46 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:

On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:49:06 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:

On 1/24/2014, Gene E. Bloch posted:
On 1/24/2014, Char Jackson posted:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:28:50 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:39:49 -0800, Gene E. Bloch
wrote:


In the books I've used and the course I took, it was emphasized
that everything you see on screen is a window. That's not well
phrased...

What I mean is that we tend to think of that whole large object
occupying a big part of the screen as *the* window - but all the
buttons and drop-down boxes and what-have-you objects in that
window are all considered to be windows as well. They are
windows within windows within windows...


I guess, as with so many things, that terminology varies with
who's
using it. Personally, I completely disagree with that statement.

As a starter, desktop icons and icons elsewhere, such as on the
task
bar, are not Windows to me. And things like dialog boxes,
drop-down
lists, error messages, etc. although much more window-like than
icons, are not usually considered to be Windows either.
Ditto!

But you guys are civilians...

Seriously? You had to drop the C-word? ;-)


And now I'll have recourse to the horse's mouth:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...=vs.85%29.aspx

From that page, not even very far down:
"If you are new to Windows programming, it may surprise you that UI
controls, such as buttons and edit boxes, are themselves windows."

Yeah, well, what do you expect Microsoft to say? When the toolbox
only contains a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Out here in the real world, we know the difference.

Writing code is a real activity, believe it or not.

Of course I believe it! I've been playing around in that area on and off
since early 1983, although I only got paid for about an 18-month stretch in
2008-2009. The rest of the time it has only been a hobby.

If one didn't know how things worked, he'd have trouble writing code to
the API.

Of course, it's true that if one *did* know how things worked, he'd
*still* have trouble writing code to the API. The voice of experience
speaks :-)

A lot depends on how well the documented API behavior matches reality.

--

Char Jackson