On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 10:43 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On a busy X session (I typically have 30-40+ windows open) > > not having a blinking cursor is crazy. > > The problem with your arguments is that you call something "crazy" > without explaining *what* would be crazy about it. But do you think it matters? Look: if a proposal is forwarded to change dubious defaults you are told to come back with a rigorous scientific usability study showing X and Y. Knowing full well that's pretty much impossible. Even claiming that 90%+ of computer users use Windows is qualified as unsupported numbers and hand-waving. However, if someone from Red Hat wakes up one morning and decides to change a default that will affect _everybody_ using a computer, they do it without a moment's notice. And we are supposed to swallow it as such because someone came up with a *totally* unsupported number of trees saved(1). > Only one out of your 30-40+ windows would be active/selected and > highlighted with different window border colours. The blinking caret will not help you much to identify the window, for that you have other clues. But in a typical editor window in X (like Eclipse, Write, etc) where there is a lot of information on the screen and the caret can be anywhere (it's not constrained like in a terminal) it can be quite helpful for some people. We are making these kind of changes driven by political motivation (2) rather than technical merit (3). This is bad. ---- 1. In fact, it's so unsupported that even when asked politely to explain how in good $DEITY name they come up with it they didn't bother. 2. Yes, it's political, based on the incorrect assumption that we're gonna save trees. 3. There have been a weak attempt to dress it in a technical argument, but it can't stand to any serious review/discussion. However, this doesn't seem to interest anybody. -- Dimi Paun <dimi@xxxxxxxxxxx> Lattica, Inc. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
