![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Grrrrrrrrr. Design issues....
I really, really, really get annoyed when a user interface has a screwup, especially if it's an obvious, bad screwup, that the user can't dodge. This is not to say that the UI work I do is perfect - I've had some of it bite me, yes. We all screw up. But I don't think I've ever committed what I'd label a UI "atrocity".
Here's one that is stupid but is not an atrocity: In Windows XP, if you use the XP-style start menu, you can "pin" items to the start menu, putting them in a list at the upper left - above your most frequently used programs. If you uninstall one of those items, or upgrade it in such a way as to break the link (which happens way too often), the icon goes to blank, just like any other dead shortcut. So far, fair enough. So, you right-click and select "Unpin from Start Menu" since it's useless, right? Well, have fun if you do. It tells you the link is bad and does nothing. Grrr. However, this is not quite an atrocity because, if you simply run it, it gives you the same error but then follows up by asking if you want to remove it from the list.
Here's one that is an atrocity (and which I'm heartily sick of). On my IBM Thinkpad, I have a "Fn" (function) key. It sites next to the left control key, under the shift key. Fine by me. But, Fn-F4 puts the computer in "standby" mode - and there's no "do you want to do this?" dialog given. Meanwhile, ctrl-F4 is used to close a child window (alt-F4 closes a parent window). Um. Folks? "Standby" and "close one of the subwindows of this program" are WILDLY different functions in effect and scope, and putting them side-by-side is NOT NICE. I hate standby. I hate it with a passion. I have no use for it. Nonetheless, I put my computer on standby once or twice a month, trying to close out sub-windows (usually either mailboxes/messages in Eudora, or mush signons in SimpleMU).
The system is set never to go to standby on its own, but that doesn't stop it from doing so when I hit that key combo, of course. Does anyone know any way to set it so Windows will never, ever, EVER do that again?
Here's one that is stupid but is not an atrocity: In Windows XP, if you use the XP-style start menu, you can "pin" items to the start menu, putting them in a list at the upper left - above your most frequently used programs. If you uninstall one of those items, or upgrade it in such a way as to break the link (which happens way too often), the icon goes to blank, just like any other dead shortcut. So far, fair enough. So, you right-click and select "Unpin from Start Menu" since it's useless, right? Well, have fun if you do. It tells you the link is bad and does nothing. Grrr. However, this is not quite an atrocity because, if you simply run it, it gives you the same error but then follows up by asking if you want to remove it from the list.
Here's one that is an atrocity (and which I'm heartily sick of). On my IBM Thinkpad, I have a "Fn" (function) key. It sites next to the left control key, under the shift key. Fine by me. But, Fn-F4 puts the computer in "standby" mode - and there's no "do you want to do this?" dialog given. Meanwhile, ctrl-F4 is used to close a child window (alt-F4 closes a parent window). Um. Folks? "Standby" and "close one of the subwindows of this program" are WILDLY different functions in effect and scope, and putting them side-by-side is NOT NICE. I hate standby. I hate it with a passion. I have no use for it. Nonetheless, I put my computer on standby once or twice a month, trying to close out sub-windows (usually either mailboxes/messages in Eudora, or mush signons in SimpleMU).
The system is set never to go to standby on its own, but that doesn't stop it from doing so when I hit that key combo, of course. Does anyone know any way to set it so Windows will never, ever, EVER do that again?