I was reading this week's edition of the SitePoint TechTimes and noticed a little blurb about the end of Netscape. The article goes on to say that Netscape developers will be sorely missed and alludes to the end of Mozilla development. I'd like to remind Kevin Yank about the many ex-Netscape developers who still plan to work on Mozilla in their spare time. Many of the people who worked for Netscape were very passionate about the product they produced, and though this is a set back, there are a good many developers who will not go quietly. Some of the Netscape employees were involved with Mozilla in one way or another before they got hired and I expect them to continue to do so.
Looking at the list of checkins which occured since that fateful day, I count 17 developers who were affected in one way or another and have checked in code to SeaMonkeyAll. Still more have been active in Bugzilla and/or IRC by doing either code reviews or providing thoughtful comments to bugs.
Yes, we will miss Netscape as a company, and we grieve for and will definitely miss those who have lost their jobs. Please do not assume that Mozilla development will come to a halt, though. Don't forget that companies other than Netscape have vested interests in Mozilla's success. And Netscape the company may be dead, but Netscape will live on through what it's created, and through other contributors who are taking up the helms.
Posted by caillon at July 23, 2003 4:46 PMBut limit your animations to whatever is required to communicate the necessary information. Avoid annoying animations that discourage ease of use. Ask yourself, "What do I need to show the user, and what is the cleanest way possible to achieve that?" A good example is the Mail application for Mac OS X. Whenever a new message arrives, the Dock icon changes appearance to indicate a changed state.
Posted by: Hieronimus at January 26, 2004 10:22 AMFor example, if you see an AIM window peeking out from behind your browser and you click on it, that window will come to the front, but the main application window will not. The Mail.app/Activity Viewer is another example. The Aqua system of layers works well in many instances, but not in all. Thank goodness that the Dock is always there to come to the rescue. I know that clicking on an application icon in the Dock will always result in not only the application coming to the front, but also any non-minimized windows associated with it. And if the application is active but no windows are open, clicking on the Dock icon should create a new window in that application.
Posted by: Joyce at January 26, 2004 10:22 AMNot quite as entertaining as Shrek, but Dock animation can be an important and useful function in your application. For example, Dock animation is a helpful way to indicate the status of your application.
Posted by: Sampson at January 26, 2004 10:23 AMIf an application is designed well, the reward for users is that they will learn it faster, accomplish their daily tasks more easily, and have fewer questions for the help desk. As a developer of a well-designed application, your returns on that investment are more upgrade revenue, reduced tech support, better reviews, less documentation, and higher customer satisfaction. The rewards of building a good-looking Aqua application are worth taking the extra time.
Posted by: John at January 26, 2004 10:23 AMOkay, I just told you what Apple wants you to look out for with window positions, but in the real world, not everyone uses the hiding feature of the Dock, and it is unrealistic to be able to predict where each user will place their Dock at any given day or how large they will have it. However, you can build a feature into your application that allows spacing for the Finder. You can give users the option of where to position their windows and what area of the screen not to cross. I know that BBEdit provides me with this feature, and I wish more developers gave me more control over my windows.
Posted by: Hercules at January 26, 2004 10:23 AMBut limit your animations to whatever is required to communicate the necessary information. Avoid annoying animations that discourage ease of use. Ask yourself, "What do I need to show the user, and what is the cleanest way possible to achieve that?" A good example is the Mail application for Mac OS X. Whenever a new message arrives, the Dock icon changes appearance to indicate a changed state.
Posted by: Archilai at January 26, 2004 10:24 AMUser Assistance. This is helping the user with the proper "next step" when performing a task. Less guesswork for the user on what to do next makes for a better experience.
Posted by: Jucentius at January 26, 2004 10:25 AMAdhere to Window Models. Document windows, Utility windows, Click-through, Layering, Drawers, Controls. How do users open windows, how do you properly title windows?
Posted by: Elizabeth at January 26, 2004 10:26 AMAdhere to Window Models. Document windows, Utility windows, Click-through, Layering, Drawers, Controls. How do users open windows, how do you properly title windows?
Posted by: Tabitha at January 26, 2004 10:26 AMFor example, if you see an AIM window peeking out from behind your browser and you click on it, that window will come to the front, but the main application window will not. The Mail.app/Activity Viewer is another example. The Aqua system of layers works well in many instances, but not in all. Thank goodness that the Dock is always there to come to the rescue. I know that clicking on an application icon in the Dock will always result in not only the application coming to the front, but also any non-minimized windows associated with it. And if the application is active but no windows are open, clicking on the Dock icon should create a new window in that application.
Posted by: Matilda at January 26, 2004 10:26 AM