From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] p9 mice From: Charles Forsyth In-Reply-To: <20040415160910.428e5351.martin@parvat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:59:43 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5c628f7c-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 >>Charles' contribution implies that the answer might be "no". Which >>would be a perfectly reasonable answer to my question! it was not so much the answer was `no' -- obviously you could use the increasingly extensive selection of function keys or an emacs-style richard-the-third scheme-- but the acme interface is clean and pleasantly uncluttered as it is, thanks. also, that i'm more interested in how other interfaces might benefit from more of the same, or in what other ways might an interface be given different `feel' (that does some good)? acme is suggestive of some possibilities for `a user interface for programmers'. (at last.) is there a potential `user interface for end-users that want to get their work done' that doesn't patronise the poor sods or limit them with cruddy `metaphors'? bouncy globes indeed.