Talk:IBM Common User Access: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Read the SAA/CUA? == |
|||
Has anyone here actually read the SAA/CUA? This bit about the CUA attempting to bring order to MS-DOS applications? Hello? HELLO? Who amongst here worked with a 3270? Hello? |
|||
OK, 1) get the books; 2) until then: SAA/CUA was started at IBM because they had (themselves, screw WP and 123) too many hardware and software interfaces. DUH. It was too confusing both for their client and their own staff. |
|||
The original PC had 10 F keys; later it got 12. If you've used a 3270 you'll immediately know why. And so forth. |
|||
Secondly, this bit about being inspired by Apple is just pure rubbish. If you feel it's true, then CITE IT - otherwise remove it. |
|||
Finally, the SAA/CUA - if the topic is to be given any respect at all (and it should) should be explained in terms of the 'seven principles' with a description of each. For example, the User in Control Principle and the Recognition Principle. (And someone actually thought these came from Apple - that's ludicrous.) |
|||
== CUI == |
== CUI == |
||
Mention of M$ using CUA is misleading. M$ officially broke with CUA, calling their standard CUI for 'consistent user interface', so as not to be confusing on the issue. |
Mention of M$ using CUA is misleading. M$ officially broke with CUA, calling their standard CUI for 'consistent user interface', so as not to be confusing on the issue. |
||
Revision as of 00:24, 14 January 2007
Read the SAA/CUA?
Has anyone here actually read the SAA/CUA? This bit about the CUA attempting to bring order to MS-DOS applications? Hello? HELLO? Who amongst here worked with a 3270? Hello?
OK, 1) get the books; 2) until then: SAA/CUA was started at IBM because they had (themselves, screw WP and 123) too many hardware and software interfaces. DUH. It was too confusing both for their client and their own staff.
The original PC had 10 F keys; later it got 12. If you've used a 3270 you'll immediately know why. And so forth.
Secondly, this bit about being inspired by Apple is just pure rubbish. If you feel it's true, then CITE IT - otherwise remove it.
Finally, the SAA/CUA - if the topic is to be given any respect at all (and it should) should be explained in terms of the 'seven principles' with a description of each. For example, the User in Control Principle and the Recognition Principle. (And someone actually thought these came from Apple - that's ludicrous.)
CUI
Mention of M$ using CUA is misleading. M$ officially broke with CUA, calling their standard CUI for 'consistent user interface', so as not to be confusing on the issue.
Hello
Hello
I am unsure where to raise this issue, so am doing it here under "Common User Access".
The current Wikipedia "skin" disobeys the Common User Access rule in one very important way: It reassigns alt-f as an "access key" to the Wikipedia search function.
alt-f should go to the "File" menu in their browser. So, when a user expects to go the file menu they go to search instead. This is a big problem.
I hope someone can help by disabling the alt-f "access key" in the skin or by reassigning another "access key" for search.
Thanks!
- Doesn't for me. It still activates the File menu in Firefox on Windows XP. Liam Proven 23:57, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
For me it activates search. Firefox on Win2003. (21 May 2006)
I agree that Alt-F should not have been highjacked; Ctrl-F is a better access key for "find" function. However, a work-around exists: press "Alt" and "F" sequentially instead of concurrently. This works for me in Firefox on Windows XP. (14 August 2006)