[sugar] frame gets in the way when alt-tabbing

[Eben Eliason]

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Erik Garrison <erik at laptop.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 12:59:52AM -0400, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
>> 760.  Running (on my XO) a ported Linux application which puts up
>> multiple screens.  As far as I could tell. I was able to access all
>> of those screens by using the alt-tab procedure.  But while doing
>> this the Frame was unacceptably intrusive.  For instance, I could
>> not see the titles on the top line, which identified each screen.
>>
>> If I rapidly pressed alt-tab and released -- the XO would not bother
>> to switch screens.  If I slowly pressed alt, then tab - the XO would
>> bring up the Frame.  I would need to release and press tab another
>> time to get the XO to switch to the next screen (while still showing
>> the Frame).  I would need to release alt to get the XO to stop
>> overlaying the screen edges with the Frame.  [And it seemed to me
>> that sometimes the Frame would not go away even then - I would have
>> to press and release the Frame key to ensure that it was gone for good.]
>>
>> --------
>>
>> One of the first things I did upon getting my G1G1 was to go into
>> one of the .py files and __NOOP__ the "autoraising" of the Frame.
>> That gave me Sugar screen behavior that was under *my* control.
>>
>> Now, Sugar has again started to interfere with what I am doing --
>> by raising the Frame when I alt-tab.  I HATE THAT!  I HATE THAT!
>> I thought the idea was to have the human in control of the computer,
>> instead of the computer dictating what the human may see.
>>
>> I would like the Frame function in the Control Panel to allow me to
>> optionally disable the automatic showing of the Frame upon alt-tab.
>>   [Let *me* decide when I want to see the Frame !]
>>
>> In the meantime, I guess I will have to go back to modifying the .py
>> files in Sugar - to reclaim Sugar screen behavior that does not
>> interfere with my use of the computer.
>>
>
> I think the idea is to use the frame to show you which windows you can
> alt+tab between, such as is done in Gnome or other WMs.  This is, in my
> opinion, quite useful.  However, I am unsure of the utility of clumsily
> animating the transition of the frame into view, or the lack of
> configurability of this option.
>
> So perhaps the best thing to do is to add a configuration option to
> allow the user to enable or disable this behavior?
>
> Would it be better if the frame was quickly displayed instead of sliding
> into view?  Maybe generally we need a configuration option to turn on
> and off fancy animations to improve system responsiveness?

Perhaps in the short term a boolean (exposed or not...I'd lean toward
not) would suit.  The big isue is lack of composition support.  The
Frame currently "slides in" about 1/2 as fast as I'd like it to, and
choppily at that.  With composition we could get smooth motion and
also speed it up significantly. (The only reason it's so slow now, I
believe, is because without composition we can't draw frames fast
enough to convey the motion unless we increase the length of the
reveal.)

- Eben


> Erik
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar mailing list
> Sugar at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
>