hahaha! this is the funniest thing i have heard all day.

I am sorry if I wasn’t clear - I speak from actual experience, I had passed speed reading cource in the school. It’s way better something to believe in than Internet links.

>But enough of this I say. Let’s move on.
Ok, anyway we have another holy war in Vista vs XP that is way more flamish. :))))

An old rant of mine is that the internet makes it possible for anyone to always find something that disagrees with whatever is being said, even if it is unsubstantiated, has been discredited or is not backed by any science or logic. Too many people take these rouge snippets of info and then try to build a real argument based on them. Mainly, they just like to hear themselves talk, whether they make sense or not.

But enough of this I say. Let’s move on.

#eRIZ - 400ms works for me. You can choose any other number than makes you happy.

I am not interested in link war. I just said what I said - not all speed reading techniques benefit from narrow columns, that is only one of numerous ways to do it.

And you are kinda keep ignoring “editing” part of argument.

~Jojo: 400ms… too long for me.

Yes, I am generalizing. To do otherwise would require writing a dissertation type document which would likely exceed the space allotted here, no one would read anyway and regardless, this being the internet, some would want to pick it to pieces.

I’ve read on speed reading in the past and played with some speed reading software. I just did some searches to refresh my knowledge. You can read a bunch of articles here (some free flash examples to download here also):

http://www.magicspeedreading.com/index.html

But it is really is about “eye span” and peripheral vision. You CAN read shorter lines faster with more comprehension.

Here are some articles on optimum line width. Best I can tell from the searching I did in terms of any type of consensus, is that a line width of about 10 [major] words in 9-12 point text is considered optimal.

http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/nov02.asp
http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/type/utbo340.htm
http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/feb02.asp

Here is a story on some very interesting technology called Live-ink and a direct link to samples on the source web site. I really like this technology and found the samples very easy to read fast. Unfortunately, the software costs $90/year and you have to cut and paste it into the program, which is not workable in real life.

http://venturebeat.com/2007/05/10/live-ink-offers-better-way-to-read-text-online/#more-10459
http://www.liveink.com/demo_samples.php

So why books aren’t few inches wide? You are generalizing and twisting the facts to fit your opinion. Not all speed reading techniques are based on columns and not all benefit from them. Some use diagonal movements, some use three points per line jumps.

And it was mentioned that it is issue of editing as well, not only reading.

For reading docs longer than a screen, it has been proven that a narrower window/column is faster to read than moving your eyes side-to-side. This is the essence of speed reading actually. It is also why newspaper and magazine columns are only a few inches wide. So scrolling is actually more efficient (and I would contend, less tiring) than moving your eyes back and forth.

As to x-wnidows, I want the window to open up when I mouse onto it and pause for a very short period of time (this eliminates windows popping up when I merely brush across it). I don’t want to have to click whenever I want to see a window. I have a 400ms popup delay set which works nicely for me.

I prefer FULL control over my system, not partial.

About fullscreen windows: maybe you know people only called “experienced”? Windows’ sizes depend on current work and purpose. For example, it’s easier to move your eyes when you’re reading a huge text instead of scrolling the object.

Oh, I forgot to answer to the post’s question: I’m not next-next-next guy
“Typical” program installation is not for me

yes, you sort of explained why you do what you do. but you also insulted anyone who does it differently. that is pompous.

perhaps i truly am a poorly organizee creature, lacking sophistication, driven by emotion and mired in a quagmire of old, inefficient habits. but in spite of my back-woods ways, i have earned three degrees, a strong career and a wonderful family. go figure!

hi, i’m garbanzo, and i run my apps full screen

To tell the truth, I usually don’t get into these “discussions” because they are a waste of time. 99% of the time when I have [politely] asked someone WHY they do something (on a computer or not), they take offense. Most people do what they do out of habit and driven by emotion. Few can actually back up why they do anything nor explain what logic drove them to any solution.

There are efficient and inefficient ways to “skin the old cat”. I explained WHY I do what I do in hopes it might help some people. Few others in this thread were able to explain why they thought their approach was advantageous. Then, some, like yourself, just want to sling mud.

full screen windows are utilized by people who are able to focus on the task at hand rather than scattering their brain across many different areas - i believe ’scatterbrained’
is the technical term.

anyway if you can remember the alt-tab order of your windows, you can get to the one you want much faster than your hunt-and-peck x-mouse method that relies on visual cues rather than quick motor skills.

“My System tray shows 32 icons right now. FF has 50 open tabs right now.”

that’s not efficiency. it’s bloat and waste. it’s indicative of a typical ‘more is better’ attitude. no one could possibly need to access that many items simultaneously.

i bet you’re a little obsessive-compulsive, aren’t you

1. I don’t need check to know I have bad eyesight. But that’s not the main reason.
2. I mostly deal with web/text/code nowadays. Working with text the more you can see without scrolling - the better and more efficicent it is.
3. At home I have dual monitor setup, main stuff goes maximized on primary monitor, rest goes on secondary. Rarely I use two maximized editors on both screens.

I am not maximizing every single window (of course), but all of my core programs are better maximized. And btw I hadn’t ever noticed link between window setup and level of skill. It depends on what is being done and what person finds most comfortable.

==================

@RIZ says “Jojo: why are you lowering everyone to the lusers’ level? In my opinion X-Mouse behaviour is for noobs. :P”

It’s OK to make a blanket statement but it would be nice if you could explain WHY you feel this way. I tried to explain my philosophy and I’d like to see you do the same. WHY do you think x-windows mouse isn’t useful?

=========================

@Rarst - I’m curious. I know you are quite experienced, so WHY do you fill up your screen with full screen windows? I don’t see this very often from experience people. It’s just not efficient to work that way [shrug]. Have you had your vision checked recently [seriously]?

Only newbies think they have supreme knowledge. You are not only person on the planet that remembers 3.11 and that doesn’t make you automagically right to say what people should or shouldn’t use.

>The problem with a lot of these comments is many people have a _little_ knowledge, which we all know is dangerous.

*sighs*