FOSSwire

This.

The File menu has been around since the dawn of user interfaces. But do you know what? It has overstayed its welcome. The File menu has been abused in far too many applications.

A File menu should deal with files. That’s it. Open a file, save a file, print a file, quit editing the file. Some, no.. most applications have been using the File menu to do everything from opening new windows to changing preferences. They don’t belong there: opening a new window should go in a Window menu, and changing preferences should be under Edit or Tools.

Here are some specific instances I’m talking about. I’m not trying to pick on any application or developer, these are just applications I have installed at the moment. But they should be fixed.

• Firefox, Epiphany, Opera, and many other browsers are abusers of the File menu. A browser generally does not have a whole lot to do with files at all. Two, maybe three items on their File menus might actually fit. But things like Open Tab, Location, and Send Link? No. It would make more sense to rename the File menu to "Browser" or "Web".
• GNOME System applets like system-config-printer-applet that only have one option in their File menu: Close. Really?
• Seahorse has a File menu that will create, import, or export keys and passwords. It kind of makes sense, but a something like "Key" or "Keyring" sounds more in-context.
• GNOME Terminal has a File menu that doesn't have a thing to do with files.
• Evolution has a huge File menu that has little do with files. "Mail" or even "Evolution" would be more appropriate.

• Synaptic's File menu could be "Package," but considering there is already a Package menu other things would need to be reorganized.
• Olive's File menu has more to do with branches, though some items would fit as File.
• GConf Editor's File menu has five items for managing keys, two of which are disabled unless you know what you're doing.
• D-Feet has a File menu that allows you to connect to different D-Bus sessions. I can't quite put my finger on what this should really be labeled.
• Devhelp, a documentation browser, has a File menu that opens new windows and prints.
• Many, many more.

Again, if you’re a developer of something on this list, don’t feel too offended. Glade (a GTK+ designer program) sticks a File menu on new menubars by default, so it may just be an oversight. That doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be fixed.

There are programs where it does make sense to have a File menu: Gedit, OpenOffice.org, GIMP, PiTiVi, and other applications that edit files as their main function.

Instead of dropping the File menu, it should be renamed to something more useful. Even though many applications abuse the File menu, there are plenty that do not. Banshee has a Media menu; Rhythmbox has Music. Most GNOME games have a Game menu. Baobab has Analyzer. Totem: Movie; Vinagre: Machine; Empathy: Chat; Gwibber: Gwibber.
Yes, even renaming your File menu to the name of your application might even be a good option.

So the next time you’re designing a GUI, keep in mind that your menus should make sense. Do that and we’ll have world peace. Well, maybe not, but it will shut me up.

When you think about desktop environments on Linux/Unix, you'll probably immediately think of the two most popular fully-featured desktop environments - GNOME and KDE.

But using a fully integrated desktop environment is only one of your options. Rather than using an integrated suite of programs, you can simply use a standalone window manager and then just run any of the apps you want.

Fluxbox is such a window manager for the X Window System. Fluxbox provides you with window management, a taskbar-like window switcher and a basic panel, a right-click menu for launching applications. It is lightweight and very configurable.

Many Linux users who are relatively new, but have a fair amount of experience with GNOME or KDE or a similar environment may be curious as to the other options available for running a graphical Linux machine. This post is aimed towards that category of user.

For the purposes of this post and the screenshost, I thought I would try out the newly released version of Linux Mint Fluxbox Community Edition.

In this post, I'm going to look at just some of the key differences between Fluxbox and using a traditional desktop environment (DE) like GNOME or KDE. Some of these differences will translate to advantages, some disadvantages.

We are literally just scratching the surface here, however. Fluxbox is a very powerful environment if you spend some time getting it to work the way you want and adapting to the differences in some key concepts that you might be used to.

#1 - No Pre-bundled Applications

As I've already mentioned, Fluxbox isn't a whole system suite. It does a few jobs, like window management, offering application launching etc. and just that. This means that unlike GNOME or KDE, it doesn't prescribe or recommend you use certain pre-bundled applications.

In GNOME, for example, you have a file manager, email client and so on that come as part of the GNOME suite and are designed to work well with GNOME.

That's not to say that you can't run KMail under GNOME if you want, but you will miss out on the visual integration and perhaps some other integration between the applications.

With Fluxbox, there are no such 'recommended' applications and integration is not really the focus. You pick and choose to run whichever program you prefer.

In a sense, because you're not so bothered about integration, perhaps you feel more inclined to pick whichever app suits you best, rather than the one that fits in the best visually.

#2 - Lightweight and Speedy

I don't want to accuse anyone of making bloatware, but an inherent disadvantage of an integrated desktop environment is that they tend to have might higher system requirements and consume more resources.

Fluxbox is designed specifically to do just a very simple task and to keep the resources consumed to a minimum.

Especially on lower powered machines, giving up that tight integration in favour of something lightweight, speedy can literally make the difference between something that is acceptable and incredibly frustrating to use.

#3 - A Different Way of Working

GNOME, KDE and Xfce all subscribe to a fairly traditional user interface, similar to the interface Windows and Mac OS X, involving often a menu bar at the top or the bottom where you can launch applications, a desktop with icons, a system tray area with icons for apps that stay running and so on.

There are other ways of working, though, and you might prefer them after getting used to it.

Fluxbox doesn't have a menu bar or a button you click to open a menu of applications. Instead, you right-click anywhere on the desktop to show a menu of the applications you can start and tasks you can do.

It is conceptual differences like this that set Fluxbox apart. While perhaps strange at first, many people come to prefer the working style of something different.

#4 - Unique Features

Admittedly somewhat tying in to the previous point, but Fluxbox offers some unique features that while, again, may require some retraining and adjustment, but can prove extremely efficient.

For example, Fluxbox includes a feature where you can merge two separate windows into one tabbed window. This might seem like a strange thing to do, but it can help organise your workspace and save screen real estate.

#5 - Control and Customisation

GNOME, to continue it as an example, often tries to make preferences and options simpler for the newcomer by removing options that are infrequently used.

Fluxbox, on the other hand, offers you complete and utter control over it. For example, you can define your own keyboard shortcuts for pretty much anything (including running a command), customise the look with a much greater level of detail, set specific window management settings for specific applications and a lot more.

There is not an awful lot that can't be changed to suit the way you want to work in Fluxbox, whereas there are frequently limits on the number of things that can be tweaked in traditional DEs to make them work just the way you want them to.

Want to Play?

Fluxbox should be available as standard in any Linux operating system's package manager. Once installed, you should be able to try it out without messing up your existing environment if you have one.

Most distributions offer a 'session' button at the login screen, which you can use to select which GUI you want to log in and use for that session. If you want to go back to your original environment, simply log out (Quit on the Fluxbox right-click menu) and click the Session button again on the login screen to go back to your normal choice.

If you haven't already got Linux on the go, or want a live CD environment, previously mentioned Linux Mint Fluxbox Community Edition is a great distribution that ships with Fluxbox by default. Linux Mint isn't particularly designed for lightweight environments and needs 512 MB of RAM, however.

Have fun with Fluxbox!

[speedometer image source]
[Fluxbox 'tabbing' image source]

OpenOffice.org, while often criticised for its slightly antiquated interface, is arguably the most popular free software and open source office suite and in many cases, a good alternative to Microsoft's ubiquitous software system.

However, like many bits of software, it does have its annoyances. One of these is the 'help agent'. It is almost akin to the hated Office Assistant ('clippy') and pops up from time to time to tell you supposedly helpful things, like how it just corrected something you typed.

Note: today's tip is applicable to all systems where you can run OOo - Windows, Linux (and other Unix) and Mac OS X.

If the popup is really annoying you by being visually distracting, or if just gets on your nerves that it is popping up and trying far too hard to be helpful, it is easy to disable entirely.

To do so, go to Tools > Options and go to the General category.

On that screen, simply uncheck 'Help Agent', click OK, and the little light bulb should bug you no longer.

[via]