xfce with taskbar

[James McDonald]

Actually I found that depending on what species of computer user you are 
either Office User/Software Development or Admin you would have an autohide 
toolbar if you are the Office/Dev user not needing to task switch too much 
due to most of the work being done in one IDE/app/internet. But if you were 
an admin and you were looking at dhcp/dns/files/internet/backups/av/mail 
server/sql at the same time then an always on top taskbar was de riguer. I 
learnt that in designing an SOE you needed to take into account those quirks 
of preference. Of course my favourite line when providing support was "A 
curse on your autohide toolbar". Horse for courses, each one to his own etc. 

My love of Linux steams from the fact I can make it into exactly what I need 
and I don't have to upgrade to next licensing level/scheme to get the new 
features.

On Sun, 30 Jun 2002 02:24, Net Llama! wrote:
> Collins wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 08:37:19 -0700 "Net Llama!"
> >
> > <netllama at linux-sxs.org> wrote:
> >>Michael Hipp wrote:
> >>>A taskbar is the most uncluttered means yet to allow one-click
> >>>random access to your running apps. Clutter is when the app you
> >>>want is hidden behind 12 others and you can't get to it by any
> >>>direct means.
> >>
> >>Nonsense.  Right click on the desktop, and you get a list of
> >>everything that is currently runing.
> >
> > I never cease to be amazed at those who believe that their approach is
> > the only possible thing to consider.  The gentleman expressly stated
> > that he (as do I, BTW) prefers to do this with a single click, wheras
> > your way requires 2 clicks.
> >
> > There's nothing wrong with your approach, but that doesn't make
> > others' choices nonsense.  The old adage applies here:  if you don't
> > like taskbar, don't use it; it's certainly not mandatory.  I happen to
> > find the xfce panel basically worthless, i.e. never used by me, but I
> > certainly won't ridicule those who love to use the panel.
>
> excuse you, but i was commenting on the fact that he stated that "you
> can't get to it by any direct means.", which is nonsense.