Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Modern Turbo Vision 2.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–96 of 96 posts

Re: Modern Turbo Vision 2.0

#91

Post by stjohnswarts »

miohtama wrote: post #23
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #21

Btw those text based interfaces are better than most gui/web interfaces of today.

Windows 95 was the peak of good UX, like the ancient Greek was the peak of statue crafting. Some things were better in the past.

I kind of agree. I think that while it's getting a little bit bloated that xfce4 still pushes the right buttons for a gui for me. Simple, lots of good shortcuts by default, nice simple launcher, and you can tweak til your heart's content (but I don't really anymore). I love xfce4 combined with the whiskers launcher, it does what I need.

Re: Modern Turbo Vision 2.0

#92

Post by stjohnswarts »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #44
miohtama wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows 95 was the peak of good UX, like the ancient Greek was the peak of statue crafting. Some things were better in the past.

Windows 95 was unreliable, NT Workstation 4.0 was better.

Well obviously, we're talking about the GUI aspect of it, not the underlying OS. Win95 ran on what was essentially DOS so of course it was unstable compared to a modern (at the time) properly jailed off userland/kernel OS like NT

Re: Modern Turbo Vision 2.0

#93

Post by pjmlp »

rezaprima wrote: post #51

IIRC C++'s TurboVision is port of Pascal's one. Like the #define Uses_TKeys line is from something like uses Tkeys in Pascal

Yes, Borland was always Turbo Pascal first (then C++), the same was with OWL, VCL and now FireMonkey.

The difference being that with Delphi/C++ Builder that made C++ extensions to interop with Delphi's object model, as such it is even the same code and no longer a port like in TV and OWL predecessors.

Re: Modern Turbo Vision 2.0

#94

Post by protomyth »

bluedino wrote: post #46
protomyth wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The accountants where I work felt all the GUI interfaces sucked compared to their terminal. This led us to buy a new iSeries. It will probably last the same 15 years as the last one.

They're faster than web based apps that's for sure.

Its amazing how fast they can do things. GUIs just cannot be depended upon to be consistent enough to allow for automatic muscle memory.

Re: Modern Turbo Vision 2.0

#95

Post by digisign »

zozbot234 wrote: post #77
digisign wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is usually handled by tabs today... not sure that has been ported back to libs like turbo vision yet. I don't think so.

Tab bars are not very TUI friendly though, since the typical TUI has too little space to display a list of usable tab names at all times. Instead there's simply a hotkey which pops up a "window list" for the user to switch to. (There are exceptions when space is genuinely abundant and a side list of "views" or "tabs" to switch to can be kept permanently visible, but they are exceptions.) Here the TUI designer profits…

Hmm, I don't agree, with terminals post 2000 or so.

My GUI text editor is currently showing about 8 tabs out of a dozen, with ◂ ▸ at the ends. This is comparable to the number of cells in my terminal now, ~100, i.e.:

    ◂│doc_one.txt ╲ doc_two.txt ╲ doc_three.tx… ╲ doc_four.tx… ╲ doc_five.tx… ╲ │▸
This is 78 "characters" wide and has extra spaces. This is enough space for typical needs, and could work even on relatively dumb terms like the linux console, DOS of yesteryear. A vte high-color term with utf8, 120+ cells wide could potentially double capacity, in number of tabs, filename length, or bit of both.

Re: Modern Turbo Vision 2.0

#96

Post by CRConrad »

dugmartin wrote: post #31
dual_dingo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC both Windows and TV where modeled after the IBM Common User Access ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Common_User_Access ) interface style, which was a somewhat big theme in the late 80s and early 90s.

Its fun seeing some of the vestigial CUA key bindings in modern apps. The one I probably use the most is F5 in the browser to refresh the page. That is listed in your Wikipedia page: > If applicable to the page/screen in question F5 provides a refresh function;

I still use the original CUA Ctrl-Ins / Shift-Ins / Shift-Del for Copy / Paste / Cut at least as often as the newfangled Macintosh-copied Ctrl-C/V/X. They still work in (most?) Windows apps even if they aren't advertised as shortcuts in the Edit menu.
Post reply on HN