[QtExtended] some things

Lorn Potter lpotter at trolltech.com
Mon Mar 16 12:27:26 CET 2009

On 16/03/2009, at 6:21 PM, Dale Maggee wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> Lorn Potter wrote:
>> Quite actually, I was using the predictive keyboard long before  
>> anyone
>> on this list was, so yes, I have done this. Many times.
> "Quite actually"??? Quite what? work on your english.
> So you've done it, many times... awesome... I note however that you
> didn't actually answer my question: How Long does it take? and now,  
> how
> long does it take on your PC?
> How long did it take you to type up my sample sms on your FR running
> QTe? and why did you do that "Many Times", as you claim? seems like
> wasted effort to me...
> Also, if you'd like to explain why I should CARE IN THE SLIGHTEST that
> you were using it long before anyone else, I'd love to hear it.

because just perhaps I have an insight in how one is supposed to  
actually be using it.

>> umm, yes. I can access the menu just fine with my finger.
>> Options -> Change Input Method.
> ok, fair enough, so you can do it in 2 clicks, which cycles input
> methods. Neat!
> Unfortunately, however, as is your usual, you've not really answered  
> my
> question: I was interested in bringing up the list of input methods,  
> not
> cycling through them. It should be 2 clicks to change from  
> predictive to
> qwerty, and 2 to go back. You're advocating 2 clicks to get to the
> qwerty keyboard, and 7 clicks to get back. How efficient.

The list of input methods was actually depreciated. What you are  
seeing is that someone didn't have the time or inspiration to remove  
that from the neo's theme.

>> A use case is usually something that is very often used and  
>> repeatable
>> for any user. Typing 'antidisestablishmentarianism' is hardly  
>> typical.
> So, you're going to squibble over semantics, rather than actually
> discussing the issues at hand? riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Sure sounds like
> you're interested in quality.
> In all the work I've ever done, I'd consider a worst-case-scenario  
> to be
> a use case, and very worthy of concern. As far as I'm concerned, if  
> you
> don't agree with that assessment, then that's a good explanation as to
> why your software is shit.
>> No, but he will need to add those words to the common dictionary  
>> before
>> they will show up in the list of words. To enter a word in the
>> dictionary - simply press and hold the letters method.
> Are you saying that any word I type which isn't in the dictionary is
> automatically added? if this is the case then why is the word 'wot',
> which I use *all the time*, not in my dictionary? Where is
> 'antidisestablishmentarianism', which I typed earlier today?
>> There are too many niche scenarios to target, so we targeted common,
>> most used ones.
> ...and when someone brings up one you didn't target? Ignore it? stick
> your head in the sand? tell them that they're imagining it? This is a
> really great way to write shit software.
> News flash: Users don't care what your software is designed to do, or

correction: _you_ don't care what the software was designed to do.

> Right, so you *are* saying that anything I type is added  
> automatically...

No, I didn't say that.

> So, you're telling me that if I accidentally misspell
> 'antidisestablishmentarianism', the misspelling will be added to the
> dictionary, and from now on it will *only* suggest the misspelt  
> version,
> meaning that next time I am *forced* to type it letter-by-letter. wow,
> how awesome!

I can't believe you failed to read the help for the input method.  
Actually I can.
In fact, I can even edit those misspellings, but I will leave that as  
an endeavor for the reader.

> I think, however, that you're really just digging a big fucking hole  
> for
> yourself, because 'antidisestablishmentarianism' is *NOT* in my
> dictionary, and neither are any of the intentional mis-spellings I've
> typed today (or, in fact, ever, as far as I can see). If I were you,  
> I'd
> steer clear of espousing the virtues of FEATURES THAT DO NOT WORK - it
> just makes you sound even more stupid, really.

well, it certainly works for me.

[snip useless drivel]

>> I am merely explaining to you the way it works.
> No, you're trying to minimise the impact of my concerns, and pretend
> that they're not valid. You're pretending like you haven't written  
> shit
> software when you have. You're acting like a complete retard, posting
> what are either outright lies or uninformed bullshit. Either is
> unacceptable from the developer of a product. You're not even  
> explaining
> the way it works, because IT DOESN'T WORK THE WAY YOU'RE SAYING.

It does.

> You'll note that I never said I could do a better job, only that *you
> have done a shit job*. These are two completely different things...  
> So,
> what's your point?

You have absolutely no idea which parts of Qtopia I worked on, so you  
cannot say I have done a bad job, when in fact, I had no contact with  
this code.

I suppose, 'those that cannot do, just complain and expect someone  
else to fix things for them'.

More information about the community mailing list