I am starting to prefer comboboxes than textboxes
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: VB6 application with manifest file
Next: Asking Advice
From: Dee Earley on 23 Feb 2010 12:25 > Okay, but my last point still holds. I think maybe you're thinking > that the user has to drop down the list every time and click on the > value required, but this is not how it works with typomatic. With > typomatic you type into the textbox portion exactly as if it were a > real textbox. There are added benefits: you can hit End or Home and > immediately jump to the highest or lowest permissible value. I know that, but not all lists have a rigid naming structure for the items in it and I still think presenting a single long list is a bad idea. My app has a wizard which requires the user to select the model of camera. The current list stands at.. 264, and this would be impractical as one big list. It is filtered first by manufacturer which reduces the largest sub selection to 40, and even that has "groups" of items to make it easier to find a given item. I admit it will be easier if the items are sorted, but it still becomes unmanageable very quickly if the user doesn't know to type and tries to scroll (required for freeform values) -- Dee Earley (dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk) i-Catcher Development Team iCode Systems
From: MikeD on 23 Feb 2010 13:59 "MM" <kylix_is(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:ol17o55g0vthrarcvtpjcn2rt7u7sknrbd(a)4ax.com... > > They don't DESERVE to use my software! Were you being facetious, or are you actually serious with that statement? I've known programmers with attitude, but I've never known any of them to claim users don't "deserve" to use their software. Talk about arrogant (if you WERE serious). -- Mike
From: MM on 23 Feb 2010 15:42 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:21:51 -0800, Karl E. Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote: >MM wrote: >>>>>>> If you want freeform text, a textbox >>>>>>> If you want a number, a numberbox (textbox with an updown control). >>>>>> >>>>>> The UpDown control requires MSCOMCT2.OCX, which may or may not be >>>>>> included as standard on all op systems. >>>>> >>>>> No, you don't. http://vb.mvps.org/samples/UpDown >>>> >>>> Don't what? >>> >>> You don't need that OCX. >>> >>>> The help file states: >>>> "To use the UpDown control in your application, you must add the >>>> MSCOMCT2.OCX file to the project. When distributing your application, >>>> install the MSCOMCT2.OCX file in the user's Microsoft Windows SYSTEM >>>> directory." >>> >>> Note, that's the helpfile for the *OCX*. I handed you code that >>> eliminates that external dependency. >> >> Well, to be honest, since I know you like honesty, I didn't look at >> it, since there's no way I'd ever use those horrid little arrows >> anyway! > >You know they work with the arrow keys as well, right? ;-) NumLock? >>>> I want this app to work with minimal extra controls, which is why I >>>> also go for user controls that can be incorporated into the exe >>>> wherever possible. And the combobox is one of the basic controls, >>>> n'est-ce pas? >>> >>> I'm just saying, you *can* use UpDown controls with nothing more than >>> drop-in class module. (Oh, that's right, you don't *do* class modules, >>> do you? <bg>) >> >> I do! I do! As long as I don't have to write the buggers. (Mind you, I >> have done a fair bit of cleaning up other programmers' code...) > >Well, should you get bored with the jigsaw puzzles, you might want to >try the sample download. :-) I'll bet y'all are now secretly trying my typomatic idea! (Innovators always have a hard time of it to begin with.... ;) MM
From: MM on 23 Feb 2010 15:43 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:59:34 -0500, "MikeD" <nobody(a)nowhere.edu> wrote: > > >"MM" <kylix_is(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >news:ol17o55g0vthrarcvtpjcn2rt7u7sknrbd(a)4ax.com... >> >> They don't DESERVE to use my software! > >Were you being facetious, or are you actually serious with that statement? >I've known programmers with attitude, but I've never known any of them to >claim users don't "deserve" to use their software. Talk about arrogant (if >you WERE serious). Oh, dear. You need signposts? MM
From: MM on 23 Feb 2010 15:47
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:25:59 +0000, Dee Earley <dee.earley(a)icode.co.uk> wrote: >> Okay, but my last point still holds. I think maybe you're thinking >> that the user has to drop down the list every time and click on the >> value required, but this is not how it works with typomatic. With >> typomatic you type into the textbox portion exactly as if it were a >> real textbox. There are added benefits: you can hit End or Home and >> immediately jump to the highest or lowest permissible value. > >I know that, but not all lists have a rigid naming structure for the >items in it and I still think presenting a single long list is a bad idea. But why? In any case, the user doesn't see a "long list". (S)he sees a textbox with an arrow alongside. It sure won't take the user long to figure out what to do and what (s)he won't know is just how bomb-proof the routine is without any extra checking code that might be buggy. >My app has a wizard which requires the user to select the model of camera. >The current list stands at.. 264, and this would be impractical as one >big list. >It is filtered first by manufacturer which reduces the largest sub >selection to 40, and even that has "groups" of items to make it easier >to find a given item. That is not what I am doing, though. As I said, I have a list of values 0 - 127 or 0 - 3000. >I admit it will be easier if the items are sorted, but it still becomes >unmanageable very quickly if the user doesn't know to type and tries to >scroll (required for freeform values) "doesn't know how to type" - how did they manage to boot the PC and sign on? MM |