Purpose of "File" > "Exit"

[asa]

Also, I though the point of extensions was to EXTEND functionality.

An Extension that replaced the bookmark toolbar with a hierarchical menu wouldn't be an extension because it removed something? You're playing semantics here. We could call them "Mods" or something different but what's the point. Extensions change things. Sometimes they add functionality, sometimes they modify it, sometimes they remove it.

Having stuff in the default build which needs an extension to disable it smacks of poor judgement.<snip>
- Chris

You're the one claiming that it's a "need". I don't think it's a need. We have lots of stuff in the default build that some folks want disabled. We have a bookmarks toolbar and some people don't want that (or have a need to see it disabled). Does it smack of poor judgement to include that because some people "need' it hidden?

--Asa

[Ted Mielczarek]

I think what we have determined here is that we cannot say what the optimal behavior is without user testing. Right now we're all posting antecdotal evidence, which really proves nothing. Some of us think it would be better one way, some of us think the other. Neither side can make a firm case that either way is really better. In addition, the multiple window vs. tabbed browsing styles of browsing affect this discussion greatly, and I don't know that anyone has firm figures on which is more popular at this point. In short, I'd have to say leave it as it is, we don't know that changing it would be any better.

[asa]

<snip>
And windows are traditionally closed by choosing the Close/Exit/Quit item usually located at the bottom of the File menu. Oops.<snip>

Maybe I'm way off base but from my experience windows are traditionally closed using the "Close" menuitem. Applications are traditionally closed using the Exit/Quit menuitem. It doesn't seem correct to say that windows are traditionally closed using the Close/Exit/Quit menuitems when Exit and Quit have traditionally served a different purpose.

--Asa

[asa]

I'm yet to be convinced. If people want to be able to shut all windows at once, they can keep things in tabs. <snip>
- Chris

I don't think it's reasonable to ask people to use tabs when they prefer windows or some combination of windows and tabs. I don't think it's reasonable to tell people that they have to use the application the way I use it either.

--Asa

[Thumper]

Back to the MacOS: File -> Quit and File -> Close aren't usually duplicated in Windows apps, but they are on MacOS because Quit is a requirement of the user interface guidelines. Because they aren't usually both present, "quit" and "close" have come to be pretty much interchangable in Windows apps.

IE doesn't have a global 'quit' function for a reason. MS might be guilty of a lot of bad decisions in their GUIs and otherwise, but they do pay people to conduct useability studies for them and the result is that IE doesn't have a global quit. Tabbing's a different kettle of fish entirely, I don't think anyone's arguing against the current "close tab" - "close" duplication because that's clear enough.

How exactly is this empirical user interface evidence to be obtained? I can already think of a few comments by one useability guy which support the removal of "quit", and I'm sure those in favour of the option could do the same for their argument.

- Chris

[shoestring]

That "exit" option is probably there because... it's there on all Windows programs! It's just an unwritten (as far as I know) standard.

Name *one* Microsoft application with a menu item to close all open windows. Just one.

Word.

I just checked.

[shoestring]

I'm yet to be convinced. If people want to be able to shut all windows at once, they can keep things in tabs. <snip>
- Chris

I don't think it's reasonable to ask people to use tabs when they prefer windows or some combination of windows and tabs. I don't think it's reasonable to tell people that they have to use the application the way I use it either.

--Asa

I can't believe how heated this discussion has become. Boggles the mind.

It's only <B>very</B> recently that I've come across a handful of idiotic apps that lack an Exit function (not counting menuless apps, obviously). I have no idea why this (to my mind) essential functionality was omitted, though I might think of a few if I tried real hard.

The whole thing smacks strongly of lowest-common-denominatorism.

Now, I have absolutely no objection to making programs as customizable as possible, and even to making the defaults as idiot-proof as you like. In fact, some of Microsoft's most egregious security holes are due to <B>not</B> choosing good defaults in programs like Outlook.

However, I want the option of fairly easily turning on "expert" mode. If some people want to do away with Exit, fine, let them have their training wheels. But I want to be supplied with the wrench to remove them.

[Thumper]

Not to be horribly petty, but the source is still there...

I think making this a pref is that last thing anyone wants to do, and I think that taking cue from other apps can only go halfway to helping because of the nature of a web-browser (it's much more common to have ten browser windows open at once than ten spreadsheets), but I can count on no fingers the amount of times I've felt the need to shut more than one instance of a running application simultaneously for any reason other than program failure, and some people are clearly confused as to why this should even be there.

The argument that the program should be allowed to get as complex as it wants would tend to favour the 'safe, new user' option as the default, and I think that most advanced users are perfectly willing to add simple extensions to get their 'advanced' functionality back (for instance, I consider mouse gestures to be essential now, but I wouldn't dream of suggesting they be included by default).

If Phoenix is intended to be a testing ground for new user interface suggestions, I propose changing the menu and seeing whether the amount of complaints rises or falls.

- Chris

[jonasj]

<snip>
And windows are traditionally closed by choosing the Close/Exit/Quit item usually located at the bottom of the File menu. Oops.<snip>

Maybe I'm way off base but from my experience windows are traditionally closed using the "Close" menuitem. Applications are traditionally closed using the Exit/Quit menuitem. It doesn't seem correct to say that windows are traditionally closed using the Close/Exit/Quit menuitems when Exit and Quit have traditionally served a different purpose.

Just for fun I tested six random applications which I happen to have on my system:


Launch Notepad.
Launch Notepad again.
Select File|Exit in one of the Notepad windows (it has no Close item).
Result: That window closes; the other one stays.

Launch Paint Shop Pro.
Launch Paint Shop Pro again.
Select File|Exit in one of the Paint Shop Pro windows (it has a Close item, but that only closes MDI child windows).
Result: That window closes; the other one stays.

Launch Microsoft Visual Basic.
Launch Microsoft Visual Basic again.
Select File|Exit in one of the Visual Basic windows (it has no Close item).
Result: That window closes; the other one stays.

Launch Winzip.
Launch Winzip again.
Select File|Exit in one of the Winzip windows (it has a Close item, but that just closes the current zipfile and leaves the window open).
Result: That window closes; the other one stays.

Launch Nero Burning Rom.
Launch Nero Burning Rom again.
Select File|Exit in one of the Nero windows (it has a Close item, but that only closes MDI child windows).
Result: That window closes; the other one stays.

Launch Microsoft Management Console.
Launch Microsoft Management Console again.
Select Console|Exit in one of the Management Console windows (it has no File menu; it doesn't have a Close item in the Console menu either).
Result: That window closes; the other one stays.


So, it seems that Close, when it exists at all, closes the current document but leaves the window open. Exit, on the other hand, closes the window.

So what is the justification for Phoenix to deviate so heavily from standard platform behavior[1] by having Exit close other windows than the one you chose the menu item in? The only difference between Pheonix and the six applications I tested is that all Phoenix's windows run in the same process, whereas other applications usually have one process per window, but do we really want that kind of irrelevant implementation details to have an impact on the user interface?

[1] Disclaimer: I run Win32; can't speak for other platforms.

[shimage]

The applications you are talking about are MDI (Multiple Document Interface) applications -- windows within windows. Their child windows can be compared to Phoenix's tabs. If Phoenix should behave the way you are describing, the Close item should close a tab, and the Exit item should close the window. But Phoenix's Exit command doesn't close the window -- it closes the window and all other Phoenix windows along with it.

i agree. i also don't really care, since i don't ever use the menu item, though.

Not for the last couple of years. Child window MDIs (as opposed to tab-based MDIs) are being fased out. Just look at Office XP versus Office 97.

pretty much every program i've used to do "work" can, and normally will, handle multiple documents in the same window (eg acrobat reader, origin, kaleidagraph, and every text editor i've ever heard of except notepad (eg Xemacs, ultraedit, editpad, winshell, texniccenter, even the text editor embedded in my file manager)). about the only programs i can think of that don't handle multiple documents are wordprocessors.

[Stefan]

So, it seems that Close, when it exists at all, closes the current document but leaves the window open. Exit, on the other hand, closes the window.

The evidence you show confirms my view that changing the menu item wording to the suggested "Exit Phoenix" instead of only "Exit" would be the best solution for this.
That should give enough of a warning to people of what they are about to do.

[Kommet]

Yes, wanting to exit the application without having to chase down all your windows is a completely reasonable desire from a user standpoint. Most users don't use tabs. Most normal users that I've ever watched end up with a trail of windows as they abandon one surfing path to follow another especially with the help of sites that launch external links in new windows. When you're done surfing it's nice to be able to hit a menuitem that exits the application.

This function may cater to power users, but as I stated earlier it violates human-interface design guidelines by treating the individual windows in an app-centric way.

The whole thing smacks strongly of lowest-common-denominatorism...

Please don't confuse "human-focused design" with "catering to newbies". This is a common misconception and one HUGE reason why computers are still hard to use, as developers confuse "good UI" with "dumb UI" and never look further.

Programmers are power users and tend to favor highly useful (not usable, mind you) interfaces which expose as many features as possible, no matter how complex the interface becomes or how steep the learning curve is. They assume that the user will learn the interface and remember not to do dangerous things (like close the whole app without saving), because they themselves can and do spend the time to memorize the way the program works.

Programmers also think in terms of applications because that is what they create. They tend to expose the underlying framework of the applications and data in the interfaces becaue this is what they deal with.

This is NOT the right way to create a user interface. Individual windows look like atomic objects to the user and should be treated as such. Interfaces should put useful and common features in toolbars (where apropriate) with obvious icons that illustrate at a glance what the tool does. Preferably this toolbar will be customizable by the user to allow commonly used functions (for that user) to be added.

Advanced features (in addition to all the basic features) should reside in menus and be grouped by function, not by the internal workings of the program. An MDI (multi-doc interface) should only be used where apropriate to the function of the application. These have ALL been determined time and again by usability studies and are all basic tennents of UI design, though often ignored.

Having an "Advanced Mode" means that the developer gave up trying to design the interface and instead designed two. THIS is the end-product of catering to the lowest common denominator because new users are expected to never use advanced features until they are willing to slog through ALL the advanced features.

As a testimony to the skill of the Mozilla and Phoenix deveolpers, Phoenix does follow almost every guideline I've mentioned!

The toolbars are functional and the icons are reasonably obvious. The toolbars can be customized. The menu items are grouped by function and concept. MDI is useful and apropriate because web pages on the same topic can be browsed in separate tabs of the same window.

The subject of this thread's debate is the one point where Phoenix falls down, treating the open windows as a single entitiy.

Name *one* Microsoft application with a menu item to close all open windows. Just one.

Word.

I just checked.

You (shoestring) should be more specific. There have been many versions of Word, and if you have used Word XP you would see that there is no "close ap" option at all.

Clicking File>Exit closes the currect window/doc. Clicking the X in the widow title bar closes the current window/doc. There is actually a "Close Window" toolbar icon just below the tile bar on the right side, which is a bit of leftover cruft from when Word DID use MDI and this icon closed the open doc (leaving the app open), but this icon is now redundant.

In older versions of Office, Microsoft was still using MDI even though it was inappropriate for the task at hand. Per their own usability studies they have started to treat each window as a single document container and have stopped treating all open Word (or Excel, or IE, or...) windows as a single app.

Why should I have to chase down all the windows and all the pop-ups and pop-unders when I just want to quit the darn thing?

Unintended pop-ups and pop-unders are a marketroid's brain-child, not a human interface designer's. They may be the greatest thing since sliced bread for selling product (or not), but they are a terrible burden on the user.

Unrequested pop-ups/unders violate usability guidelines in the worst ways, so I am very pleased (and personally greatful!) that Mozilla and Phoenix have spent so much time and energy on stopping them. By avoiding the pop-up/under windows already, this argument is rendered invalid.

To contrast, as IE has no "close app" function but does allow pop-up/under windows, it falls well behind Phoenix in usability. One proper interface choice (no "close app") plus one attrocious choice (unrestricted new pop-up/unders) can actually make IE unusable and un-closable.

I don't suggest that Phoenix lose the "close app" function so it can have IE function-parity (which is an invalid argument to me), but for the sake of good design. I also don't intend this post to be a flame or swipe at the Mozilla or Phoenix developers. This is simply an attempt at explaining what I know of UI design (which isn't everything) and how/why Phoenix should adhere to these principles.

Asa et al. are obviously free to tell me where to go shove it...

[Blake]

We are constantly revisiting decisions in Phoenix. Just because we wontfixed a bug doesn't mean it will stay wontfixed. I'm not yet sure where I stand on the issue of whether we need Exit, but I do find it rather silly that various people keep asserting that standard non-MDI Windows apps don't have both Close and Exit. Microsoft Word 2000, the wordprocessor which an overwhelming majority of computer users use, has both File > Close and File > Exit, in the exact same places as ours, and it's not MDI. So while there may be arguments against having Exit, "it's not done on Windows" isn't one of them.

[Duey]

I say we get rid of the Exit menu item. There are plenty of other ways to hide porn surfing when someone is about to walk into your room, many of which are faster than Alt+F,X.

Uh, I didn't mean hiding the windows. I live on my own and have nothing to hide. I meant, back when javascript was new and lots of sites had OnClose popup windows, it was nice that Netscape had the File/Exit so you could escape the site.

I guess now it doesn't matter too much with Phoenix, since it can handle popups intelligently.

However, since I used it a lot, I've grown attached/accustomed to it. That's probably what the original poster (and the article) were talking about. It's basically something held over from the past where it did have use, but not any more. *shrug* I'd still use it.

edit: adding replies to other comments in one message (thought it might be better)

Name *one* Microsoft application with a menu item to close all open windows. Just one.

sysedit It's still available under Windows XP

Is there a single non-pr0n example which necessitates shutting every open browser window quickly / at once?

I don't know about anybody else, but I like keeping Phoenix open. I don't really like closing applications until I'm finished using them. However, after using Phoenix for a while, opening and closing windows, it gets a bit unstable. So, for me, being able to "reboot" the browser with a few clicks is easier than switching to every window and closing it individually.

<snips>
Launch Notepad. Launch Notepad again.
Launch Paint Shop Pro. ...
Launch Nero Burning Rom. ...
Launch Microsoft Management Console. ...

I don't have VB or Winzip installed at the moment, so I don't know about them, but I checked all of these apps. Each of them, when you open a new instance, it opens in a seperate application using seperate memory. When you run Phoenix again, it instructs the current application to open a new window (I think, well, it doesn't open up a seperate application). Therefore, they cannot be compared. If Phoenix opened up seperate applications every time you ran the program then I would totally agree with you.

Also, a general comment to nobody in particular. I run my computer application centric, not document centric. Right now I have an IM program, news reader, email checker, an application that monitors all apps running (much like Windows NT Task Manager, but with more options), and of course Phoenix. None of these programs I would consider to be document centric. There's nothing I would wish to save with any. And, except for this post, nothing I'd wish to edit.

I don't see why the bad programming of document centric programs should dictate the practices of all other programs. By bad programming I mean not making sure that for the user, no work is lost if something goes wrong. I think I recall Word Perfect 5.1 (for DOS), when editing a document, would write the info to a new file. Then, if the program exited without saving (eg. power failure), it would detect the temp file and allow you to recover the work. Such things as that and notifying the user when documents aren't saved when closing an application are vital (and normally are included) to such programs.

There isn't much need for such fail-safes for web browsers. Sure, it would be really nice that the text I type here will not be lost if the power goes out or whatever. But, that is asking too much. If what I'm typing is so important, I would open up Notepad, type my message in there and save it. Then paste it here.

Ok. I'm getting too specific (ie. talking of myself) about such a general issue (ie. an option that would affect everybody). But, I believe the people who oppose File/Exit are considering Phoenix to be more than what it really is: just a web browser.

Heh, on a lighter note, I really write a lot about an issue that I've said "doesn't really matter to me". *big grin*

Duey

[old Neil Parks]

Name *one* Microsoft application with a menu item to close all open windows. Just one.

MS Word.