AKA:BattleField 2's best frend is the modern virtual desktop environment (hereafter "desktop environment") is a troublesome interface between a frustrated individual and a defective operating system. Examples of desktop environments include Windows over 9000!!!!!!, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT, Windows Y2K, Windows XP, Windows Vista, KDE, GNOME, BSE, and HIV. Computer programs can only be executed within a desktop environment, and since computer programs are essential for survival, the desktop environment is absolutely required.
The desktop environment comprises the following facilities, which we will individually discuss.
The purpose of the background is to be obscured by applications, so therefore it must be exquisitely beautiful, i.e. it should feature an excessively photoshopped image or a conceited collage of "art". The importance of the desktop background is made manifest by a wealth of features that can only be accessed via a variety of counter-intuitive and inconsistent "pointer interactions".
The desktop background may host some "icons". Icons should be systematically and automatically arranged on the desktop, and should never become disordered or "float off" the edge of the screen. The frustrated individual may, at an inopportune time, through pointer interaction, provoke some undesired effect. This is known as "application launch" and the frustrated individual strives to avoid such actions.
Quick Launch bar
The task bar should contain several icons that launch applications. Most of these applications should never be run. The rest will be executed by the user immediately after the system is booted, and would thus be better served by a "run" feature. Obscure icons are preferable, such as a small picture of a burning giraffe to represent the web browser, and the icons should change radically with each new release. These icons will take up most of the bottom of the screen whilst leaving space for some misplaced window management facilities (see below) and the "system tray".
The system tray should contain the date and time, should the user neglect to look at their watch, which is on their arm right in front of them. Present in their thousands, should be icons -- icons so small that they can barely be seen. The presence of icons fluctuates over time. One day the frustrated individual may observe twenty icons competing for their attention; the next day they may all have vanished. There should never be a 1:1 relationship between the icons present on the systray and the applications running within the operating system.
The Window Manager
The purpose of the window manager is to manage the windows. However, in reality, it is more important that the window manager decorate the windows. The window manager was originally termed the "window decorator"; unfortunately, this denotation was lost during the original translation from Latin. Should the frustrated individual wish to conduct window management, they can use the following methods instead of using the window manager:
- Through pointer interaction with the task bar, e.g. when switching desktops or windows, resizing individual windows, etc.)
- Through the desktop background (e.g. minimize all).
- Through interaction with the applications themselves; this may entail the resizing or fullscreening features present in many games and media players.
In fact, since features included in one application are automatically available in all other applications, it naturally follows that the deficiencies of a window manager can be circumvented by introducing certain disparate features into some applications. This is preferable to enriching the window manager.
Despite the fact that the window manager is capable of faultless decoration, a few applications should nonetheless deviate from the norm by proceeding to decorate themselves. For added usability, applications are free to break with the convention of rectangular windows so as to define their shape in an arbitrary fashion. When combined with non-standard decoration, this creates an experience for the frustrated individual that cannot be surpassed.
In conclusion, systems of window management are inherently vast and complex. Consequently, the frustrated individual feels belittled by such overwhelming complexity. They are helpless to resolve complex window management issues, such as efficiently organizing numerous windows within a small area without unacceptable clutter or overlap -- even though this could hypothetically be done by the touch of just a single button. This inadequacy allows the frustrated individual to just give up in depair, freeing valuable resources to concentrate on actually using their applications to somehow complete the given task at hand.
A few keys can be bound to useful things, but the frustrated individual must not be allowed to customise them. Ever. They must also be undocumented. The key bindings must necessarily conflict with those used by applications. This makes it unclear as to whether your key presses are intercepted by the desktop, or received by the application.
CPU instruction throughput, RAM availability, and limits of all other operating system resources will certainly increase indefinitely in the long-term. Also, it is well-understood that unused resources are completely wasted. Hence, there is nothing to be lost and everything to gain from ensuring that the majority of these resources are spent by the desktop environment, rather than by the applications themselves. This allows the frustrated individual to be entertained while they wait for their applications to respond.
The frustrated individual is, by nature, very very patient. There is categorically no benefit from ensuring that feedback from the desktop environment is delivered swiftly. The user subconciously understands what applications they are running and what feedback they might produce. As a result, the desktop environment is able to reorder, interleave, and indefinitely delay this feedback without consequence.
All of these advanced features allow for seamless interaction between the frustated individual and the operating system.