Electrical computers and digital data processing systems: input/ – Input/output data processing – Peripheral configuration
Reexamination Certificate
1998-10-07
2002-02-05
Lee, Thomas (Department: 2182)
Electrical computers and digital data processing systems: input/
Input/output data processing
Peripheral configuration
C345S215000, C345S215000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06345318
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates in general to improved information processing systems. In particular, the present invention relates to a method and system for configurable categories of confirmation messages.
BACKGROUND
Even the earliest computer systems included rudimentary mechanisms that allowed them to receive input from their users. These mechanisms are called user interfaces. The user interfaces of early computers often employed lights and switches that allowed the user to communicate with the computer system in the system's native language. This form of communication was essentially limited to scientists and engineers who were trained to understand the particulars of the computer system. For this reason, computer-system providers moved to user interfaces that allowed entry of textual commands. While these command-based user interfaces were easier to use than their predecessors, they still involved a large number of commands that were often difficult for non-technical users to understand and remember. The shortcomings of command-based user interfaces lead to the introduction of graphical user-interfaces, which are often referred to as GUIs. Instead of requiring the user to have in-depth knowledge of the computer system, GUIs allow even the novice user to communicate with the computer system via a pointing device, such as a mouse. To use the computer system to perform various tasks, the user simply “points and clicks” on various displayed GUI items such as icons and taskbars, which are user-friendly, easy ways of activating programs on and requesting operations of the computer.
As user interfaces became easier to use, it also became easier for the user to inadvertently destroy important data. For example, in the early days of the DOS operating system, the user could destroy all data on the hard drive by merely typing “format c:” when merely mistyping one letter, the user could mistakenly destroy all data on the computer system. GUIs also made it easy for the user to inadvertently destroy data. A GUI often provides the user with menus of potential operations. The user selects an operation from the menu by pointing the mouse pointer at the operation and clicking a mouse button. Thus, if the “delete” operation and the “rename” operation are adjacent on the menu, it is easy for the user to inadvertently select “delete” by pointing the mouse pointer at slightly the wrong location.
Prior operating systems employ an extreme approach to address this inadvertent, data-destruction problem: they send a confirmation message to the user for every requested, destructive operation. Examples of destructive operations are deleting files in folders, emptying the recycle bin, formatting the hard drive, reinstalling the operating system, copying or moving a file into a folder containing a preexisting file with the same name, and dropping the phone connection upon exiting a browser. As a further safeguard, when the user responds affirmatively to the confirmation message, instead of deleting the data, the operating system merely moves the data to a special folder or location, which is often called a recycle bin, trash can, or trash-basket folder. In order to delete the data from the recycle bin, the user must request another operation, which causes the operating system to issue yet another confirmation message. Thus, to delete a single file, the user must issue a delete operation, respond positively to the confirmation message, open the recycle bin, empty the recycle bin, and finally respond positively to yet another confirmation message.
But, the vast majority of time that the user requests a destructive operation, the user intends the operation requested. Although it is infrequent that the user has typed in the wrong name or selected the wrong command from a menu, the confirmation message occurs on every destructive operation. Because of this constant bombardment of confirmation messages asking: “are you sure you want to delete?”, users become so accustomed to the messages that they habitually respond “yes” without thinking because they are in a hurry and because “yes” is the intended response the vast majority of the time. Thus, in the rare occasions when the user intends to respond “no” because the user mistakenly requested a delete operation, the user will likely mistakenly respond “yes” to the confirmation message, regardless.
Thus, while all these confirmation messages are well intentioned, they both fail to achieve their intended purpose and only serve to annoy the user. Further, little purpose is served by a confirmation message for destroying data when the only negative consequence is the user requesting restoration from the recycle bin. Thus, there is a need for a mechanism that gives the user control of which operation receives a confirmation message and of which deleted data is sent to the recycle bin.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The invention is a method and system for presenting only those confirmation messages that the user would like to see. In the preferred embodiment, a control program allows the user to specify categories of operations in a category list, to select which categories receive confirmation messages, and to select which categories of operations have deleted data sent to a recycle bin. In the preferred embodiment, a control program intercepts all confirmation messages and determines whether the operation that caused the confirmation message is in a category list. If the operation is in the category list, the control program automatically responds to the message based on the response listed in the category list, so that the user is free from needing to deal with the message. The control program also determines whether to send deleted data to the recycle bin based on an indicator in the category list. Provision is made for the control program to either be an application that intercepts messages that the operating system sends, or for the control program to be part of the operating system.
REFERENCES:
patent: 5377354 (1994-12-01), Scannell et al.
patent: 5394540 (1995-02-01), Barrington et al.
patent: 5428734 (1995-06-01), Haynes et al.
patent: 5566339 (1996-10-01), Perholtz et al.
patent: 5671440 (1997-09-01), Curry
patent: 5675805 (1997-10-01), Boldo et al.
patent: 5796948 (1998-08-01), Cohen
patent: 5835090 (1998-11-01), Clark et al.
patent: 5864684 (1999-01-01), Nielsen
patent: 5909215 (1999-06-01), Berstis et al.
patent: 6118451 (2000-09-01), Alexander
patent: 2278468 (1994-11-01), None
patent: 9106377 (1997-04-01), None
patent: 9204333 (1997-08-01), None
http://www.bobos.demon.co.uk/par/PTFB.htm, “Push the Freakin' Button”, Nov. 1998.
wysiwyg://26/http://cgi.zdnet.com/cgi-bin/printme.fcgi, “Pesky dialog boxes giving you trouble?”, Apr. 25, 1998.
IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 38, No. 7, Jul. 1995, pp. 357-358, entitled “Design of the Commit Install Plan Process for a Network Installation Program”.
Download Confirminator 1.0 for Win95, NONAGS Misc. Utilities—32 bit, http://cnyweb.com
onags/miscu.html, p. 15 of 23.
Elamin Abdelmoniem
Gamon Owen J.
International Business Machines - Corporation
Truelson Roy W.
LandOfFree
System for maintaining a user-modifiable confirmation... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with System for maintaining a user-modifiable confirmation..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and System for maintaining a user-modifiable confirmation... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2979775