.................................
To leave Commie, hyper to
http://commie.oy.com/commie_leaving.html
.................................
Bloody bloody, how am I supposed to get my work done today, arguing
with you blokes all the time.. =)
> I can tell you that Mac users _love_ to change all the icons... But I
> agree that this is not really important... (Still I've changed my
> hard disk icons just for fun...)
I've seen icon sets for Windows too but I don't know how these things
work since I've never really wanted to change my icons. I think you can
change the icon on shortcuts, program files and other non-associated
files and the icon for _all_ associated files of a kind. But dunno fer
sure.
> >Mac doesn't automatically include the
> >file extension when saving files. This stupidity results in many a
> >difficulty when transferring data from platform to another..
> Hmmm... Which applications are you referring to? This has really
> changed after the internet boom... Photosop puts file extensions to
> the file names by default, Peak does, Illustrator does... In OS X,
> there will be both: file extensions and the creator/type metadata.
Well, Freehand doesn't (even in Windows!), that's one example I come up
with immediately. I dunno what programs all the Mac graphicians use I
have had the pleasure of working with, but it has been more of a rule
than an excuse that there are some problems with the file extensions
when receiving files from Mac users.
> > I think this is purely a matter of opinion.
> Most of opinions are matters of opinion....
=) Geez, I wouldn't have guessed.
> For a newbie, it's good to see the disk appear on the desktop.
> Simplifies things.
Okay, you have a point there, but I think it only applies to non-fixed
media.
> Actually, this is my key point: You _can_ use Windows in very
> Mac-like way (despite some limitations), but you don't, because the
> OS (or some mental state of all the Windows users) won't encourage
> you to it... Sad...
True, true. But this is _not a fault of the OS_, it's just that people
are used to doing otherwise. I suppose these same people (like myself
often) are very confused using a Mac when they cannot use the familiar
fullscreen mode..
> > But you can drag and drop in fullscreen mode! (In Windows 2000 at
> >least.) OK, I admit it's bugged out that you can't drag straight to the
> >taskbar, but if you start the drag, move the cursor over a taskbar item
> >and wait for a second or so, the window is opened and you can drop the
> >dragged item into the "new" window.
> You mentioned the magic words "wait for a second or so".... A second
> or so is a very long time in interface logic.
Well go and see it for yourself! It is not a very long time. It takes
longer to drag it down there. The delay is only to prevent accidental
triggering of a wrong program when you're moving over it.
> > I think this is some strange idea of Adobe engineers, since eg.
> >PageMaker on the other hand works just like in Mac, with a transparent
> >parent window. (I could be wrong about this since it's some time since
> >I've last used PageMaker,
> Nope, the thing in PageMaker is that you can open only one document
> to it at the time. So, there is no problem with lost sub-windows,
> because there aren't any of them...
Okay, then it wasn't PageMaker but some other Mac-oriented software..
(Might have been a previous version (3.0 or so) of PhotoShop? Dunno..)
> It was some kind of guideline on Windows-side to use this kind of
> large mother window, originally (at the times of the 3.x Windows...).
Yes, well it has it's advantages too when you get used to it. You can
have a sort of "desktop inside a program" where you can organize your
documents. It is very confusing when you see all the stuff that's
"below" the current window.
> > Sure thing is, but as said, you can do it on Windows too.
> ... if you can get the clumsy nested window thingies to work for you
> (after you've discovered that you don't have to run the proggies in
> full-screen).
Nahh, it's not that bad. You're just not used to it the Windows way.
> You said it, buddy. ;) But I've wondered, how come the new Windows
> users so often use the proggies in full-screen... They haven't used
> 3.x. In full-screen, you lose lot of the power of application
I think the reason is often that they've learned from more experienced
users who have a background in Win 3.x.
> > Well, if you need to see more nontruncated window names on the taskbar,
> >you can resize it.
> ... while you lost more the valuable screen size. I forgot to
> mention, that in Mac the interface isn't in your way all the time...
Well you can hide it if you want! There isn't just one way of doing
things.
> > In Windows 2000 there is a feature that enables you to drag&drop
> >shortcuts on a special section of the taskbar, is this what you mean or
> >something else?
>
> Nope, I was talking about popup windows. Drag a Mac window to the
> bottom of the screen and it becomes a popup-window. Windows taskbar
> made better.
OK, that's something I didn't know about since I haven't used MacOS's
past 8 and even those that I have used, I've used only very little (as
little as possible =). Back in school (you know, art school.. =) we did
work with Macs, but it isn't much different working in Freehand or
PhotoShop on Mac or working with them on Windows.
> What you're talking about is just a way to bring some part of the
> desktop back in use... Because the desktop is hidden most of the time
> in Windows, they probably made this feature to the taskbar... Thank
You can minimize all windows on Windows by right-clicking on taskbar
and choosing "Minimize all windows". And there you have the desktop.
This isn't the easiest of ways, so Windows 2000 added a shortcut for the
operation on taskbar.
I can agree that Windows doesn't utilize the desktop to the max, but
then again, Mac doesn't utilize the keyboard as much as it could.
Personally (probably because I'm an experienced Windows user), I value
more the kood keyboard support than using the desktop. Someone might
think otherwise.
> > OK, this is a nice feature but personally I am not happy with the
> >switcher interface. It's very confusing. If this hierarchical organizing
> >of programs and documents could be accomplished on Windows taskbar style
> >way, I'd be very happy with it.
> What you're talking about? If you drag the Finder menu out of the
> Apple menu bar, it becomes a floating program switcher. Hmmm... this
> was introduced in OS 8.5, though...
Didn't know that.. Part of my dislike for MacOS UI is probably due the
fact that I haven't used the latest MacOS's but I have used a lot of
Win2000 which is a great improvement to NT4 which I've worked a lot
with.
Dunno still if we're talking about the same thing at all, tho. =)
> > BTW, on the matter of switching between programs, I think it's really a
> >pain in the ass on the Mac that you cannot switch between windows using
> >a keyboard shortcut like on Windows (Alt-Tab).
> Try apple key + tab ... but because you usually see all the open
Gotta try to remember that. =)
> proggies on Mac, you can just click their windows to get them on the
> front.
You don't always. And for a oldskool Windows user it's painful to have
to try to keep all the windows in view at once.. =)
> > OK, this is true. It should have been done better on Windows too. But,
> >how critical is this, really? Do people click on the taskbar all the
> >time? No, because they can use keyboard shortcuts.
> You're missing my point: In Mac, the popupmenus continue being fully
> responsive although they're minimized to the screen edge. I've found
> it very effective.
OK, now that I am beginning to see what you're ranting all about =) I
can see you point. In Windows when you right-click taskbar items, they
show the window controls (minimize, maximize, close etc.) and you can
drag stuff on them if you wait for the second or so for them to expand.
But obviously this could be done better.
> >> "With Mac-OS, there is a single menu bar shared by every application
> >> in the system. Though it does save a small amount of space, it makes
> >> it difficult to determine which application's menu you are viewing."
> >> Well well well... This is the classical one. I don't say anything, I
> >> let the Mac interface designer say it.
> >
> > I think this is a good point! I don't think the article you are
> >referring to gives a satisfactory answer to this..
>
> Answer to the question five... What's the unsatisfactory part of it?
> This answer also explains, why getting to the Mac pulldown menues
> (and popup windows on the bottom of the screen) is so fast...
Here's the mentioned part:
> > - Q5, the "extra credit" part: "The other 'advantage' usually ascribed
> >to a menu bar at the top of each window is that they user always knows
> >where to look for the items pertaining to the task they are carrying
> >out. This is silly. Users may do various tasks within a given window,
> >and the menu items may change." So what? I'm not getting the guy's
> >point. It is an advantage to know which menu is related to which
> >program!
>
> If you see only one menu all the time, you always know that it's
> related to the program you're working with. If you want to see all
> the time, what's the program, tear the application switcher off the
> Finder menu (in Mac).
It isn't quite that easy. When you have a couple of programs with no
parent window and a few set of menus floating around (like in Photoshop)
over the screen, it's _very_ confusing trying to know, which one of them
happens to be active. The Windows way is a lot clearer, but has its
shortcomings discussed earilier.
> is right now and 2-5) the screen edges. The screen edges were the
> point, the place where the mouse is right now, was a bit of a trick.
> He continues to mention the screen edges all the time.
Yes, that's OK since it's a good point that screen edges and corners
especially are very easily accessed.
> >But the original answer A on the page is not valid with Windows
> >2000 with the possibility to add shortcuts to taskbar. And there have
> >been Start menu and system tray even before, so I don't agree 100%.
> How do you use Start menu to switch programs? Now I dropped...
The argument was: "Screen edges are prime real estate. You don't waste
an entire edge that could be housing a couple of dozen different
fast-access icons just for one object, the Taskbar."
But the taskbar just isn't some useless block of dead weight, it
contains various usable things like the Start menu and the system tray.
Anyway, taskbar just takes up one of the four edges of the screen.
Programs can include their own shortcut menus (like Office shortcut) on
the other edges. (OK, this would be better handled on the OS side like
on Mac, agreed.)
> > - Q7: What is this circular menu thingie? I thought it was something
> >like the font selection pulldown menu on Mac, but the answer implies
> >something else. Can't comment on that since I don't understand what
> >we're talking about.. =)
>
> Oh, he's talking about some Apple interface lab inventions that were
> not implemented in Mac. Circular popup menus have been used in some
> adventure games. The idea is, that the targets of the popup menu are
> _around_ the mouse cursor, not _below_ it. So, your visual memory
> remembers the locations better.
Oh yes. Well, it's not a bad idea but it's not a very economic and can
be very confusing when organizing big amounts of information. But works
nice in some games, agreed.
> > But otherwise good points. It just overemphasizes the need for speed in
> >changing between windows, lest only using mouse.
>
> ??? Switching between applications was not the key point here at all...
>
> _I_ was talking about transferring data between applications... Tog
> didn't talk about application switching at all...
Well, the taskbar seemed to be his prime enemy, and taskbar is
essentially for switching between windows. OK, maybe it wasn't the main
point but still I think the need for speed was overemphasized in
general, since most of the tasks mentioned aren't really repeated at
such frequencies (several times a minute would be different) that it
would be justified to sacrifice intiuitivity of the UI to speed.
--
"Betwixt decks there can hardlie a man catch his breath by
reason there ariseth such a funke in the night..."
- W. Capps, 1623
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
legal notice: http://www.nutempo.com/message_legal.html
