Stimulating As Always
 

Craig-Doing support fulltime for a lot of other people's systems, you get to see how folks manage to get themselves into deep water by a tendency to over-tweak things, without really understanding what they're doing.
This is why I think the root access thing was a great idea. "If you don't understand it, don't mess with it." I have known people back in OS9 that threw away extensions because they thought they didn't need it.

Craig-One of the goals of this site is to promote understanding of how things work in the normal mode, so that it's a little easier to understand how to modify them, and how to recover from over-zealousness in those modifications.
Absolutely, this is why I am so upset with Apple not providing control over (example) Dock or Trash. I have tried it since OS10.0, don't like it, have to hack it out. So I voice my discontent to Apple and encourage others to do so as well. I would much rather Apple give me some control rather than force the control out of their hands. (As Ambrose has said with such flair--made me LOL)

AHunter-I find myself moderately less productive in OS X.
I have always contended that Apple should have used the basic Platinum interface with the UNIX underpinnings so the crossover would not have been such a shock. I say this because our huge Graphics department resisted OSX until just recently because it would have slowed production down. Each employee would have to relearn how to use their Macintosh. Perhaps cold-turkey was the best way, but oy...

AHunter-I bet the Windows and Unix transplantees would appreciate the option of making an application's menus appear just below the top of the currently active window instead of in the menu bar.
I think making these users comfortable in any way possible would be a good thing. However, I would not want to bloat OSX just to please them. The goal is to make OSX lean and mean, yet still provide control for the user.

To be fair and even-handed, and because I rant too much -- what I like about Aqua / OS X's interface:

•_The way OS X handles printer choosing from the print dialog box positively trounces the MacOS 9 (and 8, 7, 6, etc.) method with its necessary trip to the Chooser. Boy is it nice to be rid of the Chooser! Well, this is not entirely interface, but I think it is in part. (If, under OS 9, Apple had made it possible to access the Chooser from within a print dialog box, that would have been wonderful too, even with the Chooser still in existence. But they didn't)

•_Progress bars under OS X are quite nice. Pretty. I am thinking of hacking the hack I'm using, of editing the Classic Platinum Theme's extras.rsrc file to incorporate Aqua's progress bars.

• The trash can is really nice-looking.

I agree all the Icons are really good looking. I mean there is no way I could imagine better looking Icons. Also, there seems to be a guideline that makes all of them looking great side by side, the way they are all lit from the top, and the subtle white reflection on the top half. The ludicrous resolution and perfect alpha keying just add that extra something that makes these graphics reach something near perfection.

As I said before, too bad it's not the point for an Icon to be cute.

Esthetics should come last in priority for OS design way behing utilisability, flexibility and, of course, neutrality.

Sounds to me like some of you would just really be happier in OS 9, or at least with the Classic Mac ui.

I wonder what percentage of Mac users fit that profile? Or how many are much happier with the new ui and workflow? We did this poll sometime back and 85% preferred Aqua. I wonder how that would go with Panther? From what I read about this around the net and in Mac magazine reviews, it seems there's much more of a favorable view of Aqua than not. That would provide little incentive for Apple to go out of their way to make a more Platinumish experience available.

No two ways about it, Phil. I'd absolutely love to have MacOS 9 on the visual level but with symmetric multiprocessing, protected memory, preemptive multitasking (with some ability to modify it, to give foreground processes more attention if I so chose) and Unix underpinnings. With the exception of the awful Chooser (a System 3 vintage anachronism with few defenders), I'd like the OS to have MacOS 9 behaviors and methods of doing things, as well as its better surface appearance.

I think you're right that people with my tastes are a minority, although I suspect we constitute more than 15% (this site by its nature has always attracted early adopters and enthusiastic embracers of all that is new with MacOS X more than semi-curmudgeonly people like me with one foot stomping through unfamiliar command line tricks and permissions settings while the other foot is firmly dug in in more historicaly Apple territories).

I hear you, AHunter, although I don't follow the part about doing "command line tricks." I very rarely need to use command-line, and when I do, it's to accomplish tasks and perform tweaks I could never do in OS <9.

But, hey, 'tis the season to be jolly. I've put together a series of desktop pictures in the 80% grey range. That ought to help cheer up any veteran Mac user! ;)

As a pendulum loses momentum, we are reaching a middle ground.

I have always felt that Apple did the right thing going symmetric multiprocessing, protected memory, preemptive multitasking, menu printer choice and Unix underpinnings. However, where they blew it was forcing a new way of using your machine. Everything should have been done under the hood. It is not a matter of taste, it is a matter of how an individual has spent years learning how to operate in his/her computer in their business or art. To be slowed down is a waste of OUR money, not Apple's. All the power items that Apple added (listed above) speed us up. Their interface changes slowed us back down. So going from 9 to X has been sweet and sour. It was never a nostollgia thing with me (although I did like the look better) it was the efficiency of movement that OS9 offered.

With Jaguar, I became fairly happy. Panther has made me content. Perhaps the next version (Puma?) will mollify me for good.

Puma was 10.1.

I'm hoping for Smilodon. :D

To be slowed down is a waste of OUR money, not Apple's. All the power items that Apple added (listed above) speed us up. Their interface changes slowed us back down.

Umm . . . well, maybe for a few days, then I actually found I could work faster in OS X. For example, file management with two column view browsers open and the right toolbar shortcuts made for a much better situation, imo. But, yes, we did have to learn a few new work habits. C'est la vie! ;)

I'm growing kind of ashamed as I realize I'm more reticent to change I tough I was. About 70% of the things that bug me in OSX are not really related to the fact they are useless or not well designed, but more because they are not what I am used to. Hey, maybe those changes will enventually lead to something greater, far away from the concept of windows and menus and preference files. If the system allowed everybody to change their settings so it looks just like OS9, use a Chooser-like application(you never know), and a windows-like taskbar, how could Apple bring the next evolution of their interface smoothly?

Generally speaking, when Apple has introduced a new feature that was a genuine leap forward, there haven't been many cries for a way of disabling them. No one said:

"Aliases? I don't want aliases! This useless command clutters up my menu, please get rid of it"

"Hey, how come my Finder comments don't disappear any more when I rebuild the Desktop? Now I have to delete them all manually to get the same effect, this sucks!"

"Dear Apple -- it used to be that my Trash can would empty itself whenever I shut down the computer. Now you've made it so it only empties when I tell it to. How can I disable this stupid so-called 'feature' and make my Trash can behave the way it should?"

"Hey, I had a file copy going and I went to click on a folder and it let me do it. That's not right. When you've got files copying you're not supposed to be able to do anything else"


Other Apple innovations may have been less universally well-received but didn't irritate as many people because you were provided with a way to ignore them or turn them off:

"Like wow man. I can make my file orange and it says 'Hot', or blue and it says 'Cool'. That's so hot. That's so cool. Does anyone actually use these silly things?"

"What's this? Oh, a 'Launcher'. I get it. So I'm supposed to get rid of Apollo or OtherMenu and use this thing that sits here in the middle of my @#%$ screen distracting me. Ain't gonna happen."

"What's this? Oh, I can hide my Desktop when other applications are active, and save all my files in a Documents folder. Gee, I was really burning up with Pee Cee envy, thanks Apple."


Finally, there were the ones where Apple changed something and gave you no choice (or a deeply hidden and non-obvious choice) and it wasn't exactly a home run, and on these you may well have heard some legitimate screaming:

"Yeah boy, System 7, a memory hog permanent MultiFinder you can't quit out of and oopsie sorry but MacroMaker is broken but you didn't really need all those 1300 recorded Macros anyway did you? Umm, call me when System 7 is worth it, I'm sticking with 6."

"Hello Apple Tech Support. I just installed MacOS 8. You introduced this cute little trick whereby Command Tab switches applications. I do not want Command Tab to switch my applications. How the hell do I turn this bloody thing the hell off?"

"Die, cursed Desktop Printer, die! Arrgh! It won't let me get rid of it! I'm going to throw away every extension and control panel I find that I don't recognize until these things go away"


Unfortunately, lots of the things that were new about MacOS X, or even about specific new interations thereof, have been in the latter category.

Fear not -- when Apple does it right, we notice. If they make windows and menus unnecessary by replacing them with something much easier and cooler to use, we'll embrace it. But unless it's spectacularly better, they'd better give us options.

Wow, it is so great to hear myself speak through someone else, and AHunter really hit it for me.

It has always been my angst that I am forced to use the "new thing" with the inability to shut it off or modify it appropriately. I will sing the praises of all the new and wonderful things under the hood in OSX, and I am excited about the future. But Apple needs to listen to the average user regarding these issues. Apple may think it minor, but it is major to us.

Yes, it is good to be flexible, but not everyone is like that. Try telling your father or grandfather that the way they have been using the Mac you convinced him to buy has now changed 150 degrees and that HE has to relearn what he has spent the last 2 years trying to understand.

So this means more work for me to help folks relearn the new way of doing things, not just me.

Gentlemen, I'm not following the "us" part in your posts, especially if it's meant to represent the "average user" and you portray yourselves as representatives. I'm not arguing here against more and better options, but you really only speak for yourselves and a small minority of Mac users when you express such strong dissatisfaction with the ui.

Every one of the 70 + members in our Mac Users Group prefers OS X and Aqua. That wasn't always the case; initially, there were lots of angry voices in our meetings about how Apple had screwed up. Then there are people like my wife and kids--very average Mac users--who made the adjustment within a couple of days and haven't looked back. Learning to use the new OS and its interface is not that hard, and many of the changes really are improvements, imo.

That's really good honesty, slamex, and I think you put your finger on one of the most common issues generating complaints--the fact that people have to change a few work habits and that seems to be more difficult for some than others.

I think these people have really set the new bar for all OS builders to try to match in the future.

I'm sure 10.4 and Longhorn will both reflect this new user-centric design paradigm. :p

Genie and Scale are based upon sound scientific principles
 

Indeed, it is useful--perhaps more than many realize. I think you realize this, but others might not know that it's not all flashy graphics for the sake of a good show.

This isn't the place to go into detail, but, basically, user testing proves that a slow transition, such as the Genie, which shows clearly what is changing [and, for moving objects, clearly shows where it's moved from and where it's moving to], dramatically improves a person's ability to see what has just happened and recognize it. If you're interested in more proof, look up "change blindness" ....

These effects are undoubtedly the result of careful design and *user testing*. You may not prefer it, but it would be a mistake to think of these effects as superfluous entertainment. They are conscious improvements to the computer-user interface.

I would tend to agree with that. System 1 had a system whereby when you double-clicked on a floppy's icon, you'd see zoomrecs going from the icon to the exact center of the screen and then bouncing as if off the surface of the desktop "up" at you and outward (expanding) to the dimensions of the window. Apple simplified this with System 2 and gave us the zoomrecs we (those of us who grew up with classic MacOS, at least) are familiar with -- ever-expanding rectangles that start from the icon and just go outward from there without the intermediate step of bouncing off the middle of the desktop.

Some people regarded zoomrecs as nothing but an unnecessary slowdown but they gave you visual feedback that your double-click had "taken" and that something was opening or launching.

If I could minimize things to something other than the Dock (which I won't use), I would cheerfully accept minimizing as an improvement over window-shading, and if it were available to me I'd like some visual feedback rather than just click <gone>. Maybe less imposing than genie but that general type of thing. As with the zoomecs bouncing off the middle of the desktop, the genie effect is a bit much, but not at all a bad idea.

As it is, of course, I just windowshade and therefore don't ever see genie or other such effects anyhow.

Whoops. Accidentally posted twice. Please pardon me.
 

Whoops. Accidentally posted twice. Please pardon me.

Living with the Dock
 

I see that someone else has already pointed out a way to live without the Dock: let it start up, but let a script that runs at login kill it after it has started. A friend of mine does that to all the student lab machines she sets up, and showed me how it's done, but I decided to try and get along with the Dock, figuring that I should give it a good chance to prove itself.

After dealing with the Dock for some time, I've found that the following practices have proven useful:

1. Use Apple-Option-d to hide the Dock when you don't want to see it. I do that often. In general, I prefer using keys to the mouse [less wear and tear on the wrists], but sometimes I want to see the Dock. I'm glad there's a keyboard shortcut for this. You already knew this, but do you use it? Hide that Dock til you need it, if ever.

2. The friend I mentioned above pins her Dock to the left side of the screen, but allows it to auto-hide and to magnify. I tried it -- she's right about the fact that the left edge of the screen is the one my mouse least often touches, so that the Dock stays out of the way, and she has a point that the Dock can't block me from resizing a window if it's pinned left. Maybe you'd find it easier to live with over on the left. The scroll bars aren't there, nor is the single corner that you can drag to resize a window [now *that*, I wish were done the way Microsoft does it--resize from any edge--but it's a small thing].

3. Most of the time, though, I leave the Dock at the bottom, BUT I ALWAYS DISABLE MAGNIFICATION of the Dock icons -- I find that behavior distracting and annoying, especially when logged into my machines with VNC or Timbuktu, or when trying to drag something into Trash. [Speaking of trash, I use a hint recently appearing at this site to put a Trash icon on my desk, onto which I can drop things. It doesn't replace the Trash in the Dock, but it's easier to delete things with the desktop icon.]

4. I keep certain things in my Dock always, but also allow myself to freely add and remove things from the Dock as it suits me. You'd think that would be hard to get used to, but the more I do it, the more I like it. While working on a certain client's files, I drag relevant folders to the Dock until I'm done with that client. I love how easy it is to add and remove icons there.

One thing I do that makes the Dock, and the entire OS, more comfortable for me is to customize icons. I really appreciate how easy that is to do. I give a client's folder a certain icon -- I downloaded a bunch so I can just go to my 'iconz' folder and pick one of a few hundred or so -- and give my Documents folder a certain icon [a green apple], etc. When these items are in the Dock, their icons instantly convey to me what they are, because I have so many icons to choose from and I was the one who chose the icons.

A bunch of blue folders in a row on my Dock is useless to me, but an apple, a toaster, SpongeBob, Darth Vader, and a coffee cup are all instantly visually distinct. I don't have to hover over them to remind myself which folder is which. That's my #1 tip for living with the Dock: customize your icons, and the Dock will be a conceptual map with *your* landmarks on it.

I would like to do away with bouncing icons, though -- perhaps there's a less obtrusive way to convey their message. How about a slight throb, just a pulsation of the icon so that you see it's moving [moving things attract our attention] without the icon obscuring your view at all.

Easy, go into System Preferences > Dock and uncheck "Animate Opening Applications". Now you'lll only have the little blinking triangle under the app icon during launch with no bounce.

I have the Dock running under root user only, and when I log in as root I've got the Dock pinned to the far left as you said.

They wouldn't have to change all that much to make the Dock tolerable:

a) The option to manifest the Dock as a menu in the menubar instead of floating around somewhere onscreen. Or, better yet, incorporate it into the Apple menu. Like this (Yes, that is System 6) except each running app would have a submenu of open documents. And, hey, if we're going to do that, we could let people add folders, documents, or applications to the Apple menu in lieu of adding them to the Dock, like this (courtesy of MacOS 8.6). And frankly, I'd like to see a Programs menu in the Apple menu, and to see commercial software installers get in the habit of offering to put an alias to the newly installed app in the Programs folder of the Apple menu. It's a nice touch for newbies, and one of the few Windows conventions I like (although editing the Start menu is a pain in the butt compared to editing the Apple menu of System 7 thru OS 9). Sorry, where was I? Oh yeah....

b) The option to change the keystroke combo for "go to next application", or disable it altogether. I'm sorry, but I'm a FileMaker programmer and Command-Tab is taken, the OS can't have it. I know users of various Adobe software products who feel the same way about it.

There, now, isn't that a much nicer Dock?