I do have to interject an opinion: I watch a lot of video on my Macs—particularly the Mini attached to my TV. I am constantly doing whatever I can to remove distracting UI elements while watching videos. Usually this entails using fullscreen mode, but a video window that transformed into a clean video box upon mouse-out or mouse-stop sounds awesome!
And, to be fair, a lot of the time the rest of the 'shit on my screen' is driving me up the walls. Maybe I'm just a neat freak. My bad.
Exactly, I'm much the same way. When watching videos on Hulu, for instance, I always hide all of Safari's toolbars and as many other UI elements as possible because Hulu's videos aren't meant for full-screen viewing.
Not only is the titlebar of a QuickTime video window distracting, the play controls, especially the playhead and time ticker, bug me because I don't need them to be visible all the time.
No, it's not. What if you're trying to look at something in the video but the controls get in the way? Say for example, something catches your eye and you pause the video to take a closer look. And all you end up with is a control bar in your way. Floating controls make the most sense in Full Screen.
Agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chabig
Then move the controls. They are draggable, you know.
Why should we, when they could be out of the way to start with? It's not like having them over the image has other advantages...
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon
Having the title bar of QuickTime videos disappear makes sense because it's a distracting element.
ADD much?
Actually, that's the whole point of full screen mode. If you don't want to be distracted with other things, put it in full screen. If you're not in full screen, then it nearly always means you want to be paying attention to something else as well as the video... in which case, removing useful features to avoid distraction is a stupid plan.
Kim, you can't expect people to read every single thread to find statements that as far as they know, you MAY have made, or you may NOT have made. If you have an argument in any thread, you have to present it to people you're talking to.
Had he asked politely, I would have repeated what I had said in another thread or I would have linked to the post. But seeing as how he came off as a total jerk, I didn't feel like it.
Khm... Will those guys at NYPD agree?? Doesn't better resolution sound like job cuts??? Alas.
No, just more people behind bars.
Quote:
Yet I loved Apple exactly for providing me with a minimal toolkit allowing to do what I like right out of the box. It was indeed astonishing that I modeled the plane path in Quartz Composer, selected "Export as QT movie", and... there was no progress bar shown at all! I thought it didn't work
Why should we, when they could be out of the way to start with? It's not like having them over the image has other advantages...
It does. I pointed out several before.
Quote:
Actually, that's the whole point of full screen mode. If you don't want to be distracted with other things, put it in full screen. If you're not in full screen, then it nearly always means you want to be paying attention to something else as well as the video... in which case, removing useful features to avoid distraction is a stupid plan.
That would be true, except the on screen controls disappear with full screen.
Not only is the titlebar of a QuickTime video window distracting, the play controls, especially the playhead and time ticker, bug me because I don't need them to be visible all the time.
Like many have said, that's why the fullscreen option exists. If the titlebar or controls bother you, then the rest of the visual clutter on your screen won't help.
What's the point of hiding the titlebar or controls in fuckin' window-mode? People use window-mode for a reason...because they need to get as much info as possible. And people use fullscreen-mode for another reason...because they want to focus on a single thing and don't care what else is going on in the background.
There isn't a special rule about video that makes it OK for titlebars and controls to disappear while in window-mode. That rule *could* apply to *anything* because there will always be special cases where people feel that they don't want to be distracted by titlebars and controls. I'm sure anyone could extend this silly idea to other apps. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find someone that would like to browse the internet in a titlebar-less, control-less window when he's simply reading a web page. Wouldn't THAT be great?
Had he asked politely, I would have repeated what I had said in another thread or I would have linked to the post. But seeing as how he came off as a total jerk, I didn't feel like it.
It was a challenge, as we all make to someone we're arguing with.
Actually, that's the whole point of full screen mode. If you don't want to be distracted with other things, put it in full screen. If you're not in full screen, then it nearly always means you want to be paying attention to something else as well as the video... in which case, removing useful features to avoid distraction is a stupid plan.
Again, I'm talking about when videos aren't high resolution enough to go fullscreen without getting horribly pixelated. I have a very serene desktop and the fewer distractions the better.
I also stated that I think playback controls, or at least the titlebar, will be visible when the video is paused and visible on mouse-over regardless.
I am constantly doing whatever I can to remove distracting UI elements while watching videos
There is always QuickLook to play videos. There is no Menu bar that changes and the windows is very simple. You can then go to Fullscreen to see nothing but video. You also have Front Row at your disposal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon
Exactly, I'm much the same way. When watching videos on Hulu, for instance, I always hide all of Safari's toolbars and as many other UI elements as possible because Hulu's videos aren't meant for full-screen viewing.
I don't understand that comment about Hulu. There is a fullpage option that is accessible with every Hulu video I've seen.
Again, I'm talking about when videos aren't high resolution enough to go fullscreen without getting horribly pixelated. I have a very serene desktop and the fewer distractions the better.
I also stated that I think playback controls, or at least the titlebar, will be visible when the video is paused and visible on mouse-over regardless.
Can we all agree that it wouldn't be so bad to lose titlebars, transport, frames, etc from a video window if the user plays (not just opens and lets it sit there) a video and the mouse is un-moved for 5 seconds or so IF all IU pieces snap back where they belong upon any input on the Mac (ie: moving the mouse, touching a key). IU, of course, returns when the movie is paused, or is scrubbed through.
My rationale is that if someone flips open a video, hits play and is not touching the mouse, the user is most likely just WATCHING THE VIDEO and not looking at what other details can be gleaned from titlebars, transport controls, etc. As soon as someone might become interested in such things all they need to do is touch the mouse and all the overlay titlebar, transport, etc appears again.
Apple, like every other company, experiments with the UI. They have to. Nothing is static.
I don't want them to change every program and the OS over all at once. What if it's a bomb? Try one program at a time. If people really don't like it, or it doesn't work, then they can go to something else.
It's a lot of work researching, and re-programming UI's.
It seems like they could do one experiment at a time rather than three. Having all three video programs operate so differently goes against the idea of keeping things consistent.
Like many have said, that's why the fullscreen option exists. If the titlebar or controls bother you, then the rest of the visual clutter on your screen won't help.
What's the point of hiding the titlebar or controls in fuckin' window-mode? People use window-mode for a reason...because they need to get as much info as possible. And people use fullscreen-mode for another reason...because they want to focus on a single thing and don't care what else is going on in the background.
Following that logic, fullscreen mode should have no controls at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol
There isn't a special rule about video that makes it OK for titlebars and controls to disappear while in window-mode.
I never said, nor meant to imply there was one.
With that said, there are already examples of disappearing controls in window-mode in Mac OS X apps: iTunes videos and .MOVs played in Safari 4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol
That rule *could* apply to *anything* because there will always be special cases where people feel that they don't want to be distracted by titlebars and controls. I'm sure anyone could extend this silly idea to other apps. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find someone that would like to browse the internet in a titlebar-less, control-less window when he's simply reading a web page. Wouldn't THAT be great?
You can try to apply any idea specific to a given situation to everything else, that doesn't mean it would be practical.
Video is a very specific situation. It's largely about...watching it. QuickTime X is about ultra efficient playback first and foremost.
There is always QuickLook to play videos. There is no Menu bar that changes and the windows is very simple. You can then go to Fullscreen to see nothing but video. You also have Front Row at your disposal.
I don't understand that comment about Hulu. There is a fullpage option that is accessible with every Hulu video I've seen.
Quicklook is a bigger window than a normal quicktime window and all the controls are on the outside of the window. No matter how long I leave the mouse untouched the UI is still there.
Front row is way too much work for a video that was casually downloaded on the internet.
Regardless of the other facilities in Mac OS to look at videos, I really like the ideas suggested in the article about a minimal video window in QTX that hides itself as much as possible while I am watching video.
I don't understand that comment about Hulu. There is a fullpage option that is accessible with every Hulu video I've seen.
I know, I'm saying the videos Hulu hosts aren't high enough quality to view in fullscreen without said videos getting pixalated (or chugging because my computer is old). So I remove as many UI elements as possible, I use Hulu's built-in "Dim the lights" feature, etc.
Like many have said, that's why the fullscreen option exists. If the titlebar or controls bother you, then the rest of the visual clutter on your screen won't help.
What's the point of hiding the titlebar or controls in fuckin' window-mode? People use window-mode for a reason...because they need to get as much info as possible. And people use fullscreen-mode for another reason...because they want to focus on a single thing and don't care what else is going on in the background.
There isn't a special rule about video that makes it OK for titlebars and controls to disappear while in window-mode. That rule *could* apply to *anything* because there will always be special cases where people feel that they don't want to be distracted by titlebars and controls. I'm sure anyone could extend this silly idea to other apps. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find someone that would like to browse the internet in a titlebar-less, control-less window when he's simply reading a web page. Wouldn't THAT be great?
You certainly can look no further than Adobe Creative Suite. All these applications have multiple editing modes that successively remove more and UI to permit the artist to focus more directly on the task at have. One of the best retouching modes in Photoshop is to remove the entire UI and use keyboard shortcuts to alter your clones stamp settings and edit on a screen filled only with the artwork and no clutter at all. There are several intermediate modes which are tradeoffs between UI centric and artwork centric views.
The only thing that would make these features better would be Adobe figuring out a way to automatically determine what the most appropriate level of UI is based on the context. This sounds like what Apple may be attempting with QTX.
Can we all agree that it wouldn't be so bad to lose titlebars, transport, frames, etc from a video window if the user plays (not just opens and lets it sit there) a video and the mouse is un-moved for 5 seconds or so IF all IU pieces snap back where they belong upon any input on the Mac (ie: moving the mouse, touching a key). IU, of course, returns when the movie is paused, or is scrubbed through.
My rationale is that if someone flips open a video, hits play and is not touching the mouse, the user is most likely just WATCHING THE VIDEO and not looking at what other details can be gleaned from titlebars, transport controls, etc. As soon as someone might become interested in such things all they need to do is touch the mouse and all the overlay titlebar, transport, etc appears again.
The nonsensical comment about low definition videos? Here's a tip: you can view videos at "actual size" in fullscreen. Nothing's forcing you to view them scaled up to ridiculous sizes.
Quote:
Following that logic, fullscreen mode should have no controls at all.
Nope...following that logic, however, fullscreen mode should hide the controls when there is no mouse or keyboard input. Window mode should NEVER hide the controls or any other information that has been around for 3 decades for a reason (info like the name of the file).
Quote:
I never said, nor meant to imply there was one.
With that said, there are already examples of disappearing controls in window-mode in Mac OS X apps: iTunes videos and .MOVs played in Safari 4.
Yes, that's why I never use iTunes for video. The first thing I usually do is set QuickTime Player as the default .mov or .m4v player rather than iTunes because it's such a crummy interface for video (but such an lovely interface for audio).
Embedded videos have an excuse not to have the normal set of controls since they're not in a full-fledged video player.
Quote:
You can try to apply any idea specific to a given situation to everything else, that doesn't mean it would be practical.
Video is a very specific situation. It's largely about...watching it. QuickTime X is about ultra efficient playback first and foremost.
Yeah...and for ultra efficient playback, people need ultra efficient playback controls and that means they have to be visible so that you don't need to guess where they'll appear inside the video playback area. In other words, the controls must always be visible and at the same place.
Putting a fullscreen GUI on what is supposed to be a window-GUI is asking for trouble.
It seems like they could do one experiment at a time rather than three. Having all three video programs operate so differently goes against the idea of keeping things consistent.
That's true. But I suppose they have a number of ideas and are trying to see what works best. We are computer users after all, we should be able to work with a few different interfaces without falling off the cliff.
You certainly can look no further than Adobe Creative Suite. All these applications have multiple editing modes that successively remove more and UI to permit the artist to focus more directly on the task at have. One of the best retouching modes in Photoshop is to remove the entire UI and use keyboard shortcuts to alter your clones stamp settings and edit on a screen filled only with the artwork and no clutter at all. There are several intermediate modes which are tradeoffs between UI centric and artwork centric views.
The only thing that would make these features better would be Adobe figuring out a way to automatically determine what the most appropriate level of UI is based on the context. This sounds like what Apple may be attempting with QTX.
Yeah, but the difference is that QTX is forcing this dumb idea on everyone instead of offering it as an option like Adobe.
Yes, there are lots of apps that offer fullscreen options or palettes that fade. But they're *options*.
Comments
I do have to interject an opinion: I watch a lot of video on my Macs—particularly the Mini attached to my TV. I am constantly doing whatever I can to remove distracting UI elements while watching videos. Usually this entails using fullscreen mode, but a video window that transformed into a clean video box upon mouse-out or mouse-stop sounds awesome!
And, to be fair, a lot of the time the rest of the 'shit on my screen' is driving me up the walls. Maybe I'm just a neat freak. My bad.
Exactly, I'm much the same way. When watching videos on Hulu, for instance, I always hide all of Safari's toolbars and as many other UI elements as possible because Hulu's videos aren't meant for full-screen viewing.
Not only is the titlebar of a QuickTime video window distracting, the play controls, especially the playhead and time ticker, bug me because I don't need them to be visible all the time.
No, it's not. What if you're trying to look at something in the video but the controls get in the way? Say for example, something catches your eye and you pause the video to take a closer look. And all you end up with is a control bar in your way. Floating controls make the most sense in Full Screen.
Agree.
Then move the controls. They are draggable, you know.
Why should we, when they could be out of the way to start with? It's not like having them over the image has other advantages...
Having the title bar of QuickTime videos disappear makes sense because it's a distracting element.
ADD much?
Actually, that's the whole point of full screen mode. If you don't want to be distracted with other things, put it in full screen. If you're not in full screen, then it nearly always means you want to be paying attention to something else as well as the video... in which case, removing useful features to avoid distraction is a stupid plan.
Kim, you can't expect people to read every single thread to find statements that as far as they know, you MAY have made, or you may NOT have made. If you have an argument in any thread, you have to present it to people you're talking to.
Had he asked politely, I would have repeated what I had said in another thread or I would have linked to the post. But seeing as how he came off as a total jerk, I didn't feel like it.
Khm... Will those guys at NYPD agree?? Doesn't better resolution sound like job cuts???
No, just more people behind bars.
Yet I loved Apple exactly for providing me with a minimal toolkit allowing to do what I like right out of the box. It was indeed astonishing that I modeled the plane path in Quartz Composer, selected "Export as QT movie", and... there was no progress bar shown at all! I thought it didn't work
Agreed.
A
Why should we, when they could be out of the way to start with? It's not like having them over the image has other advantages...
It does. I pointed out several before.
Actually, that's the whole point of full screen mode. If you don't want to be distracted with other things, put it in full screen. If you're not in full screen, then it nearly always means you want to be paying attention to something else as well as the video... in which case, removing useful features to avoid distraction is a stupid plan.
That would be true, except the on screen controls disappear with full screen.
Not only is the titlebar of a QuickTime video window distracting, the play controls, especially the playhead and time ticker, bug me because I don't need them to be visible all the time.
Like many have said, that's why the fullscreen option exists. If the titlebar or controls bother you, then the rest of the visual clutter on your screen won't help.
What's the point of hiding the titlebar or controls in fuckin' window-mode? People use window-mode for a reason...because they need to get as much info as possible. And people use fullscreen-mode for another reason...because they want to focus on a single thing and don't care what else is going on in the background.
There isn't a special rule about video that makes it OK for titlebars and controls to disappear while in window-mode. That rule *could* apply to *anything* because there will always be special cases where people feel that they don't want to be distracted by titlebars and controls. I'm sure anyone could extend this silly idea to other apps. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find someone that would like to browse the internet in a titlebar-less, control-less window when he's simply reading a web page. Wouldn't THAT be great?
Had he asked politely, I would have repeated what I had said in another thread or I would have linked to the post. But seeing as how he came off as a total jerk, I didn't feel like it.
It was a challenge, as we all make to someone we're arguing with.
No, just more people behind bars.
Ah. I seem to be ignorant of NY completely.
ADD much?
Hah, no.
Actually, that's the whole point of full screen mode. If you don't want to be distracted with other things, put it in full screen. If you're not in full screen, then it nearly always means you want to be paying attention to something else as well as the video... in which case, removing useful features to avoid distraction is a stupid plan.
Again, I'm talking about when videos aren't high resolution enough to go fullscreen without getting horribly pixelated. I have a very serene desktop and the fewer distractions the better.
I also stated that I think playback controls, or at least the titlebar, will be visible when the video is paused and visible on mouse-over regardless.
I am constantly doing whatever I can to remove distracting UI elements while watching videos
There is always QuickLook to play videos. There is no Menu bar that changes and the windows is very simple. You can then go to Fullscreen to see nothing but video. You also have Front Row at your disposal.
Exactly, I'm much the same way. When watching videos on Hulu, for instance, I always hide all of Safari's toolbars and as many other UI elements as possible because Hulu's videos aren't meant for full-screen viewing.
I don't understand that comment about Hulu. There is a fullpage option that is accessible with every Hulu video I've seen.
Hah, no.
Again, I'm talking about when videos aren't high resolution enough to go fullscreen without getting horribly pixelated. I have a very serene desktop and the fewer distractions the better.
I also stated that I think playback controls, or at least the titlebar, will be visible when the video is paused and visible on mouse-over regardless.
Can we all agree that it wouldn't be so bad to lose titlebars, transport, frames, etc from a video window if the user plays (not just opens and lets it sit there) a video and the mouse is un-moved for 5 seconds or so IF all IU pieces snap back where they belong upon any input on the Mac (ie: moving the mouse, touching a key). IU, of course, returns when the movie is paused, or is scrubbed through.
My rationale is that if someone flips open a video, hits play and is not touching the mouse, the user is most likely just WATCHING THE VIDEO and not looking at what other details can be gleaned from titlebars, transport controls, etc. As soon as someone might become interested in such things all they need to do is touch the mouse and all the overlay titlebar, transport, etc appears again.
Apple, like every other company, experiments with the UI. They have to. Nothing is static.
I don't want them to change every program and the OS over all at once. What if it's a bomb? Try one program at a time. If people really don't like it, or it doesn't work, then they can go to something else.
It's a lot of work researching, and re-programming UI's.
It seems like they could do one experiment at a time rather than three. Having all three video programs operate so differently goes against the idea of keeping things consistent.
Like many have said, that's why the fullscreen option exists. If the titlebar or controls bother you, then the rest of the visual clutter on your screen won't help.
See my above comments to Amorya.
What's the point of hiding the titlebar or controls in fuckin' window-mode? People use window-mode for a reason...because they need to get as much info as possible. And people use fullscreen-mode for another reason...because they want to focus on a single thing and don't care what else is going on in the background.
Following that logic, fullscreen mode should have no controls at all.
There isn't a special rule about video that makes it OK for titlebars and controls to disappear while in window-mode.
I never said, nor meant to imply there was one.
With that said, there are already examples of disappearing controls in window-mode in Mac OS X apps: iTunes videos and .MOVs played in Safari 4.
That rule *could* apply to *anything* because there will always be special cases where people feel that they don't want to be distracted by titlebars and controls. I'm sure anyone could extend this silly idea to other apps. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find someone that would like to browse the internet in a titlebar-less, control-less window when he's simply reading a web page. Wouldn't THAT be great?
You can try to apply any idea specific to a given situation to everything else, that doesn't mean it would be practical.
Video is a very specific situation. It's largely about...watching it.
There is always QuickLook to play videos. There is no Menu bar that changes and the windows is very simple. You can then go to Fullscreen to see nothing but video. You also have Front Row at your disposal.
I don't understand that comment about Hulu. There is a fullpage option that is accessible with every Hulu video I've seen.
Quicklook is a bigger window than a normal quicktime window and all the controls are on the outside of the window. No matter how long I leave the mouse untouched the UI is still there.
Front row is way too much work for a video that was casually downloaded on the internet.
Regardless of the other facilities in Mac OS to look at videos, I really like the ideas suggested in the article about a minimal video window in QTX that hides itself as much as possible while I am watching video.
I don't understand that comment about Hulu. There is a fullpage option that is accessible with every Hulu video I've seen.
I know, I'm saying the videos Hulu hosts aren't high enough quality to view in fullscreen without said videos getting pixalated (or chugging because my computer is old). So I remove as many UI elements as possible, I use Hulu's built-in "Dim the lights" feature, etc.
Like many have said, that's why the fullscreen option exists. If the titlebar or controls bother you, then the rest of the visual clutter on your screen won't help.
What's the point of hiding the titlebar or controls in fuckin' window-mode? People use window-mode for a reason...because they need to get as much info as possible. And people use fullscreen-mode for another reason...because they want to focus on a single thing and don't care what else is going on in the background.
There isn't a special rule about video that makes it OK for titlebars and controls to disappear while in window-mode. That rule *could* apply to *anything* because there will always be special cases where people feel that they don't want to be distracted by titlebars and controls. I'm sure anyone could extend this silly idea to other apps. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find someone that would like to browse the internet in a titlebar-less, control-less window when he's simply reading a web page. Wouldn't THAT be great?
You certainly can look no further than Adobe Creative Suite. All these applications have multiple editing modes that successively remove more and UI to permit the artist to focus more directly on the task at have. One of the best retouching modes in Photoshop is to remove the entire UI and use keyboard shortcuts to alter your clones stamp settings and edit on a screen filled only with the artwork and no clutter at all. There are several intermediate modes which are tradeoffs between UI centric and artwork centric views.
The only thing that would make these features better would be Adobe figuring out a way to automatically determine what the most appropriate level of UI is based on the context. This sounds like what Apple may be attempting with QTX.
Can we all agree that it wouldn't be so bad to lose titlebars, transport, frames, etc from a video window if the user plays (not just opens and lets it sit there) a video and the mouse is un-moved for 5 seconds or so IF all IU pieces snap back where they belong upon any input on the Mac (ie: moving the mouse, touching a key). IU, of course, returns when the movie is paused, or is scrubbed through.
My rationale is that if someone flips open a video, hits play and is not touching the mouse, the user is most likely just WATCHING THE VIDEO and not looking at what other details can be gleaned from titlebars, transport controls, etc. As soon as someone might become interested in such things all they need to do is touch the mouse and all the overlay titlebar, transport, etc appears again.
YES. Thank you.
See my above comments to Amorya.
The nonsensical comment about low definition videos? Here's a tip: you can view videos at "actual size" in fullscreen. Nothing's forcing you to view them scaled up to ridiculous sizes.
Following that logic, fullscreen mode should have no controls at all.
Nope...following that logic, however, fullscreen mode should hide the controls when there is no mouse or keyboard input. Window mode should NEVER hide the controls or any other information that has been around for 3 decades for a reason (info like the name of the file).
I never said, nor meant to imply there was one.
With that said, there are already examples of disappearing controls in window-mode in Mac OS X apps: iTunes videos and .MOVs played in Safari 4.
Yes, that's why I never use iTunes for video. The first thing I usually do is set QuickTime Player as the default .mov or .m4v player rather than iTunes because it's such a crummy interface for video (but such an lovely interface for audio).
Embedded videos have an excuse not to have the normal set of controls since they're not in a full-fledged video player.
You can try to apply any idea specific to a given situation to everything else, that doesn't mean it would be practical.
Video is a very specific situation. It's largely about...watching it.
Yeah...and for ultra efficient playback, people need ultra efficient playback controls and that means they have to be visible so that you don't need to guess where they'll appear inside the video playback area. In other words, the controls must always be visible and at the same place.
Putting a fullscreen GUI on what is supposed to be a window-GUI is asking for trouble.
It seems like they could do one experiment at a time rather than three. Having all three video programs operate so differently goes against the idea of keeping things consistent.
That's true. But I suppose they have a number of ideas and are trying to see what works best. We are computer users after all, we should be able to work with a few different interfaces without falling off the cliff.
You certainly can look no further than Adobe Creative Suite. All these applications have multiple editing modes that successively remove more and UI to permit the artist to focus more directly on the task at have. One of the best retouching modes in Photoshop is to remove the entire UI and use keyboard shortcuts to alter your clones stamp settings and edit on a screen filled only with the artwork and no clutter at all. There are several intermediate modes which are tradeoffs between UI centric and artwork centric views.
The only thing that would make these features better would be Adobe figuring out a way to automatically determine what the most appropriate level of UI is based on the context. This sounds like what Apple may be attempting with QTX.
Yeah, but the difference is that QTX is forcing this dumb idea on everyone instead of offering it as an option like Adobe.
Yes, there are lots of apps that offer fullscreen options or palettes that fade. But they're *options*.