AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple seeds second beta of Mac OS X 10.6.2 to developers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple seeds second beta of Mac OS X 10.6.2 to developers - Page 2

post #41 of 82
10/10/09 at 7:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You assume you are the majority in the way that you do things. I didn't even notice a functional difference in Expose. I set Expose to open with my mouse button 4. I don't use my keyboard at all.



When I repeated your test under Leopard 10.5.8, I see neither. Only when they were not minimized or hidden did Expose show either.

Yes. That's the proper behaviour. It's NOT the way the Snow Leopard acts.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 82
10/10/09 at 7:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

I'll give you one clearly, objectively broken thing.

Open TextEdit. Write "minimized" in the window, and then minimize it (with the yellow button). Open a new window. Write "Not minimized" in that window. Then use Command-H to hide TextEdit. Then view "All Windows" in Expose. Notice how the MINIMIZED window shows up in Expose, but the NOT MINIMIZED window does not show up in Expose.

Wow. So that's why Expose is 'broken'?

Do you think if you tried a little harder you could find something even more trivial?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #43 of 82
10/10/09 at 8:30am
Consistency of design and spatial clues - both part of the Apple HIG - require that windows retain their relative size and scale when in exposé. Snow Leopard exposé breaks both of those rules. Windows change their relative position, change their relative size, and become unreadable. That's inexcusably broken behavior. Whether the majority of people rely on the correct behavior is an irrelevant question. Software design is and should be a meritocracy, not mob rule. If you want what the "majority" seem to think is best, go back to Windows.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 82
10/10/09 at 9:08am
It'd be nice if they made it so you could tell you have more than one 'document' per app open in the Dock, much like Windows 7 does.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 82
10/10/09 at 9:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

Submitted it pre-10.6.1... Here's hoping for a fix in 10.6.2.

Besides, that's minor stuff. If you want a really egregious, unforgivable bug in Snow Leopard, Calculator has got it.

First on my list of piss-offs is that the caret (Shift+6) doesn't do exponentiation like you'd expect. In fact, Shift+6 does the exact opposite; it takes the nth root of something.

Second, it can't parse mathematical expressions correctly. Try calculating 5^2*5^2. (The caret here indicates exponentiation.) On a real scientific calculator (and on Calculator in 10.4 and 10.5), it's parsed as "pow(5,2)*pow(5,2)" and the answer is 625. In Snow Leopard, it's parsed as "pow(pow(5,2)*5,2)" and the answer is 15625.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Climbing up the scale of stupidity, calculator can't even do simple arithmetic anymore. Open the "Paper Tape" window and then calculate 90-2.2. If you have 15-digits of accuracy enabled (which is the default setting), then you'll be quite surprised to learn that the answer is actually 87.799999999999997.

And a final glitch. Open up calculator about 20 times. You'll find that some of those times will have a bright "LCD" and some of those times it will have a dark "LCD".

I'm not going to fire up my Turbo Dimension Cube, but I bet if I did, the calculator in NeXTStep would work fine
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 82
10/10/09 at 10:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

Yes. That's the proper behaviour. It's NOT the way the Snow Leopard acts.

So you specifically told the OS to Hide your window, and then don't like it when it doesn't show it to you in Expose? Because of this you 'hate' Expose? Seems unhealthy to me.

I wouldn't (and didn't) even give this a second though. First because I don't even have a use for 'hide' and second, I actually prefer to see all apps, whether they are minimized or not. The SL way seems proper to me. If it's working as designed, then it's not a bug, it's just something you don't like.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #47 of 82
10/10/09 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

So you specifically told the OS to Hide your window, and then don't like it when it doesn't show it to you in Expose? Because of this you 'hate' Expose? Seems unhealthy to me.

I wouldn't (and didn't) even give this a second though. First because I don't even have a use for 'hide' and second, I actually prefer to see all apps, whether they are minimized or not. The SL way seems proper to me. If it's working as designed, then it's not a bug, it's just something you don't like.

I dont have use for that option either and overall I think its a very trival thing so this will be my last post on it, but I think he has a valid point and this should be submitted as a bug. He told the app to hide, not just the open windows. At that point, when Exposé is called either all windows from that hidden yet open app should appear or none at all.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #48 of 82
10/10/09 at 10:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

...and I say this because OS X, unlike Windows, behaves in a "document-centric" mode instead of "application-centric" mode.

I think you have that backwards.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 82
10/10/09 at 12:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrarlen View Post

Has Apple addressed the crashing of Adobe CS4 yet?

Wrong question. Correct question is

Has Adobe addressed the crashing of Adobe CS4 yet?
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 82
10/10/09 at 12:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrarlen View Post

Has Apple addressed the crashing of Adobe CS4 yet?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximara View Post

Wrong question. Correct question is

Has Adobe addressed the crashing of Adobe CS4 yet?

Im under the impression that all should be working fine...
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/files/A...eopard_FAQ.pdf
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #51 of 82
10/10/09 at 12:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Amiga OS had that capability back in 1991. In some ways, it was a beautiful OS.

The Amiga was the best of both worlds. It was TRULY ahead of it's time. It was just as easy to use as Macintosh, but better than both. It was cheaper too! I guess there just wasn't room for a second proprietary system. I really had not tried Macintosh before I did Windows after the Amiga. When I finally did, I did it because It reminded so much of the simplicity of the Amiga. Icons, Drag and Drop, Delete something by dragging to the Trash. Insert a Disk, it appears.. It was heaven.

It had true MultiTasking, better color management, Great Audio. It was like I said.. Ahead of it's time.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 82
10/10/09 at 3:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimoase View Post

For the last couple of years the Mail rules window will go off the screen when there are more than 25 rules entries... ie filter to a mail box for 25+ mail sources. [snippy snip snip]
Any one else want to try this? Create a rule... enter 25 or more conditions. Then see if the window buttons are visible.

Jim

Yep, they are.

When you're list gets too long, a scroll bar appears (as expected) on the right of the rules list.

It's safe to get in the water again.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 82
10/10/09 at 5:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by steviet02 View Post

Why would you even be thinking that they would add new features to non major releases?

The have in the past (minor UI tweaks, new glide pad gestures, Boot Camp, Safari, and I can go on) . Have you been on the Mac platform that long?
Tory Hagen
Break the Wedge!
Reply
Tory Hagen
Break the Wedge!
Reply
post #54 of 82
10/10/09 at 10:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

So you specifically told the OS to Hide your window, and then don't like it when it doesn't show it to you in Expose? Because of this you 'hate' Expose? Seems unhealthy to me.

Did you actually read what I posted? I'm assuming that you didn't, since that's not what I'm complaining about at all. And I didn't use the word "hate" so I'd prefer if you didn't put it in quotation marks and attribute it to me.

I'm complaining about the exact OPPOSITE of what you've suggested. I'm complaining that "Hide" DOESN'T effectively hide things from Expose, and things that SHOULD be hidden AREN'T. If I minimize a TextEdit document and then "Hide TextEdit", there's absolutely no reason why the minimized window should not be hidden from Expose just like all of the maximized ones.

Get it now?
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 82
10/11/09 at 6:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

Did you actually read what I posted? I'm assuming that you didn't, since that's not what I'm complaining about at all. And I didn't use the word "hate" so I'd prefer if you didn't put it in quotation marks and attribute it to me.

I'm complaining about the exact OPPOSITE of what you've suggested. I'm complaining that "Hide" DOESN'T effectively hide things from Expose, and things that SHOULD be hidden AREN'T. If I minimize a TextEdit document and then "Hide TextEdit", there's absolutely no reason why the minimized window should not be hidden from Expose just like all of the maximized ones.

Get it now?

No I don't get it. It doesn't work that way in Leopard either. If it's hidden or minimized, it doesn't show either.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #56 of 82
10/11/09 at 8:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

Submitted it pre-10.6.1... Here's hoping for a fix in 10.6.2.

Besides, that's minor stuff. If you want a really egregious, unforgivable bug in Snow Leopard, Calculator has got it.

First on my list of piss-offs is that the caret (Shift+6) doesn't do exponentiation like you'd expect. In fact, Shift+6 does the exact opposite; it takes the nth root of something.

Second, it can't parse mathematical expressions correctly. Try calculating 5^2*5^2. (The caret here indicates exponentiation.) On a real scientific calculator (and on Calculator in 10.4 and 10.5), it's parsed as "pow(5,2)*pow(5,2)" and the answer is 625. In Snow Leopard, it's parsed as "pow(pow(5,2)*5,2)" and the answer is 15625.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Climbing up the scale of stupidity, calculator can't even do simple arithmetic anymore. Open the "Paper Tape" window and then calculate 90-2.2. If you have 15-digits of accuracy enabled (which is the default setting), then you'll be quite surprised to learn that the answer is actually 87.799999999999997.

And a final glitch. Open up calculator about 20 times. You'll find that some of those times will have a bright "LCD" and some of those times it will have a dark "LCD".

on't

I don't frequently use the Mac calculator to that degree anymore; because I either use Excel or my own applications formulae/functions instead.

However, since Snow Leopard, I have used Spotlight for similarly complicated calculations a number of times. Works extremely well if I must say so myself.

If anybody hasn't tried it, just enter a calculation in Spotlight. You don't even have to hit the equal sign. http://www.macosxhints.com/article.p...d%2Bcalculator
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 82
10/11/09 at 8:40am
My Fuji Xerox DocuPrint 203A is no longer manufactured, but it worked perfectly with Tiger. Now with Snow Leopard the printer fails to function, indicating that a software update is required, but none is available. Will the new version of Snow Leopard allow these old drivers to function with the OS, or will we have to chuck these printers (or revert to Tiger)?
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 82
10/11/09 at 11:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

on't

I don't frequently use the Mac calculator to that degree anymore; because I either use Excel or my own applications formulae/functions instead.

However, since Snow Leopard, I have used Spotlight for similarly complicated calculations a number of times. Works extremely well if I must say so myself.

If anybody hasn't tried it, just enter a calculation in Spotlight. You don't even have to hit the equal sign. http://www.macosxhints.com/article.p...d%2Bcalculator

Spotlight does Bueller_007 calculation example (5^2*5^2 = 625) correctly.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #59 of 82
10/11/09 at 6:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I never use the Hide app option so I would never have come across that feature, but I agree that its bad design. Either the whole app should be hidden from Exposé or all windows should show up in Exposé. This seems like something that should be submitted to Apple. Thanks for the clear example.

See, I actually want hidden windows to be completely ignored by expose, I hide them because they are things like e-mail or Safari that have one window & I'd never use the expose feature on them.

Expose for me is mostly all windows to switch between apps, or I use the per app expose on Finder.

Everyone is going to have a little different preference, for me I'm glad it operates to my own. Sorry folks.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 82
10/11/09 at 9:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

See, I actually want hidden windows to be completely ignored by expose, I hide them because they are things like e-mail or Safari that have one window & I'd never use the expose feature on them.

Expose for me is mostly all windows to switch between apps, or I use the per app expose on Finder.

Everyone is going to have a little different preference, for me I'm glad it operates to my own. Sorry folks.

But this is exactly the point. You don't hide windows; you hide an application. (Notice that the menu says "Hide Firefox", "Hide Safari", etc., not "Hide This Window".)

What we're saying is that we want exactly what you want: hidden applications should be completely ignored by Expose. You shouldn't see any of a hidden application's windows in Expose's "All Windows" view--minimized windows of the hidden application should also be hidden.

Again, try the demo I laid out, and tell me if you think Expose's behaviour makes ANY intuitive sense:
1) Open TextEdit.
2) Write "MINIMIZED" in the document.
3) Minimize the window using the yellow button in the top left corner.
4) Hit Command+N to open a new TextEdit document.
5) Write "NOT MINIMIZED" in this document.
6) Hit Command+H to hide the application.
7) Activate Expose's "All Windows" view.

You'll see that the minimized document appears, but the other document does not. The problem is that I don't want EITHER of them to appear--that's why I hid the application.

If maximized windows of hidden applications don't appear in Expose, then minimized windows of hidden applications sure as hell shouldn't either. Expose's behaviour at present makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

"Keep ALL of a hidden application's windows out of Expose!" is what we're saying.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 82
10/12/09 at 7:24am
When reports of a new OS X point release start circulating you can bet your 401K that threads like this one will quickly devolve into arguments over what is a bug and what is not. It seems everyone thinks their pet issue is experienced by every other user and is therefore known to all. Then come the "I hope Apple fixes this" comments followed immediately by the "It's not broke, it's your broken system" replies. The comments that are the funniest are the ones accusing Apple of not fixing something because they are incompetent. It's all so predictable but entertaining as well. We're all guilty of this behavior from time to time. The fact is none of us really know what the heck is going on. Only the software engineers at Apple do and maybe not all the time either. I, for one, continue to be amazed that computers do what they do at all.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 82
10/12/09 at 7:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

I, for one, continue to be amazed that computers do what they do at all.

Which reminds me of.....Everything's Amazing, Nobody's Happy
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 82
10/12/09 at 8:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JupiterOne View Post

Which reminds me of.....Everything's Amazing, Nobody's Happy

That video perfectly describes this thread! Thank you! I had never heard of Louis C.K.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 82
10/12/09 at 8:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrarlen View Post

Has Apple addressed the crashing of Adobe CS4 yet?

That's Adobe's Responsibility... Not Apples.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 82
10/12/09 at 11:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

1) Open TextEdit.
2) Write "MINIMIZED" in the document.
3) Minimize the window using the yellow button in the top left corner.
4) Hit Command+N to open a new TextEdit document.
5) Write "NOT MINIMIZED" in this document.
6) Hit Command+H to hide the application.
7) Activate Expose's "All Windows" view.

Just out of curiosity (I'm using a PC right now so I can't try myself), could you please confirm the result is the same if you create the "NOT MINIMIZED" document first and activate Expose's "All Windows" view right after minimizing the "MINIMIZED" document?
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 82
10/12/09 at 2:54pm
Hope Apple fixes web sharing. Snow Leopard broke it. For me, Snow Leopard has been nothing but disaster!! How's that for praise. http://forums.appleinsider.com/images/smilies/lol.gif
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 82
10/12/09 at 3:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarman View Post

Just out of curiosity (I'm using a PC right now so I can't try myself), could you please confirm the result is the same if you create the "NOT MINIMIZED" document first and activate Expose's "All Windows" view right after minimizing the "MINIMIZED" document?

Yes, it's the same. It has nothing to do with the order in which you perform the steps. Minimized windows of hidden apps always show up in Expose's All Windows mode.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 82
10/12/09 at 3:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

Yes, it's the same. It has nothing to do with the order in which you perform the steps. Minimized windows of hidden apps always show up in Expose's All Windows mode.

And to me that seems logical. The whole purpose of Expose is to show Open apps. It makes sense to me if they are hidden to not show them in Expose. It does not make sense that a window that is minimized wouldn't show.

If you don't want it to show up, hide it instead of minimize it. I prefer the new way as it seems more logical to me. "Hide" actually does what it's name claims. If I open Expose I want to see all apps, otherwise I have to hunt in Expose only to realize it's minimized and then turn around and hunt for it on the dock under Leopard.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #69 of 82
10/12/09 at 3:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario View Post

CS4 is not crashing for me. Not even once and I'm a heavy user of Photoshop.

If you would say that to the retouchers where I work I think they would look at you like this:
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 82
10/12/09 at 3:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by a Martin View Post

If you would say that to the retouchers where I work I think they would look at you like this:

I use it heavily as well. Never a single crash under SL. Are you doing some specific function/filter that makes it crash?
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #71 of 82
10/12/09 at 3:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by webraider View Post

That's Adobe's Responsibility... Not Apples.

It's not always that simple. Apple provides the OS/API's and there can be bugs in it that causes problems.
I'm not saying Adobe's code is flawless, but to blame everything on them is a bit naive.

Check the thread on Adobe's forum about Photoshop and Snow Leopard here:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/492068?tstart=0
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 82
10/12/09 at 3:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by a Martin View Post

It's not always that simple. Apple provides the OS/API's and there can be bugs in it that causes problems.
I'm not saying Adobe's code is flawless, but to blame everything on them is a bit naive.

Check the thread on Adobe's forum about Photoshop and Snow Leopard here:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/492068?tstart=0

I see nothing in this thread that points to Apple admitting fault in this case. I see someone indicating that they believe it's Apple's responsibility, but this type of finger pointing is common when working with Vendors. It appears to be limited to users on software raid, with CS3 (Not sure if that CS3 was a typo in the thread or not) who are saving to the raid array with a new filename. This may be why many of us are not seeing this issue. Unless I missed it, I don't see anywhere where Apple has conceded that this was a fault in their code. It appears the Adobe folks didn't do thorough testing however, before signing off that it was certified under SL.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #73 of 82
10/12/09 at 9:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

And to me that seems logical. The whole purpose of Expose is to show Open apps. It makes sense to me if they are hidden to not show them in Expose. It does not make sense that a window that is minimized wouldn't show.

For the last time:

You don't hide windows. You hide applications. That means that the minimized windows of a hidden application should also be hidden.

Quote:
If you don't want it to show up, hide it instead of minimize it.

I often have up to 10 PDF documents open on my computer at one time. I use minimize to get 3 or 4 of them out of the way temporarily. I can't hide them, because that would hide ALL of my PDF documents.

If I have a few minimized PDFs, and I temporarily hide Preview so that I can access my Word documents more easily, I don't want the minimized PDFs to show up in Expose. And why would they? Why on earth would I want Expose to show me the minimized windows (but not the maximized windows) of a hidden application? By minimizing the window and then hiding the app, I told the operating system to make those windows go away TWICE.

Do you see now how the usage of minimize and hide differ?
  • Minimize is window-specific. It is designed with the express purpose of getting a single window out of your way temporarily. These windows SHOULD show up in Expose (just like all of the app's other windows), UNLESS the app is hidden.
  • Hide is application-specific. It is designed with the express purpose of getting ALL of the windows of an application out of your way temporarily. NO windows of a hidden app should appear in Expose.

Expose displaying minimized windows of hidden applications makes no sense whatsoever.
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 82
10/13/09 at 2:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I see nothing in this thread that points to Apple admitting fault in this case. I see someone indicating that they believe it's Apple's responsibility, but this type of finger pointing is common when working with Vendors. It appears to be limited to users on software raid, with CS3 (Not sure if that CS3 was a typo in the thread or not) who are saving to the raid array with a new filename. This may be why many of us are not seeing this issue. Unless I missed it, I don't see anywhere where Apple has conceded that this was a fault in their code. It appears the Adobe folks didn't do thorough testing however, before signing off that it was certified under SL.

I'm not saying it is Apple's fault entirely. All I'm saying is that Mac OS X has/can have bugs that causes applications to crash.

Also, (for whatever reason) all versions of Adobe Photoshop has been crashing for us once in a while. 10+ retouchers working full time in Photoshop.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 82
10/13/09 at 3:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller_007 View Post

For the last time:

You don't hide windows. You hide applications. That means that the minimized windows of a hidden application should also be hidden.



I often have up to 10 PDF documents open on my computer at one time. I use minimize to get 3 or 4 of them out of the way temporarily. I can't hide them, because that would hide ALL of my PDF documents.

If I have a few minimized PDFs, and I temporarily hide Preview so that I can access my Word documents more easily, I don't want the minimized PDFs to show up in Expose. And why would they? Why on earth would I want Expose to show me the minimized windows (but not the maximized windows) of a hidden application? By minimizing the window and then hiding the app, I told the operating system to make those windows go away TWICE.

Do you see now how the usage of minimize and hide differ?
  • Minimize is window-specific. It is designed with the express purpose of getting a single window out of your way temporarily. These windows SHOULD show up in Expose (just like all of the app's other windows), UNLESS the app is hidden.
  • Hide is application-specific. It is designed with the express purpose of getting ALL of the windows of an application out of your way temporarily. NO windows of a hidden app should appear in Expose.

Expose displaying minimized windows of hidden applications makes no sense whatsoever.

It may not make sense to you, but it makes perfect sense to me. Just because you don't like the way it works, doesn't make it illogical. You have a very specific use that is counter productive with Expose. Sounds like you need a combination of Expose and Spaces to better organize your work, or possibly some third party app that would handle that functionality. I wouldn't say the current system is illogical, but rather you need something in between the two extremes.

Have you submitted a bug report?
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #76 of 82
10/13/09 at 9:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

It may not make sense to you, but it makes perfect sense to me. Just because you don't like the way it works, doesn't make it illogical.

Nobody said it was illogical "just because [he] do[es]n't like the way it works." Don't be so disingenuous. Putting words in other people's mouths is inappropriate behavior.

Acting as though only a window is hidden, when - ostensibly - the entire application is hidden, is objectively illogical. Logic would dictate: the entire application is hidden; the window is part of the application; therefore the window is hidden. The window is hidden; hidden windows should not show in exposé; therefore the window should not show in exposé. I don't know what "logic" looks like where you come from, but your characterization of it is deficient.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 82
10/13/09 at 9:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LtKaffee View Post

Nobody said it was illogical "just because [he] do[es]n't like the way it works." Don't be so disingenuous. Putting words in other people's mouths is inappropriate behavior.

Acting as though only a window is hidden, when - ostensibly - the entire application is hidden, is objectively illogical. Logic would dictate: the entire application is hidden; the window is part of the application; therefore the window is hidden. The window is hidden; hidden windows should not show in exposé; therefore the window should not show in exposé. I don't know what "logic" looks like where you come from, but your characterization of it is deficient.

Actually they did. Try to keep up, shall we?

Quote:
If maximized windows of hidden applications don't appear in Expose, then minimized windows of hidden applications sure as hell shouldn't either. Expose's behaviour at present makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I believe this would imply 'illogical'?

When you minimize a Window, you are minimizing only a part or aspect of the application, not the application, just as 'closing' an app in OS X doesn't actually close the application. You are only closing that instance.

Hide is application wide. It affects the entire application. Minimize only affects an aspect (instance) of an application. From my perspective, your logic is flawed. If you 'hide' an application, it does not show in Expose. If you just minimize a window, it does. Easy enough.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #78 of 82
10/13/09 at 9:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Actually they did. Try to keep up, shall we?

No, they didn't. And there is no such thing as "logic from someone's perspective." Logic is ipso facto non-subjective.

Your behavior on this board is increasingly inappropriate. It's dramatically impolite to insult the intelligence of the people trying to make you understand a simple concept: hidden applications should not show in exposé, but they do.

In light of your ostensible inability to understand such a simple idea, I've decided that you do not understand because you do not wish to understand. You are, in a word, a troll. Be gone.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 82
10/13/09 at 10:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LtKaffee View Post

No, they didn't. And there is no such thing as "logic from someone's perspective." Logic is ipso facto non-subjective.

Your behavior on this board is increasingly inappropriate. It's dramatically impolite to insult the intelligence of the people trying to make you understand a simple concept: hidden applications should not show in exposé, but they do.

In light of your ostensible inability to understand such a simple idea, I've decided that you do not understand because you do not wish to understand. You are, in a word, a troll. Be gone.

You should learn the definition of Troll. If I disagree with you, it doesn't make me a troll. As to inappropriate, that is your opinion. Ignore me if you wish. It won't bother me in the slightest.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #80 of 82
10/13/09 at 2:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Hide is application wide. It affects the entire application. Minimize only affects an aspect (instance) of an application. From my perspective, your logic is flawed. If you 'hide' an application, it does not show in Expose. If you just minimize a window, it does. Easy enough.

I think you agree with me and you just don't know it.

If you "just minimize" a window, it SHOULD show up in Expose. I agree with you.

But if I subsequently "hide" an application that has minimized windows, then ALL windows of that hidden application (including the minimized ones) should be hidden from Expose.

When it comes to the behaviour of Expose, Hide should take precedence over Minimize because windows belong to applications, not the other way around.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple seeds second beta of Mac OS X 10.6.2 to developers