or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Sources: Apple developing updated AirPorts, two-button mouse
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sources: Apple developing updated AirPorts, two-button mouse - Page 4

post #121 of 253
Food for thought:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1777308,00.asp
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #122 of 253
Yup. And when it gets rolled out here, I can replace my DSL modem with an 802.11n access point, and have it be the ISP link. Then I can upgrade my laptop at my convenience. In the meantime, the rest of my network setup doesn't have to change at all. Excellent.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #123 of 253
Hmmmm...I think Apple should stop trying to reinvent the wheel and ship a basic scroll-wheel three button mouse. Apple's one button mouse doesn't seem like such an ergonomic breakthrough, and the troubling thing is that Apple believes their own one-button mouse is a work of genius. It's a good thing Apple doesn't build cars, or we would have oblong steering wheels and radios with one knob to control everything. Yes, sometimes designers put too many functions on the right mouse button, but you know what? It's also a problem with designers put too many controls on the LEFT button. Spread functions out between two buttons and a computer is much easier to use. Oh, and I've seen many frustrated Mac users who couldn't remember all the arcane key combos they needed because of Apple's stubbornness over the one button mouse.

We're at the point now where independent designers are making the true innovations in mouse design. Many users don't want an innovative mouse, they want something simple that doesn't make their wrist or hand hurt. Apple should cater to these users and let the "power-users" buy their own 12 button mice with twin scroll wheels and optical document scanner.
post #124 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Yes, sometimes designers put too many functions on the right mouse button, but you know what? It's also a problem with designers put too many controls on the LEFT button.

JD, that sentence simply doesn't even make sense. The left button is what interacts with the UI widgets on screen in a direct manner. What you're saying is that the UI widgets are what... cumbersome? Or are you trying to discuss modifier-key-assisted-left-clicks? Red herring. The functionality will still be found elsewhere using unmodified-left-click in a well designed system.

Modifier-click, or right/center/upper-left/behind-your-back-click, it doesn't matter, those are simply not unmodified-left-click, and are to be treated equally: as efficiency items only.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #125 of 253
This sounds like the kind of mouse I'm looking for, I'd buy one of these if I get an iMac or mini;

Quote:
Apple is known to have patented a "scroll wheel mouse" that uses a small iPod-like trackpad atop an otherwise familiar Apple mouse design; more recent recon suggests the new mouse will also come equipped to detect "right-clicks" when the mouse is pressed on its right side but that there will be no actual separate button.

This feature will only be enabled by default on PowerMacs with which it will ship; on consumer-oriented Macs, Apple's mouse drives will detect only standard single-button functionality from the mouse unless the user enables right-click detection in the Mouse preference panel.

In this way, Apple finally brings additional mouse functionality to market without breaking one of its core human-interface principles: no application should *require* or expect multiple mouse buttons by default.

This is from macosxrumors.com, apologies if it has already been posted.
post #126 of 253
The one think I'd love to see in Airport, but I don't think we will, is a base station with a built-in broadband modem and an audio output. That is all I need, and I'm sure a lot of people would agree. Sure, chuck in a USB port and an ethernet as well just to keep everyone happy, and make it £100 and I'd be there. As it is, if I want to go wireless, I need to buy a wireless broadband modem router, an airport card, and an airport express - that's a lot of money so I'll be staying wired unless Apple can do the above for me.
post #127 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by sickoperationz
a 3 button gyration mouse would be superb and perfect to go with tiger

next step: 3d space, gyration mouse sensing the Z so u can go in and out rather then just left right, up down . THAT would be hot...

hehehe. I hear you. The Finder will be the coolest 3D game on the Mac.
post #128 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
JD, that sentence simply doesn't even make sense. The left button is what interacts with the UI widgets on screen in a direct manner. What you're saying is that the UI widgets are what... cumbersome? Or are you trying to discuss modifier-key-assisted-left-clicks? Red herring. The functionality will still be found elsewhere using unmodified-left-click in a well designed system

Yes, it makes sense. I'm talking about Apple putting too many functions in their single button. Key combos take two hands, a right-click is ONE finger. Tell me how Apple's method is better.
post #129 of 253
Red herring. We were discussing creating a UI where the *only* access to certain functionality was in right-or-other click. That's the quagmire that a single button as default avoids.

What you're discussing is how one accesses secondary functionality for efficiency. Apple supports multiple buttons just fine. If you want one, go get one, no one's stopping you, the support is in the OS.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #130 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by webmail
Why wouldn't a wireless mouse be standard? I've seen my share of latency filled wireless mice, but take for example the Logitech MX1000 laser mouse wireless using fastrf.

That mouse is the best one in the market!

On another note, perhaps the Apple mouse will be like this:

Have two buttons - left side clicks, not 'button' as such (as with the current one) and right side same as the left. The scroll wheel won't be a crude out of date ugly looking wheel , but instead will be a touch sensitive strip in the middle of the two buttons, like the iPods.

And use the same wireless system as the Logitech mouse, but Apple has a fetish with bluetooth, so this isn't going to happen.
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
post #131 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by mattyj
That mouse [MX1000] is the best one in the market!

I totally agree!! Best mouse EVAR!

Whatever Apple releases, it's not even going to begin to compare, and the biggest reason you just pointed out:

Quote:
Originally posted by mattyj
And use the same wireless system as the Logitech mouse, but Apple has a fetish with bluetooth, so this isn't going to happen.

Yeah bluetooth only refreshes 80x per second, logitech and USB both refresh 125x per second.

Not to mention logitech's next-generation laser that nobody has bothered to use but them.

pictures:
button listing

Mouse with stand
Mac user since before you were born.
Reply
Mac user since before you were born.
Reply
post #132 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by slughead
I totally agree!! Best mouse EVAR!

Whatever Apple releases, it's not even going to begin to compare, and the biggest reason you just pointed out:



Yeah bluetooth only refreshes 80x per second, logitech and USB both refresh 125x per second.

Not to mention logitech's next-generation laser that nobody has bothered to use but them.

pictures:
button listing

Mouse with stand

logitech's software is dodgy though and so is the tracking on some of the logitech mice. My MX500 is good though. MX1000 is too heavy.
post #133 of 253
Why do you find it too heavy? I think the weight is alright. The shape is a bit weird though. But despite that I still reckon it's the best mouse out there atm.
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
post #134 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by MacCrazy
logitech's software is dodgy though and so is the tracking on some of the logitech mice. My MX500 is good though. MX1000 is too heavy.

I've never had a problem with the software aside from the MX1000 being too sensitive and I had to modify a plist. Their new version takes care of all of that.

You get used to the weight after a couple weeks. My reaction time in FPS games half the time gets me to the top of the server.
Mac user since before you were born.
Reply
Mac user since before you were born.
Reply
post #135 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
Red herring. We were discussing creating a UI where the *only* access to certain functionality was in right-or-other click. That's the quagmire that a single button as default avoids.

What you're discussing is how one accesses secondary functionality for efficiency. Apple supports multiple buttons just fine. If you want one, go get one, no one's stopping you, the support is in the OS.

It's not a red herring, it's the crux of the issue! If Apple had a two button mouse, what would be wrong with make some functions exclusive to one of the buttons?

It's like this, I've got three stalks on my steering column. One stalk has turn signals and head light functions, the other has windshield wiper functions, and third is for cruise control. You see, each one is specialized and has it's very own functions - no other stalk may have the functions of another. If each of the three stalks did everything, or if, God forbid, the automaker had put all of the functions on a single stalk, it would be a friggin' mess. Well that's Apple, trying to put three stalks worth of functions on one button.

It's just good design to spread functions out among the control surfaces you have. Now with a mouse this could get confusing, probably with three buttons and definitely with >3, but two buttons works. We know it works because millions of people use them on Windows with no problem. Many here at AI use a >2 button mouse and wouldn't part with it for anything.

A one button mouse is a joke. Apple's mice have been jokes for years, and have fueled a Mac mouse industry for those who throw out the "Pro" mouse. And guess what? 90% of replacement Mac mice are >1 button! So the argument that people can't figure out more than one button is bogus.

And note that for every instance of bad two button mouse design, one can find another instance where two buttons makes interacting with the computer faster and more enjoyable. Keeping a one button mouse to defend against bad software development is foolish. It's like sticking with a CRT because one's afraid of a dead pixel.
post #136 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
It's not a red herring, it's the crux of the issue! If Apple had a two button mouse, what would be wrong with make some functions exclusive to one of the buttons?

I'm sorry, have you not been following *any* of the conversation? If that's your opinion, fine, but it flies in the face of every principle of good UI design, comprehension, and usability that research of the last 30 years has put out.

Nothing else is worth arguing about, if that's your initial assumption.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #137 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
I'm sorry, have you not been following *any* of the conversation? If that's your opinion, fine, but it flies in the face of every principle of good UI design, comprehension, and usability that research of the last 30 years has put out.

Nothing else is worth arguing about, if that's your initial assumption.

Ok, cool.

You stick with your one button mouse, and I'll keep my two button mouse. And Apple will continue shipping one button turds for Mac users to throw away.

Sounds like a good arrangement to me!
post #138 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Ok, cool.

You stick with your one button mouse, and I'll keep my two button mouse. And Apple will continue shipping one button turds for Mac users to throw away.

Sounds like a good arrangement to me!

The reason you need more than button is due to bad UI design. If companies, like Microsoft designed a proper interface for Office you would only need one button. If Apple made a two-button mouse it would open the floodgates for more badly designed software. Right-click is a contextual menu, if the software companies (Apple included) made a contextual dashboard one button would suffice. When I'm a home I use an eight-button mouse. When I'm on the move a one-button track-pad. Both work fine for me. Some of Safari's features (such as spell-check) are right-click only and this needs to be addressed. Although right-click is faster than searching through menus. Scrolling is more important than right-click.
post #139 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Ok, cool.

You stick with your one button mouse, and I'll keep my two button mouse. And Apple will continue shipping one button turds for Mac users to throw away.

Sounds like a good arrangement to me!

You still don't get it?

He wasn't arguing that he prefers to use a one-button mouse. Instead, he prefers using a platform which ships a one-button mouse as default. It forces developers to not hide things only in contextual menus.


Efficiency is good. That's why Apple supports multiple buttons.
Discoverablility is good. That's why Apples ship with a single-button mouse as default.

There is merit in both.
post #140 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by MacCrazy
Some of Safari's features (such as spell-check) are right-click only and this needs to be addressed.

Select text. Edit -> Spelling -> Check Spelling.

Or, Cmd-;

My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #141 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
Select text. Edit -> Spelling -> Check Spelling.

Or, Cmd-;


not if you want to check just the selected word quickly without using spell checker for the whole text box.
post #142 of 253
D'oh, you're right, it doesn't work on a per-selection basis. Cmd-; goes to the next misspelled word in the text field. The closest thing is to bring up the Spelling box with Cmd-:, then place the cursor before the misspelled word, and hit Cmd-;, or 'Find Next'. If it triggers a misspelling, it will give you the same options in the box as you get in the contextual menu. I *guess* technically that is the same as the right-click, but...
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #143 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg

A one button mouse is a joke. Apple's mice have been jokes for years, and have fueled a Mac mouse industry for those who throw out the "Pro" mouse. And guess what? 90% of replacement Mac mice are >1 button! So the argument that people can't figure out more than one button is bogus.

And note that for every instance of bad two button mouse design, one can find another instance where two buttons makes interacting with the computer faster and more enjoyable. Keeping a one button mouse to defend against bad software development is foolish. It's like sticking with a CRT because one's afraid of a dead pixel.

1. The one-button mouse is not a joke. It's a pointing device you and many others don't like, but many do.
2. Did you just make up that "90% of replacement Mac mice are >1 button" claim? Is that an estimation, a guess or do you have a source? I don't doubt you could be right on that figure. I guess it could be even higher than 90% but I think it's important to teach people not to fabricate stats on the fly or at least indicate it's a guess, an estimation or a documented stat, etc.
3. More buttons on my mouse wouldn't make my experience that much more enjoyable so that's relative.
4. I can take a dead pixel. Heck, my PowerBook has more than one I guess. But bad "software development" or bad "UI interaction" is not OK. If a standard one-button mouse helps in the slightest way to enforce good "UI development" practices, then I'm all for it.
post #144 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
D'oh, you're right, it doesn't work on a per-selection basis. Cmd-; goes to the next misspelled word in the text field. The closest thing is to bring up the Spelling box with Cmd-:, then place the cursor before the misspelled word, and hit Cmd-;, or 'Find Next'. If it triggers a misspelling, it will give you the same options in the box as you get in the contextual menu. I *guess* technically that is the same as the right-click, but...

I always select the word (double-click) then command-;

*shrug*
post #145 of 253
They key commands are pretty insane - I pride myself on knowing a lot of them, but today came accross the cmd-opt-ctrl-eject combos for sleeping, restarting, and shutting down.

What gets me is that Apple is shipping keybaords with help buttons that do NOTHING! Why put a help button on your keyboard if the OS expects Cmd-? for help viewer? Or F13 and F14 which control brightness on iMacs and Apple displays, why not silk screen these on the keyboards, so what if someone has a third party monitor. I have an iMac G5 and would appreciatea keybaord made for it -- by Apple (isn't that a crazy idea?)

And to comment on the Airport Updates, they are not touch 802.11n standard -- nah, I think g will be the way for a few more years, rather I think they will combine "Airtunes" functionality in the big Base Station with a 1/8" mini-optical/analog plug - why let the express have a cool feature that the big daddy of the airport family doesn't have?
post #146 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by dfiler
You still don't get it?

He wasn't arguing that he prefers to use a one-button mouse. Instead, he prefers using a platform which ships a one-button mouse as default. It forces developers to not hide things only in contextual menus.


Efficiency is good. That's why Apple supports multiple buttons.
Discoverablility is good. That's why Apples ship with a single-button mouse as default.

There is merit in both.

Yes, but if Apple shipped a two-button mouse, nobody could "hide" anything in the contextual menus, because they would be no more difficult to access than the normal menus. Point and click simplicity. It's only bad GUI design on a Mac because Apple ships a single button mouse.

This argument that Apple should ship deficient hardware because it promotes good GUI design smacks of Apple apologism. Hardware doesn't promote good GUI design, good design principles promote good GUI design.
post #147 of 253


JD, I really suggest you do some investigation into UI research before relaying an opinion like that publicly. It might save you some embarrassment.

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it false. cf: evolution and fundamentalists.

'Hiding' is in reference to that fact that prior to clicking the right mouse button, there is *NO* visual indication that there is any functionality present. With left-clicking, you have menus, buttons, and other *visible* items giving immediate feedback to the user of "these are the things you can do". This is called discoverability and is one of the basic principles of good UI design. Contextual menus don't do that. They are hidden, ie, non-visible, ie non-direct, ie, harder to find. If a developer places some functionality *only* in a contextual menu, they have created a poor UI for that functionality. If they choose to place a *secondary* accessor to that functionality in a contextual menu (or keystroke), then they have scaled their UI for efficiency, but retained the discoverability principle. That's good UI. That's what shipping a single button mouse as default enforces at the developer end.

However, I get the feeling that I utterly wasted my time typing the above explanation.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #148 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha


JD, I really suggest you do some investigation into UI research before relaying an opinion like that publicly. It might save you some embarrassment.

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it false. cf: evolution and fundamentalists.

'Hiding' is in reference to that fact that prior to clicking the right mouse button, there is *NO* visual indication that there is any functionality present. With left-clicking, you have menus, buttons, and other *visible* items giving immediate feedback to the user of "these are the things you can do". This is called discoverability and is one of the basic principles of good UI design. Contextual menus don't do that. They are hidden, ie, non-visible, ie non-direct, ie, harder to find. If a developer places some functionality *only* in a contextual menu, they have created a poor UI for that functionality. If they choose to place a *secondary* accessor to that functionality in a contextual menu (or keystroke), then they have scaled their UI for efficiency, but retained the discoverability principle. That's good UI. That's what shipping a single button mouse as default enforces at the developer end.

However, I get the feeling that I utterly wasted my time typing the above explanation.

It's good to see somebody with some sense and knowledge. I don't know any apps that do not hide at least one thing in a contextual menu.
post #149 of 253
You cannot draw any meaningful conclusion from a statement like "90% of replacement mice for macs are 2-button." If you're going to replace a mac mouse with a 3rd party mouse, you'd have a very hard time finding a 3rd party mouse at all. There are two reasons for this:


1.) the BEST one-button mouse in existance actually comes with the computer! YOu can't compete against a free peripheral that offers same/better performance -- the market is too small and the replacement market is even smaller.

2.) 3rd party makers sell mice primarily to the windows market. That's the only market where they can compete and make money. In light of reason 1, the best business case is to make windows mice that also work on a mac (which Apple takes care of anyway.)

Therefore, "replacement" mice are bound to be 2 button jobs 90+% of the time - they are the only non OEM options out there.


Consider that, Macally had some limited success with one button in the days of the puck. People didn't get it (the puck) and some of those bought more conventional one button mice. We haven't seen a one button 3rd party offering since Apple's optical simply because there is no need, and therefore no market opportunity.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #150 of 253
I have an idea!!!!!!!





I really love the one button, I use it every day with my PB. I have the Logitech MX 1000, which is too big to travel with. I have the Logitech V500 wich is a pain in the ass to hold. I have the Apple Wireless, which skips bumps and tracks horribly. I have a regular mouse that works fine, but has 25 feet of cord to it. I have a knsington mouse that tracks fine, but I have to reset it evrytime I reconnect it. Point not one damn mouse out there works well every day but the one button jobber.

I agree with EVERYONE that more button enhance functionality! Why not keep the design just like it is and add a second detent to the button. You know, like when you roll down you window at the drive-thru. First detent, rolls some, second detent automatically rolls all the way down. I never remember anyone bitching, saying that that design is too complicated.....


The first detent can be click, the second detent can be right click. Also, the control key can be used for custom configurations.

I also use keyboard short cuts for copy and paste and such, SO NO 500 button mouses to do every damn thing under the sun!
A new fan of FileMaker...
Reply
A new fan of FileMaker...
Reply
post #151 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by pbaker05
I have an idea!!!!!!!





I really love the one button, I use it every day with my PB. I have the Logitech MX 1000, which is too big to travel with. I have the Logitech V500 wich is a pain in the ass to hold. I have the Apple Wireless, which skips bumps and tracks horribly. I have a regular mouse that works fine, but has 25 feet of cord to it. I have a knsington mouse that tracks fine, but I have to reset it evrytime I reconnect it. Point not one damn mouse out there works well every day but the one button jobber.

I agree with EVERYONE that more button enhance functionality! Why not keep the design just like it is and add a second detent to the button. You know, like when you roll down you window at the drive-thru. First detent, rolls some, second detent automatically rolls all the way down. I never remember anyone bitching, saying that that design is too complicated.....


The first detent can be click, the second detent can be right click. Also, the control key can be used for custom configurations.

I also use keyboard short cuts for copy and paste and such, SO NO 500 button mouses to do every damn thing under the sun!

That's like the click and hold idea. Click once for a click and hold it for a right click. BUT it should be a mouse feature not a UI design. As in the app thinks the hold is a right click. Although a scroll wheel is more important IMO.
post #152 of 253
I've happily used a one-button mouse since I started using a Mac back in '87. I have no desire to use a two-button mouse.

The whole idea behind one button is that things are supposed to be easy enough that you don't *need* a second button!

Long live the one-button Apple Pro Mouse.
post #153 of 253
Quote:
I really love the one button, I use it every day with my PB. I have the Logitech MX 1000, which is too big to travel with. I have the Logitech V500 wich is a pain in the ass to hold. I have the Apple Wireless, which skips bumps and tracks horribly. I have a regular mouse that works fine, but has 25 feet of cord to it. I have a knsington mouse that tracks fine, but I have to reset it evrytime I reconnect it. Point not one damn mouse out there works well every day but the one button jobber.

I agree with EVERYONE that more button enhance functionality! Why not keep the design just like it is and add a second detent to the button. You know, like when you roll down you window at the drive-thru. First detent, rolls some, second detent automatically rolls all the way down. I never remember anyone bitching, saying that that design is too complicated.....


The first detent can be click, the second detent can be right click. Also, the control key can be used for custom configurations.

I also use keyboard short cuts for copy and paste and such, SO NO 500 button mouses to do every damn thing under the sun!


Yes, I quoted myself and there is probably a law against that...
I think that a 2 detent jobber with some kind of scroll aparatus would be perfect...
I don't like mice with forward and back buttons, because using those buttons usually undoes whatever you just did...

I DO AGREE THAT APPLE NEEDS TO GET ALL OF IT APPS DOING THE SAME THINGS WITH EITHER ACTION BUTTONS OR CONTROL CLICKS OR ALL MENU ITEMS...WHATEVER.. I personally don't care about the action buttons one way or the other


Since this is a mouse thread, I would love to see a really good, accurate BT mouse. One that you can use evrey day that doesn't have annoying lag, or that skips your cursor to the other side of the screen for no reason...
A new fan of FileMaker...
Reply
A new fan of FileMaker...
Reply
post #154 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by zeus423
I've happily used a one-button mouse since I started using a Mac back in '87. I have no desire to use a two-button mouse.

The whole idea behind one button is that things are supposed to be easy enough that you don't *need* a second button!

Long live the one-button Apple Pro Mouse.


I SECOND THAT! In fact, I should go out and buy one right now...
post #155 of 253
For those of you who are "throwing away your one-button mouse," how about donating them to my high school?

I fought and fought just to get Macs in my classroom six years ago and we could always use a few extra mice just in case something goes wrong. From what I heard, my school district (Akron Public Schools) wants to totally push Macs out of the district to "save money on support" despite my Macs being rock solid compared to the crappy Gateways that are always broken down, riddled with viruses and spyware. They buy that crap because they get a deal and the IT people love their job security.

Donate your working one-button Apple Pro Mouse by dropping me an email:
zeus423@hotmail.com

Thanks!!!
post #156 of 253
Four pages of discussion about mice and only a few posts about Airports. What changes do you think will happen, and when? I'm really itching to order stuff from the Apple Store but I want to save in shipping, and I could use a wireless access point..
post #157 of 253
I for one am itching for multiple itunes streams to be broadcast to remote speakers.

Or streaming video.

but I would be happy with streaming the same music to multiple speakers.
post #158 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha


JD, I really suggest you do some investigation into UI research before relaying an opinion like that publicly. It might save you some embarrassment.

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it false. cf: evolution and fundamentalists.

'Hiding' is in reference to that fact that prior to clicking the right mouse button, there is *NO* visual indication that there is any functionality present. With left-clicking, you have menus, buttons, and other *visible* items giving immediate feedback to the user of "these are the things you can do". This is called discoverability and is one of the basic principles of good UI design. Contextual menus don't do that. They are hidden, ie, non-visible, ie non-direct, ie, harder to find. If a developer places some functionality *only* in a contextual menu, they have created a poor UI for that functionality. If they choose to place a *secondary* accessor to that functionality in a contextual menu (or keystroke), then they have scaled their UI for efficiency, but retained the discoverability principle. That's good UI. That's what shipping a single button mouse as default enforces at the developer end.

However, I get the feeling that I utterly wasted my time typing the above explanation.

Kickaha, I have to come in here to share Junkyard Dawgs embarrassment, because honestly, his posting was just spot-on. The more I read in this thread about this argument of discoverability, the more convinced I am that JD understands it, and you and all the other menu bar fans are labouring under a delusion. Youre all stating that actions on a menu bar are discoverable and actions on a context menu are hidden, as though that was an obvious truth. I dont think it is. Heres why...

You have an object on screen that you want to perform an action on. Two ways to do it; a) the context menu, or b) the menu bar. Method a): right-click the object. The program knows what the object is, and displays a context menu with actions appropriate to the object. Method b): left-click the object, move the cursor up to the menu bar, and click again on the menu item (out of probably half-a-dozen or so items) that you think has the action you need. If you get it wrong, as I do frequently, shuttle the mouse from side to side until you get it right. Now to my mind, method a is a lot more discoverable than method b.
OK, you do need to know that you can right-click to pull up a context menu, but on the Windows platform, that is becoming more and more an accepted convention. And thats happening because its very convenient. A string of menu bar items and a plethora of toolbars can be really bewildering - very often its not obvious what you need to click on. Much easier to just right-click on something, and let the program throw up a list of appropriate actions. The concept is easily understood, even by beginners.

Ive taught people to use MS Word. This is the sort of thing that happens very often: theyve got some text selected that they want to copy. I say ok, copy, its on the menu bar under edit. They look at the screen. Along the top are the words File Edit View etc. Under that are a couple of rows of buttons. Theyve no idea where to click; they dont know what a menu bar is. More importantly, they dont realise that if they click on the words at the top, a list of other words will appear underneath. And why should they? Its not intuitively obvious; you just learn it by experience. The same way that Windows users learn about right-clicking.

I actually hate menu bars. Ive seen so many programs trying to fit their various options around this straight-jacket format of File, Edit, View, whatever when it just doesnt apply, and it makes it really difficult to find things. I bet a lot of applications could do without a menu bar altogether. Mine does.

Yes Kickaha, I am one of your despised developers! Ive just brought out a little font management program for Windows. Youd probably hate it, as it breaks the guidelines all over the place. Not only is there no menu bar, but lots of areas on the screen dont look at first glance as if theyre clickable, although they are. And what will put it completely beyond the pale is that there are things you can only do with a right-click. But I challenge anyone (even you, Kickaha, if you know anyone with a PC) to play with it for half an hour and then tell me it isnt a quicker, easier way to do things. If Id stuck to the guidelines, Id never have developed it. If anyone is interested, theres a free trial version on my website www.fontrainbow.com.

This thread has given me a good deal of food for thought, as I intend to bring out an Apple version for my sins. Ill need to make adjustments of course, but what I certainly wont be doing is putting in a menu bar just to fit in with some clunky convention.
post #159 of 253
Quote:
Originally posted by RainbowGuy
[BYes Kickaha, I am one of your despised developers! Ive just brought out a little font management program for Windows. Youd probably hate it, as it breaks the guidelines all over the place. Not only is there no menu bar, but lots of areas on the screen dont look at first glance as if theyre clickable, although they are. And what will put it completely beyond the pale is that there are things you can only do with a right-click. But I challenge anyone (even you, Kickaha, if you know anyone with a PC) to play with it for half an hour and then tell me it isnt a quicker, easier way to do things. If Id stuck to the guidelines, Id never have developed it. If anyone is interested, theres a free trial version on my website www.fontrainbow.com.

This thread has given me a good deal of food for thought, as I intend to bring out an Apple version for my sins. Ill need to make adjustments of course, but what I certainly wont be doing is putting in a menu bar just to fit in with some clunky convention. [/B]

I assume that you have a manual, no matter how short, that explains these clickable ares.

Just what the world needs, another small font program. How many is that now? Three dozen, four?

Well, I hope that yours is really better, because I've tried many, and they are all the same, and they aren't very good.

I'm waiting for yours. I hope it's really better. All authors say that.

Though I do agree about the right click. Only after a Mac comes with a 2 button mouse as standard, however, will you be right about that on a Mac though. Right now not enough Mac users are used to the convention. Clicking the control key is easy to ignore, or forget.

Oops! Edited to correct option for control key.
post #160 of 253
I hate to make a cliche, but *OW, MY EYES*!

Interesting UI, that's for sure. I can't say I like it, at all, sorry.

You may want to look at FontBook which comes included with every Mac before putting effort into porting that. I think you'll find that what your app does, FontBook does also, including much of the filtering. And I think you'd be hard pressed to outdo the built in Unicode-aware Character Palette that all apps have access to. In any case, maybe they'll give you some ideas.

One thing you'll find on moving to the Mac though, if you do... you have to work rather hard to *not* have a menu bar, and choosing not to have one will put you in for a world of hurt with the dev tools. Your choice of course, but there's simply no reason not to have a menu bar for most apps.

And I'm sorry, but your app's UI hasn't exactly led me to change my mind regarding single button mice. In fact, it's rather strengthened my opinion.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Sources: Apple developing updated AirPorts, two-button mouse