More UI stuff - the "close" widget - Page 2

[quote]Originally posted by PooPooDoctor:
<strong>Don't you think it's unnatural for an app to continue doing it's thing even after you have close it's window? Talk about inconsistency! What happens when you close a movie clip from QuickTime? Does it continue playing to the end?</strong><hr></blockquote>

No, it's not unnatural. The window in iTunes is not the feedback from the file. The speaker is.

With the iTunes window closed, I can still control playback with the menu or keyboard commands, I can change preferences, commence an import action, open a specific file, and perform a number of other very useful tasks. Or I can just leave the app open so I don't have to relaunch it when I'm ready to play again.

I think anyone who expects the app to quit on window-close is likely new to the Mac, or is otherwise familiar with the Windows way of doing things.

[quote]Originally posted by tonton:
<strong>

No, it's not unnatural. The window in iTunes is not the feedback from the file. The speaker is.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, but... but...but... where's the music coming form? I know it's the speaker... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> but where's the visual identification that the user identifies this action with? It's not there is it? You closed it, but it's still going! If you closed it, it should have stopped. Common. If I minimize it yes, but when I close it's window?!! You don't find that strange yet you argue about such things as consistency in UI?
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />

I think EVERYONE can agree that in Mac OS X, the red light should ONLY close a window.

It's a pretty basic Aqua GUI stuff here. I also don't like how optimize doesn't work as standard in iTunes, SerialBox etc.

Barto

Some people speak (in this case post) without thinking. In the same manner, some people choose handles without thinking

EDIT: I'd like to add that this is very different from tabs. Any GUI element which is widespread throughout a computer's software should behave the same at all times. Now THAT'S obvious.

Barto

[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Barto ]</p>

Can I ask why people are quitting so many Apps?

You've got true unix-based multitasking stability, so use it. Quitting an app shoud be a case of "why?" rather than "why not?"

Mac OS X is a complex tool. To get the most out of it you need to learn how to use it. You can pretend that it is Mac OS 9 or Windows XP, but you're not fooling anyone. And trying to import power-user behaviours from these OS's is an even worse idea.

I have a stack of Apps set to launch on startup and they don't quit till shutdown. They sit hidden from view, ready to leap into action.

Try it, you might like it.

I don't personally mind if Apple experiments with new UI elements or behaviors so long as, in the end, all apps behave with consistancy... sort of an ISO9001 thing: Decide what you want to do, document it, then always do it.

In the case of the close widget, I agree that Apple must find a logical and consistant use of it and stick to it. But in addition, the intended action must be effectively communicated. Single-window apps quitting and multi-window apps not quitting may be consistant, but it is not obvious. If I get a new app, do I know if it is single-window? Do I want to click the "close" widget to find out?

If Apple were to apply a different mouseover glyph to the red widget if it results in a "quit" rather than a "close", I'd be much happier.

In the near term, though, Apple correcting the behavior of iCal and Address Book is a comforting development; it shows that they are aware of their mistake (as Eugene said) and fixed it. But it also shows that even Apple is unclear on how the "close" widget should be used since they got it wrong in the first place!

Consistancy and an effective communication of results-- this is what Apple must strive for in the use of its UI elements.

[quote]Originally posted by stupider...likeafox:
<strong>Can I ask why people are quitting so many Apps?

You've got true unix-based multitasking stability, so use it. Quitting an app shoud be a case of "why?" rather than "why not?"</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, that's why I always open my applications-folder and do Command-A, Command-O the first thing I do when I startup my computer. Why? Why not?

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>
Look at the menu bar. You can empty the cache, change prefs, clear your history, review downloads, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why would anyone want to do that on a regular basis? I just don't get it. The check downloads thing I get, the rest are a mystery to me. Unless you surf a lot of porn and don't want ppl to know..

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>
Why do you agree with me on QuickTime Player and not other apps? Don't you care about consistent interface?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Quicktime shouldn't open a new window when clicked cause I can't do anything with it. The most stupid thing in interface is being consistent "just because", and not thinking about how the user works. It's better to have to learn a new, improved behaviour than to have to work your way _around_ a "consistent" interface.

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>What does the red widget mean to you? Define its function.</strong><hr></blockquote>

"Close what I'm currently doing and not gonna need anymore". Pretty straightforward. When I'm finished viewing a movie, close the movie, when i'm finished listening to music, stop the music, when I'm finished processing a text document, close it. If I want something to just not be visible, I _hide_ it.

When you've closed down a word-document, can you still edit it? When you've closed down a movie, does it continue playing video and/or sound in the background? There's the connection for you. Using the close-box to _hide_ something is just plain wrong.

Have you noticed how some close widgets have dots in the middle? What the hell do those mean? I haven't found one single explanation for those. It just seems to vary from window to window. Maybe they could use the dot for something useful, like indicating that clicking it will quit the application rather than close the window. Instead of just taunting and confusing users.

[quote]Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
<strong>Have you noticed how some close widgets have dots in the middle? What the hell do those mean? ...</strong><hr></blockquote>

If a document window's close widget has a dot, it indicates that the document has been modified. Clicking it will result in a "save?" dialog box.

[quote]Originally posted by Whyatt Thrash:
<strong>
quote: originally posted by stupider...likeafox:
----
Can I ask why people are quitting so many Apps?

You've got true unix-based multitasking stability, so use it. Quitting an app shoud be a case of "why?" rather than "why not?"
----

Yeah, that's why I always open my Applications-folder and do Command-A, Command-O the first thing I do when I startup my computer. Why? Why not?</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: stupider...likeafox ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by stupider...likeafox:
<strong>

:confused:

[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: stupider...likeafox ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, that was my initial reaction to your post too..

[quote]Originally posted by Whyatt Thrash:
<strong>
Yeah, that was my initial reaction to your post too..</strong><hr></blockquote>

Blimey, who lit the fuse on your tampon?

I'll take you through it slowly if you want.

You don't need to quit apps when your using OS X as much as you do on Mac OS 9 or Windows.

The magical unix fairy will automatically move any unused app's memory allocation out to disk in order to free it up when needed.

¿Comprende?

the open, close, resize widgets in mac os x suck. red green and yellow might go together on a traffic light, but they make no sense in the window management context.

i know a lot of long-time mac users hopelessly confused by this. Apple should go back to Mac OS 9 style widgets, or at least make widgets that show what clicking the button will do. Also, it looks like they have picked up the annoying Windows habit of putting close and resize right next to each other.

Combine that with apps which close automatically when they have no windows open, and you have a big annoyance on your hands.

[quote]Originally posted by Gizzmonic:
<strong>the open, close, resize widgets in mac os x suck.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think putting the destructive close widget on the same side of the window as the other two is possibly the biggest UI blunder in OS X.

On a more positive note, the genie effect is the most underated. People not interested in usability will probably be unaware that many people have 'lost ' windows after accidently clicking on minimize widgets in WIMP environments. The genie effect clearly shows where the window has gone.

stupider...likeafox and Eugene speak the truth. I'm glad there are a few intelligent people left on forums that have education levels greater than elementry school.

Anyhoo...I think Apple is starting to do a 180 on their stupid decision of having the close widget on single-window apps quit the app.

They've changed their mind on iCal and Address Book...why not everything else?

A well written app takes up 0% CPU when idle. There's absolutely no reason why apps shouldn't stay launched and ready. There's nothing better than clicking on a launched Safari to get an instant web browser window (or any other app).

[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by stupider...likeafox:
<strong>

Blimey, who lit the fuse on your tampon?

I'll take you through it slowly if you want.

You don't need to quit apps when your using OS X as much as you do on Mac OS 9 or Windows.

The magical unix fairy will automatically move any unused app's memory allocation out to disk in order to free it up when needed.

¿Comprende?</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

[quote]Originally posted by stupider...likeafox:
<strong>

Blimey, who lit the fuse on your tampon?

I'll take you through it slowly if you want.

You don't need to quit apps when your using OS X as much as you do on Mac OS 9 or Windows.

The magical unix fairy will automatically move any unused app's memory allocation out to disk in order to free it up when needed.

¿Comprende?</strong><hr></blockquote>

And i think this is as preposterous as opening all your apps on startup just because you can have them all open at once. I quit an app because It's memory & processor intensive (possibly even when "idle") and/or I'm not gonna use it again during the rest of the day.

Plus, I like my Dock clean..

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

Where on earth did you get the idea that I want the red widget to hide windows? My beef is with the widget acting as a "Quit" function. That doesn't mean I want it to be anything other than a "Close" function. In the iTunes example, the music should not stop playing when the controller window is close because it's not what's creating the sound. It's also not necessary. Imagine if QuickTime's controller was separate from the viewer window. Closing the controller window should not close/stop the movie. The controller is not the movie file just as the iTunes controller is not the audio file.

You've taken my point about iTunes and mixed yourself up.

Some people want the red widget to "close this window or quit the application if it's the last open window for certain apps."

I want the widget to mean one thing... "close this window"

I do not want the widget to "hide this window."</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wanna talk about consistensy? In every app that shouldn't quit upon closing, ie document-oriented apps, command-N spawns a new window. What does command-N do in iTunes?

to open up the window I've closed down I have to figure out that the menu-item "iTunes" under "Windows" opens it. Now THAT'S consistent behaviour.

When in doubt Eugene, ask your mom. MacOS was intended to be smart enough to be used by all the moms in this world. I've got a homework assignment for you, ask your mom what she thinks on this. She'll reply "If i can't see it, I won't think it's there." And different words in the menubar is not enough user feedback to show what app you're currently using or have open if you have no open windows. NOT for the moms of the world.

The reason I'm taking this up is because this issue is on usuability, and user-centered functionality, NOT on what's considered "right" or "wrong" behaviour. Just what makes most sense when it comes to how people interact with computer. non-advanced users already work on a document-centered basis, and closing down the last window of a document-app is the same as quitting it to them. Same thing happens, they're not working in it anymore.

Out of memory and processor issues, I'm not propagating that. I'm talking about how I think ONE-window apps should work, here. Think Calculator, iCal, Mail, iTunes, Acqusition, Disk repair etc. Windows that you're closing down cause you're finished working on them.

You mad about Disk Repair quitting upon closing down the app-window too?

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>
You've taken my point about iTunes and mixed yourself up.

Some people want the red widget to "close this window or quit the application if it's the last open window for certain apps."

I want the widget to mean one thing... "close this window"

I do not want the widget to "hide this window."</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well then, consider what it's doing. You close down the controller-window, nothing gets saved, nothing gets thrown away. You bring it up again using the menu, nothing gets reverted, no action is taken at all. You've temporarily hidden the controller window to show it again later. Since iTunes is a one-window app, I have a tip for you. The "Hide iTunes" command does the same thing. Only now you won't have access to your "other window", the menu bar. But since most actions there are used to do stuff in the controller window, they're now useless anyways.

You're thinking from the programmer's point of view, what windows "are" and how those windows should work. While MacOS is the user's OS, it should be focused on how the users work & think... If I can't see it, it shouldn't be there...

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>Apps aren't documents. You still can't get over that hill, can you? Okay, let's use the human example again. Writing a paper is an application. The piece of paper is the document, but it's not the whole application. You still need a writing tool.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Some apps don't HAVE documents. They don't CREATE documents, they only have one window that provides the functionality for that app. Logically, these apps should stop working when you remove the interface for them. Otherwise you're dealing with a hidden interface which is a Bad Thing.

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>Besides, you can't take the metaphor too literally anyway. In the case of iTunes, the document is a piece of music. The document is not the controller.

And if you insist on using the desktop/workspace metaphor, I can take my calculator out of my desk, turn it on, and put it away without turning it off.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Congratulations, you've just "hidden" an application.

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>
And Mail is NOT a single-window app. You can open several viewer windows and several compose windows at once. Mail also works in the background. I leave Mail running so it can check my inbox every 5 minutes. It even tells me visually when I have new Mail in the Dock. Why the heck would I want to sacrifice that functionality because you don't know there's more to apps than their windows?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sacrifice functionality? You can't continue to do this with the app hidden? I've got news for you m8.



If you really want to hide the app, umm, that's what you should do...

Please, ask your mom. She'll set things straight for you. Try to think about what you're actually DOING and not how things "work". Having to spend time figuring out how things "work" is not the preferred approach to any interface.

You're never gonna understand me, I'm never gonna agree with you. The OS should be built with the user in mind, not obsolete interface guidelines.

[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: Whyatt Thrash ]</p>

I consider this thread dead as dogmeat.

[quote]Originally posted by Whyatt Thrash:
<strong>
You're never gonna understand me, I'm never gonna agree with you. The OS should be built with the user in mind, not obsolete interface guidelines.
</strong><hr></blockquote>


Well whatever you're ranting about and whatever this mom fetish of yours is, Apple is making a 180 on the decision that these apps should quit on close.

Why? Because the idea is inconsistent. ASK YOUR MOM! She'll quickly be confused why some apps stay open and others quit.

And because certain apps can retain functionality with the main interface closed or hidden, all apps should remain open.

Besides, apps take very little CPU when idle. As for memory...ok, they take memory. But computers nowadays can handle it. Apple isn't going to change OS X to fit the old G3 and G4 users that are still stuck with 128MB of RAM and slower processors.

2 reasons why you should keep your apps launched and why apps shouldn't quit on close:

1. Launch time is still an issue (a small one, but imagine having to launch the app everytime you closed the app? You'd start thinking twice before hitting that close button.)
2. So the Dock doesn't do the Silly Dance. I'd find it annoying that the Dock grows and shrink everytime I launched and quit an app...and so should you.

2 reasons why apps shouldn't quit on close (of the last window or quit on close of the 'single-window'):

1. Apps that still retain functionality even when the main interface window is closed would severly lose this functionality.
2. If certain apps are allowed to stay launched and others not on close, it would cause inconsistencies that YOUR MOM would have nightmare about...do you want your mom to have nightmares? I do. But not you. If your mom starts getting scared that the close button on iTunes will stop the music and quit the app because she's seen this behavior in other apps, then the WHOLE idea of quitting apps on close is BAD.

[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]

[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by kim kap sol:
<strong>

do you want your mom to have nightmares? I do. But not you. </strong><hr></blockquote>

And you really expect me to treat you and reply respectfully after such comments?

This thread is now more dead than a aborted goat-fetus.



[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: Whyatt Thrash ]</p>

I thought with the introduction of the dock in OS X, the idea was that it isn't important to a user whether an application is running or not. If you want to use it, you click on its dock icon. The applications current state and whether it is opened or closed is a system 'problem', the user shouldn't need to know or care (hence the barely noticeable triangle under running applications etc).

go, eugene, go.

[quote]Originally posted by RodUK:
<strong>I thought with the introduction of the dock in OS X, the idea was that it isn't important to a user whether an application is running or not. If you want to use it, you click on its dock icon. The applications current state and whether it is opened or closed is a system 'problem', the user shouldn't need to know or care (hence the barely noticeable triangle under running applications etc).</strong><hr></blockquote>

This has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

[quote]Originally posted by kim kap sol:
<strong>

This has nothing to do with the topic at hand.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The point I was trying to make is that whether the close widget closes the application or not, and hence all the arguments for and against, should be irrelevant.

Considering well-written apps should spawn a new window when its Dock icon is clicked, having an app quit on close is rather dumb.

To remove all ambiguities in the OS...close widgets should only close the window. It should be up to the user to decide whether to quit the app or not via cmd-Q or the Quit menu item.

The well-written app should allow the last window to close without quitting the app...regardless of how useless the app may become without that window. The well-written app should also bring a new document window or the main interface window back up when the user clicks on the Dock icon...to prevent Mom and Pops from wondering if they clicked anything at all.

Not quitting the app means lightning fast interaction. Instead of waiting for the app to launch, you get your window instantly. Having the Address Book and iCal close all the time was a huge PITA.

I'm not saying...never quit any of your apps. I'm saying don't bother quitting the ones you use often. I use iCal often, and having it quit all the time (during it's initial release) was driving me up the wall.

If Safari quit on close of the last window...I'd lose my frickin' mind!