More important, is Fitt's Law - any item on the edge of the screen is easier (and faster) to hit than the same sized item in the middle of the screen. It removes one axis of needed precision, effectively rendering the size of the object along that axis as 'infinite'. (ie, you can just jam your cursor into the edge of the screen, and never have to worry about overshooting it - all you have to do is navigate sideways along the edge.)
It's one of the few completely repeatable, indisputable facts about UI navigation with a mouse. Not using the edges of the screen for the most commonly used items (and not using it *all the way* - a 1 pixel gutter breaks it) is just inane.
Some things make sense though; if I can have an option to slow-down the Genie Effect (totally useless), then I should have the option to maximize my windows as much as I want (in this case, fullscreen). It doesn't have to be the default behaviour, just something that is available for those that want it.
Every person that's against more choice uses the argument of 'bad UI design', but that's not necessarily true because if I ask any of you what great UI design you have done to be able to so expertly judge something to be 'bad UI design', then you'll most likely draw a blank. But you're the first to say that it isn't possible 'because it's bad UI design.'
Nobody's asking for maximize to be the default option. Heck, even hide it from System Preferences. But give people something, anything, to make it easier for them to transition without having to adjust to something that's as arbitrary as maximize (zoom). When you want a bigger chunk of the market, you have to adjust to the market - the market doesn't adjust to you.
Nobody's asking for maximize to be the default option. Heck, even hide it from System Preferences. But give people something
From using Tiger, I don't really see that there's anything wrong with the plus button. In Safari, it maximizes the window vertically only, which is what I'd expect. In image apps, it expands in both directions and most of my apps when they maximize in both directions, they take up the full screen.
What I have seen is the use of alt-left-click to maximize differently. For example, the plus button in itunes switches between a small window and a big one but alt-left-click oddly centers the window without resizing at all.
In some apps where the plus didn't maximize the window in both directions, I've seen alt-click do it.
I would say there could probably be more consistency between apps if anything. The fact that itunes minimizes to a small window when clicking the plus is completely different to what you'd expect. That behaviour was usually controlled by the pill-shaped button that is in the top right of some apps, although it mostly hides toolbars.
Windows shortcut key mappings. 1 click setting in the preference pane.
If that was added it would be enough for me to say 'Upgrade' and this thing is worth the $129.
Apple key shortcuts SUCK when you work on both OS's, go with the friggin standard already. Ctrl+C Ctrl+V, Home, End, Arrows...just make them work. Just work. JUST WORK.
Yeah, i know there are third party options and remapping and suck like that but it should be a check box in the OS. Done.
thanks.
Dude, you could not have put it any better! WTF doenst Apple get it and make the OS prefs more flexable! Like for instance.. the damn Delete key doent delete a damn thing in the finder! hwy the hell is it on the keyboard if it doent delete!!??
Cmd-Delete, because operations that work on icons are commands.
Also, you don't want an accidental hit of Delete to wipe out files. Minor error, major consequences.
Perhaps if you could outline what you think isn't flexible enough, that'd help. Chances are, you aren't seeing the options available to you, such as with the earlier swapping of Crtl and Cmd. It's there, but it shouldn't be the default, or even easily accessible due to it messing up too much else.
See, Unix uses Ctrl, and MacOS GUI layers use Cmd. If I have a Terminal open, and press Ctrl-A, that's a Unix shell command to go back to the beginning of the line. Cmd-A, however, selects all the text in the screen since that's at the GUI level. By keeping the two distinct and using their own sets of modifiers, it sets up a clean line between MacOS and Unix layers, and legacy users of each can jump right in. Windows' use of Ctrl was an unfortunate (and late) choice on MS part way back when, and is the one approach that is incompatible with the others.
There are good reasons for these design decisions, even if you don't see them immediately. And usually, there is already a way to modify it to act like you want. Just ask.
Cmd-Delete, because operations that work on icons are commands.
Also, you don't want an accidental hit of Delete to wipe out files. Minor error, major consequences.
Perhaps if you could outline what you think isn't flexible enough, that'd help. Chances are, you aren't seeing the options available to you, such as with the earlier swapping of Crtl and Cmd. It's there, but it shouldn't be the default, or even easily accessible due to it messing up too much else.
See, Unix uses Ctrl, and MacOS GUI layers use Cmd. If I have a Terminal open, and press Ctrl-A, that's a Unix shell command to go back to the beginning of the line. Cmd-A, however, selects all the text in the screen since that's at the GUI level. By keeping the two distinct and using their own sets of modifiers, it sets up a clean line between MacOS and Unix layers, and legacy users of each can jump right in. Windows' use of Ctrl was an unfortunate (and late) choice on MS part way back when, and is the one approach that is incompatible with the others.
There are good reasons for these design decisions, even if you don't see them immediately. And usually, there is already a way to modify it to act like you want. Just ask.
True...yes I see your point, but still having a one tap key to delete a file would be handy, it could be palced far way from the normal op keys just so you dont hit it by accident though..
True...yes I see your point, but still having a one tap key to delete a file would be handy, it could be placed or assigned far way from the normal op keys just so you dont hit it by accident though..
True...yes I see your point, but still having a one tap key to delete a file would be handy, it could be palced far way from the normal op keys just so you dont hit it by accident though..
Um, I don't know where your delete key is, but mine's right below the Expose/Eject button and above the backslash (iBook G4). There are a lot of keyboards where delete isn't in a totally out of the way spot, especially since Apple seems to not make a distinction between backspace and delete. The odds of pressing cmd-delete, however, are far smaller.
Yes, the Windows implimentation of keyboard shortcuts makes soooo much more sense than the way Apple has implimented it....
Oh wait... instead of 1 modifier key there are 2, the Control Key AND the Windows Key. Control c, x, v does your copy, cut, paste but to do a search you have to use Windows Key - F.
Perhaps youre right and Windows keyboard mapping is much better...
(Personal Attack Deleted -JL).
And FYI, I seem to be able to go between my Mac and my Windows PC without a problem, why cant you?
Control c, x, v does your copy, cut, paste but to do a search you have to use Windows Key - F.
On windows ctrl-F does do search within the currently active program. Winkey-F is also search, but it's a different search - it launches Explorer's harddrive search (regardless of what app you're in). If you happen to have an explorer window open, ctrl-F launches the same search as winkey-F. Not only does this make sense, but it's analagous to Macs using command-F for the current app's search and command-space for spotlight's harddrive search.
(On the other hand, you might legitimately complain that cut/copy/paste should be linked to the Windows key, seeing at they work with a system-wide clipboard rather than anything app-specific, but those kinds of things are just a historical quirk from back before we had that silly windows key to deal with.)
Only one problem with your argument - calling for Apple to replace Zoom with Maximize is like asking them to replace Column View with Icon View.
And yes, some people *do* ask for a full replacement of one with the other. And they're wrong. Period. Just as those asking for Icon and *no* Column View would be.
Those are the people that get under my hide. "Why isn't just like Wiiiiiiindows? *whine* Apple is st00pid!" Duh, you're changing OSs - did you *really* expect it to be the same?
Those are the people I was addressing. Not us intelligent, rational folks who have come to a consensus that a modifier click on the Zoom widget to fullscreen it wouldn't be a *terrible* idea.
I'm tired of people saying "your preference is wrong and if you don't like a single thing about Mac OS X, go use Windows you heathen."
There is an important distinction to be made about this comment. The argument is not "your preference is wrong" but "your expectation that OS X behave just like Windows is WRONG!" This is particularly applicable to your Windows UI preferences. Now, does this mean that there aren't Windows UI
approaches that would be a benefit if implemented in OS X? As I pointed out before the answer is no. But some of these expectations are freaking ridiculous (ie that Apple implement something just "to go with the 'standard'").
Got it?
To Sandau: My apologies for the rude comments others have directed toward you. You and I disagree on this particular issue, but I sympathize with you because I know the frustrations that are associated with switching to OS X after being a long time Windows user. If this is indeed your situation I hope that your transition goes well.
Some things make sense though; if I can have an option to slow-down the Genie Effect (totally useless), then I should have the option to maximize my windows as much as I want (in this case, fullscreen). It doesn't have to be the default behaviour, just something that is available for those that want it.
...
I wouldn't consider all the slow mo genie effects as utter useless.
These sort of effects are all celebrating the beauty of Exposé etc.
They all occur to me as, say, recreation zones. I believe
Apple Corp had this in mind, when they developed/implemented
To Sandau: My apologies for the rude comments others have directed toward you. You and I disagree on this particular issue, but I sympathize with you because I know the frustrations that are associated with switching to OS X after being a long time Windows user. If this is indeed your situation I hope that your transition goes well.
oh, i transitioned a long time ago and have no problems using the OS X shortcuts. My only request is to have something easy to modify to my preferences (and probably 99% of the switchers this year). I prefer a single keyboard interface regardless of the OS i use, be it OS X, Ubuntu, Suse, Windows.
the number 1 complaint I hear from new OS X users is the keyboard doesn't work right. Yeah, tell them to think different, its not going to happen, some people will switch back simply because they can't stand using the different cut and paste commands.
I just say drop the attitude and 'better than thou' and make using the computer easy and if it takes swallowing some bitter pills and allowing a commonly used shortcut set up option (such as windows format) then just do it. Seems so trivial. I don't understand 30 of the 34 comments before this, people have so much angst over something so minor. Just make it easy and don't check the box if you don't want it.
Providing an option isn't always the best way. That's what Windows does a lot of time and many Linux distros do to absurdity, and it makes for a less cogent product with endless rows of checkboxes buried in some pref panel somewhere.
For example, using control- instead command- just doesn't make a lot of sense on a Mac keyboard. Command is much closer to the keys you want to hit them with frequently (esp C, V, X, and W) and fits nicely under your thumb. It's better in the long run for the user to learn using the command key when using a Mac. And really, it's not too hard. One can adjust in a few hours to a few days.
Mind you, I agree that Apple needs to bend backward to make using a Mac as switcher-friendly as possible. (Smarter full keyboard access is a must -- Windows is still much better in this area.) But in this case, aren't they doing so already? You can change your keyboard commands just about any which way you please in System Pref > Keyboard. IOW, if you're dead-set on making "control" act like "command", you can do so.
oh, i transitioned a long time ago and have no problems using the OS X shortcuts. My only request is to have something easy to modify to my preferences
RTFM: You transitioned a long time ago and you don't know your way around the keyboard settings in the system preferences? This is very simple to do in OS X (as Placebo pointed out and others as well).
Quote:
the number 1 complaint I hear from new OS X users is the keyboard doesn't work right. Yeah, tell them to think different, its not going to happen, some people will switch back simply because they can't stand using the different cut and paste commands.
My experience with Windows users that are new to OS X is that
1) the come to the OS with a plethora of XP habbits and dismiss OS X simply because it doesn't conform to what they are used to (I work in a High School computer lab where 90% of the kids are XP users at home so I see variations of this on a daily basis). Your comment that new users complain that the "keyboard doesn't work right" in OS X reflects an inaccuracy. Keyboard shortcuts work exactly as they were designed to work under OS X. If by "work right" you mean XP shortcuts, then you are wrong to equate "work right" with XP shortcuts. This is what caused some of the more ascerbic comments about your post.
2) As you alluded, there is a bit of laziness associated with all of this. First, new Windows users just assume that because THEY don't know how to do something in OS X that it cannot be done or that the OS X way is inferior. Have you changed your keyboard shortcuts following the steps that I and others suggested? Why can't people just try to find out how things work in OS X before they go off and claim that OS X needs a feature or that something can't be done? Case in point: If you had opened System Preferences and fooled around with the keyboard settings, this thread would not exist. I posted the link before, but read this article for the typical complaints of XP users after using OS X. Some of these complaints are moronic.
I just say drop the attitude and 'better than thou' and make using the computer easy and if it takes swallowing some bitter pills and allowing a commonly used shortcut set up option (such as windows format) then just do it.[/B]
See above about how "easy" this is. And since I'm the guy that apologized for the rude comments of others, I'll assume that the "better than thou" attitude remark was not directed at me. Ironically, I'm just questioning your assumption that Windows keyboard shortcuts are better. I've never said anything to the effect that one keyboard mapping is better than the other.
I am always in favor of options. I have no problem with an option in System Prefs for "Windows Shortcuts". Adobe did this with InDesign for Quark Switchers, and for good reason, as many long time users have shortcuts engrained in their minds. Sure it would be confusing for other Mac users that would happen to use your computer (if the same account), but the notion is fine with me.
With that said, you made the comment:
Quote:
Originally posted by sandau
Apple key shortcuts SUCK when you work on both OS's, go with the friggin standard already. Ctrl+C Ctrl+V, Home, End, Arrows...just make them work. Just work. JUST WORK.
You are obviously implying inferiority, and that long time Mac users should comply with Windows shortcuts (ironically, just after you said you wanted "options").
I think if you had left out this comment, virtually no one would have a problem with your suggestion. I certainly wouldn't have.
Just my 2¢
And to respond to the notion that the Command Key should be used for OS functionality and Control for Applications; the Finder is essentially an application. With this in mind, it makes complete sense to need only 1 major modifier key, not 2. Yes, Spotlight muddies the water, but this is the only instance I can think of (personally, I dont use Spotlight more than a replacement for the previous find command, so it is not an issue for me). I would argue that 1 exception (and a new one at that) is not worth the complexity of an enirely separate set of modifier keys. Besides, ergonomically speaking the command key is much easier to access than the control key.
Providing an option isn't always the best way. That's what Windows does a lot of time and many Linux distros do to absurdity, and it makes for a less cogent product with endless rows of checkboxes buried in some pref panel somewhere.
Incorrect. Neither Windows, nor Linux, offer any type of pref panel with an endless row of checkboxes buried somewhere. In Windows it's called Control Panel, and it offers a somewhat equal amount of options as System Preferences, and in Linux (you must mean GNOME or KDE), it's either in 'Control Center' in KDE, or GNOME Administration in, well, GNOME.
And they both offer a sane amount of options that users could use. What they do though, at least Linux, is allow you to install apps that extend that metaphor to other things; like Alacarte Menu to re-arrange or re-organize your applications menu, etc. They make it easier for people to use such apps if they choose to.
That's all it comes down to; sane default, with the possibility of extending those options to include something else not provided by Apple or any other vendor.
Comments
It's one of the few completely repeatable, indisputable facts about UI navigation with a mouse. Not using the edges of the screen for the most commonly used items (and not using it *all the way* - a 1 pixel gutter breaks it) is just inane.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Some things make sense though; if I can have an option to slow-down the Genie Effect (totally useless), then I should have the option to maximize my windows as much as I want (in this case, fullscreen). It doesn't have to be the default behaviour, just something that is available for those that want it.
Every person that's against more choice uses the argument of 'bad UI design', but that's not necessarily true because if I ask any of you what great UI design you have done to be able to so expertly judge something to be 'bad UI design', then you'll most likely draw a blank. But you're the first to say that it isn't possible 'because it's bad UI design.'
Nobody's asking for maximize to be the default option. Heck, even hide it from System Preferences. But give people something, anything, to make it easier for them to transition without having to adjust to something that's as arbitrary as maximize (zoom). When you want a bigger chunk of the market, you have to adjust to the market - the market doesn't adjust to you.
Just resize the window.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Nobody's asking for maximize to be the default option. Heck, even hide it from System Preferences. But give people something
From using Tiger, I don't really see that there's anything wrong with the plus button. In Safari, it maximizes the window vertically only, which is what I'd expect. In image apps, it expands in both directions and most of my apps when they maximize in both directions, they take up the full screen.
What I have seen is the use of alt-left-click to maximize differently. For example, the plus button in itunes switches between a small window and a big one but alt-left-click oddly centers the window without resizing at all.
In some apps where the plus didn't maximize the window in both directions, I've seen alt-click do it.
I would say there could probably be more consistency between apps if anything. The fact that itunes minimizes to a small window when clicking the plus is completely different to what you'd expect. That behaviour was usually controlled by the pill-shaped button that is in the top right of some apps, although it mostly hides toolbars.
Originally posted by sandau
All I want from Leopard is:
Windows shortcut key mappings. 1 click setting in the preference pane.
If that was added it would be enough for me to say 'Upgrade' and this thing is worth the $129.
Apple key shortcuts SUCK when you work on both OS's, go with the friggin standard already. Ctrl+C Ctrl+V, Home, End, Arrows...just make them work. Just work. JUST WORK.
Yeah, i know there are third party options and remapping and suck like that but it should be a check box in the OS. Done.
thanks.
Dude, you could not have put it any better! WTF doenst Apple get it and make the OS prefs more flexable! Like for instance.. the damn Delete key doent delete a damn thing in the finder! hwy the hell is it on the keyboard if it doent delete!!??
Also, you don't want an accidental hit of Delete to wipe out files. Minor error, major consequences.
Perhaps if you could outline what you think isn't flexible enough, that'd help. Chances are, you aren't seeing the options available to you, such as with the earlier swapping of Crtl and Cmd. It's there, but it shouldn't be the default, or even easily accessible due to it messing up too much else.
See, Unix uses Ctrl, and MacOS GUI layers use Cmd. If I have a Terminal open, and press Ctrl-A, that's a Unix shell command to go back to the beginning of the line. Cmd-A, however, selects all the text in the screen since that's at the GUI level. By keeping the two distinct and using their own sets of modifiers, it sets up a clean line between MacOS and Unix layers, and legacy users of each can jump right in. Windows' use of Ctrl was an unfortunate (and late) choice on MS part way back when, and is the one approach that is incompatible with the others.
There are good reasons for these design decisions, even if you don't see them immediately. And usually, there is already a way to modify it to act like you want. Just ask.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Cmd-Delete, because operations that work on icons are commands.
Also, you don't want an accidental hit of Delete to wipe out files. Minor error, major consequences.
Perhaps if you could outline what you think isn't flexible enough, that'd help. Chances are, you aren't seeing the options available to you, such as with the earlier swapping of Crtl and Cmd. It's there, but it shouldn't be the default, or even easily accessible due to it messing up too much else.
See, Unix uses Ctrl, and MacOS GUI layers use Cmd. If I have a Terminal open, and press Ctrl-A, that's a Unix shell command to go back to the beginning of the line. Cmd-A, however, selects all the text in the screen since that's at the GUI level. By keeping the two distinct and using their own sets of modifiers, it sets up a clean line between MacOS and Unix layers, and legacy users of each can jump right in. Windows' use of Ctrl was an unfortunate (and late) choice on MS part way back when, and is the one approach that is incompatible with the others.
There are good reasons for these design decisions, even if you don't see them immediately. And usually, there is already a way to modify it to act like you want. Just ask.
True...yes I see your point, but still having a one tap key to delete a file would be handy, it could be palced far way from the normal op keys just so you dont hit it by accident though..
Originally posted by hypoluxa
True...yes I see your point, but still having a one tap key to delete a file would be handy, it could be placed or assigned far way from the normal op keys just so you dont hit it by accident though..
Originally posted by hypoluxa
True...yes I see your point, but still having a one tap key to delete a file would be handy, it could be palced far way from the normal op keys just so you dont hit it by accident though..
Um, I don't know where your delete key is, but mine's right below the Expose/Eject button and above the backslash (iBook G4). There are a lot of keyboards where delete isn't in a totally out of the way spot, especially since Apple seems to not make a distinction between backspace and delete. The odds of pressing cmd-delete, however, are far smaller.
Oh wait... instead of 1 modifier key there are 2, the Control Key AND the Windows Key. Control c, x, v does your copy, cut, paste but to do a search you have to use Windows Key - F.
Perhaps youre right and Windows keyboard mapping is much better...
(Personal Attack Deleted -JL).
And FYI, I seem to be able to go between my Mac and my Windows PC without a problem, why cant you?
Originally posted by 4fx
Control c, x, v does your copy, cut, paste but to do a search you have to use Windows Key - F.
On windows ctrl-F does do search within the currently active program. Winkey-F is also search, but it's a different search - it launches Explorer's harddrive search (regardless of what app you're in). If you happen to have an explorer window open, ctrl-F launches the same search as winkey-F. Not only does this make sense, but it's analagous to Macs using command-F for the current app's search and command-space for spotlight's harddrive search.
(On the other hand, you might legitimately complain that cut/copy/paste should be linked to the Windows key, seeing at they work with a system-wide clipboard rather than anything app-specific, but those kinds of things are just a historical quirk from back before we had that silly windows key to deal with.)
Originally posted by Kickaha
Cue whining about Maximize vs. Zoom...
My view on it is... if you want it to be JUST LIKE WINDOWS... then USE WINDOWS. Cripes.
I'm tired of people saying "your preference is wrong and if you don't like a single thing about Mac OS X, go use Windows you heathen."
Mac OS X has Icon View. Icon View is completely useless for all but the most elementary users. So is Maximize versus Zoom.
And yes, some people *do* ask for a full replacement of one with the other. And they're wrong. Period. Just as those asking for Icon and *no* Column View would be.
Those are the people that get under my hide. "Why isn't just like Wiiiiiiindows? *whine* Apple is st00pid!" Duh, you're changing OSs - did you *really* expect it to be the same?
Those are the people I was addressing. Not us intelligent, rational folks who have come to a consensus that a modifier click on the Zoom widget to fullscreen it wouldn't be a *terrible* idea.
Originally posted by Placebo
I'm tired of people saying "your preference is wrong and if you don't like a single thing about Mac OS X, go use Windows you heathen."
There is an important distinction to be made about this comment. The argument is not "your preference is wrong" but "your expectation that OS X behave just like Windows is WRONG!" This is particularly applicable to your Windows UI preferences. Now, does this mean that there aren't Windows UI
approaches that would be a benefit if implemented in OS X? As I pointed out before the answer is no. But some of these expectations are freaking ridiculous (ie that Apple implement something just "to go with the 'standard'").
Got it?
To Sandau: My apologies for the rude comments others have directed toward you. You and I disagree on this particular issue, but I sympathize with you because I know the frustrations that are associated with switching to OS X after being a long time Windows user. If this is indeed your situation I hope that your transition goes well.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
...
Some things make sense though; if I can have an option to slow-down the Genie Effect (totally useless), then I should have the option to maximize my windows as much as I want (in this case, fullscreen). It doesn't have to be the default behaviour, just something that is available for those that want it.
...
I wouldn't consider all the slow mo genie effects as utter useless.
These sort of effects are all celebrating the beauty of Exposé etc.
They all occur to me as, say, recreation zones. I believe
Apple Corp had this in mind, when they developed/implemented
the slow down effects.
Originally posted by Neruda
To Sandau: My apologies for the rude comments others have directed toward you. You and I disagree on this particular issue, but I sympathize with you because I know the frustrations that are associated with switching to OS X after being a long time Windows user. If this is indeed your situation I hope that your transition goes well.
oh, i transitioned a long time ago and have no problems using the OS X shortcuts. My only request is to have something easy to modify to my preferences (and probably 99% of the switchers this year). I prefer a single keyboard interface regardless of the OS i use, be it OS X, Ubuntu, Suse, Windows.
the number 1 complaint I hear from new OS X users is the keyboard doesn't work right. Yeah, tell them to think different, its not going to happen, some people will switch back simply because they can't stand using the different cut and paste commands.
I just say drop the attitude and 'better than thou' and make using the computer easy and if it takes swallowing some bitter pills and allowing a commonly used shortcut set up option (such as windows format) then just do it. Seems so trivial. I don't understand 30 of the 34 comments before this, people have so much angst over something so minor. Just make it easy and don't check the box if you don't want it.
sheesh.
For example, using control- instead command- just doesn't make a lot of sense on a Mac keyboard. Command is much closer to the keys you want to hit them with frequently (esp C, V, X, and W) and fits nicely under your thumb. It's better in the long run for the user to learn using the command key when using a Mac. And really, it's not too hard. One can adjust in a few hours to a few days.
Mind you, I agree that Apple needs to bend backward to make using a Mac as switcher-friendly as possible. (Smarter full keyboard access is a must -- Windows is still much better in this area.) But in this case, aren't they doing so already? You can change your keyboard commands just about any which way you please in System Pref > Keyboard. IOW, if you're dead-set on making "control" act like "command", you can do so.
Originally posted by sandau
oh, i transitioned a long time ago and have no problems using the OS X shortcuts. My only request is to have something easy to modify to my preferences
RTFM: You transitioned a long time ago and you don't know your way around the keyboard settings in the system preferences? This is very simple to do in OS X (as Placebo pointed out and others as well).
the number 1 complaint I hear from new OS X users is the keyboard doesn't work right. Yeah, tell them to think different, its not going to happen, some people will switch back simply because they can't stand using the different cut and paste commands.
My experience with Windows users that are new to OS X is that
1) the come to the OS with a plethora of XP habbits and dismiss OS X simply because it doesn't conform to what they are used to (I work in a High School computer lab where 90% of the kids are XP users at home so I see variations of this on a daily basis). Your comment that new users complain that the "keyboard doesn't work right" in OS X reflects an inaccuracy. Keyboard shortcuts work exactly as they were designed to work under OS X. If by "work right" you mean XP shortcuts, then you are wrong to equate "work right" with XP shortcuts. This is what caused some of the more ascerbic comments about your post.
2) As you alluded, there is a bit of laziness associated with all of this. First, new Windows users just assume that because THEY don't know how to do something in OS X that it cannot be done or that the OS X way is inferior. Have you changed your keyboard shortcuts following the steps that I and others suggested? Why can't people just try to find out how things work in OS X before they go off and claim that OS X needs a feature or that something can't be done? Case in point: If you had opened System Preferences and fooled around with the keyboard settings, this thread would not exist. I posted the link before, but read this article for the typical complaints of XP users after using OS X. Some of these complaints are moronic.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1986689,00.asp
I just say drop the attitude and 'better than thou' and make using the computer easy and if it takes swallowing some bitter pills and allowing a commonly used shortcut set up option (such as windows format) then just do it.[/B]
See above about how "easy" this is. And since I'm the guy that apologized for the rude comments of others, I'll assume that the "better than thou" attitude remark was not directed at me. Ironically, I'm just questioning your assumption that Windows keyboard shortcuts are better. I've never said anything to the effect that one keyboard mapping is better than the other.
With that said, you made the comment:
Originally posted by sandau
Apple key shortcuts SUCK when you work on both OS's, go with the friggin standard already. Ctrl+C Ctrl+V, Home, End, Arrows...just make them work. Just work. JUST WORK.
You are obviously implying inferiority, and that long time Mac users should comply with Windows shortcuts (ironically, just after you said you wanted "options").
I think if you had left out this comment, virtually no one would have a problem with your suggestion. I certainly wouldn't have.
Just my 2¢
And to respond to the notion that the Command Key should be used for OS functionality and Control for Applications; the Finder is essentially an application. With this in mind, it makes complete sense to need only 1 major modifier key, not 2. Yes, Spotlight muddies the water, but this is the only instance I can think of (personally, I dont use Spotlight more than a replacement for the previous find command, so it is not an issue for me). I would argue that 1 exception (and a new one at that) is not worth the complexity of an enirely separate set of modifier keys. Besides, ergonomically speaking the command key is much easier to access than the control key.
Originally posted by Hobbes
Providing an option isn't always the best way. That's what Windows does a lot of time and many Linux distros do to absurdity, and it makes for a less cogent product with endless rows of checkboxes buried in some pref panel somewhere.
Incorrect. Neither Windows, nor Linux, offer any type of pref panel with an endless row of checkboxes buried somewhere. In Windows it's called Control Panel, and it offers a somewhat equal amount of options as System Preferences, and in Linux (you must mean GNOME or KDE), it's either in 'Control Center' in KDE, or GNOME Administration in, well, GNOME.
And they both offer a sane amount of options that users could use. What they do though, at least Linux, is allow you to install apps that extend that metaphor to other things; like Alacarte Menu to re-arrange or re-organize your applications menu, etc. They make it easier for people to use such apps if they choose to.
That's all it comes down to; sane default, with the possibility of extending those options to include something else not provided by Apple or any other vendor.