Oh, I don't know, in the User's manual. Oh, right, there is no user's manual.
Sorry, user's shouldn't have to search around the internet to find features that are supposed to be awesome.
You don't. There's a big honking blue Apple menu up there, and in there is System Preferences. In there is Keyboard and Mouse. In there is Trackpad. On that page is a blue circle with a question mark. If you click that, it explains how to use the trackpad. Or you can type trackpad into the Help box.
Quote:
No, but you need to KNOW it does it. I don't normally get a computer and then start playing with all sorts of varying keyboard and finger combinations trying to figure out all these 'cool' features.
You should at least look at all the menus and screens of the included applications. Or click the Help menu and read the topics.
Quote:
Apple just has problems letting users control things, like turning off memory and CPU hogs like spotlight and dashboard.
You don't need to manually turn stuff off. The Mach kernel will page it out if it is not used and the memory is needed, and if you don't use it, it won't be paged back in. The idea of keeping memory "free" is a false one - memory that is purchased should be used, not kept free, and that is what OS X does.
Spotlight does nothing unless you run a search. Perhaps you are referring to the metadata server and metadata worker processes - they are using exactly 0.0% to 0.1% CPU on my machine right now.
Dashboard - there are hacks to disable it, but just close all of its widgets and drag its icon out of the Dock and it is for all practical purposes gone.
There is no need to see the Desktop, either - you can leave a little sliver of it exposed at the bottom if you want to actually drag stuff there, or you can put the Desktop folder in the Dock in Leopard and drag stuff into it from any app without using Exposé.
Oh, I don't know, in the User's manual. Oh, right, there is no user's manual.
Sorry, user's shouldn't have to search around the internet to find features that are supposed to be awesome.
No, but you need to KNOW it does it. I don't normally get a computer and then start playing with all sorts of varying keyboard and finger combinations trying to figure out all these 'cool' features.
Apple just has problems letting users control things, like turning off memory and CPU hogs like spotlight and dashboard. Hell, my MBP has this nifty illuminated keyboard. Yet I seem to have no control over when it will illuminate. Apple basically decides how dark the room has to be before I need it. Thanks, guys!
I was just about to give you some help. However, considering that most of your posts are outright whining, forget it.
As for Apple basically deciding how dark the room has to be before you use it, look at the bright side. It would have to be high noon in the middle of the Sahara and I doubt there would be enough light for you to understand.
I was just about to give you some help. However, considering that most of your posts are outright whining, forget it.
As for Apple basically deciding how dark the room has to be before you use it, look at the bright side. It would have to be high noon in the middle of the Sahara and I doubt there would be enough light for you to understand.
I DO like Apple and Macs, but I don't understand why it's so hard to admit that Apple just plain got the whole one-button thing wrong:
It's totally untrue that two BUTTONS are confusing for users. The only confusing thing might having two different FUNCTIONS available. Windows exposes to the user by having a second button that there are different things to do with the left one and the right one, otherwise there wouldn't be two of them. So you've got the immediate choice to just try it. If you don't then you don't, you wouldn't really be missing anything because everything is accessible via ordinary menus. But it's so much easier with the second button, and therefore it's there and easy to find.
Apple on the other had also has something like context menus which are, as explained, a good thing. But it totally HIDES that functionality because (1) there is no second mouse button (2) pressing modifier keys along with pressing the mouse button is (a) totally counter-intuitive (b) really hard to find out (I mean, there are at least four modifier keys (Function, Control, Option, Command; you could even count 6 because there are two Command and Option keys) and (c) complicated as you need the other hand, and (3) the double-finger touchpad option is not enabled by default (as far as I know), and (4) enabling it is for most users completely out of reach. At least 90% don't even ever enable tap-to-click.
People who might EVER find out about ANY of the options to simulate a right-click are 100 times smarter than you need to be to just use a second totally obvious mouse button.
There are exactly two coices:
a) offer a context menu and make it accessible by a second button
b) don't offer a second button but then don't offer a context menu.
i'm only interested in one thing, and that's memory use! right now safari uses an insane amount of ram, considering it's just a web browser. as much as I like safari, having to quit it on a very regular basis because its ram use creeps up to anything between 200 and 300 mb ram is just plain silly!!!
I'm running it right now, 5 tabs, and the total memory consumed is 86MB (according to the system monitor).
Just out of curisosity - what are your system specifications - Intel or PowerPC Mac? what version of MacOS X? have you lodged a bug report?
You guys should really compile these articles and release them as a book - they're fantastic! Informative not only about the road to Leopard, but the phenomenal rise, fall & reserection of Apple, as well as the development of the internet and operating systems as a whole.
Truly great stuff. One of the best features on the internet I've ever found.
Yes that would be GREAT!
Quote:
Originally Posted by saschke
no. i want to be able to open a new tab with one mouse click or a double-click. right now i have four options: 1. FILE-> NEW TAB, 2. right click on tabbar, select "New Tab", 3. CMD+T, 4. Mouse Gesture
a simple "PLUS"-symbol or the double-click ability would solve this problem. this is stubborn.
AGREED! I love this in FF. Very simple to add, Very easy to use.
One thing i do notice about the beta is the lack of PDF support. Everytime i open a PDF on the web, it crashes! This will be fixed, but crashing on something as basic as a PDF? C'mon guys!
I also would like the ability to add keywords for searching my bookmarks.
Why can't we STAR our bookmarks and then search by those like in iTunes?!
Wouldn't it be very easy to implement something like in Vienna (a very good RSS reader)? The most recent version has built-in WebKit so you can view RSS articles right in Vienna. It looks like this:
It's absolutely true that tabs fail to use Exposé. That's the point - they are an alternative to Exposé, because Exposé is a sub-optimal workflow for switching between documents within an application. Just because it can do that doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job. Exposé is the best application switcher around, but that's about all it's good for. I gave up on the "Show Application Windows" feature ages ago, as it was simply useless to me. Now i isn't my business that you prefer to use the wrong tool for the job of browser window switching, but you should really back off of those who prefer to do things the right way.
You gotta be shittin' me. I can't even be bothered answering the rest of your post after reading this paragraph.
1. I don't know how many tabs (or browser windows) you have open to make them 'unusable' in Exposé but even 10 similar pages are easily identifiable on any Mac Apple ships today and can be handled by Exposé's 'Show Application Windows' even on your Mac Mini with 1 gig of RAM...shit, it was VERY usable on my dual 800MHz G4 with 512 megs of RAM
2. You're super lucky that Safari has an algorithm that shows the differences in the web page titles instead of showing the dozen or so first characters...otherwise, tabs would be quite unusable with similar pages with similar names...still...put more than twelve tabs in a normal width browser window and you've got a serious problem...not so with Exposé, you can have 20 windows open and still have Exposé be usable.
With Spaces, Exposé can become up to 16 times more effective.
How many tabs do you have open simultaneously at any one time? 20? 30? 40?
Tab expose would be a good option. There are currently plugins for this functionality:
Tabexpose is quite good: http://www.cocoamug.com/tabexpose/index.html But it costs, and as far as I know cannot be configured to work with the normal expose function. Ideally one should be able to select an option which separates the tabs in ordinary expose.
I DO like Apple and Macs, but I don't understand why it's so hard to admit that Apple just plain got the whole one-button thing wrong:
It's totally untrue that two BUTTONS are confusing for users.
Not according to the extensive usability studies Apple did before releasing the original Mac.
Quote:
The only confusing thing might {be} having two different FUNCTIONS available. Windows exposes to the user by having a second button that there are different things to do with the left one and the right one, otherwise there wouldn't be two of them. So you've got the immediate choice to just try it. If you don't then you don't, you wouldn't really be missing anything because everything is accessible via ordinary menus. But it's so much easier with the second button, and therefore it's there and easy to find.
For you maybe, but studies show that the vast majority of new Windows users do not know how to use the right mouse button, or even that there is a right mouse button.
Quote:
Apple on the other had also has something like context menus which are, as explained, a good thing. But it totally HIDES that functionality because (1) there is no second mouse button
Yes there is. Mac OS has supported two-button mice since 2001. Apple has been shipping the Mighty Mouse, which has two buttons, for a while now.
Quote:
(2) pressing modifier keys along with pressing the mouse button is (a) totally counter-intuitive (b) really hard to find out (I mean, there are at least four modifier keys (Function, Control, Option, Command; you could even count 6 because there are two Command and Option keys) and (c) complicated as you need the other hand, and (3) the double-finger touchpad option is not enabled by default (as far as I know), and (4) enabling it is for most users completely out of reach. At least 90% don't even ever enable tap-to-click.
People who might EVER find out about ANY of the options to simulate a right-click are 100 times smarter than you need to be to just use a second totally obvious mouse button.
It's all in the Help sections.
Quote:
There are exactly two coices:
a) offer a context menu and make it accessible by a second button
They do.
Quote:
b) don't offer a second button but then don't offer a context menu.
Anything else is plain stupid.
The reason Apple stuck to the single-button was to prevent third-party developers from writing code that REQUIRED the right-click, as is true in so many Windows apps. As long as the majority of Mac users had only one button, developers HAD to put all the functions of their programs on the main menus - not true with Windows apps, which have many functions available ONLY from the right-click.
If you think Mac OS X doesn't support right-clicking, I don't know what to tell you except go use a Mac.
I DO like Apple and Macs, but I don't understand why it's so hard to admit that Apple just plain got the whole one-button thing wrong:
It's totally untrue that two BUTTONS are confusing for users. The only confusing thing might having two different FUNCTIONS available. Windows exposes to the user by having a second button that there are different things to do with the left one and the right one, otherwise there wouldn't be two of them. So you've got the immediate choice to just try it. If you don't then you don't, you wouldn't really be missing anything because everything is accessible via ordinary menus. But it's so much easier with the second button, and therefore it's there and easy to find.
Apple on the other had also has something like context menus which are, as explained, a good thing. But it totally HIDES that functionality because (1) there is no second mouse button (2) pressing modifier keys along with pressing the mouse button is (a) totally counter-intuitive (b) really hard to find out (I mean, there are at least four modifier keys (Function, Control, Option, Command; you could even count 6 because there are two Command and Option keys) and (c) complicated as you need the other hand, and (3) the double-finger touchpad option is not enabled by default (as far as I know), and (4) enabling it is for most users completely out of reach. At least 90% don't even ever enable tap-to-click.
People who might EVER find out about ANY of the options to simulate a right-click are 100 times smarter than you need to be to just use a second totally obvious mouse button.
There are exactly two coices:
a) offer a context menu and make it accessible by a second button
b) don't offer a second button but then don't offer a context menu.
Anything else is plain stupid.
Excuse me, but why is this post directed towards me?
While I am here though, I would like to comment on your opinion that Apple got the one-button wrong.
Now this is not to say that I wouldn't use a two button mouse. In fact, I have used multi-button, multifunctional wheel mice for years. And only use my Macbook Pro trackpad on the plane or in bed, always accompanied with a mini travel mouse and last few years, my Logitech MX that I got specifically to interchange between my Macbook Pro, Mac Pro and a PC.
Why the continuous demand for Apple to change behooves me. Particularly because I look at mice like I look at gloves. I don't use my ski gloves playing golf, or a catchers mitt playing shortstop. In fact, on very cold days I opt for ski mitts over gloves. Obviously, I don't visit a pro shop to buy work gloves or Home Depot for dress gloves.
But lucky for us we can go to a number of places in which the selection is mind-boggling. So much that the adage, the more choice the longer it takes to make a decision, is no better exampled.
Big mice, little mice, left-hand, right-hand, travel mice, track-ball, wire-less, USB, Bluetooth, one-button, two-button, three-button, sliders, side buttons, roller-ball, optical, keyboard combos, and the colors. And for years, Apple has let me make the choice?ensuring simplicity in design and function, but supporting the efforts of those who wish to expand the horizon.
Excuse me, but why is this post directed towards me?
Wans't directed specifically to you but to the mouse button discussion where, as far as I remember, your's was the last post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core
...Why the continuous demand for Apple to change behooves me. Particularly because I look at mice like I look at gloves. I don't use my ski gloves playing golf, or a catchers mitt playing shortstop. In fact, on very cold days I opt for ski mitts over gloves. Obviously, I don't visit a pro shop to buy work gloves or Home Depot for dress gloves.
But lucky for us we can go to a number of places in which the selection is mind-boggling. So much that the adage, the more choice the longer it takes to make a decision, is no better exampled.
Big mice, little mice, left-hand, right-hand, travel mice, track-ball, wire-less, USB, Bluetooth, one-button, two-button, three-button, sliders, side buttons, roller-ball, optical, keyboard combos, and the colors. And for years, Apple has let me make the choice?ensuring simplicity in design and function, but supporting the efforts of those who wish to expand the horizon.
You just don't have the choice when using the trackpad. Which is what probably 95% of all MacBook users and still >80% of all MBP users do.
Not according to the extensive usability studies Apple did before releasing the original Mac.
For you maybe, but studies show that the vast majority of new Windows users do not know how to use the right mouse button, or even that there is a right mouse button.
Yes there is. Mac OS has supported two-button mice since 2001. Apple has been shipping the Mighty Mouse, which has two buttons, for a while now.
It's all in the Help sections.
They do.
The reason Apple stuck to the single-button was to prevent third-party developers from writing code that REQUIRED the right-click, as is true in so many Windows apps. As long as the majority of Mac users had only one button, developers HAD to put all the functions of their programs on the main menus - not true with Windows apps, which have many functions available ONLY from the right-click.
If you think Mac OS X doesn't support right-clicking, I don't know what to tell you except go use a Mac.
This is the same argumentation I read every single time. While some of it is true (mostly where I never said the opposite) the rest is plain inconsistent:
- Do you really mean studies done before the first Mac was released? They would be some 20 years old, wouldn't they? I'd never rely on 20 years old knowledge with regard to today's IT. Anyway, it's not the two buttons but the functions behind them. You could still have both buttons behave the same as standard (which would be even more confusing I'd think)
- you're plain wrong that there are any Apple mice/trackpads that have a second physical button. There is the MIghty Mouse that simulates a second button with a totally unintuitive finger movement, and there's touchpad that requires THREE fingers to simulate the second button. Therefore, it is HIDDEN. Nothing more I said.
- Similarly, Apple does NOT offer a context menu accessible with a second button. They offer a context menu accessible with strange totally unintuitive finger movements on either a mouse of a touchpad. Why can't you admit that it's MORE intuitive and EASIER to understand to have a separate button for it? There's really NOTHING to argue about THAT fact.
- referring to a Help section completely defies the intended simplicity of a single-button interface. Noone ever reads the Help section, and with Apple, you would never find that second-button functionality otherwise. With two-button mice/touchpads, there is a chance of I don't know 90% that people find out (I mean, they do find out that there is not just the ESC key on the keyboard ).
That said, it is also obvious that a one-button interface with only one-button functionality is easier to use/understand than a two-button interface. But there are also good reasons to offer a second-button functionality. A very good use for example is the context menu. But a context menu hidden behind some two-button simulation that I have to dig the Help section for to know about is no longer a good idea.
Furthermore, I do see your final argument that, considering the non-negligible number of people not realizing there is a second button, the use of the second mouse button should not be imperative. You write that in Windows, it is common that you can't access functions in other ways but using the context menu. While I don't want to contradict you, I just can't think of any right now to be honest. Do you have examples?
I'd never rely on 20 years old knowledge with regard to today's IT.
A n00b in 1984 is the same n00b in 2007. Two buttons confuse them.
Quote:
- you're plain wrong that there are any Apple mice/trackpads that have a second physical button.
Oh. PHYSICAL button. OK.
Quote:
There is the MIghty Mouse that simulates a second button with a totally unintuitive finger movement,
Unintuitive to you, and me. I buy a Logitech anyway.
Quote:
and there's touchpad that requires THREE fingers to simulate the second button.
I never use 3 fingers on my MBP. I have no idea what you are referring to. Two finger tap brings up the CM, and one more tap selects the menu item.
Quote:
Why can't you admit that it's MORE intuitive and EASIER to understand to have a separate button for it? There's really NOTHING to argue about THAT fact.
Maybe if you are accustomed to PC laptops. I've never used one and don't miss any "second button" - I use the two finger tap - tap. I don't use any physical button at all.
Quote:
You write that in Windows, it is common that you can't access functions in other ways but using the context menu. While I don't want to contradict you, I just can't think of any right now to be honest. Do you have examples?
No. But I bet a lot of the members on this forum do. I have some scripts to work on and can't boot into XP right now.
The second mouse button and the context menu were invented to allow users to quickly access oft used actions. This was necessary under Windows where UI guidelines were nearly inexistent and design flaws allowed for apps to have actions that didn't have a menu bar equivalent or where apps didn't have a menu bar at all.
Because every action is generally accessible on Macs via the menu bar, the need for a second mouse button or a context menu is greatly diminished, even unnecessary in most cases.
The context menus are generally populated with ridiculous actions that have much faster equivalents. The novice user will learn things like double-clicking (to open apps), using the 'delete/backspace' key to delete text and will *not* need context-sensitive actions like 'Open' or 'Delete' which just needlessly clutter the context with slower, inefficient methods of performing an action. Using Cut, Copy and Paste from the context menu for text instead of using the Edit menu to perform these actions or instead of learning the key combination is like keeping training wheels on your bike for the rest of your life. Too lazy to really learn how to efficiently ride the bike. If the context menu didn't exist (or the training wheels), you effectively learn *faster* because you have no choice but to learn the best way to perform an action. You'll fall at first but it'll hurt and you'll never want to fall again...with training wheels you'll always feel safe but you'll never go anywhere fast.
Things get interesting when context menus are populated with actions that aren't often used. Actions like 'Open With'. Now context menus become valuable...or DO they? If the UI is well built, these actions should be readily accessible without the need of a context menu. This is where the toolbar, the context sensitive inspector windows, and (new in iWorks) format bars come in. These things offer way more powerful context sensitive options (which could possibly be matched by a context menu but probably never exceed).
I hardly ever use the context menu. In fact, I only really use it because it's there. And I doesn't actually increase my productivity. In some cases it may even decrease my productivity. The time it takes me to invoke 'Open With' (a rarely used action in my opinion considering all the possible ways to open a file with a specific app) from a context menu is probably the same as reaching over to the Action button in the Finder toolbar or slightly slower by reaching for the File menu.
With a proper GUI, there should be no need for a context menu or a second mouse button. Why confuse the novice user with multiple buttons if everything can be done as fast or faster with a single button and the keyboard? Why is there a need to introduce a 'half-ass' way to cut, copy, paste, delete, open using the second mouse button? It provides a false sense of productivity increase.
The only thing a context menu does is keep context-sensitive actions close to the mouse cursor and you never have to learn any key combinations. It's a bad tradeoff to two existing solutions...one that is lightning fast (key combinations) and one that is currently more powerful (format bars + inspectors).
Apple has also always provided the control key as a means to simulate a second mouse button click for the people that actually think they are being more productive with context menus on the Mac.
My opinion changes when the second mouse button is actually used as a real time saver (ie in graphics apps when tools are mapped to it) or in games.
But context menus should not exist. And novice users should never learn how to use them. They're far from being the optimal solution. It's just better that they never be confused by a second mouse button and use the menu bar and context sensitive inspector windows and format bars all the time until they eventually learn the key combinations to make them super efficient instead of half-efficient.
Very glad the default Mighty Mouse behavior is one-button. Mighty Mouse was created because of the need to make Windows switchers feel more at home in Mac OS X and allow for second button use in Boot Camp (under Windows, the second button is essential due to UI design flaws.)
Every Apple app can be used with ease with a single-button mouse. This might not be true of third-party apps but this is simply because a lot of developers (Windows and Linux developers in particular) spend a lot of time on the code and almost no time on the user interface and the context menu always seems like the easy way out for them when they don't know how to properly make the features accessible. In Microsoft's case, the easy way out is having a mega toolbar with tons of tiny little icons for every imaginable action...no context-sensitivity or anything. Good job MS. I suppose I should give them a bit of credit...they've swept the mess under the rug with their new Ribbon UI instead of actually vacuuming it.
You don't have to hold down with two fingers to keep the context menu up. You just tap with two fingers, release, and then use a single tap to select a menu item.
Yes, let's have buttons for copy, paste, cut, view source, change text encoding to shift-JIS too! OK seriously, I can see where you're coming from but what's with the hate for keyboard shortcuts? You surely use keyboard shortcuts for quit, close window, copy, paste etc?
There is a very big difference between commonly known keyboard shortcuts for everyday functions and forcing the user to be aware of unannounced let alone visually undiscoverable actions.
OSX is making too much use of the following and too many smug people "in the know" think this is somehow clever.
Like having a hidden catch on the bathroom door, which itself is hidden behind a rotating bookshelf, that you can only learn of by meeting someone who's actually managed to find the way through.
Whose bright idea was it to make the Mac's GUI like a game of Myst?
Look - anyone who is unaware of the double-tap didn't look at the Trackpad Preference Pane, the Help documentation, or any of the Mac online magazines.
How do you expect Apple to "tell" people about these things if not in the Help section and in the System Preferences? Don't people browse through their Mac when they get it to see what all the menus are about?
Plus, you do not *need* to know about the double-tap; Safari has a perfectly plain back arrow in its toolbar as well as a "Back" menu item as well as "Delete" and "command-left bracket" named as the shortcuts for "Back" in the Safari Help text.
There are all sorts of guided tours and tutorials on the Apple website also.
You don't have to hold down with two fingers to keep the context menu up. You just tap with two fingers, release, and then use a single tap to select a menu item.
Whoa.
I never use the trackpad to click, so I didn't know that. It's cool at first but seems to get in the way for me. And using the trackpad to click is also annoying, so it's not worth the tradeoff. The best two-finger gesture, well besides these, has to be two-finger scrolling. I don't know how we got along without it years ago.
Comments
Oh, I don't know, in the User's manual. Oh, right, there is no user's manual.
Sorry, user's shouldn't have to search around the internet to find features that are supposed to be awesome.
You don't. There's a big honking blue Apple menu up there, and in there is System Preferences. In there is Keyboard and Mouse. In there is Trackpad. On that page is a blue circle with a question mark. If you click that, it explains how to use the trackpad. Or you can type trackpad into the Help box.
No, but you need to KNOW it does it. I don't normally get a computer and then start playing with all sorts of varying keyboard and finger combinations trying to figure out all these 'cool' features.
You should at least look at all the menus and screens of the included applications. Or click the Help menu and read the topics.
Apple just has problems letting users control things, like turning off memory and CPU hogs like spotlight and dashboard.
You don't need to manually turn stuff off. The Mach kernel will page it out if it is not used and the memory is needed, and if you don't use it, it won't be paged back in. The idea of keeping memory "free" is a false one - memory that is purchased should be used, not kept free, and that is what OS X does.
Spotlight does nothing unless you run a search. Perhaps you are referring to the metadata server and metadata worker processes - they are using exactly 0.0% to 0.1% CPU on my machine right now.
Dashboard - there are hacks to disable it, but just close all of its widgets and drag its icon out of the Dock and it is for all practical purposes gone.
There is no need to see the Desktop, either - you can leave a little sliver of it exposed at the bottom if you want to actually drag stuff there, or you can put the Desktop folder in the Dock in Leopard and drag stuff into it from any app without using Exposé.
Oh, I don't know, in the User's manual. Oh, right, there is no user's manual.
Sorry, user's shouldn't have to search around the internet to find features that are supposed to be awesome.
No, but you need to KNOW it does it. I don't normally get a computer and then start playing with all sorts of varying keyboard and finger combinations trying to figure out all these 'cool' features.
Apple just has problems letting users control things, like turning off memory and CPU hogs like spotlight and dashboard. Hell, my MBP has this nifty illuminated keyboard. Yet I seem to have no control over when it will illuminate. Apple basically decides how dark the room has to be before I need it. Thanks, guys!
I was just about to give you some help. However, considering that most of your posts are outright whining, forget it.
As for Apple basically deciding how dark the room has to be before you use it, look at the bright side. It would have to be high noon in the middle of the Sahara and I doubt there would be enough light for you to understand.
I was just about to give you some help. However, considering that most of your posts are outright whining, forget it.
As for Apple basically deciding how dark the room has to be before you use it, look at the bright side. It would have to be high noon in the middle of the Sahara and I doubt there would be enough light for you to understand.
I DO like Apple and Macs, but I don't understand why it's so hard to admit that Apple just plain got the whole one-button thing wrong:
It's totally untrue that two BUTTONS are confusing for users. The only confusing thing might having two different FUNCTIONS available. Windows exposes to the user by having a second button that there are different things to do with the left one and the right one, otherwise there wouldn't be two of them. So you've got the immediate choice to just try it. If you don't then you don't, you wouldn't really be missing anything because everything is accessible via ordinary menus. But it's so much easier with the second button, and therefore it's there and easy to find.
Apple on the other had also has something like context menus which are, as explained, a good thing. But it totally HIDES that functionality because (1) there is no second mouse button (2) pressing modifier keys along with pressing the mouse button is (a) totally counter-intuitive (b) really hard to find out (I mean, there are at least four modifier keys (Function, Control, Option, Command; you could even count 6 because there are two Command and Option keys) and (c) complicated as you need the other hand, and (3) the double-finger touchpad option is not enabled by default (as far as I know), and (4) enabling it is for most users completely out of reach. At least 90% don't even ever enable tap-to-click.
People who might EVER find out about ANY of the options to simulate a right-click are 100 times smarter than you need to be to just use a second totally obvious mouse button.
There are exactly two coices:
a) offer a context menu and make it accessible by a second button
b) don't offer a second button but then don't offer a context menu.
Anything else is plain stupid.
i'm only interested in one thing, and that's memory use! right now safari uses an insane amount of ram, considering it's just a web browser. as much as I like safari, having to quit it on a very regular basis because its ram use creeps up to anything between 200 and 300 mb ram is just plain silly!!!
I'm running it right now, 5 tabs, and the total memory consumed is 86MB (according to the system monitor).
Just out of curisosity - what are your system specifications - Intel or PowerPC Mac? what version of MacOS X? have you lodged a bug report?
You guys should really compile these articles and release them as a book - they're fantastic! Informative not only about the road to Leopard, but the phenomenal rise, fall & reserection of Apple, as well as the development of the internet and operating systems as a whole.
Truly great stuff. One of the best features on the internet I've ever found.
no. i want to be able to open a new tab with one mouse click or a double-click. right now i have four options: 1. FILE-> NEW TAB, 2. right click on tabbar, select "New Tab", 3. CMD+T, 4. Mouse Gesture
a simple "PLUS"-symbol or the double-click ability would solve this problem. this is stubborn.
AGREED! I love this in FF. Very simple to add, Very easy to use.
One thing i do notice about the beta is the lack of PDF support. Everytime i open a PDF on the web, it crashes! This will be fixed, but crashing on something as basic as a PDF? C'mon guys!
I also would like the ability to add keywords for searching my bookmarks.
Why can't we STAR our bookmarks and then search by those like in iTunes?!
Just some thoughts?
RichGetz.com
It's very unobtrusive and simple.
It's absolutely true that tabs fail to use Exposé. That's the point - they are an alternative to Exposé, because Exposé is a sub-optimal workflow for switching between documents within an application. Just because it can do that doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job. Exposé is the best application switcher around, but that's about all it's good for. I gave up on the "Show Application Windows" feature ages ago, as it was simply useless to me. Now i isn't my business that you prefer to use the wrong tool for the job of browser window switching, but you should really back off of those who prefer to do things the right way.
You gotta be shittin' me. I can't even be bothered answering the rest of your post after reading this paragraph.
1. I don't know how many tabs (or browser windows) you have open to make them 'unusable' in Exposé but even 10 similar pages are easily identifiable on any Mac Apple ships today and can be handled by Exposé's 'Show Application Windows' even on your Mac Mini with 1 gig of RAM...shit, it was VERY usable on my dual 800MHz G4 with 512 megs of RAM
2. You're super lucky that Safari has an algorithm that shows the differences in the web page titles instead of showing the dozen or so first characters...otherwise, tabs would be quite unusable with similar pages with similar names...still...put more than twelve tabs in a normal width browser window and you've got a serious problem...not so with Exposé, you can have 20 windows open and still have Exposé be usable.
With Spaces, Exposé can become up to 16 times more effective.
How many tabs do you have open simultaneously at any one time? 20? 30? 40?
Tabexpose is quite good: http://www.cocoamug.com/tabexpose/index.html But it costs, and as far as I know cannot be configured to work with the normal expose function. Ideally one should be able to select an option which separates the tabs in ordinary expose.
I DO like Apple and Macs, but I don't understand why it's so hard to admit that Apple just plain got the whole one-button thing wrong:
It's totally untrue that two BUTTONS are confusing for users.
Not according to the extensive usability studies Apple did before releasing the original Mac.
The only confusing thing might {be} having two different FUNCTIONS available. Windows exposes to the user by having a second button that there are different things to do with the left one and the right one, otherwise there wouldn't be two of them. So you've got the immediate choice to just try it. If you don't then you don't, you wouldn't really be missing anything because everything is accessible via ordinary menus. But it's so much easier with the second button, and therefore it's there and easy to find.
For you maybe, but studies show that the vast majority of new Windows users do not know how to use the right mouse button, or even that there is a right mouse button.
Apple on the other had also has something like context menus which are, as explained, a good thing. But it totally HIDES that functionality because (1) there is no second mouse button
Yes there is. Mac OS has supported two-button mice since 2001. Apple has been shipping the Mighty Mouse, which has two buttons, for a while now.
(2) pressing modifier keys along with pressing the mouse button is (a) totally counter-intuitive (b) really hard to find out (I mean, there are at least four modifier keys (Function, Control, Option, Command; you could even count 6 because there are two Command and Option keys) and (c) complicated as you need the other hand, and (3) the double-finger touchpad option is not enabled by default (as far as I know), and (4) enabling it is for most users completely out of reach. At least 90% don't even ever enable tap-to-click.
People who might EVER find out about ANY of the options to simulate a right-click are 100 times smarter than you need to be to just use a second totally obvious mouse button.
It's all in the Help sections.
There are exactly two coices:
a) offer a context menu and make it accessible by a second button
They do.
b) don't offer a second button but then don't offer a context menu.
Anything else is plain stupid.
The reason Apple stuck to the single-button was to prevent third-party developers from writing code that REQUIRED the right-click, as is true in so many Windows apps. As long as the majority of Mac users had only one button, developers HAD to put all the functions of their programs on the main menus - not true with Windows apps, which have many functions available ONLY from the right-click.
If you think Mac OS X doesn't support right-clicking, I don't know what to tell you except go use a Mac.
I DO like Apple and Macs, but I don't understand why it's so hard to admit that Apple just plain got the whole one-button thing wrong:
It's totally untrue that two BUTTONS are confusing for users. The only confusing thing might having two different FUNCTIONS available. Windows exposes to the user by having a second button that there are different things to do with the left one and the right one, otherwise there wouldn't be two of them. So you've got the immediate choice to just try it. If you don't then you don't, you wouldn't really be missing anything because everything is accessible via ordinary menus. But it's so much easier with the second button, and therefore it's there and easy to find.
Apple on the other had also has something like context menus which are, as explained, a good thing. But it totally HIDES that functionality because (1) there is no second mouse button (2) pressing modifier keys along with pressing the mouse button is (a) totally counter-intuitive (b) really hard to find out (I mean, there are at least four modifier keys (Function, Control, Option, Command; you could even count 6 because there are two Command and Option keys) and (c) complicated as you need the other hand, and (3) the double-finger touchpad option is not enabled by default (as far as I know), and (4) enabling it is for most users completely out of reach. At least 90% don't even ever enable tap-to-click.
People who might EVER find out about ANY of the options to simulate a right-click are 100 times smarter than you need to be to just use a second totally obvious mouse button.
There are exactly two coices:
a) offer a context menu and make it accessible by a second button
b) don't offer a second button but then don't offer a context menu.
Anything else is plain stupid.
Excuse me, but why is this post directed towards me?
While I am here though, I would like to comment on your opinion that Apple got the one-button wrong.
For many of the reasons posted elsewhere, e.g., http://www.gearlive.com/index.php/ne...ouse-01280820/ I commend Apple for sticking to it's mouse strategy, i.e., keep it simple.
Now this is not to say that I wouldn't use a two button mouse. In fact, I have used multi-button, multifunctional wheel mice for years. And only use my Macbook Pro trackpad on the plane or in bed, always accompanied with a mini travel mouse and last few years, my Logitech MX that I got specifically to interchange between my Macbook Pro, Mac Pro and a PC.
Why the continuous demand for Apple to change behooves me. Particularly because I look at mice like I look at gloves. I don't use my ski gloves playing golf, or a catchers mitt playing shortstop. In fact, on very cold days I opt for ski mitts over gloves. Obviously, I don't visit a pro shop to buy work gloves or Home Depot for dress gloves.
But lucky for us we can go to a number of places in which the selection is mind-boggling. So much that the adage, the more choice the longer it takes to make a decision, is no better exampled.
Big mice, little mice, left-hand, right-hand, travel mice, track-ball, wire-less, USB, Bluetooth, one-button, two-button, three-button, sliders, side buttons, roller-ball, optical, keyboard combos, and the colors. And for years, Apple has let me make the choice?ensuring simplicity in design and function, but supporting the efforts of those who wish to expand the horizon.
And last but not least, it doesn't have a "new tab" button!
Command-T works well enough for me.
Excuse me, but why is this post directed towards me?
Wans't directed specifically to you but to the mouse button discussion where, as far as I remember, your's was the last post.
...Why the continuous demand for Apple to change behooves me. Particularly because I look at mice like I look at gloves. I don't use my ski gloves playing golf, or a catchers mitt playing shortstop. In fact, on very cold days I opt for ski mitts over gloves. Obviously, I don't visit a pro shop to buy work gloves or Home Depot for dress gloves.
But lucky for us we can go to a number of places in which the selection is mind-boggling. So much that the adage, the more choice the longer it takes to make a decision, is no better exampled.
Big mice, little mice, left-hand, right-hand, travel mice, track-ball, wire-less, USB, Bluetooth, one-button, two-button, three-button, sliders, side buttons, roller-ball, optical, keyboard combos, and the colors. And for years, Apple has let me make the choice?ensuring simplicity in design and function, but supporting the efforts of those who wish to expand the horizon.
You just don't have the choice when using the trackpad. Which is what probably 95% of all MacBook users and still >80% of all MBP users do.
Not according to the extensive usability studies Apple did before releasing the original Mac.
For you maybe, but studies show that the vast majority of new Windows users do not know how to use the right mouse button, or even that there is a right mouse button.
Yes there is. Mac OS has supported two-button mice since 2001. Apple has been shipping the Mighty Mouse, which has two buttons, for a while now.
It's all in the Help sections.
They do.
The reason Apple stuck to the single-button was to prevent third-party developers from writing code that REQUIRED the right-click, as is true in so many Windows apps. As long as the majority of Mac users had only one button, developers HAD to put all the functions of their programs on the main menus - not true with Windows apps, which have many functions available ONLY from the right-click.
If you think Mac OS X doesn't support right-clicking, I don't know what to tell you except go use a Mac.
This is the same argumentation I read every single time. While some of it is true (mostly where I never said the opposite) the rest is plain inconsistent:
- Do you really mean studies done before the first Mac was released? They would be some 20 years old, wouldn't they? I'd never rely on 20 years old knowledge with regard to today's IT. Anyway, it's not the two buttons but the functions behind them. You could still have both buttons behave the same as standard (which would be even more confusing I'd think)
- you're plain wrong that there are any Apple mice/trackpads that have a second physical button. There is the MIghty Mouse that simulates a second button with a totally unintuitive finger movement, and there's touchpad that requires THREE fingers to simulate the second button. Therefore, it is HIDDEN. Nothing more I said.
- Similarly, Apple does NOT offer a context menu accessible with a second button. They offer a context menu accessible with strange totally unintuitive finger movements on either a mouse of a touchpad. Why can't you admit that it's MORE intuitive and EASIER to understand to have a separate button for it? There's really NOTHING to argue about THAT fact.
- referring to a Help section completely defies the intended simplicity of a single-button interface. Noone ever reads the Help section, and with Apple, you would never find that second-button functionality otherwise. With two-button mice/touchpads, there is a chance of I don't know 90% that people find out (I mean, they do find out that there is not just the ESC key on the keyboard
That said, it is also obvious that a one-button interface with only one-button functionality is easier to use/understand than a two-button interface. But there are also good reasons to offer a second-button functionality. A very good use for example is the context menu. But a context menu hidden behind some two-button simulation that I have to dig the Help section for to know about is no longer a good idea.
Furthermore, I do see your final argument that, considering the non-negligible number of people not realizing there is a second button, the use of the second mouse button should not be imperative. You write that in Windows, it is common that you can't access functions in other ways but using the context menu. While I don't want to contradict you, I just can't think of any right now to be honest. Do you have examples?
I'd never rely on 20 years old knowledge with regard to today's IT.
A n00b in 1984 is the same n00b in 2007. Two buttons confuse them.
- you're plain wrong that there are any Apple mice/trackpads that have a second physical button.
Oh. PHYSICAL button. OK.
There is the MIghty Mouse that simulates a second button with a totally unintuitive finger movement,
Unintuitive to you, and me. I buy a Logitech anyway.
and there's touchpad that requires THREE fingers to simulate the second button.
I never use 3 fingers on my MBP. I have no idea what you are referring to. Two finger tap brings up the CM, and one more tap selects the menu item.
Why can't you admit that it's MORE intuitive and EASIER to understand to have a separate button for it? There's really NOTHING to argue about THAT fact.
Maybe if you are accustomed to PC laptops. I've never used one and don't miss any "second button" - I use the two finger tap - tap. I don't use any physical button at all.
You write that in Windows, it is common that you can't access functions in other ways but using the context menu. While I don't want to contradict you, I just can't think of any right now to be honest. Do you have examples?
No. But I bet a lot of the members on this forum do. I have some scripts to work on and can't boot into XP right now.
Because every action is generally accessible on Macs via the menu bar, the need for a second mouse button or a context menu is greatly diminished, even unnecessary in most cases.
The context menus are generally populated with ridiculous actions that have much faster equivalents. The novice user will learn things like double-clicking (to open apps), using the 'delete/backspace' key to delete text and will *not* need context-sensitive actions like 'Open' or 'Delete' which just needlessly clutter the context with slower, inefficient methods of performing an action. Using Cut, Copy and Paste from the context menu for text instead of using the Edit menu to perform these actions or instead of learning the key combination is like keeping training wheels on your bike for the rest of your life. Too lazy to really learn how to efficiently ride the bike. If the context menu didn't exist (or the training wheels), you effectively learn *faster* because you have no choice but to learn the best way to perform an action. You'll fall at first but it'll hurt and you'll never want to fall again...with training wheels you'll always feel safe but you'll never go anywhere fast.
Things get interesting when context menus are populated with actions that aren't often used. Actions like 'Open With'. Now context menus become valuable...or DO they? If the UI is well built, these actions should be readily accessible without the need of a context menu. This is where the toolbar, the context sensitive inspector windows, and (new in iWorks) format bars come in. These things offer way more powerful context sensitive options (which could possibly be matched by a context menu but probably never exceed).
I hardly ever use the context menu. In fact, I only really use it because it's there. And I doesn't actually increase my productivity. In some cases it may even decrease my productivity. The time it takes me to invoke 'Open With' (a rarely used action in my opinion considering all the possible ways to open a file with a specific app) from a context menu is probably the same as reaching over to the Action button in the Finder toolbar or slightly slower by reaching for the File menu.
With a proper GUI, there should be no need for a context menu or a second mouse button. Why confuse the novice user with multiple buttons if everything can be done as fast or faster with a single button and the keyboard? Why is there a need to introduce a 'half-ass' way to cut, copy, paste, delete, open using the second mouse button? It provides a false sense of productivity increase.
The only thing a context menu does is keep context-sensitive actions close to the mouse cursor and you never have to learn any key combinations. It's a bad tradeoff to two existing solutions...one that is lightning fast (key combinations) and one that is currently more powerful (format bars + inspectors).
Apple has also always provided the control key as a means to simulate a second mouse button click for the people that actually think they are being more productive with context menus on the Mac.
My opinion changes when the second mouse button is actually used as a real time saver (ie in graphics apps when tools are mapped to it) or in games.
But context menus should not exist. And novice users should never learn how to use them. They're far from being the optimal solution. It's just better that they never be confused by a second mouse button and use the menu bar and context sensitive inspector windows and format bars all the time until they eventually learn the key combinations to make them super efficient instead of half-efficient.
Very glad the default Mighty Mouse behavior is one-button. Mighty Mouse was created because of the need to make Windows switchers feel more at home in Mac OS X and allow for second button use in Boot Camp (under Windows, the second button is essential due to UI design flaws.)
Every Apple app can be used with ease with a single-button mouse. This might not be true of third-party apps but this is simply because a lot of developers (Windows and Linux developers in particular) spend a lot of time on the code and almost no time on the user interface and the context menu always seems like the easy way out for them when they don't know how to properly make the features accessible. In Microsoft's case, the easy way out is having a mega toolbar with tons of tiny little icons for every imaginable action...no context-sensitivity or anything. Good job MS. I suppose I should give them a bit of credit...they've swept the mess under the rug with their new Ribbon UI instead of actually vacuuming it.
I never use 3 fingers on my MBP. I have no idea what you are referring to. Two finger tap brings up the CM, and one more tap selects the menu item.
It was my belief that you had to put two fingers on the touch pad and click the button with the third (can't check right now)
Yes, let's have buttons for copy, paste, cut, view source, change text encoding to shift-JIS too! OK seriously, I can see where you're coming from but what's with the hate for keyboard shortcuts? You surely use keyboard shortcuts for quit, close window, copy, paste etc?
There is a very big difference between commonly known keyboard shortcuts for everyday functions and forcing the user to be aware of unannounced let alone visually undiscoverable actions.
OSX is making too much use of the following and too many smug people "in the know" think this is somehow clever.
Like having a hidden catch on the bathroom door, which itself is hidden behind a rotating bookshelf, that you can only learn of by meeting someone who's actually managed to find the way through.
Whose bright idea was it to make the Mac's GUI like a game of Myst?
How do you expect Apple to "tell" people about these things if not in the Help section and in the System Preferences? Don't people browse through their Mac when they get it to see what all the menus are about?
Plus, you do not *need* to know about the double-tap; Safari has a perfectly plain back arrow in its toolbar as well as a "Back" menu item as well as "Delete" and "command-left bracket" named as the shortcuts for "Back" in the Safari Help text.
There are all sorts of guided tours and tutorials on the Apple website also.
You don't have to hold down with two fingers to keep the context menu up. You just tap with two fingers, release, and then use a single tap to select a menu item.
Whoa.
I never use the trackpad to click, so I didn't know that. It's cool at first but seems to get in the way for me. And using the trackpad to click is also annoying, so it's not worth the tradeoff. The best two-finger gesture, well besides these, has to be two-finger scrolling. I don't know how we got along without it years ago.