[quote] Yeah, it was 48% to 48% no sig digits. <hr></blockquote>
It was a few hundred thousand and by then, California didn't vote becasue they thought it was over. Let's not forget the 5,000+ votes for Gore that would've gave him the lead and presidency was diallowed by Republican Catherine Harris who works next door to brother Jeb. mmm, Iran-Contra part ll.....2 precidencies stolen
It was a few hundred thousand and by then, California didn't vote becasue they thought it was over. Let's not forget the 5,000+ votes for Gore that would've gave him the lead and presidency was diallowed by Republican Catherine Harris who works next door to brother Jeb. mmm, Iran-Contra part ll.....2 precidencies stolen</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, you want to hear the really ironic part? If either party had gotten their way, for how they originally wanted the votes to be counted, the *OTHER* party's candidate would have won, had they done a full and complete tally in FL.
So let's just chalk it up to fubared voting systems, and move on, shall we?
<strong>nVidia claims that the new Geforce 4 fully accelerates the Aqua interface. Perhaps that's why the new Power Macs are such speedos?
Anyone's got more on this? Just marketing?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where did you read that? A link would be nice.
I think I heard that if anything the GeForce 4 Ti may have some speed ups for Aqua but the GeForce 4 MX are just GeForce 3s so I don't see a reason why they would provide any advantages over that of the GeForce 3.
<strong>Where did you read that? A link would be nice.</strong><hr></blockquote>It was on nVidia's web page for the GeForce 4 when it was launched. It stirred up a lot of talk in the Mac community at the time. I'll try finding a link...
? Optimizations for the hottest 3D games and multimedia applications
? Full acceleration for Mac® OS X Aqua Interface<hr></blockquote>There you have it.
Rick (from The Omni Group) had this to say: [quote] First off, I wouldn't assume anything about NVidia's claim until we see it in action. For all we know, "Full acceleration of the Mac OS X Aqua interface" means the GeForce4 does exactly the same thing as every other supported graphics chip does under Mac OS X.
See, Mac OS X's 2D graphics are indeed hardware accelerated in some places. Got the Developer Tools installed? Open Quartz Debug, and turn on "Flash screen updates" and "No delay after flash". Then drag a window around, and notice where you see yellow. If your graphics accelerator is supported, you'll get yellow flashing borders, but the window content will remain visible as you drag the window around. Quartz uses your GPU to move the static window content around, but it can't use it for alpha-blending on the window shadow and translucent parts. (Theoretically, a next-generation GPU could have enough horsepower to make , though.)
So, while it'd be nice to believe that Apple is leveraging the GeForce4 for hardware-accelerated alpha blending, I wouldn't count on it just from NVidia's PR claim -- remember, that's marketingspeak. <hr></blockquote>
It was already mentioned that 10.2 may contain 64-bit code that would give away the impending release of a G5. Therefore Apple's secrecy of 10.2 may be directly related to their hardware secrecy. If this is true I can see why they would do this, otherwise I totally agree with you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I was wondering if anyone with a build of 10.2 could grep for any mentions of 64 bit code. If anyone has a copy please do this. Althought I believe that 64 bit versions X will arrive somewhere between 10.3 to 10.5 there might be some clues in a developers build of 10.2
<strong>No one really cares about Apples groovy base layer of *nix goodness or Quartz--the UI IS THE OS--and when the Aqua fashion show is over there ain't much left that is an improvement over OS9.</strong><hr></blockquote>
when you have a real point to make, like you do, don't destroy your credibility by making such obviously false statements. why go so crazy extreme? you're trying to prove a point, not make yourself look like an idiot, present your side- but don't present it like it is the only side.
[quote]when you have a real point to make, like you do, don't destroy your credibility by making such obviously false statements. why go so crazy extreme? you're trying to prove a point, not make yourself look like an idiot, present your side- but don't present it like it is the only side.<hr></blockquote>
hahh hahh:
1. This is the appleinsider forum where hyperbole is king, and sexual characteristics (mostly JYD penis size) are a close second.
2. Follow the answer-reponse chant, wherein the Dock is UI perfection and all who challenge this assertion shall be smote dead.
3. The OS is NOW the default install on consumer level machines. Note the many many reviews aimed at customers that do NOT mention *nix, etc, but which do mention ease of use.
4. Many people still choose to purchase Macs at a premium--you know the drill, slower machines, higher prices. And from the market share numbers we can posit that a vast majority as ongoing Mac users, for whom the UI is a BIG deal. And its a bigger deal because of the point above.
5. Many graphics pros depend on a certain workflow that is UI facilitated. You've no doubt heard the many tiresome complaints about lack of labels, tabbed folders, spring loaded folders, Finder issues and FUBARed printing. As many pro apps get "nativized" pros will start migrating and the same UI complaints will again be heard.
6. You argue your own side. Thats your job.
7. Your intolerance and lack of humor are tiresome.
I' ve found that the only people having trouble adjusting to OS X are the people who try to bring their OS 9 ideas and workflows into OS X. OS X is not OS 9, so don't try to make it as such. For instance, in OS 9, when you launch an app, you sit there and wait for it to finish before doing other things. In OS X, you launch an app and then do other things while the app is opening. In OS 9, you put an application that is busy rendering or processing something as the front-most app and you wait. In OS X, you put that app in the background and do other things. In OS 9, you use windowshade to hide the windows covering up your hard drive icons and desktop and trash. In OS X, you use the dock to always have access to any of the above features. In OS 9, you again use windowshade to see the window behind the front most one. In OS X, you quickly drag the window out of the way and see what's behind it just as quickly because of the live window feature.
Point is, there are TONS of advantages over OS 9, you just have to change your workflow and use them. Sure, OS X probably doesn't feel as polished to everyone who's been using the 7-9 OS, but remember that it wasn't always like that, and OS X UI is a baby considering what Platinum has gone through. it's getting better and better all the time, you just have to use it the way it was meant to be used.
I actually saw a post in another forum (full of supposedly technically competant people) where one person actually harped on 10.1.3 as being a "beta" and everyone who is using it as a "guinea pig." It's ridiculous. Then there are the people who know even less and say "application x sucks because it's carbon and not cocoa." That one always makes me laugh - albeit in a pittying sort of way.
The bottom line is they're going to get left behind. I say to hell with 'em. If they're so negative and unwilling to use X in the ways it was intended, let them get left behind. I couldn't care less. Meanwhile the rest of us will get on with the business of providing a constant stream of *useful* feedback to Apple, Adobe, and others - with the products getting better and better all the while.
Is the Dock perfect? No. That doesn't mean it is totally useless - it simply needs to be implemented in a more flexible way such that you can have it on when you want, off when you want, any side you want, etc.
Is the Finder perfect. No. There are some basic things missing like the ability to sort column views by type, search for files within the Finder toolbar, etc. But it's still got its good points.
Can Aqua get in the way sometimes with its shiny blue buttons? YES dumbasses - that's what the Graphite theme is for! Use it. (sorry, getting carried away here).
The point is, Gambit, it's not even worth responding and trying to reason with these people because they already have their minds made up that OS X sucks because it doesn't do things exactly the way they want. Probably the same people that would quit in the middle of a pick-up basketball game when they were kids, because they were losing and so it just wasn't any fun.
[quote]you just have to use it the way it was meant to be used<hr></blockquote>
No, the whole point of an excellent UI is that is not be noticed and it lets you work how you want to work. The above statement is an MS view of the UI.
[quote]In OS 9, you again use windowshade to see the window behind the front most one. In OS X, you quickly drag the window out of the way and see what's behind it just as quickly because of the live window feature<hr></blockquote>
Bad example. Which is better a double-click, or a click and drag? You might have said minimize, to help your point, but that requires a mouse movement and scrub to find the minimized window, and a click to pop it back up again. Like it or not, windowshading works when you don't have multiple monitors and you are working on revising a design, or revising a paper, and you need to switch quickly between a few different windows.
[quote]Point is, there are TONS of advantages over OS 9, you just have to change your workflow and use them<hr></blockquote>That's not how people who use their computers for a living make $$$. Point is there are advantages to OSX. Love that I can render in the background and still do other work, or that it doesn't usually crash. But these advantages have to be coupled with those already present in the previous version of the OS or you go back a couple of steps and the advantages are negated.
Yes I knows things will get better. We'll see after 10.2.
Don't be a f*ckwit Moogs. How is asking for metadata, or a better organized Dock not providing useful feedback to Apple?
<strong>No, the whole point of an excellent UI is that is not be noticed and it lets you work how you want to work. The above statement is an MS view of the UI.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, that's not true. Once you get used to working a certain way, you feel that that's the way everything should work. For instance, after working and establishing a routine in OS 9, you can't just switch to Windows without disrupting your workflow (and productivity) without a transitional period. Same thing applies to OS X. OS X is NOT OS 9 so there will be a transitional period AND a disruption in productivity while you adjust to a new workflow. You just have to use OS X as OS X and accept it like that. To say that the UI has to work FOR YOU without a learning curve or transitional period is crap at best. No matter WHAT UI you use, you have to learn it, one way or another. Did you know the MacOS the SECOND you started using it? No. You adapted a workflow to use what OS 9 gave you. Now you have to do the same with X. There's really no way to get out of that logic. NOTE THAT I'm not saying OS X can't be improved, of course it can; I'm just saying you need to relearn a few things.
[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
[QBBad example. Which is better a double-click, or a click and drag? You might have said minimize, to help your point, but that requires a mouse movement and scrub to find the minimized window, and a click to pop it back up again. Like it or not, windowshading works when you don't have multiple monitors and you are working on revising a design, or revising a paper, and you need to switch quickly between a few different windows.[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
If you select the top of the window and drag it out of the way RRRREAAL FAST, you get to see what's behind it, and then drag the window back. That's ONE mouse click. Minimizing is different. That is for when you REALLY want a window out of the way. I am aware of which point I wanted to make and the drag window out of the way and back is exactly the example I wanted to illustrate. Windowshading made sense in OS 9 because of the lack of live redraw, it doesn't make much sense in X (as for the workflow I've grown accustomed to).
[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>That's not how people who use their computers for a living make $$$. Point is there are advantages to OSX. Love that I can render in the background and still do other work, or that it doesn't usually crash. But these advantages have to be coupled with those already present in the previous version of the OS or you go back a couple of steps and the advantages are negated.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Listen, I'm not some 12 year old kid posting the benefits of X because I'm bored. I KNOW how people work and I know how people make money. I work in the IT department for a major bio-med company and it is IMPERATIVE that we keep our machines up as we're in Stage Three of FDA approval for a drug we're putting out next year. Given that, uptime and improved workflow is key, hence why we're moving to OS X. I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't write off OS X the way you've been doing it because the UI and workflow hasn't been completely polished yet. That's all.
As far as making it a religious thing, THAT was a joke. Sorry you didn't take it as such. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[quote]I'm just saying you need to relearn a few things<hr></blockquote>
There's actually very little to be relearned in OSX. The Dock is very intuitive as and apps launcher and switcher. For all other things that Apple wishes it to do, it falls on its face. Most sys prefs are pretty transparent [moving over from OS9] and printing and network browsing are a wash--thank god there is no Chooser, but WTF is up with Print Center and Apple-K. The point is that it is absolutely maddening that Apple could spend so much time on the "appearance" of the OS and gloss over obvious useability issues (some of which were fixed in 10.1 and hopefully more will be fixed in 10.2).
I can drag a window out of the way real fasssst in OS9 too. Never really had the urge to, except when I'm baked. The biggest UI upgrade since 10.1 has been the purchase of a two-button scroll mouse.
I'm in OSX and OS9 half and half. We have legacy hardware (printers w/ software RIPS) and for some things, like font management, informal project management and versioning, OS9 works better (stupid things like tabbed folders and labels). The other thing that is killing us is the spotty quality of many carbon ports.
Okay I think this thread has been hijacked enough. Anyone know if Darwin bugtracker has or will be fixed? Or has it been "steved" for leaking too much info. Also any info on synching Darwin with BSD4--will they synch BSD 4.4 or 4.5?
The thing about you is that you list all these SUBJECTIVE things, mix them with half truths, and then expect everyone to think that way.
Not all business professionals need to not notice the UI.
Not everyone likes Window shade ( as matter of fact 2 clicks instead one seems like more work ).
I've heard a lot of fanatics complain about Labels ( I thought they were kind neat back in '93 but didn't use them ).
Spring loaded folders now here is something useful although I didn't use them that much ( browser view kind of deminishes their usefulness ).
Lastly staring at a bland UI all day would drive me crazy ( I know I use Windows at work ). I do think they should impliment themes again because this is subjective ( at least I admit it ).
Not everyone likes Window shade ( as matter of fact 2 clicks instead one seems like more work ). <hr></blockquote>
you mean click, move mouse cursor down to location in the dock which moves depending on items in te dock then click again then go back up to the window. for just wanting to see what's behind for a moment that is a lot more work and unintuitive. if it ain't broke don't fix it. there was no reason to remove window shade. it could easily coexist with minimize
[quote]
I've heard a lot of fanatics complain about Labels ( I thought they were kind neat back in '93 but didn't use them ).<hr></blockquote>
so many people did. A major arguement of yours is that you don't use things but you must realize people do use them. you did the same thing with the DVD Player and 10.0. Only difference is you pushed the fact that you could restart into 9 to play movies. why not push the fact that you can restart into 9 for labels
[quote]
Spring loaded folders now here is something useful although I didn't use them that much ( browser view kind of deminishes their usefulness ).<hr></blockquote>
actually browser view enhances their usefullness several times over. imagine dragging an item on a folder and the hierarchy keeps sliding over in browser view as you dig deeper with the spring loaded folders.
[quote]Lastly staring at a bland UI all day would drive me crazy ( I know I use Windows at work ). I do think they should impliment themes again because this is subjective ( at least I admit it ).<hr></blockquote>
Comments
It was a few hundred thousand and by then, California didn't vote becasue they thought it was over. Let's not forget the 5,000+ votes for Gore that would've gave him the lead and presidency was diallowed by Republican Catherine Harris who works next door to brother Jeb. mmm, Iran-Contra part ll.....2 precidencies stolen
<strong>
It was a few hundred thousand and by then, California didn't vote becasue they thought it was over. Let's not forget the 5,000+ votes for Gore that would've gave him the lead and presidency was diallowed by Republican Catherine Harris who works next door to brother Jeb. mmm, Iran-Contra part ll.....2 precidencies stolen</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, you want to hear the really ironic part? If either party had gotten their way, for how they originally wanted the votes to be counted, the *OTHER* party's candidate would have won, had they done a full and complete tally in FL.
So let's just chalk it up to fubared voting systems, and move on, shall we?
Anyone's got more on this? Just marketing?
<strong>nVidia claims that the new Geforce 4 fully accelerates the Aqua interface. Perhaps that's why the new Power Macs are such speedos?
Anyone's got more on this? Just marketing?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where did you read that? A link would be nice.
I think I heard that if anything the GeForce 4 Ti may have some speed ups for Aqua but the GeForce 4 MX are just GeForce 3s so I don't see a reason why they would provide any advantages over that of the GeForce 3.
<strong>Where did you read that? A link would be nice.</strong><hr></blockquote>It was on nVidia's web page for the GeForce 4 when it was launched. It stirred up a lot of talk in the Mac community at the time. I'll try finding a link...
<a href="http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=macintosh"; target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=macintosh</a>;
[quote]Software Features:
? Optimizations for the hottest 3D games and multimedia applications
? Full acceleration for Mac® OS X Aqua Interface<hr></blockquote>There you have it.
Rick (from The Omni Group) had this to say: [quote] First off, I wouldn't assume anything about NVidia's claim until we see it in action. For all we know, "Full acceleration of the Mac OS X Aqua interface" means the GeForce4 does exactly the same thing as every other supported graphics chip does under Mac OS X.
See, Mac OS X's 2D graphics are indeed hardware accelerated in some places. Got the Developer Tools installed? Open Quartz Debug, and turn on "Flash screen updates" and "No delay after flash". Then drag a window around, and notice where you see yellow. If your graphics accelerator is supported, you'll get yellow flashing borders, but the window content will remain visible as you drag the window around. Quartz uses your GPU to move the static window content around, but it can't use it for alpha-blending on the window shadow and translucent parts. (Theoretically, a next-generation GPU could have enough horsepower to make , though.)
So, while it'd be nice to believe that Apple is leveraging the GeForce4 for hardware-accelerated alpha blending, I wouldn't count on it just from NVidia's PR claim -- remember, that's marketingspeak.
[ 03-16-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
Marketing....
<strong>
It was already mentioned that 10.2 may contain 64-bit code that would give away the impending release of a G5. Therefore Apple's secrecy of 10.2 may be directly related to their hardware secrecy. If this is true I can see why they would do this, otherwise I totally agree with you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I was wondering if anyone with a build of 10.2 could grep for any mentions of 64 bit code. If anyone has a copy please do this. Althought I believe that 64 bit versions X will arrive somewhere between 10.3 to 10.5 there might be some clues in a developers build of 10.2
<strong>No one really cares about Apples groovy base layer of *nix goodness or Quartz--the UI IS THE OS--and when the Aqua fashion show is over there ain't much left that is an improvement over OS9.</strong><hr></blockquote>
when you have a real point to make, like you do, don't destroy your credibility by making such obviously false statements. why go so crazy extreme? you're trying to prove a point, not make yourself look like an idiot, present your side- but don't present it like it is the only side.
hahh hahh:
1. This is the appleinsider forum where hyperbole is king, and sexual characteristics (mostly JYD penis size) are a close second.
2. Follow the answer-reponse chant, wherein the Dock is UI perfection and all who challenge this assertion shall be smote dead.
3. The OS is NOW the default install on consumer level machines. Note the many many reviews aimed at customers that do NOT mention *nix, etc, but which do mention ease of use.
4. Many people still choose to purchase Macs at a premium--you know the drill, slower machines, higher prices. And from the market share numbers we can posit that a vast majority as ongoing Mac users, for whom the UI is a BIG deal. And its a bigger deal because of the point above.
5. Many graphics pros depend on a certain workflow that is UI facilitated. You've no doubt heard the many tiresome complaints about lack of labels, tabbed folders, spring loaded folders, Finder issues and FUBARed printing. As many pro apps get "nativized" pros will start migrating and the same UI complaints will again be heard.
6. You argue your own side. Thats your job.
7. Your intolerance and lack of humor are tiresome.
[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>
Point is, there are TONS of advantages over OS 9, you just have to change your workflow and use them. Sure, OS X probably doesn't feel as polished to everyone who's been using the 7-9 OS, but remember that it wasn't always like that, and OS X UI is a baby considering what Platinum has gone through. it's getting better and better all the time, you just have to use it the way it was meant to be used.
I actually saw a post in another forum (full of supposedly technically competant people) where one person actually harped on 10.1.3 as being a "beta" and everyone who is using it as a "guinea pig." It's ridiculous. Then there are the people who know even less and say "application x sucks because it's carbon and not cocoa." That one always makes me laugh - albeit in a pittying sort of way.
The bottom line is they're going to get left behind. I say to hell with 'em. If they're so negative and unwilling to use X in the ways it was intended, let them get left behind. I couldn't care less. Meanwhile the rest of us will get on with the business of providing a constant stream of *useful* feedback to Apple, Adobe, and others - with the products getting better and better all the while.
Is the Dock perfect? No. That doesn't mean it is totally useless - it simply needs to be implemented in a more flexible way such that you can have it on when you want, off when you want, any side you want, etc.
Is the Finder perfect. No. There are some basic things missing like the ability to sort column views by type, search for files within the Finder toolbar, etc. But it's still got its good points.
Can Aqua get in the way sometimes with its shiny blue buttons? YES dumbasses - that's what the Graphite theme is for! Use it. (sorry, getting carried away here).
The point is, Gambit, it's not even worth responding and trying to reason with these people because they already have their minds made up that OS X sucks because it doesn't do things exactly the way they want. Probably the same people that would quit in the middle of a pick-up basketball game when they were kids, because they were losing and so it just wasn't any fun.
No, the whole point of an excellent UI is that is not be noticed and it lets you work how you want to work. The above statement is an MS view of the UI.
[quote]In OS 9, you again use windowshade to see the window behind the front most one. In OS X, you quickly drag the window out of the way and see what's behind it just as quickly because of the live window feature<hr></blockquote>
Bad example. Which is better a double-click, or a click and drag? You might have said minimize, to help your point, but that requires a mouse movement and scrub to find the minimized window, and a click to pop it back up again. Like it or not, windowshading works when you don't have multiple monitors and you are working on revising a design, or revising a paper, and you need to switch quickly between a few different windows.
[quote]Point is, there are TONS of advantages over OS 9, you just have to change your workflow and use them<hr></blockquote>That's not how people who use their computers for a living make $$$. Point is there are advantages to OSX. Love that I can render in the background and still do other work, or that it doesn't usually crash. But these advantages have to be coupled with those already present in the previous version of the OS or you go back a couple of steps and the advantages are negated.
Yes I knows things will get better. We'll see after 10.2.
Don't be a f*ckwit Moogs. How is asking for metadata, or a better organized Dock not providing useful feedback to Apple?
[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>
Guess who has a deadline today
[inserted sarcasm tags, though it should be blazingly obvious]
[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>
<strong>No, the whole point of an excellent UI is that is not be noticed and it lets you work how you want to work. The above statement is an MS view of the UI.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, that's not true. Once you get used to working a certain way, you feel that that's the way everything should work. For instance, after working and establishing a routine in OS 9, you can't just switch to Windows without disrupting your workflow (and productivity) without a transitional period. Same thing applies to OS X. OS X is NOT OS 9 so there will be a transitional period AND a disruption in productivity while you adjust to a new workflow. You just have to use OS X as OS X and accept it like that. To say that the UI has to work FOR YOU without a learning curve or transitional period is crap at best. No matter WHAT UI you use, you have to learn it, one way or another. Did you know the MacOS the SECOND you started using it? No. You adapted a workflow to use what OS 9 gave you. Now you have to do the same with X. There's really no way to get out of that logic. NOTE THAT I'm not saying OS X can't be improved, of course it can; I'm just saying you need to relearn a few things.
[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
[QBBad example. Which is better a double-click, or a click and drag? You might have said minimize, to help your point, but that requires a mouse movement and scrub to find the minimized window, and a click to pop it back up again. Like it or not, windowshading works when you don't have multiple monitors and you are working on revising a design, or revising a paper, and you need to switch quickly between a few different windows.[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
If you select the top of the window and drag it out of the way RRRREAAL FAST, you get to see what's behind it, and then drag the window back. That's ONE mouse click. Minimizing is different. That is for when you REALLY want a window out of the way. I am aware of which point I wanted to make and the drag window out of the way and back is exactly the example I wanted to illustrate. Windowshading made sense in OS 9 because of the lack of live redraw, it doesn't make much sense in X (as for the workflow I've grown accustomed to).
[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>That's not how people who use their computers for a living make $$$. Point is there are advantages to OSX. Love that I can render in the background and still do other work, or that it doesn't usually crash. But these advantages have to be coupled with those already present in the previous version of the OS or you go back a couple of steps and the advantages are negated.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Listen, I'm not some 12 year old kid posting the benefits of X because I'm bored. I KNOW how people work and I know how people make money. I work in the IT department for a major bio-med company and it is IMPERATIVE that we keep our machines up as we're in Stage Three of FDA approval for a drug we're putting out next year. Given that, uptime and improved workflow is key, hence why we're moving to OS X. I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't write off OS X the way you've been doing it because the UI and workflow hasn't been completely polished yet. That's all.
As far as making it a religious thing, THAT was a joke. Sorry you didn't take it as such. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: Gambit ]</p>
There's actually very little to be relearned in OSX. The Dock is very intuitive as and apps launcher and switcher. For all other things that Apple wishes it to do, it falls on its face. Most sys prefs are pretty transparent [moving over from OS9] and printing and network browsing are a wash--thank god there is no Chooser, but WTF is up with Print Center and Apple-K. The point is that it is absolutely maddening that Apple could spend so much time on the "appearance" of the OS and gloss over obvious useability issues (some of which were fixed in 10.1 and hopefully more will be fixed in 10.2).
I can drag a window out of the way real fasssst in OS9 too. Never really had the urge to, except when I'm baked. The biggest UI upgrade since 10.1 has been the purchase of a two-button scroll mouse.
I'm in OSX and OS9 half and half. We have legacy hardware (printers w/ software RIPS) and for some things, like font management, informal project management and versioning, OS9 works better (stupid things like tabbed folders and labels). The other thing that is killing us is the spotty quality of many carbon ports.
Okay I think this thread has been hijacked enough. Anyone know if Darwin bugtracker has or will be fixed? Or has it been "steved" for leaking too much info. Also any info on synching Darwin with BSD4--will they synch BSD 4.4 or 4.5?
[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>
The thing about you is that you list all these SUBJECTIVE things, mix them with half truths, and then expect everyone to think that way.
Not all business professionals need to not notice the UI.
Not everyone likes Window shade ( as matter of fact 2 clicks instead one seems like more work ).
I've heard a lot of fanatics complain about Labels ( I thought they were kind neat back in '93 but didn't use them ).
Spring loaded folders now here is something useful although I didn't use them that much ( browser view kind of deminishes their usefulness ).
Lastly staring at a bland UI all day would drive me crazy ( I know I use Windows at work ). I do think they should impliment themes again because this is subjective ( at least I admit it ).
See, subjective.
[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Not everyone likes Window shade ( as matter of fact 2 clicks instead one seems like more work ). <hr></blockquote>
you mean click, move mouse cursor down to location in the dock which moves depending on items in te dock then click again then go back up to the window. for just wanting to see what's behind for a moment that is a lot more work and unintuitive. if it ain't broke don't fix it. there was no reason to remove window shade. it could easily coexist with minimize
[quote]
I've heard a lot of fanatics complain about Labels ( I thought they were kind neat back in '93 but didn't use them ).<hr></blockquote>
so many people did. A major arguement of yours is that you don't use things but you must realize people do use them. you did the same thing with the DVD Player and 10.0. Only difference is you pushed the fact that you could restart into 9 to play movies. why not push the fact that you can restart into 9 for labels
[quote]
Spring loaded folders now here is something useful although I didn't use them that much ( browser view kind of deminishes their usefulness ).<hr></blockquote>
actually browser view enhances their usefullness several times over. imagine dragging an item on a folder and the hierarchy keeps sliding over in browser view as you dig deeper with the spring loaded folders.
[quote]Lastly staring at a bland UI all day would drive me crazy ( I know I use Windows at work ). I do think they should impliment themes again because this is subjective ( at least I admit it ).<hr></blockquote>
OS 9 drove you crazy?