The maximize button in 10.1.x only maximizes vertically and one would be inclined to think it would extend both horizontal and vertical. I, however, doubt that Jaguar will address this, not that its a big deal anyways.
<strong>The maximize button in 10.1.x only maximizes vertically and one would be inclined to think it would extend both horizontal and vertical. I, however, doubt that Jaguar will address this, not that its a big deal anyways.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Eh? Maximize doesn't maximize to full screen, ala Windows, it maximizes the the minimum needed to show all the content. It should only maximize enough to get rid of the scroll bars if possible. 'Optimize' is a better term for the button, IMHO.
I must say I totally agree with philter, about the OS X. The Dock sucks, and the new Apple menu sucks. Too much fancy things, not enough usefull things like the labels, which are gone. I need the labels.
<strong>I must say I totally agree with philter, about the OS X. The Dock sucks, and the new Apple menu sucks. Too much fancy things, not enough usefull things like the labels, which are gone. I need the labels.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Throw me in with this group. Don't know about iphoto, but there are some extremely simple changes that would help OSX alot. Putting favorites in the Apple menu would let us rely less on the dock. Putting the trash can back on the sedk top would help because at times its very difficult to throw things away when the dock is set to hide. Bring back 'Windowshade', an extremely useful tool. Give us Notepad-why wouldn't it be here? Don't tell me about shareware-it shouldn't be necessary. If the 'GO' Menu replaced the 'Special' Menu then the items that used to be there should be in the Go Menu as well. The fonts on screen are just awful-blurry as hell. It gives me a headache-let us change the font or fix the damn thing. Very simple changes, but it would enhance the OS so much and make it more acceptaable to older Mac users and it would make OSX even more helpful and easy to use.
<strong>Putting favorites in the Apple menu would let us rely less on the dock.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agreed. I'd like them there too.
[quote]<strong>Putting the trash can back on the sedk top would help because at times its very difficult to throw things away when the dock is set to hide.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It' still easier than having to find it under all those windows. Now all apps can hopefully start to use it whereas before it was really just a Finder tool.
[quote]<strong>If the 'GO' Menu replaced the 'Special' Menu then the items that used to be there should be in the Go Menu as well.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Shut down and restart, etc. make more sense under the System-wide Apple menu now. They are accessible from any app and are placed at the top of the menubar hierarchy. Actually, I think we've discussed this before.
[quote]<strong>The fonts on screen are just awful-blurry as hell. It gives me a headache-let us change the font or fix the damn thing.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Small fonts can be difficult to read with antialiasing. But OS X has that setting to turn it off under a certain text size. Large fonts are much easier to read with this antialiasing model -- it appears as basically the same as Adobe's PDF model for text rendering. That's why made up anti-aliasing in the first place: easier to read as well as being closer to true WSIWYG.
LABELS! GIMME MY HOTDAMN LABELS BACK YOU COMMIE APPLE BASTARDS
If youre gonna give us Spring-Loaded folders back, go the whole damn 9 yards and give us flippin labels back. And no, I dont give a rats @ss if his Holiness doesn't use them and therefore doesn't see them fit for "the rest of us".
I think SJ should have at least 2 or 3 themes anstead of the aqua GUI theme. Maybe alowing people to make their own themes ruins the brand image, but if apple went ahead and made like 3 standard themes, they would still be able to propagate the Mac OS image to the public, while giving mac users more options without having to use hacks. Personally i would like a theme that is a little darker, kinda reminisent of the 20th Aniversary Mac, that is highly angular, uses darker greys, and wastes little screen real-estate.
<strong>... Learn the facts first. Carry on.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What facts? iPhoto works exactly as described. Seems you never looked into it, hm?
With regard to PS re-read his posting, you got that wrong I think.
Apples iApps business is a bit weird since when I bought a copy of SoundJam this was a nice app then, but when Apple bought the lot of it and turned it into iTunes, it lost performance and ease and options. IMHO. I would not have bought a copy of iTunes to be frank. I do not know if there is a predecessor to iPhoto, but it is all the same style like iTunes, but easily tops it in the field of resource hogging. It is not only a goofy app, but it is wasting space on disk and screen in a way unseen in anything Apple did prior. IMHO. Test it against Curator, a decent app compared to iPhoto, and you might see the difference.
So far all iApps by Apple I have dealt with are less than half decent and would slip through as freeware made by lazy and bored programmers with no interest in anything that makes a good program a good program, this is sad.
As long as these things are "free" and I can happily delete the bulk of them, they are not too bad. But a.) we all are paying for this by paying for the OS and b.) it seems that Apple integrates support for this into the OS, which both doesn't invoke happy feelings. It feels and tastes too much like MS if you ask me.
If you feel that those iApps do a good job for you I suggest comparing things to other programs, if you still are happy with them, well, I'd say I won't disturb you.
Apple, I really don't care about your damn iApps, gadgets and bubbles. I want full options and functionality back in OS X, like in OS 9. I'm not interested in fancy colorfull 3D buttons, fancy shadows and animation effects.
Why should I change all my habbits, just to adapt to a new OS, while they were fully efficient in the old OS ? Why change things while it was simple and efficient before ? Don't flame me, I'll get used to OS X. But I'm pissed to see the absence from OS X of really usefull options that were there in all the older OS (at least since system 6).
I WANT THE LABELS BACK !
I need labels. They are very important to me, because they let me make some special orders in my folders, documents, etc... I can't live without labels, god dammit !
I can think of lots of areas where OS 9 was a crusty hack job. To think that the way one edited the Apple menu, or the fact that only the initiated figured out how to switch other apps, the fact that Quit was something you did to the app but it was under the File menu, etc, etc, etc.
Let's not rehash the same old points. They are adding features (though why labels aren't there is beyond me -- I thought they would have some better alternative in Jaguar) for casual and high-end users.
Throw me in with this group. Don't know about iphoto, but there are some extremely simple changes that would help OSX alot. Putting favorites in the Apple menu would let us rely less on the dock. Putting the trash can back on the sedk top would help because at times its very difficult to throw things away when the dock is set to hide. Bring back 'Windowshade', an extremely useful tool. Give us Notepad-why wouldn't it be here? Don't tell me about shareware-it shouldn't be necessary. If the 'GO' Menu replaced the 'Special' Menu then the items that used to be there should be in the Go Menu as well. The fonts on screen are just awful-blurry as hell. It gives me a headache-let us change the font or fix the damn thing. Very simple changes, but it would enhance the OS so much and make it more acceptaable to older Mac users and it would make OSX even more helpful and easy to use.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey! These are GREAT suggestions!! Maybe we should implement them? ...... What's that? They've ALREADY been implemented? On OS 9? Ooooohh.
Hey! I got an idea. Why don't you actually try USING the Dock instead of hiding it? That way, you can minimize windows and use the Trash Can the way it was designed to be used: always up front, never anything in its way to move aside when you want to put things in it.
I don't know if you noticed, but the OS X concept relies HEAVILY on the Dock, and the more you fight it, the more frustrated you'll become. So, you can either take a deep breath, give it a chance and relearn the MacOS; or you can stay in your comfort zone and be buried along with 9.
Small fonts can be difficult to read with antialiasing. But OS X has that setting to turn it off under a certain text size. Large fonts are much easier to read with this antialiasing model -- it appears as basically the same as Adobe's PDF model for text rendering. That's why made up anti-aliasing in the first place: easier to read as well as being closer to true WSIWYG.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but if you turn off anti-aliasing, then the fonts suddenly look like crap. I mean, Geneva is not Geneva anymore, it turns into this horrible scrunched up thing were letters run together and it just looks really really bad. Why? because Quartz is still rendering the postscript, not using a Screen Font like old Mac OS does. What a JOKE!!! Quartz blows!!! Even when it does render PostScript, it looks wayyy worse than ATM. Do this comparison: Get Futura Medium, 12 point. Get Office 2001 and then get Office X (any two programs will work though). Now, open a document in OS 9 with ATM and change the font to Futura Med. 12. Look at it. Quit. Restart. Open it in OS X. Now the font is darker and harder to read. The antialiasing engine is less accurate and not as crisp as Adobe's. Well, big surprise, I mean, Postscript is an Adobe technology after all. But Apple really needs to fix this.
Not to mention that now, my Word document scrolls a million times slower. Hopefully Xtreeeeeem Quartz will fix this problem. But you shouldn't need a 32 MB Radeon JUST TO GET SOME FRICKING HARDWARE 2D ACCELARATION FOR THE GUI!!! COME ON APPLE!!
Their argument is that, "Duh, well, you shouldn't complain that what we're doing is way advanced and your hardware just can't run it. Your computer can still do exactly what it could do the day you bought it." Yeah but the day I bought it, OS X sucked then too! So when are you gonna finally own up to the fact that your CHEESY-ARSE interface is the problem, not the fact that my hardware (a 550 G4) is too slow to run it??
a. being rendered as PDFs essentially so look in an Acrobat file in OS 9 and tell me the OS 9 ones look better. This isn't Postscript, it's PDF because PDF is an open standard that ties web/screen and print together whereas Postscript is a print-oriented model.
b. Some fonts were designed for the OS 9 display model, such as Geneva. Geneva is Apple's original rip-off of Helvetica debcause Helvetica would cost them money and didn't read as clearly under the old text rendering model of the original Mac. The point is that fonts are WYSIWYG so let go of using Geneva and its ilk. It's pointless to use now. Use real fonts.
c. Office X's font rendering sucks -- it's not even using Quartz ATSUI rendering, it's still using QuickDraw. So you have Quickdraw being rendered to a system that composites everythingin Quartz. Yes, looks crappy, and a lot of Carbon ports do this because they didn't take the time or care to render using the new font rendering model.
But frankly, I think this isn't really your gripe. I think you have much bigger issues.
Hey! I got an idea. Why don't you actually try USING the Dock instead of hiding it? That way, you can minimize windows and use the Trash Can the way it was designed to be used: always up front, never anything in its way to move aside when you want to put things in it.
I don't know if you noticed, but the OS X concept relies HEAVILY on the Dock, and the more you fight it, the more frustrated you'll become. So, you can either take a deep breath, give it a chance and relearn the MacOS; or you can stay in your comfort zone and be buried along with 9.
< < <
Hey I dunno if you're the Gambit I used to know from the old BBS days, but if so, then hello! (Dark Goob here.)
Anyways, other than that, your suggestions sark uss. Why? Because look. You want me to adopt AN INFERIOR USER INTERFACE CONEPT that uses up way too much screen real estate and is wayyy too slow.
In my dock, there are 35 programs, five folders. I HAVE to hide it; it's ugly! Besides, my Titanium PowerBook's screen is too small to afford the screen real estate to have that lame dock always sitting there, popping up and reacting every time my cursor ventures near that edge of the screen.
I do minimize windows into it sometimes. But, how is this any better than just hiding programs, like in the old OS? It's not any better. I can just windowshade a window if I really want to hide it. Don't get me wrong, the Genie comes in handy on occasion, but I ABSOLUTELY DETEST the suggestion that it is now somehow "bad" and "evil" to run with 8 windows open on the screen at once. I'm a human being, I have a brain, I can multitask in my head, my desk is full of clutter, and I like a cluttered screen. I know where everything is; I like having all my information laid out in front of me at once, not all hidden away in some stupid dock somewhere. I routinely have about 5 finder windows open: the root, my documents folder, my OS 9 and OS X applications folders (because the dock is insufficient to hold aliases for everything, like spring-loaded folders used to), plus a few web browser windows, my e-mail, etc. I hide a few programs, switch between them, etc. I don't need some lame-arse dock down there hickory-dickory-docking my beloved Macintosh into inanity and ridiculousness. Alls I need is a trusty Apple Menu with aliases for my favorite programs. The dock can stay out of my way, hidden, until I really need it -- as it should be.
Really, the dock is just Apple's way to try to make a better "task bar," in order to make windows users feel more comfortable switching over. But the "task bar" was even better than the dock, because at least it can be configured to display text only instead of icons only, thus taking up less screen real estate. Apple's designers obviously have the luxury of 22" cinema displays so they don't notice the obvious flaws in their designs. But not every mac user has two million pixels spare to play around with.
I can go on and on and on. "The OS X concept," as you refer to it, goes counter to and flies in the face of "The Macintosh concept," or as I have always known it, "The best way to use a computer." Use your brain, instead of falling under Apple's hypnotising spell of whirly-majig gadgetry of interface design that looks pretty but is slow and counter-efficient. For instance, the dock could be made hierarchical: i would like to see it be able to expand out like a tree instead of everything being in a row. And I don't just mean having to click on a folder, wait TWO SECONDS for the pop up menu, and then go though A DOG - ARSE SLOW excuse for a hierarchical menu; I mean, something truly navigable like the old Apple menu.
There are a lot of great things about OS X, but the interface isn't one of them. It's definitely better than any of the other Unices out there, but come on, it ain't the Mac, at least, not yet.
Comments
<strong>
If I ever see Steve Jobs in person, I will give him a piece of my mind.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just before his bodyguards kill you and throw your body into an iGrave.
J :cool:
<strong>The maximize button in 10.1.x only maximizes vertically and one would be inclined to think it would extend both horizontal and vertical. I, however, doubt that Jaguar will address this, not that its a big deal anyways.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Eh? Maximize doesn't maximize to full screen, ala Windows, it maximizes the the minimum needed to show all the content. It should only maximize enough to get rid of the scroll bars if possible. 'Optimize' is a better term for the button, IMHO.
<strong>I must say I totally agree with philter, about the OS X. The Dock sucks, and the new Apple menu sucks. Too much fancy things, not enough usefull things like the labels, which are gone. I need the labels.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Throw me in with this group. Don't know about iphoto, but there are some extremely simple changes that would help OSX alot. Putting favorites in the Apple menu would let us rely less on the dock. Putting the trash can back on the sedk top would help because at times its very difficult to throw things away when the dock is set to hide. Bring back 'Windowshade', an extremely useful tool. Give us Notepad-why wouldn't it be here? Don't tell me about shareware-it shouldn't be necessary. If the 'GO' Menu replaced the 'Special' Menu then the items that used to be there should be in the Go Menu as well. The fonts on screen are just awful-blurry as hell. It gives me a headache-let us change the font or fix the damn thing. Very simple changes, but it would enhance the OS so much and make it more acceptaable to older Mac users and it would make OSX even more helpful and easy to use.
<strong>
Why is FreeBSD 4.4 even worth mentioning while the current version is 4.5 and version 5.0 is in late Beta?
<a href="http://www.freebsd.org/"; target="_blank">http://www.freebsd.org/</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;
FreeBSD 5.0 is currently in "developers' preview 1" stage, and is supposed to ship in late 2002.
The next release will be 4.6 on June 1.
Still, 4.4 offers quite some improvements over 3.2 (which was what Darwin is roughly in sync with right now).
Bye,
RazzFazz
<strong>Putting favorites in the Apple menu would let us rely less on the dock.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agreed. I'd like them there too.
[quote]<strong>Putting the trash can back on the sedk top would help because at times its very difficult to throw things away when the dock is set to hide.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It' still easier than having to find it under all those windows. Now all apps can hopefully start to use it whereas before it was really just a Finder tool.
[quote]<strong>If the 'GO' Menu replaced the 'Special' Menu then the items that used to be there should be in the Go Menu as well.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Shut down and restart, etc. make more sense under the System-wide Apple menu now. They are accessible from any app and are placed at the top of the menubar hierarchy. Actually, I think we've discussed this before.
[quote]<strong>The fonts on screen are just awful-blurry as hell. It gives me a headache-let us change the font or fix the damn thing.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Small fonts can be difficult to read with antialiasing. But OS X has that setting to turn it off under a certain text size. Large fonts are much easier to read with this antialiasing model -- it appears as basically the same as Adobe's PDF model for text rendering. That's why made up anti-aliasing in the first place: easier to read as well as being closer to true WSIWYG.
If youre gonna give us Spring-Loaded folders back, go the whole damn 9 yards and give us flippin labels back. And no, I dont give a rats @ss if his Holiness doesn't use them and therefore doesn't see them fit for "the rest of us".
Grrrrrrrr....
<strong>LABELS! GIMME MY HOTDAMN LABELS BACK YOU COMMIE APPLE BASTARDS
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Use <a href="http://www.cocoatech.com/"; target="_blank">SNAX</a> instead of Finder. It works better, has more features, and restores labels.
Of course I fall victim to the very same craziness at times, so I shouldn't talk.
<strong>... Learn the facts first. Carry on.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What facts? iPhoto works exactly as described. Seems you never looked into it, hm?
With regard to PS re-read his posting, you got that wrong I think.
Apples iApps business is a bit weird since when I bought a copy of SoundJam this was a nice app then, but when Apple bought the lot of it and turned it into iTunes, it lost performance and ease and options. IMHO. I would not have bought a copy of iTunes to be frank. I do not know if there is a predecessor to iPhoto, but it is all the same style like iTunes, but easily tops it in the field of resource hogging. It is not only a goofy app, but it is wasting space on disk and screen in a way unseen in anything Apple did prior. IMHO. Test it against Curator, a decent app compared to iPhoto, and you might see the difference.
So far all iApps by Apple I have dealt with are less than half decent and would slip through as freeware made by lazy and bored programmers with no interest in anything that makes a good program a good program, this is sad.
As long as these things are "free" and I can happily delete the bulk of them, they are not too bad. But a.) we all are paying for this by paying for the OS and b.) it seems that Apple integrates support for this into the OS, which both doesn't invoke happy feelings. It feels and tastes too much like MS if you ask me.
If you feel that those iApps do a good job for you I suggest comparing things to other programs, if you still are happy with them, well, I'd say I won't disturb you.
Why should I change all my habbits, just to adapt to a new OS, while they were fully efficient in the old OS ? Why change things while it was simple and efficient before ? Don't flame me, I'll get used to OS X. But I'm pissed to see the absence from OS X of really usefull options that were there in all the older OS (at least since system 6).
I WANT THE LABELS BACK !
I need labels. They are very important to me, because they let me make some special orders in my folders, documents, etc... I can't live without labels, god dammit !
Apple is losing its time on too fancy things.
FEATURES ! FEATURES ! FEATURES !
Let's not rehash the same old points. They are adding features (though why labels aren't there is beyond me -- I thought they would have some better alternative in Jaguar) for casual and high-end users.
<strong>
Throw me in with this group. Don't know about iphoto, but there are some extremely simple changes that would help OSX alot. Putting favorites in the Apple menu would let us rely less on the dock. Putting the trash can back on the sedk top would help because at times its very difficult to throw things away when the dock is set to hide. Bring back 'Windowshade', an extremely useful tool. Give us Notepad-why wouldn't it be here? Don't tell me about shareware-it shouldn't be necessary. If the 'GO' Menu replaced the 'Special' Menu then the items that used to be there should be in the Go Menu as well. The fonts on screen are just awful-blurry as hell. It gives me a headache-let us change the font or fix the damn thing. Very simple changes, but it would enhance the OS so much and make it more acceptaable to older Mac users and it would make OSX even more helpful and easy to use.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey! These are GREAT suggestions!! Maybe we should implement them? ...... What's that? They've ALREADY been implemented? On OS 9? Ooooohh.
Hey! I got an idea. Why don't you actually try USING the Dock instead of hiding it? That way, you can minimize windows and use the Trash Can the way it was designed to be used: always up front, never anything in its way to move aside when you want to put things in it.
I don't know if you noticed, but the OS X concept relies HEAVILY on the Dock, and the more you fight it, the more frustrated you'll become. So, you can either take a deep breath, give it a chance and relearn the MacOS; or you can stay in your comfort zone and be buried along with 9.
<strong>
Small fonts can be difficult to read with antialiasing. But OS X has that setting to turn it off under a certain text size. Large fonts are much easier to read with this antialiasing model -- it appears as basically the same as Adobe's PDF model for text rendering. That's why made up anti-aliasing in the first place: easier to read as well as being closer to true WSIWYG.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but if you turn off anti-aliasing, then the fonts suddenly look like crap. I mean, Geneva is not Geneva anymore, it turns into this horrible scrunched up thing were letters run together and it just looks really really bad. Why? because Quartz is still rendering the postscript, not using a Screen Font like old Mac OS does. What a JOKE!!! Quartz blows!!! Even when it does render PostScript, it looks wayyy worse than ATM. Do this comparison: Get Futura Medium, 12 point. Get Office 2001 and then get Office X (any two programs will work though). Now, open a document in OS 9 with ATM and change the font to Futura Med. 12. Look at it. Quit. Restart. Open it in OS X. Now the font is darker and harder to read. The antialiasing engine is less accurate and not as crisp as Adobe's. Well, big surprise, I mean, Postscript is an Adobe technology after all. But Apple really needs to fix this.
Not to mention that now, my Word document scrolls a million times slower. Hopefully Xtreeeeeem Quartz will fix this problem. But you shouldn't need a 32 MB Radeon JUST TO GET SOME FRICKING HARDWARE 2D ACCELARATION FOR THE GUI!!! COME ON APPLE!!
Their argument is that, "Duh, well, you shouldn't complain that what we're doing is way advanced and your hardware just can't run it. Your computer can still do exactly what it could do the day you bought it." Yeah but the day I bought it, OS X sucked then too! So when are you gonna finally own up to the fact that your CHEESY-ARSE interface is the problem, not the fact that my hardware (a 550 G4) is too slow to run it??
<strong>
FreeBSD 5.0 is currently in "developers' preview 1" stage, and is supposed to ship in late 2002.
The next release will be 4.6 on June 1.
Still, 4.4 offers quite some improvements over 3.2 (which was what Darwin is roughly in sync with right now).
Bye,
RazzFazz</strong><hr></blockquote>
Could you help us out please. What improvements does 4.4 offer over 3.2. Don't need a complete list just the biggies if you would.
a. being rendered as PDFs essentially so look in an Acrobat file in OS 9 and tell me the OS 9 ones look better. This isn't Postscript, it's PDF because PDF is an open standard that ties web/screen and print together whereas Postscript is a print-oriented model.
b. Some fonts were designed for the OS 9 display model, such as Geneva. Geneva is Apple's original rip-off of Helvetica debcause Helvetica would cost them money and didn't read as clearly under the old text rendering model of the original Mac. The point is that fonts are WYSIWYG so let go of using Geneva and its ilk. It's pointless to use now. Use real fonts.
c. Office X's font rendering sucks -- it's not even using Quartz ATSUI rendering, it's still using QuickDraw. So you have Quickdraw being rendered to a system that composites everythingin Quartz. Yes, looks crappy, and a lot of Carbon ports do this because they didn't take the time or care to render using the new font rendering model.
But frankly, I think this isn't really your gripe. I think you have much bigger issues.
> > >
Hey! I got an idea. Why don't you actually try USING the Dock instead of hiding it? That way, you can minimize windows and use the Trash Can the way it was designed to be used: always up front, never anything in its way to move aside when you want to put things in it.
I don't know if you noticed, but the OS X concept relies HEAVILY on the Dock, and the more you fight it, the more frustrated you'll become. So, you can either take a deep breath, give it a chance and relearn the MacOS; or you can stay in your comfort zone and be buried along with 9.
< < <
Hey I dunno if you're the Gambit I used to know from the old BBS days, but if so, then hello! (Dark Goob here.)
Anyways, other than that, your suggestions sark uss. Why? Because look. You want me to adopt AN INFERIOR USER INTERFACE CONEPT that uses up way too much screen real estate and is wayyy too slow.
In my dock, there are 35 programs, five folders. I HAVE to hide it; it's ugly! Besides, my Titanium PowerBook's screen is too small to afford the screen real estate to have that lame dock always sitting there, popping up and reacting every time my cursor ventures near that edge of the screen.
I do minimize windows into it sometimes. But, how is this any better than just hiding programs, like in the old OS? It's not any better. I can just windowshade a window if I really want to hide it. Don't get me wrong, the Genie comes in handy on occasion, but I ABSOLUTELY DETEST the suggestion that it is now somehow "bad" and "evil" to run with 8 windows open on the screen at once. I'm a human being, I have a brain, I can multitask in my head, my desk is full of clutter, and I like a cluttered screen. I know where everything is; I like having all my information laid out in front of me at once, not all hidden away in some stupid dock somewhere. I routinely have about 5 finder windows open: the root, my documents folder, my OS 9 and OS X applications folders (because the dock is insufficient to hold aliases for everything, like spring-loaded folders used to), plus a few web browser windows, my e-mail, etc. I hide a few programs, switch between them, etc. I don't need some lame-arse dock down there hickory-dickory-docking my beloved Macintosh into inanity and ridiculousness. Alls I need is a trusty Apple Menu with aliases for my favorite programs. The dock can stay out of my way, hidden, until I really need it -- as it should be.
Really, the dock is just Apple's way to try to make a better "task bar," in order to make windows users feel more comfortable switching over. But the "task bar" was even better than the dock, because at least it can be configured to display text only instead of icons only, thus taking up less screen real estate. Apple's designers obviously have the luxury of 22" cinema displays so they don't notice the obvious flaws in their designs. But not every mac user has two million pixels spare to play around with.
I can go on and on and on. "The OS X concept," as you refer to it, goes counter to and flies in the face of "The Macintosh concept," or as I have always known it, "The best way to use a computer." Use your brain, instead of falling under Apple's hypnotising spell of whirly-majig gadgetry of interface design that looks pretty but is slow and counter-efficient. For instance, the dock could be made hierarchical: i would like to see it be able to expand out like a tree instead of everything being in a row. And I don't just mean having to click on a folder, wait TWO SECONDS for the pop up menu, and then go though A DOG - ARSE SLOW excuse for a hierarchical menu; I mean, something truly navigable like the old Apple menu.
There are a lot of great things about OS X, but the interface isn't one of them. It's definitely better than any of the other Unices out there, but come on, it ain't the Mac, at least, not yet.