It's been mentioned here already. but the article really shouldn't have left out OS/2's Launchpad, which is by far the most functionally and visually similar to OS X's dock. it even had similar functionality to OS X's stacks ( though considerably more primitive )
Below is what it looked like in OS/2 Warp 3 from 1995
Also Sun's Solaris 2.5 had the CDE task bar in 1995 as well.
Windows has less stuff to the OS, I give them credit for that. Mac has a lot of areas to learn. For me as a long time user, I am ok with it, but teaching someone new, I soon realize that there are just a lot of pockets where things are happening. Seems like too many.
But now try to teach someone Windows who is new to that
I'd say the opposite is firmly true:
You've counted the Mac's menu bar as three things, but you've only counted the Task Bar as one, when in fact it includes multiple different areas that work in different, non-obvious ways. Ditto for the Start menu, which is divided up into numerous unrelated operations. And you count the Mac's menu bar but don't count the Windows menu bar at all--which in fact you can have many of going at once. Then compare file management in Windows to the Leopard Finder: there are a zillions places you have to go to get things done. Last but not least, look at how much more consistent things are in OS X. You want to change the settings for an app? Always look under Preferences, always in the same place. Windows tucks the same functionality under multiple names like Options, Tools and Properties--and buries them in a different place every time! Look at IE--the one basic app that should work predictably: it doesn't have a traditional menu bar at all! It hides those basic functions (like Copy and Paste, which are ALWAYS in the same place on a Mac) in miscellaneous other places for you to find. And all that complexity in Windows is actually necessary for you to get things done. You can simply ignore much of OS X, but Windows is eventually going to make you poke around everywhere from right-button menus to the DOS prompt!
I would say Windows has FAR more complexity, chaos, clutter, confusion, and overall "surface area" than OS X, even if OS X is more powerful. Windows is a Rube Goldberg by comparison (and not getting any better--in fact its complexity is in your face more than ever with all the new security warnings) while OS X gets more streamlined and more unified.
The computing beginners I know go through living hell with Windows--but those who get a Mac suddenly get by just fine. They need less tech support on the new "unfamiliar" system than they ever did with the "familiar" windows.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. You can organize your Apps folder however you like. However, there are some apps that are expected to be in a specific location for other apps to access them (Mail, Safari, Disk Utility, etc.) Moving those might have adverse affects on how other apps interact with those apps, but will not stop those apps from working at all.
If you want to group all of your web browsers in to a folder called "Web Browsers", under the apps folder, you can. If you want to have an apps folder inside your home folder, you can.
You sound like an uninformed Windows user. Get some hands on time w/ Mac OS X and you'll see you can organize your folders however you like.
Oh, and for comparison, start mucking around with your apps folders inside your Program Files folder on a Windows box. I guarantee you more apps will break faster than doing the similiar action on a Mac OS X machine.
There was a time on OS X when you *couldn't* move applications or the updaters wouldn't update the applications, just put folders with the updated components into /Applications. It was extremely annoying having to drag my apps out of their categorized folder and into the main directory to get them to update properly. I've seen this happen occasionally still, but overall most updaters are "intelligent" enough to look for the apps, and not just assume.
In the Classic OS, you could put apps wherever you wanted. Each application had an ID that was used to locate it rather than a path. You could make aliases and move the original, it would still find it. In OS X, you CAN put most things where you want, but especially Apple apps won't be found in a subfolder of /Applications - when being called by other applications or Software Update. And yes, Adobe's new Window's-like approach to the Mac is very annoying as well and if you move Adobe folders from their default location, it will have to 'fix' itself which Photoshop has never been capable of doing properly on my system. What has happened is that my /Applications folder is very messy and I've given up on Apple ever allowing me to organize things the way I want them again.
For all users running Leopard, Applications will be in packages made by PackageMaker 3.0. Developers using PackageMaker 3.0 will be able to find their apps on the user's disk no matter where the user has moved them. It uses a combination of Spotlight and Launch Services to do this search.
Other features of the new package format:
- no more need to use disk images. Packages download and are unpacked by the Installer automatically. Nothing to throw away or unmount.
- packages downloaded from the internet can have the user choose their elements of the package first, before downloading, and then the download only includes those elements. The user steps through the Installer as usual, but all of the user's choosing happens before anything is actually downloaded. Imagine if you could uncheck 1.2 GB of GarageBand update before clicking "Install".
- updates will always find their current version to update by search, and will verify it by not only MD5 hash but by signed certificate.
- updates can be patch packages, wherein only the difference patch is applied to the existing binary.
- the Installer will now install in the Home folder if desired.
No more disk images, no more zipping needed. Packages are in xar format but the user never sees that.
- The old Receipts mechanism is gone, and replaced by a Receipts Database.
Tiger-style packages are still supported, but apps destined for Leopard-only can use the new PackageMaker flat-package format.
However, I've been perplexed with the Dock ever since OSX came out. It just seems like it is confused, trying to do too many things, and not doing others well.
I also use Windows (who doesn't) and find the Taskbar quite handy. What I like about it is it's uniformity. It is there, and not in the way, when any program is open. The Dock always seems to be in the way, or so large that it annoys me how much screen real estate it takes up. Or it moves around with the magnifying glass like you're boxing the OS.
I hope Apple finds a way to mix the best parts of the Dock and Taskbar. I was hoping this would happen with Leopard. Was also hoping for a more significant update to the finder.
Ugh.
I don't understand why people want to keep the Dock open all of the time. It serves no real purpose that way, except for newbies. You can also make the icons on the dock smaller. I don't see the problem.
Once you use your machine for a while, you can point to the correct app on the Dock first time, or at least very near to it if you have a lot of stuff there as I do.
The Taskbar and Start menu always seems to be too rigid, or simply a pain to use, having to look for items.
I also like how Windows handles closing and quitting applications better.
God I wish Apple would implement some of these things, but think it would be difficult to implement platform-wide. Plus, Apple might loose some face by "copying Windows". But I'm sure they could just say some other, earlier OS did it first and they "borrowed" it from them instead!
There's a difference in philosophy. I really can't stand the way Windows closes programs. I may want to close the window, but that doesn't mean that I want to close the program.
I agree: iTunes handles the Zoom button in a way totally different from other apps, and it's annoying. Instead of truly zooming, it toggles a compact floating remote. That should be some other button and Zoom should be Zoom! And while you're at it, bring back the visualizer and equalizer buttons--there's plenty of space
But beyond iTunes, I like OS X's handling of the Zoom button: it makes the window only as big (or small) as is useful--sometimes full-screen, sometimes less (big enough to fit all content, but not hogging the whole screen for no reason but to show empty white).
It would be nice to have a modifier key to make the Zoom button force-maximize though. And it could be a toggle pref: people with Windows habits could make the unmodified button maximize, and the modified button zoom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHateRegistering
This is true.
But then my grandparents call me and wonder why their iMac is running so slow. I come over and they have 17 programs open (but no windows open). They don't know the difference between CLOSE and QUIT no matter how many times I explain it; and they've NEVER used Windows.
There may be something wrong with your grandparents' iMac, or with one of those 17 apps. A Mac can have a ton of apps open at once, and only the ones that are actually DOING something at the moment will use significant resources (meaning RAM, CPU cycles, disk I/O, and net bandwidth). Normally, especially for casual users, this means only ONE app is using significant resources at a time. (In an older, slower version of OS X, on me old 333MHz, PowerBook G3 with 256 RAM, I once opened ALL my apps at once. Classic, cocoa, carbon... games, Adobe/Macromedia suites... ALL of them.)
I'd suggest, though, if they rely need 17 apps, and some are resource-hogging problem apps, don't tell them about Close at all. Keep it simple and have them always Quit.
Or if they only really need 5 or 6 apps, you could have them all launch at login and not do any quitting at all. I can't think of any apps I've used that drain system resources when no windows are open.
But now try to teach someone Windows who is new to that
I'd say the opposite is firmly true:
You've counted the Mac's menu bar as three things, but you've only counted the Task Bar as one, when in fact it includes multiple different areas that work in different, non-obvious ways. Ditto for the Start menu, which is divided up into numerous unrelated operations. And you count the Mac's menu bar but don't count the Windows menu bar at all--which in fact you can have many of going at once. Then compare file management in Windows to the Leopard Finder: there are a zillions places you have to go to get things done. Last but not least, look at how much more consistent things are in OS X. You want to change the settings for an app? Always look under Preferences, always in the same place. Windows tucks the same functionality under multiple names like Options, Tools and Properties--and buries them in a different place every time! Look at IE--the one basic app that should work predictably: it doesn't have a traditional menu bar at all! It hides those basic functions (like Copy and Paste, which are ALWAYS in the same place on a Mac) in miscellaneous other places for you to find. And all that complexity in Windows is actually necessary for you to get things done. You can simply ignore much of OS X, but Windows is eventually going to make you poke around everywhere from right-button menus to the DOS prompt!
I would say Windows has FAR more complexity, chaos, clutter, confusion, and overall "surface area" than OS X, even if OS X is more powerful. Windows is a Rube Goldberg by comparison (and not getting any better--in fact its complexity is in your face more than ever with all the new security warnings) while OS X gets more streamlined and more unified.
The computing beginners I know go through living hell with Windows--but those who get a Mac suddenly get by just fine. They need less tech support on the new "unfamiliar" system than they ever did with the "familiar" windows.
I don't think you understood my point. I agree with most of yours. I did not say that Windows is easier to learn - it isn't. You are right, that its totally inconsistent. Clearly, it sucks. I always feel like as soon as I dig into it, it all goes to shit. Like for me System Preferences is on of the strongest areas of Mac experience. Its very easy to use, Leopard helps here a lot, I am talking about Network and other spots. You do that stuff in Windows, dig into prefs and its a mess, at least the last few times I've tried.
But given that OSX is better, and given that this article is about the dock, I just think that there is something about trying to understand all this stuff, that is hard. Members of my family have no clue about system prefs. They don't really understand the concept of the Finder, they don't know what it does. Files are on the desktop, or they are in the void. If an app falls off the dock, its a problem for them. I know its lame, but I watch them struggle with this stuff.
So, to me, that Start menu is an advantage to Windows, its central to the experience in a way that the Apple menu is not. And the taskbar, while it does have other crap on it, you are right, is also easier to understand than the dock.
Recently, this girl who got a Mac called me, she just need to force quit an app. So I was like, look under the Apple menu for Force Quit. She was like, what is the Apple Menu? I was floored. She had had the Mac for like 3 months. She'd had other stuff come up, she did not even know what it was! Now granted, part of that is the strength of the Mac, stuff is so easy and works so well, maybe you dont need the Apple menu, but I still found it strange.
For as much as I think Windows sucks, people know about the Start menu, they depend on it, and they know that it is a gateway to more functions on the computer. On the Mac you have the Dock, the Apple menu for System prefs and then "the Finder" which really ends up being quite a leap to help people find apps and their files. Why is it so much trouble to find a list of apps on a computer? People figure it out, but its a leap for them.
I also think with Mac, there is a problem that people don't understand that they have switched from one app to another. If someone calls me with a problem I am like, what app are you in? And they have no idea what I am talking about. So I say, what is the word next to the Apple in the upper left hand corner? And they are like "File?" No, to the left of that? Its crazy. I think its going to be a bigger problem now that all the apps look the same, blue bar on the left, coverflow with list below it. It takes me a couple cycles to judge what I am looking at....iTunes? Finder? Mail? At least with OS 9 the app tear off menu showed you the active app.
I am just saying that as good as it is, there is still a way to go to make it easier.
I don't understand why people want to keep the Dock open all of the time.
Because it is annoying to have it pop up each time your mouse pointer reach the place it is hidden, either accidentally or on purpose when you want to do something else than make the Dock pop up.
There may be something wrong with your grandparents' iMac, or with one of those 17 apps. A Mac can have a ton of apps open at once, and only the ones that are actually DOING something at the moment will use significant resources (meaning RAM, CPU cycles, disk I/O, and net bandwidth).
There are applications that can take too much CPU by just sitting there without open windows, because they are buggy. Classic example are the web browsers lately. I find myself quiting them much more often than before because of that. I don't know though if this is a problem with the Intel-based Macs too.
They don't know the difference between CLOSE and QUIT no matter how many times I explain it; and they've NEVER used Windows.
Similar but not exactly the same problem with my wife. She does not want to learn to quit the applications. It is just too much for her. She likes having finished by just closing the last window. So Windows and X11 are her favorite places.
But then my grandparents call me and wonder why their iMac is running so slow. I come over and they have 17 programs open (but no windows open). They don't know the difference between CLOSE and QUIT no matter how many times I explain it; and they've NEVER used Windows.
That's an interesting thing I've discussed with Windows users over the years. There have also been many articles about this in the computer mags, as well as computer sites.
The consensus is that what you are saying is wrong.
I can't even imagine what your grandparents are doing with 17 programs in the first place. The grandparent argument is also getting old. "My old, half senile grandparents are having problems with their Mac, therefore...".
Boy, would they have problems with a Windows machine!
I often run 6 to 10 programs on my Mac at once without ever slowing my machine down. Sometimes, there are 40, or more, windows open. I don't know where you get the idea that a Mac slows down when several programs are open at once, but it's not true. It hasn't been true ever.
On the other hand, Windows is famous for grinding to a halt when just a few programs are open at once, or when more than a few windows are open. That's the main reason why (among other reasons) Windows shuts down programs when the window is closed.
There are quite a few articles about this. Even well known Windows users have written about how they were amazed when switching to a Mac, they didn't have this problem.
One reason is that Windows, despite MS's add-ons for networking, and multi-users, is, at heart, a single user system, based on old protocols of the CP/M system that DOS was derived from. MS never truly updated that metaphor when they moved on to NT. These systems were designed to run just one program at a time.
Because of that, Windows spews off memory fragments which quickly clutters up system memory, dragging the whole machine down. Again, a very well known problem.
With the Mac, we do have some badly behaved programs, such as Safari from Apple itself, which aren't good memory caretakers. But, this doesn't bring down the system, and isn't endemic to the overall design. I've had Safari on now for at least two days without any problems, and have been working with Photoshop, inDesign, and several file converters, all open, and often doing work, at the same time, without any noticeable machine slowdown.
The only place a Mac might get bogged down somewhat, is if several programs must do high bandwidth operations at the same time. But that's a matter of modern machines having more than one core to take care of this.
Windows machines will still grind to a halt, because multiple cpu's can't solve the basic system design faults.
I forget about things when the Dock or Taskbar are hidden. Guess I smoked too many drugs as a teen.
I also wish OSX would MAXIMIZE windows. Ever maximize iTunes? Annoying trying to perfectly drag the window, then re-size it to take up as much screen as possible, and it never looks right. It looks messy, like a kid coloring outside the lines. Then you got a big ~1" slab of wasted space along the bottom of the screen, with the dock right in the middle.
I don't know. Maybe we should go back to the Apple menu. I sure used it alot in OS 7, 8, and 9. And those OSes maximized windows properly, too!
BTW: I rarely, hardly ever use the START menu in Windows. The Quicklaunch is way better.
I just watched a link in a previous post on some of the GUI wizardry these Linux variants can do... quite impressive! If they had enough 3rd party support I'd prolly go for it.
there is no doubt that the Mac is not perfect. While I understand the concept behind the way windows resizing on the Mac works, I also am very aware that it doesn't always do what we want it to. Sometimes it seems to do something other than what it should.
The concept iot that the maximize button will maximize the window to cover all of the information in that window, but no more. That makes much more sense to me than Windows having the window always open to the entire screen, covering everything else I want to see.. Hitting the button again, should bring the windoe back to it's former size. But, it doesn't always do that properly, and I'm not sure why. That leads to confusion as to what it is actually supposed to do.
I don't think you understood my point. I agree with most of yours. I did not say that Windows is easier to learn - it isn't. You are right, that its totally inconsistent. Clearly, it sucks. I always feel like as soon as I dig into it, it all goes to shit. Like for me System Preferences is on of the strongest areas of Mac experience. Its very easy to use, Leopard helps here a lot, I am talking about Network and other spots. You do that stuff in Windows, dig into prefs and its a mess, at least the last few times I've tried.
But given that OSX is better, and given that this article is about the dock, I just think that there is something about trying to understand all this stuff, that is hard. Members of my family have no clue about system prefs. They don't really understand the concept of the Finder, they don't know what it does. Files are on the desktop, or they are in the void. If an app falls off the dock, its a problem for them. I know its lame, but I watch them struggle with this stuff.
So, to me, that Start menu is an advantage to Windows, its central to the experience in a way that the Apple menu is not. And the taskbar, while it does have other crap on it, you are right, is also easier to understand than the dock.
Recently, this girl who got a Mac called me, she just need to force quit an app. So I was like, look under the Apple menu for Force Quit. She was like, what is the Apple Menu? I was floored. She had had the Mac for like 3 months. She'd had other stuff come up, she did not even know what it was! Now granted, part of that is the strength of the Mac, stuff is so easy and works so well, maybe you dont need the Apple menu, but I still found it strange.
For as much as I think Windows sucks, people know about the Start menu, they depend on it, and they know that it is a gateway to more functions on the computer. On the Mac you have the Dock, the Apple menu for System prefs and then "the Finder" which really ends up being quite a leap to help people find apps and their files. Why is it so much trouble to find a list of apps on a computer? People figure it out, but its a leap for them.
I also think with Mac, there is a problem that people don't understand that they have switched from one app to another. If someone calls me with a problem I am like, what app are you in? And they have no idea what I am talking about. So I say, what is the word next to the Apple in the upper left hand corner? And they are like "File?" No, to the left of that? Its crazy. I think its going to be a bigger problem now that all the apps look the same, blue bar on the left, coverflow with list below it. It takes me a couple cycles to judge what I am looking at....iTunes? Finder? Mail? At least with OS 9 the app tear off menu showed you the active app.
I am just saying that as good as it is, there is still a way to go to make it easier.
You could have made it much easier for that girl if you just told her to hit "command "Q"" to quit. If someone can't understand that, they shouldn't be allowed to have a computer.\
Of course I'm exagerating 17 apps but they have a bunch of crap open, and it does run slower the more they have open. They don't know what they are doing and the great-grandkids come over and do all kinds of crap. They call me when an icon is missing from the Dock for Christ's sake. I'm just thankful grandpa can play solitaire and grandma can use the email (after shifting through all the porn and Viagra spam). Nice.
This is an original iMac DV probably 266Mhz 512MB RAM (maybe) running OSX 10.2 at the most. Oh yeah and AOL through dial-up!
Anyways, they see the shiny red Close button and click it. They can't help it. Trust me no amount of explaining will stop this... I've tried.
Once again, Junkie, I agree with your post 100%.
Since that shiny button doesn't say close, how did they find out what it did?
It seems to me that you could also have told them about the keyboard method. Works every time, no matter who I show it to.
Because it is annoying to have it pop up each time your mouse pointer reach the place it is hidden, either accidentally or on purpose when you want to do something else than make the Dock pop up.
So it's less annoying having it there taking up unnecessary space? Place it where you don't go with your cursor. I find the left side to be fine. When I do hit it, rarely, it goes away almost instantly anyway.
There are applications that can take too much CPU by just sitting there without open windows, because they are buggy. Classic example are the web browsers lately. I find myself quiting them much more often than before because of that. I don't know though if this is a problem with the Intel-based Macs too.
That's very rare, and not norrmal. Even then, the machine does not come to a halt. With Windows, it's a problem, constantly.
Similar but not exactly the same problem with my wife. She does not want to learn to quit the applications. It is just too much for her. She likes having finished by just closing the last window. So Windows and X11 are her favorite places.
I hope you're not saying that Apple should change the entire concept of the OS, so that a few people like her won't have to learn how to close a program?
She's used to doing it that way. I had the same problem with my wife. even though she's been using Macs from way back, and much prefers them, she is so used to Windows at work, that she instintively closes the window. But telling her about "command Q" solved the problem. Certainly simple enough.
There is an interesting article about why the Dock isn't that great. This article was written by Bruce Tognazzini, founder of the Apple Human Interface Group and author of the Apple Human Interface Guidelines:
Bad that Apple didn't really improved the Dock in Leopard. But a shame that most of the Mac users aren't really critical about what Apple is doing/not doing.
Comments
Below is what it looked like in OS/2 Warp 3 from 1995
Also Sun's Solaris 2.5 had the CDE task bar in 1995 as well.
Does FTP finally let you upload to a folder?
I'd really love that.
Yes. **
...
OSX:
Menubar
Apple Menu
MenuBar Items (volume, wifi)
Dock
Vista:
Taskbar
Startmenu
Windows has less stuff to the OS, I give them credit for that. Mac has a lot of areas to learn. For me as a long time user, I am ok with it, but teaching someone new, I soon realize that there are just a lot of pockets where things are happening. Seems like too many.
But now try to teach someone Windows who is new to that
I'd say the opposite is firmly true:
You've counted the Mac's menu bar as three things, but you've only counted the Task Bar as one, when in fact it includes multiple different areas that work in different, non-obvious ways. Ditto for the Start menu, which is divided up into numerous unrelated operations. And you count the Mac's menu bar but don't count the Windows menu bar at all--which in fact you can have many of going at once. Then compare file management in Windows to the Leopard Finder: there are a zillions places you have to go to get things done. Last but not least, look at how much more consistent things are in OS X. You want to change the settings for an app? Always look under Preferences, always in the same place. Windows tucks the same functionality under multiple names like Options, Tools and Properties--and buries them in a different place every time! Look at IE--the one basic app that should work predictably: it doesn't have a traditional menu bar at all! It hides those basic functions (like Copy and Paste, which are ALWAYS in the same place on a Mac) in miscellaneous other places for you to find. And all that complexity in Windows is actually necessary for you to get things done. You can simply ignore much of OS X, but Windows is eventually going to make you poke around everywhere from right-button menus to the DOS prompt!
I would say Windows has FAR more complexity, chaos, clutter, confusion, and overall "surface area" than OS X, even if OS X is more powerful. Windows is a Rube Goldberg by comparison (and not getting any better--in fact its complexity is in your face more than ever with all the new security warnings) while OS X gets more streamlined and more unified.
The computing beginners I know go through living hell with Windows--but those who get a Mac suddenly get by just fine. They need less tech support on the new "unfamiliar" system than they ever did with the "familiar" windows.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. You can organize your Apps folder however you like. However, there are some apps that are expected to be in a specific location for other apps to access them (Mail, Safari, Disk Utility, etc.) Moving those might have adverse affects on how other apps interact with those apps, but will not stop those apps from working at all.
If you want to group all of your web browsers in to a folder called "Web Browsers", under the apps folder, you can. If you want to have an apps folder inside your home folder, you can.
You sound like an uninformed Windows user. Get some hands on time w/ Mac OS X and you'll see you can organize your folders however you like.
Oh, and for comparison, start mucking around with your apps folders inside your Program Files folder on a Windows box. I guarantee you more apps will break faster than doing the similiar action on a Mac OS X machine.
There was a time on OS X when you *couldn't* move applications or the updaters wouldn't update the applications, just put folders with the updated components into /Applications. It was extremely annoying having to drag my apps out of their categorized folder and into the main directory to get them to update properly. I've seen this happen occasionally still, but overall most updaters are "intelligent" enough to look for the apps, and not just assume.
In the Classic OS, you could put apps wherever you wanted. Each application had an ID that was used to locate it rather than a path. You could make aliases and move the original, it would still find it. In OS X, you CAN put most things where you want, but especially Apple apps won't be found in a subfolder of /Applications - when being called by other applications or Software Update. And yes, Adobe's new Window's-like approach to the Mac is very annoying as well and if you move Adobe folders from their default location, it will have to 'fix' itself which Photoshop has never been capable of doing properly on my system. What has happened is that my /Applications folder is very messy and I've given up on Apple ever allowing me to organize things the way I want them again.
For all users running Leopard, Applications will be in packages made by PackageMaker 3.0. Developers using PackageMaker 3.0 will be able to find their apps on the user's disk no matter where the user has moved them. It uses a combination of Spotlight and Launch Services to do this search.
Other features of the new package format:
- no more need to use disk images. Packages download and are unpacked by the Installer automatically. Nothing to throw away or unmount.
- packages downloaded from the internet can have the user choose their elements of the package first, before downloading, and then the download only includes those elements. The user steps through the Installer as usual, but all of the user's choosing happens before anything is actually downloaded. Imagine if you could uncheck 1.2 GB of GarageBand update before clicking "Install".
- updates will always find their current version to update by search, and will verify it by not only MD5 hash but by signed certificate.
- updates can be patch packages, wherein only the difference patch is applied to the existing binary.
- the Installer will now install in the Home folder if desired.
No more disk images, no more zipping needed. Packages are in xar format but the user never sees that.
- The old Receipts mechanism is gone, and replaced by a Receipts Database.
Tiger-style packages are still supported, but apps destined for Leopard-only can use the new PackageMaker flat-package format.
Long time Mac user and lover.
However, I've been perplexed with the Dock ever since OSX came out. It just seems like it is confused, trying to do too many things, and not doing others well.
I also use Windows (who doesn't) and find the Taskbar quite handy. What I like about it is it's uniformity. It is there, and not in the way, when any program is open. The Dock always seems to be in the way, or so large that it annoys me how much screen real estate it takes up. Or it moves around with the magnifying glass like you're boxing the OS.
I hope Apple finds a way to mix the best parts of the Dock and Taskbar. I was hoping this would happen with Leopard. Was also hoping for a more significant update to the finder.
Ugh.
I don't understand why people want to keep the Dock open all of the time. It serves no real purpose that way, except for newbies. You can also make the icons on the dock smaller. I don't see the problem.
Once you use your machine for a while, you can point to the correct app on the Dock first time, or at least very near to it if you have a lot of stuff there as I do.
The Taskbar and Start menu always seems to be too rigid, or simply a pain to use, having to look for items.
I feel the same way on all counts.
I also like how Windows handles closing and quitting applications better.
God I wish Apple would implement some of these things, but think it would be difficult to implement platform-wide. Plus, Apple might loose some face by "copying Windows". But I'm sure they could just say some other, earlier OS did it first and they "borrowed" it from them instead!
There's a difference in philosophy. I really can't stand the way Windows closes programs. I may want to close the window, but that doesn't mean that I want to close the program.
But beyond iTunes, I like OS X's handling of the Zoom button: it makes the window only as big (or small) as is useful--sometimes full-screen, sometimes less (big enough to fit all content, but not hogging the whole screen for no reason but to show empty white).
It would be nice to have a modifier key to make the Zoom button force-maximize though. And it could be a toggle pref: people with Windows habits could make the unmodified button maximize, and the modified button zoom.
This is true.
But then my grandparents call me and wonder why their iMac is running so slow. I come over and they have 17 programs open (but no windows open). They don't know the difference between CLOSE and QUIT no matter how many times I explain it; and they've NEVER used Windows.
There may be something wrong with your grandparents' iMac, or with one of those 17 apps. A Mac can have a ton of apps open at once, and only the ones that are actually DOING something at the moment will use significant resources (meaning RAM, CPU cycles, disk I/O, and net bandwidth). Normally, especially for casual users, this means only ONE app is using significant resources at a time. (In an older, slower version of OS X, on me old 333MHz, PowerBook G3 with 256 RAM, I once opened ALL my apps at once. Classic, cocoa, carbon... games, Adobe/Macromedia suites... ALL of them.)
I'd suggest, though, if they rely need 17 apps, and some are resource-hogging problem apps, don't tell them about Close at all. Keep it simple and have them always Quit.
Or if they only really need 5 or 6 apps, you could have them all launch at login and not do any quitting at all. I can't think of any apps I've used that drain system resources when no windows are open.
But now try to teach someone Windows who is new to that
I'd say the opposite is firmly true:
You've counted the Mac's menu bar as three things, but you've only counted the Task Bar as one, when in fact it includes multiple different areas that work in different, non-obvious ways. Ditto for the Start menu, which is divided up into numerous unrelated operations. And you count the Mac's menu bar but don't count the Windows menu bar at all--which in fact you can have many of going at once. Then compare file management in Windows to the Leopard Finder: there are a zillions places you have to go to get things done. Last but not least, look at how much more consistent things are in OS X. You want to change the settings for an app? Always look under Preferences, always in the same place. Windows tucks the same functionality under multiple names like Options, Tools and Properties--and buries them in a different place every time! Look at IE--the one basic app that should work predictably: it doesn't have a traditional menu bar at all! It hides those basic functions (like Copy and Paste, which are ALWAYS in the same place on a Mac) in miscellaneous other places for you to find. And all that complexity in Windows is actually necessary for you to get things done. You can simply ignore much of OS X, but Windows is eventually going to make you poke around everywhere from right-button menus to the DOS prompt!
I would say Windows has FAR more complexity, chaos, clutter, confusion, and overall "surface area" than OS X, even if OS X is more powerful. Windows is a Rube Goldberg by comparison (and not getting any better--in fact its complexity is in your face more than ever with all the new security warnings) while OS X gets more streamlined and more unified.
The computing beginners I know go through living hell with Windows--but those who get a Mac suddenly get by just fine. They need less tech support on the new "unfamiliar" system than they ever did with the "familiar" windows.
I don't think you understood my point. I agree with most of yours. I did not say that Windows is easier to learn - it isn't. You are right, that its totally inconsistent. Clearly, it sucks. I always feel like as soon as I dig into it, it all goes to shit. Like for me System Preferences is on of the strongest areas of Mac experience. Its very easy to use, Leopard helps here a lot, I am talking about Network and other spots. You do that stuff in Windows, dig into prefs and its a mess, at least the last few times I've tried.
But given that OSX is better, and given that this article is about the dock, I just think that there is something about trying to understand all this stuff, that is hard. Members of my family have no clue about system prefs. They don't really understand the concept of the Finder, they don't know what it does. Files are on the desktop, or they are in the void. If an app falls off the dock, its a problem for them. I know its lame, but I watch them struggle with this stuff.
So, to me, that Start menu is an advantage to Windows, its central to the experience in a way that the Apple menu is not. And the taskbar, while it does have other crap on it, you are right, is also easier to understand than the dock.
Recently, this girl who got a Mac called me, she just need to force quit an app. So I was like, look under the Apple menu for Force Quit. She was like, what is the Apple Menu? I was floored. She had had the Mac for like 3 months. She'd had other stuff come up, she did not even know what it was! Now granted, part of that is the strength of the Mac, stuff is so easy and works so well, maybe you dont need the Apple menu, but I still found it strange.
For as much as I think Windows sucks, people know about the Start menu, they depend on it, and they know that it is a gateway to more functions on the computer. On the Mac you have the Dock, the Apple menu for System prefs and then "the Finder" which really ends up being quite a leap to help people find apps and their files. Why is it so much trouble to find a list of apps on a computer? People figure it out, but its a leap for them.
I also think with Mac, there is a problem that people don't understand that they have switched from one app to another. If someone calls me with a problem I am like, what app are you in? And they have no idea what I am talking about. So I say, what is the word next to the Apple in the upper left hand corner? And they are like "File?" No, to the left of that? Its crazy. I think its going to be a bigger problem now that all the apps look the same, blue bar on the left, coverflow with list below it. It takes me a couple cycles to judge what I am looking at....iTunes? Finder? Mail? At least with OS 9 the app tear off menu showed you the active app.
I am just saying that as good as it is, there is still a way to go to make it easier.
I don't understand why people want to keep the Dock open all of the time.
Because it is annoying to have it pop up each time your mouse pointer reach the place it is hidden, either accidentally or on purpose when you want to do something else than make the Dock pop up.
There may be something wrong with your grandparents' iMac, or with one of those 17 apps. A Mac can have a ton of apps open at once, and only the ones that are actually DOING something at the moment will use significant resources (meaning RAM, CPU cycles, disk I/O, and net bandwidth).
There are applications that can take too much CPU by just sitting there without open windows, because they are buggy. Classic example are the web browsers lately. I find myself quiting them much more often than before because of that. I don't know though if this is a problem with the Intel-based Macs too.
They don't know the difference between CLOSE and QUIT no matter how many times I explain it; and they've NEVER used Windows.
Similar but not exactly the same problem with my wife. She does not want to learn to quit the applications. It is just too much for her. She likes having finished by just closing the last window. So Windows and X11 are her favorite places.
This is true.
But then my grandparents call me and wonder why their iMac is running so slow. I come over and they have 17 programs open (but no windows open). They don't know the difference between CLOSE and QUIT no matter how many times I explain it; and they've NEVER used Windows.
That's an interesting thing I've discussed with Windows users over the years. There have also been many articles about this in the computer mags, as well as computer sites.
The consensus is that what you are saying is wrong.
I can't even imagine what your grandparents are doing with 17 programs in the first place. The grandparent argument is also getting old. "My old, half senile grandparents are having problems with their Mac, therefore...".
Boy, would they have problems with a Windows machine!
I often run 6 to 10 programs on my Mac at once without ever slowing my machine down. Sometimes, there are 40, or more, windows open. I don't know where you get the idea that a Mac slows down when several programs are open at once, but it's not true. It hasn't been true ever.
On the other hand, Windows is famous for grinding to a halt when just a few programs are open at once, or when more than a few windows are open. That's the main reason why (among other reasons) Windows shuts down programs when the window is closed.
There are quite a few articles about this. Even well known Windows users have written about how they were amazed when switching to a Mac, they didn't have this problem.
One reason is that Windows, despite MS's add-ons for networking, and multi-users, is, at heart, a single user system, based on old protocols of the CP/M system that DOS was derived from. MS never truly updated that metaphor when they moved on to NT. These systems were designed to run just one program at a time.
Because of that, Windows spews off memory fragments which quickly clutters up system memory, dragging the whole machine down. Again, a very well known problem.
With the Mac, we do have some badly behaved programs, such as Safari from Apple itself, which aren't good memory caretakers. But, this doesn't bring down the system, and isn't endemic to the overall design. I've had Safari on now for at least two days without any problems, and have been working with Photoshop, inDesign, and several file converters, all open, and often doing work, at the same time, without any noticeable machine slowdown.
The only place a Mac might get bogged down somewhat, is if several programs must do high bandwidth operations at the same time. But that's a matter of modern machines having more than one core to take care of this.
Windows machines will still grind to a halt, because multiple cpu's can't solve the basic system design faults.
I forget about things when the Dock or Taskbar are hidden. Guess I smoked too many drugs as a teen.
I also wish OSX would MAXIMIZE windows. Ever maximize iTunes? Annoying trying to perfectly drag the window, then re-size it to take up as much screen as possible, and it never looks right. It looks messy, like a kid coloring outside the lines. Then you got a big ~1" slab of wasted space along the bottom of the screen, with the dock right in the middle.
I don't know. Maybe we should go back to the Apple menu. I sure used it alot in OS 7, 8, and 9. And those OSes maximized windows properly, too!
BTW: I rarely, hardly ever use the START menu in Windows. The Quicklaunch is way better.
I just watched a link in a previous post on some of the GUI wizardry these Linux variants can do... quite impressive! If they had enough 3rd party support I'd prolly go for it.
there is no doubt that the Mac is not perfect. While I understand the concept behind the way windows resizing on the Mac works, I also am very aware that it doesn't always do what we want it to. Sometimes it seems to do something other than what it should.
The concept iot that the maximize button will maximize the window to cover all of the information in that window, but no more. That makes much more sense to me than Windows having the window always open to the entire screen, covering everything else I want to see.. Hitting the button again, should bring the windoe back to it's former size. But, it doesn't always do that properly, and I'm not sure why. That leads to confusion as to what it is actually supposed to do.
Unless I've been missing something since 10.0.
There are complaints about Quicklaunch as well.
I don't think you understood my point. I agree with most of yours. I did not say that Windows is easier to learn - it isn't. You are right, that its totally inconsistent. Clearly, it sucks. I always feel like as soon as I dig into it, it all goes to shit. Like for me System Preferences is on of the strongest areas of Mac experience. Its very easy to use, Leopard helps here a lot, I am talking about Network and other spots. You do that stuff in Windows, dig into prefs and its a mess, at least the last few times I've tried.
But given that OSX is better, and given that this article is about the dock, I just think that there is something about trying to understand all this stuff, that is hard. Members of my family have no clue about system prefs. They don't really understand the concept of the Finder, they don't know what it does. Files are on the desktop, or they are in the void. If an app falls off the dock, its a problem for them. I know its lame, but I watch them struggle with this stuff.
So, to me, that Start menu is an advantage to Windows, its central to the experience in a way that the Apple menu is not. And the taskbar, while it does have other crap on it, you are right, is also easier to understand than the dock.
Recently, this girl who got a Mac called me, she just need to force quit an app. So I was like, look under the Apple menu for Force Quit. She was like, what is the Apple Menu? I was floored. She had had the Mac for like 3 months. She'd had other stuff come up, she did not even know what it was! Now granted, part of that is the strength of the Mac, stuff is so easy and works so well, maybe you dont need the Apple menu, but I still found it strange.
For as much as I think Windows sucks, people know about the Start menu, they depend on it, and they know that it is a gateway to more functions on the computer. On the Mac you have the Dock, the Apple menu for System prefs and then "the Finder" which really ends up being quite a leap to help people find apps and their files. Why is it so much trouble to find a list of apps on a computer? People figure it out, but its a leap for them.
I also think with Mac, there is a problem that people don't understand that they have switched from one app to another. If someone calls me with a problem I am like, what app are you in? And they have no idea what I am talking about. So I say, what is the word next to the Apple in the upper left hand corner? And they are like "File?" No, to the left of that? Its crazy. I think its going to be a bigger problem now that all the apps look the same, blue bar on the left, coverflow with list below it. It takes me a couple cycles to judge what I am looking at....iTunes? Finder? Mail? At least with OS 9 the app tear off menu showed you the active app.
I am just saying that as good as it is, there is still a way to go to make it easier.
You could have made it much easier for that girl if you just told her to hit "command "Q"" to quit. If someone can't understand that, they shouldn't be allowed to have a computer.
Of course I'm exagerating 17 apps but they have a bunch of crap open, and it does run slower the more they have open. They don't know what they are doing and the great-grandkids come over and do all kinds of crap. They call me when an icon is missing from the Dock for Christ's sake. I'm just thankful grandpa can play solitaire and grandma can use the email (after shifting through all the porn and Viagra spam). Nice.
This is an original iMac DV probably 266Mhz 512MB RAM (maybe) running OSX 10.2 at the most. Oh yeah and AOL through dial-up!
Anyways, they see the shiny red Close button and click it. They can't help it. Trust me no amount of explaining will stop this... I've tried.
Once again, Junkie, I agree with your post 100%.
Since that shiny button doesn't say close, how did they find out what it did?
It seems to me that you could also have told them about the keyboard method. Works every time, no matter who I show it to.
Because it is annoying to have it pop up each time your mouse pointer reach the place it is hidden, either accidentally or on purpose when you want to do something else than make the Dock pop up.
So it's less annoying having it there taking up unnecessary space? Place it where you don't go with your cursor. I find the left side to be fine. When I do hit it, rarely, it goes away almost instantly anyway.
There are applications that can take too much CPU by just sitting there without open windows, because they are buggy. Classic example are the web browsers lately. I find myself quiting them much more often than before because of that. I don't know though if this is a problem with the Intel-based Macs too.
That's very rare, and not norrmal. Even then, the machine does not come to a halt. With Windows, it's a problem, constantly.
Similar but not exactly the same problem with my wife. She does not want to learn to quit the applications. It is just too much for her. She likes having finished by just closing the last window. So Windows and X11 are her favorite places.
I hope you're not saying that Apple should change the entire concept of the OS, so that a few people like her won't have to learn how to close a program?
She's used to doing it that way. I had the same problem with my wife. even though she's been using Macs from way back, and much prefers them, she is so used to Windows at work, that she instintively closes the window. But telling her about "command Q" solved the problem. Certainly simple enough.
There is an interesting article about why the Dock isn't that great. This article was written by Bruce Tognazzini, founder of the Apple Human Interface Group and author of the Apple Human Interface Guidelines:
http://www.asktog.com/columns/044top10docksucks.html
Bad that Apple didn't really improved the Dock in Leopard. But a shame that most of the Mac users aren't really critical about what Apple is doing/not doing.