Human Interface Standards, the Dock and More...

A

ahaig

Registered
Please - Bring back Human Interface Standards to determine how people should program/lay out applications!

Mac OS X right now feels so very much like Windows instead of Mac OS - but even windows keeps menu names consistent, requiring File menus to the left of all the other menus etc.

Why do apps get their own menus between the "apple menu" (which is now useless, formerly perhaps the most-used item in the entire operating system) and the File menu? Why aren't those items in other menus (with appropriate names so we can know about the menu contents before looking in the menu)?

More importantly, why do applications now get to choose what shortcuts they assign? Cmd-Shift-O to open a file?? It is disappointing to see the consistent nature of the Mac OS fall apart and begin to look like a hack for Windows.

Along similar lines, please - bring back the functionality of the apple menu. As long as it is going to be there (with a number of useless items) at least make it customizable so that we can add our own folders. I am aware that the Dock has "the functionality of the apple menu" but it's not the same for a number of reasons. Most importantly, it takes up a ton of space on the screen. If I hide it, it's annoying to get to. The same thing goes for the process menu - we may not need it, but some of us truly appreciate having it, both as it makes it VERY clear what application is currently in the foreground, and because it enables simple switching without having to worry about the Dock using up all screen real-estate.

How about windows remembering their positions? I am hoping this is simply a quirk in the release and it will be remedied soon. Having to reposition windows every time they are opened when I have moved them before is one of the most frustrating aspects of the system.

Or Windowshades? Minimizing might serve a similar function, but it puts windows away where you have to go somewhere else (the Dock) to make them return. Sometimes it is useful to be able to simple shade a window quickly to see what is under it and then be able to double-click _without moving the mouse_ to make it return to normal.

Or another Windows "feature" - move control panels back to being individually accesible. Having to open an application first to access any of them (or not being able to directly open a single control panel without opening the generic application first) is ridiculously inefficient and annoying.

Bring back the Mac in Mac OS!

-Asher Haig
 
I agree.

...to a certain extent. Many of the things you speak of are associated with "Macintosh." But the thing you have to realize now is... This is not "Macintosh" in the sense we knew it before. This system is new. Much of it is more logical and intuitive than what we knew before. Having all of the control panels stored in one, easy to access application makes way more sense than having them in a folder in the Apple menu, which is subject to change at any time. I don't like having to wait for System Preferences to open either, but we must all change our paradigm (whoa, do I sound smart!) and think in new ways. Apple ain't kiddin' when it wants you to "Think Different."

But like I said, I agree. Windowshading is incredibly handy and I've really missed it. Perhaps they oughtta make it so that if you hit the minimize button, it goes to the dock, but if you double click the menubar, it windowshades.

Yes, the Apple menu is no longer customizable. The dock, in my findings at least, DOES in fact replace much of what the Apple menu used to do. You can put folders in it, and you can put apps in it, and you can put docs in it. It takes up tons of room, but not if you autohide it. It's no more annoying to get to than navigating to a menu. The only qualm I have with it is that with too many items, things become unusable. Like anything that tries to do too much (app switching, apple menu, etc.), it will never do any of those things as well as their OS 9 counterparts. But change your way of thinking.

Yeah, this new OS is a helluvalot more like Windows than the old one, and it's lost a lot of what makes it a "Macintosh." But Apple's put a lot of work into it, and I don't think they're about to change things.

That's just my two cents, and I'm pretty sure much of it is incoherent. :)

P.S.- Start running XFree86. Or simply go to the command line (logout and type ">console" as the login name). That'll really make you shudder and say, "MY GOD! This is a Mac??)
 
I've done both - used X11 and CLI. They have their places... The problem with Windows is that it's a hack that remains somewhere between DOS (another hack) and a real (Mac) interface. OS X just feels like that sort of hack, now.

You're right about all of the functionality, but there's no REASON to change these things. People have gotten used to them and they've been that way because they function well. I appreciate the addition of the dock, but keep the apple menu!

Autohide is slow and still takes up more room (there's the hot spot) and the hot-spot doesn't work as easily as being able to find the apple quickly.

Apple has the power to change things - they should.

-Asher
 
Both of you are starting an argument that's been running on these threads and throughout the history of OS development.

In movng to a standards based OS, Apple has chosen a MUCH more logical approach to the menu bar then they have used before.

In 9.1 and previous Mac OSes, the menu bar changed depending on the application, albeit, there was a certain consistency between each application, but they still changed and added what ever else the particualr application wanted up there.

In OS X, to provide better functionality, Apple has reserved the first two spots for Global functions and app functions, in that order. So, no matter which program you are in, by going to the apple menu you have access to all the commands that would previously get burried when the Special menu item was hidden by another apps menu bar. The App specific spot is to encourage developers to place all app-global command in one area (i.e., about, preferences, etc.).

It actually is a much better way of handling menuing. Just give it longer then two weeks, , you need to get used to it to see its functionality.

What bothers me here is that you claim it is reminiscent of Windows, which is so farm from accurate it isn't funny. On any current Windows OS, each application has it's own Menu bar, displayed in it's own application space. Macs have always used the Main Menu bar as common space for menuing, which allows for larger work areas and the use of motor memory skills because you are always moving up to the same area to access something from the menu bar in any application.
 
ahaig, stop speaking for everyone. I LIKE the dock, and the current menu system in OSX. I don't want apple to change the stuff you say. Maybe there are more people with my point of view than yours. Apple got a lot of feedback during the beta and if they thought it would piss off a significant number of people who have used it for a while, they would have changed it. But you know what? They didn't!

When i boot into OS 9 (games) i start to notice all the silly thing there are.

You say bring back Human Interface Standards, apple is.
Example:
In OS 9 where is the preferences command in a application? sometimes the edit menu (Why??) some times elsewhere. In OSX it is in the same menu, the application menu.

You say that windows should remember their positions. In OS 9 each app had to implement this themselves. In OSX it is a standard, one line command that is very easy to program. If developers don't use it, blame them! OS X does have user interface guidelines, they're just different to the OS 9 ones.

The idea of having all the control panels in one application was MAC. Go to system 6. It was a desk accessory with a list of icons for the control panels on the side. And correct me if I'm wrong but in windows control panels are separate apps in a folder. So OS 9 is closer to Windows in that respect.

In fact I do agree with you on one thing: Windowshades. I too wish that there was a way to do as you say and I have sent apple feedback.

</rant>

peter
 
Those are some seriously quality args you have there.

I never said to get rid of anything. I just said add the Apple menu back (so those of us who don't like the dock can use a real interface that doesn't get in the way) and let us have an app menu. No reason you have to use it.

As for the App menu, it gets in the way where it is and destroys consistency. There's no REASON to change it when it's worked how it's been for a long long time. Prior to Jobs killing HIS things were in standard positions.

As for control panels, OS X is more like windows b/c you have to first open the control panels section to get to any of them. I, unlike you apparently, appreciate efficiency. I like to be able to quickly access the specific settings I want to deal with. I don't care how the OS deals with them, but I want the option of a menu that will enable quick access.

I'm not speaking for anyone but myself. You people are all giving in to some weak-ass design and even applauding teh shitwork that Apple has put out. This is supposed to be our new OS - let's see something new and innovative about it that actually makes sense for serious use instead of just looking pretty for you to fantasize about.
 
Originally posted by ahaig
Those are some seriously quality args you have there.

I never said to get rid of anything. I just said add the Apple menu back (so those of us who don't like the dock can use a real interface that doesn't get in the way) and let us have an app menu. No reason you have to use it.

As for the App menu, it gets in the way where it is and destroys consistency. There's no REASON to change it when it's worked how it's been for a long long time. Prior to Jobs killing HIS things were in standard positions.

As for control panels, OS X is more like windows b/c you have to first open the control panels section to get to any of them. I, unlike you apparently, appreciate efficiency. I like to be able to quickly access the specific settings I want to deal with. I don't care how the OS deals with them, but I want the option of a menu that will enable quick access.

I'm not speaking for anyone but myself. You people are all giving in to some weak-ass design and even applauding teh shitwork that Apple has put out. This is supposed to be our new OS - let's see something new and innovative about it that actually makes sense for serious use instead of just looking pretty for you to fantasize about.
Click to expand...

It's funny, but, most of the "features" you support remaining the same and claim have been around a "long, long" time, were only implemented in the OS as of version 8. Whihc, if memory serves, was the first release after Jobs took the post as interim-CEO/director (whatever they called the position).

Particularly, the contextual menus under the Apple... some people say those weren't even completely functional until 8.6.
 
That's just plain inaccurate. The features I'm talking about have all been around since _at least_ 7.5 and before that with third party extensions (that Apple absorbed into the system).

As for contextual menus - who cares. I liked my right mouse button being shift-click - it was far more useful.

Regardless... I'm not complaining about adding features, but about the implementation of those. Not even Jobs could fuck up the generally standard (although not universal once he killed HIS) method of implementation in pre-X systems. Now he has complete control and he's destroy(ing/ed) the Mac standard.
 
ahaig - you just keep right on goin, there's nothing wrong with liking something because its good, quirks/features not withstanding.

In MacOSX there are things that have been lost or not as easy to get at.

The DOCK has been around for a long time under UNIX, CDE for instance. The latter has extra pieces which would be good to include into the Dock (or have I not found it yet, not imediately apparent), i.e. workspaces.

Solaris is going to Gnome, which does not have a big fat Dock, its much more like Windows (KDE also). Although I did find the way to reduce the scale of the Dock later, so now I have a little Dock. I'm giving up on this metaphore.

Window shade I do miss, its going to be interesting to see where an X-windows running under a rootless Quarts/Aqua window is going to go when its iconised. I prefered the "control Pannel" STRETCH which would iconize the window when minimised, like 4Dwm, Motif, and others.

I am not keen on the retaining menu bars all over the place, looked untidy but it was usefull. However if workspaces are implemented then untidy screens are no longer a problem.

As a UNIX guy, I think MacOSX is out too early, its too quirky and the deliniation between UNIX and MacOSX is unclear. From a UNIX point of view its not clear if I should use BSD configuration files or the MacOSX gui tools to configure the box, if the GUI tools are used then some of the standard UNIX files look untouched. Without any books you wouldn't know where the configs are kept.

To be fair to Apple though its a big leap in OS and to solve all the issues and problems in one go is hard. My feeling is that now its in the hands of a "shed load" of people its going to have to evolve significantlly.

 
Originally posted by ahaig
That's just plain inaccurate. The features I'm talking about have all been around since _at least_ 7.5 and before that with third party extensions (that Apple absorbed into the system).

As for contextual menus - who cares. I liked my right mouse button being shift-click - it was far more useful.

Regardless... I'm not complaining about adding features, but about the implementation of those. Not even Jobs could fuck up the generally standard (although not universal once he killed HIS) method of implementation in pre-X systems. Now he has complete control and he's destroy(ing/ed) the Mac standard.
Click to expand...

Uhmmm... since at least 7.5, wow, that a big difference from 8. As for contextual menus, isn't that what you're talking about with the Apple menu? The only way that functions as any kind of serious "interface" (and I use that term as you did, but oh so very loosely) is if you have contextual/flyout menus, otherwise it's nothing more then a repository for throwing folder aliases and then what's the sense?

Further, you argue that Steve jobs, the creator of Apple mind you, is destroying the Mac standard. Well, i ask you, what standard is that? nevermind, don't answer, you see, because here's the thing, you yourself destroy your own arguments and lambast yourself inadvertantly.

I quote again: "and before that with third party extensions (that Apple absorbed into the system)."

This belies your argument of these very same things beng an Apple standard, they aren't, they are add-on features that came into the system via demand. The same thing will hold true here, the problem is, you want something from yesterday when it's already tomorrow... wake up and smell the coffee. be patient, be practical, think different... and you will find ways to work that you never thought of before, and new applications will come that give you heretofore untold of options for the same tasks that you used to do with your beloved Apple menu.

Hell, it was just a drop down text list of expandable items... since when did that constitute an interface?
 
Originally posted by ahaig
As for control panels, OS X is more like windows b/c you have to first open the control panels section to get to any of them. I, unlike you apparently, appreciate efficiency. I like to be able to quickly access the specific settings I want to deal with. I don't care how the OS deals with them, but I want the option of a menu that will enable quick access.
Click to expand...

Yes I too like efficiency. That's way I recently set System Preferences, Preview, TextEdit and the Terminal to load on startup and hide. With System Preferences when you're done changing stuff just close the window, instead of quitting. Next time you need it click on it in the dock and it reopens its window. The point is OS X as great virtual memory, there's no harm in leaving apps open. (IMHO apple really need to speed up application launch times.)

Also I didn't say apple should get rid of the apple menu. I was merely saying that I like the way OS X does the application menu and I think it sould stay. It is more consistent. Please explain to me what what Quit has to do with Files? To me putting application commands in an application menu make more sense.

peter
 
and I'll say it again. Mac OS X has been completely rethought, redesigned, reorganized, and refined from the pre-ten experience.

Let's pretend-- A software developer creates an application and puts features in its menu bars:

In the OS menu they put info on the application itself.

In the menu for managing your file, they put the ability to quit the application and adjust the color depth of a secondary monitor

In the help menu they put the ability to edit preferences, but in the edit menu they put the ability to contact their web support database

Mac OS 9 and under is just like that -- things are spread out with no rhyme or reason. You quit the Application from the File menu. You get info on the App from the Apple menu. Where does one find preferences? who knows? each application puts it in a different place (some edit prefs under the Edit menu, others under the View or Tools, or...)

What Apple has done is rethought where to put stuff so a person can find what their looking for quickly.

Here is a brief explanation of where things are and their value:

Apple Menu
Anything that is related to the OS itself can now be accessed directly from whatever application you are in without having to click to the finder first. (About this Mac, OS preferences, Sleep, Restart, Shutdown, Logout)

Application Menu
This is where one would find items that are directly related to the Application itself, so you can find it quickly without having to dig through menus (About this product, app preferences, services, hide app/others, quit app)

File Menu
Finally, this menu only contains items that related to the file that you are currently working on. Does not contain Preferences, App shortcuts, or the ability to quit the app. (Open/Close, save, etc)

As for the App menu, it gets in the way where it is and destroys consistency. There's no REASON to change it when it's worked how it's been for a long long time. Prior to Jobs killing HIS things were in standard positions.
Click to expand...

Actually, there was never any reason to have the Apple menu behave the way that it has. Just because something was available in 9 didn't make it right -- we were just used to it. Mac OS X isn't 9, so I recommend that you adapt.

If you want to have your shortcuts to your favorite items, feel free to put that either in the Dock or the mini-dock (at the top of every window).

If you put a folder into the dock, you have the exact same experience of navigating the directories as you did through the Apple Menu -- and it saves you two levels of navigation!

If you put a folder into the 'shelf' (at the top of every finder window) you can drop-drop stuff into them...

Is OS X complete? HARDLY. But it's far, far better than 9 ever will be.

Again, just because something was available in 9 didn't make it a good thing... embrace the new.
 
Originally posted by plaidpjs

Uhmmm... since at least 7.5, wow, that a big difference from 8. As for contextual menus, isn't that what you're talking about with the Apple menu?
Click to expand...

Umm.. Not quite. Contextual menus are the menus that "pop-out" when you right-click on an object. The ones being referred to are hierarchical menus, if I'm not mistaken. Apple Menu Options in System 7.5 provided this feature. Prior to System 7.5, there were third party programs that would give this feature, one in particular is BeHierarchic.

The only way that functions as any kind of serious "interface" (and I use that term as you did, but oh so very loosely) is if you have contextual/flyout menus, otherwise it's nothing more then a repository for throwing folder aliases and then what's the sense?
Click to expand...


I personally am fan of direct access to control panels. Although I don't dislike System Preferences in Mac OS X, I miss the ability to directly run a control panel from any application (through the Apple Menu > Control Panel). I'm not sure if this is possible in Mac OS X. What I like about System Preferences, however, is that control panels have become "integrated."

:)
 
Gino (and others),

As to the first part, you are completely correct, I was inded using the wrong expression and thinking backwards. However, not to belabor the point, these things have not been long time Apple OS components, but rather, have been fairly recently added to the OS because of the popularity of a 3rd party extension.

As to the second part, you ALWAYS have acces to System preferences in OS X, even if you kill the Dock. Go to the Apple menu and select System Preferences. As for Control Panels, THANK GOD THEY ARE GONE! Under OS X there is no need for some global set of control panels beyond those needed for basic system setup and modification. beyond that, each program has it's own preferences panel to control the way it acts, and because the kernel can dynamically load components (in the form of daemons and kexts), there is no need to have everything start up at boot and suck system resources.

Ciao
 
Originally posted by plaidpjs
However, not to belabor the point, these things have not been long time Apple OS components, but rather, have been fairly recently added to the OS because of the popularity of a 3rd party extension.
Click to expand...

I guess the question of some users was "Why did Apple remove it?"

As to the second part, you ALWAYS have acces to System preferences in OS X, even if you kill the Dock. Go to the Apple menu and select System Preferences. As for Control Panels, THANK GOD THEY ARE GONE!
Click to expand...

I agree. Control panels have always been a cause for system software conflicts and crashes. But the feature I wanted was direct access to a certain part of System Preferences. :) For example, System Preferences > Startup Disk and the like. I know it's probably easy enough to create a Dockling (ala Displays), but that would just take up more space in my Dock. :)
 
Those with complaints about the new interface have a lot of valid points. Personally I am quite satisfied overall, despite several things I feel could be improved (e.g. Application menu in the upper right corner w/ icon). But I think the arguments miss the whole point of OS X.

As Mac enthusiasts, we want to idolize Apple as some great computing leader. But we musn't forget that they are just a company out there to turn a profit. Don't get me wrong, Apple's business model of development and innovation is incredible, and deserves praise in a world of scams and clever packaging to sell the same old products on an even lower budget.

INNOVATION is what Apple does. When Apple was in big trouble before Jobs came back, what was wrong? No vision, nothing spectacular or innovative was coming out. He re-vitalized the macintosh with a simple colored computer. The product line has been brought back to the elegance of the early years. Titanium powerbook, graphite G4s, iBooks. They look great, but that is all so superficial, Apple's OS strategy had to catch up to really start winning people over. I love Macs as much as any of you, but OS 9 doesn't have $#!t on Windows. I mean, it is better in some ways, but Windows has just as many superiorities in terms of easy of use. This was evidenced by the fact that Apple was continuing to slowly lose marketshare.

Enter OS X, 4+ years in the making, a completely new MacOS basically written from the ground up. It was a bold move, but IMHO, a stroke of genius. Why? Because not only does it restores Apple's status as a true innovator, but it is the first counter-MS strategy with any merit. See, by going with an open-source kernel, and building a unix-based OS from scratch, there is no way that Microsoft can simply slap these 'deep' features onto Windows XXX or whatever their latest piece of crap happens to be. Apple has struck the first blow in the destruction of proprietary consumer OSes. Linux struck the first blow against Microsoft, but it doesn't have a decent consumer GUI or the commercial applications that regular people need. Apple gave unix the consumer interface it needed to become mainstream. Fundamentally this is what makes me so proud to own an Apple (and the reason I bought a G4 rather than a faster pentium machine for half the price).

Ah, but I am a geek, so i can immediately appreciate the glories of Unix. That won't convince all the consumers though. In order to steal back consumer marketshare from Microsoft, something VISIBLE needed to be changed to the system. Since they were re-writing the whole GUI anyway, they took the opportunity to change anything they thought could be improved. The "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" argument against these changes has a big hole. The OS was broke, because it wasn't gaining marketshare, and Apple would slowly suffocate unless something drastic was done.

This was a do or die move for Apple, but in the end I think they have played their hand well. Minor interface tweaks that bother people are MINOR ERRORs, compared to the possible bigger error of leaving everything the same and not wooing any new customers.

The one mistake I think COULD hurt Apple, but hopefully they will take notice and fix, are the speed issues. I have 128 Ram on my G4-400, and it is certainly useable. Some things seem MUCH slower (responsiveness when DLing in IE, menus opening, appz starting), other things seem MUCH faster (working while apps are opening, telnetting to my school account, quicktime playback).

For starters Apple needs to offer an option to turn off the eye-candy. I wonder how much faster this would be if I could just lose all the translucency and fancy FX. Secondly, I think that a memory control panel to offer some options to tweak memory usage on machines with only 128 megs o' RAM would be good. I say that because it seems just as slow with 1 application open as with 20, methinks an optimzation could be had there.

At any rate, before they ship OS X on all new Macs, they better either speed it up or put 256 in every machine.
&lt/rant&gt
 
Let's get some things straight |-)

Apple didn't steal from Microsoft when they made the Dock, Microsoft stole from NeXT.

The task bar is more of a method to deal with the MS Windows global window problem (which is the only way windows apps can have an application-wide menu bar). Clearly OS X isn't like this. In fact MacOS was more similar to MS Windows in that all the windows of one app would be brought to the foreground. I much prefer OS X where each document can be brought to the foreground seperately.

If you want to compare OS X to MS Windows I would rather point out that selecting text in Cocoa is MS Windows-like and not mac-like.

I feel the greater problem in OS X is not the silly widgets which we choose to use (or can choose not to) but the schizophrenic nature of the OS where Cocoa and Carbon applications do not behave the same.

They use different file dialogs, they draw their own title and menu bars, they have different color wheels, they have different support levels for drag+drop text (which in MacOS was nearly ubiquitous). The Cocoa API is incomplete forcing Cocoa developers to link to Carbon for stuff like file types, aliases, internet settings, keychain, etc.

Also not all gestures are shared. Carbon's TextEdit and WASTE do not follow the useful double-click-drag gesture. Also Carbon apps do not follow command-click-through for background windows except for title bars. In all these cases Apple's Aqua HI Guidelines avoid areas where the two APIs conflict, they should be doing the opposite.

UI uniformity is a much larger issue than silly UI widgets. Widgets can be added later, let's concentrate on programmatic issues first!
 
First off, well said strobe!

Secondly, here are some ideas. I think instead of complaining, maybe peopple should come to these forums to say "Hey, I miss Apple Menu Control Panel access. Anyone figured out a workaround?"

Then myself and others could offer helpful tips, like:

1. To get direct access to a particular system preference, simply make an alias of the prefernces folder in the /System/Library folder, and drag it to the Dock. Now you have one-click and hold access to any system preference. Easier and faster than OS 9<.

2. If you want to know what app is active, all you have to do is look at the left end of the menu, instead of the right. What is the purpose of the right-side application menu? All of it's functions are replaced by the left side application menu, along with additional application wide features. Not to mention, the menu bar NOW follows a logical pattern: System/Application/File/Contents/...

3. If the Dock takes up too much screen space, make it smaller. It can actually take up as little space as the floating application palette of OS 9< -- and auto-hide, if you want.

4. Between the Dock and the Finder toolbars, the hierarchical Apple Menu is put to shame by their usability, customizability, and ease. They almost make spring-loaded folders obsolete, as well. People need to play around with these VERY powerful features.

The list of added features and improvemts really goes on and on. I LOVE OS X, and think it is much better, more organized, and easier to use than OS 9. Sometimes, it takes a little while to discover the features, but they're there. ALthough there may be some speed issues with window resizing, blah, blah, blah--I find that I am working so much faster, in general, that these obvious speed bugs are greatly overshadowed.

I mean, spring-loaded folders were a GREAT time saver, but customizable, drag-and-droppable, Finder toolbars are even better!

As a final note, I do miss Window-shade, but am discovering that the Dock contextual menus are a nice work-around, as is simply shift or option or control or Apple clicking on a Dock Icon.

$0.02
 
A few things I will note:

I never liked the Apple menu post-System 6. Now Menus always trumped Apple Menu Options feature for feature. Most notably the ability to change any menu item hotkey.

I miss window shade too, although I only found it useful when using a theme with a title bar only as long as the title, like NeuTech.

Why, why, why is System Preferences in the /Applications/ directory?! Put it with the other system apps in /System/Library/CoreServices. Allow 3rd paties to put extra preference panes in /Library/Panels or something. Dump Sherlock in utilities and open it by creator code instead of symlink (how stupid! All the excellent MacOS technologies WHOOOSH out the window)

Also allow 3rd parties to make their own preview plugins, used by the Finder.

The Dock will never get all the enhancements we all want to long it's closed source and we have to beg for each one.

Somebody please find out how the Dock selects individual windows so we can make a process menu which can do the same thing.

Put ALL system files in /System/ so I can copy a system by dragging the /System/ folder to a new volume. MacOS can do this and its the most convenient way to make a bootable backup. Currently I have to use HDT in MacOS to do a device copy as a backup because no sync utility exists which understands all UNIX and MacOS meta-data.

I use TinkerTool to disable the desktop (another stupid idea which was a bad idea in System 1 - 9) however it also disables the desktop picture.

The QuickDraw text 'smoothing' and Quartz text AA (which are totally different) can have their default thresholds set, but there is no graphical way to do this. I set my Quartz AA theshold from 12 to 2 so everything is more legible, I would probably do the opposite to text smoothing which makes things less legible.

I have other suggestions but they are difficult to conceptualize without some kind of movie (anybody know how to author Flash movies?)
 
Strobe, one of your best posts ever. ... followed by my two cents...

The Apple menu was on the left top corner becasue it was so oft used. It is not so oft used any more, and I'd like it to go over to the right corner so that the often used Application menu can be easier to navigate to. (bumping into the corner and clicking) With this ease, it might make sense to make the app a little icon again, for some, not for me.

Creator codes, yeah, please. X seems to actively throw away creator codes so that it doesn't remember stuff. Maybe I just have bad luck. I'd like to see applications packaged in such a manner that they can travel unscathed across other file systems and launch when brough to a mac again. I also think that a forked data structure ROCKS and could be utilized again to gain preferences for the application specific to that machine, extracted from flat file compatible source. File types and Creator codes are way too important to the conceptual Mac way of life, I don't understand what they're trying to do now.

And finally, just on user interface widgets, the three buttons need different shapes around them, or an altered spacing theme that would make + distinguishable form x ... colorblind anyone? How about dyslexic where + and x look a LOT like each other?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top