Mac OS X Desktop and GUI Design
Khelder sent us a nifty little bit about the MacOS X Desktop. It talks quite a bit about
UI Design (mirror) from a Mac-Centric but also a general perspective. It's quite interesting stuff for anyone into MacOS-X, but also it has lots of practical stuff for anyone who's ever tried to create a usable theme for one of today's modern window managers.
It's worth noting that Tog, who wrote the article that's linked to, was one of the (if not the only) designers of the original Mac OS GUI. If anyone has a foundation for constructive criticism of a GUI, this man does. If I were Jobs, or anyone else at Apple for that matter, I'd pay attention to what Tog has to say.
------
WWhhaatt ddooeess dduupplleexx mmeeaann??
This sig intentionally left justified.
Actually, there are a large number of Mac users (myself included) who have some reservations with the new UI. It's hard to tell until we actually get to sit down with it, though.
I'm cautiously optimistic, but there are a number of people who have had major issues with what Apple has shown so far. Tog, who worked at Apple for 14 years, is one of them. I personally think Apple threw the screenshots out for public consumption as a sort of trial balloon - they've done this before. Given that there are 5-6 months until release, they've got time to make the kind of minor changes people are advocating.
Anyhow, please don't stereotype Mac users. We don't all agree with everything Apple does, and aren't nearly as blind/conformist as you think we are (witness the deafening roar of bitching Mac users erupted in when QuickTime 4 was released).
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
Do _you_ know Fitts's law?
GUI design has been well researched by Apple and others, and the developers of the new desktops should actually read this stuff. It seems that most of the features included in both desktop environments seem to be added because they are "cool" or they are what a particular developer thinks is best. If everyone makes sure that they are playing by these rules, we can ensure that both environments are superior in speed and ease-of-use to both windows and mac.
I have, I think, created the most accurate random dice throw simulator ever known to the computer world. It is held inside a tiny black box, with a serial connection and an Ethernet port.
Questions please?
Q: How does it work?
A: It is sent signals from the programmer that set the method used to determine the result, and to get a new throw.
Q: What do I have to do to use it in program X?
A: Sending it a zero over the serial port will get a new random throw. Sending it any other number from 1 to 11 will set the method it uses.
Q: What methods does it use?
A: The number sets it, and it increases in randomness with the number; i.e. 1 just does a fairly simple random generator, while 10 takes a minute to mathematically simulate the dice on an atomic scale as it flies through the air!
Q: Why does it need Ethernet then?
A: That's for when you send it the signal 11, the most random mode. It posts a comment to Slashdot, enters a wait state for two hours, then comes back, takes the moderation score and adds 1.
I used to respect Tognazzini a great deal. However, close reading of his writing, over an extended period of time, has led me to believe that he has questionable judgment about many issues. Just examine his article, How Programmers Stole the Web, where he claims that:
These are only a sample of the glaring Deep Wrongness in the article I link to above.
In addition, Tog is a relentless Apple partisan, despite his objections to the new Aqua interface. This clouds his perception of all Apple-related issues. For example, among other things, he says in the Aqua/OS X interface article that "Apple could argue, and few would deny it, that Apple was first and Microsoft is the one who made things difficult by failing to accurately copy the Mac interface." Ignoring, of course, the fact that Microsoft would have been perfectly happy to copy the Apple interface exactly, except that Apple is one of the most litigious companies in the IT industry (have you seen Microsoft threaten to sue KDE over their Windows98 theme?).
IMHO, Tognazzini has suffered from a lesser form of the same brain rot that has affected Jon Katz since becoming published on the web: free to spout off without an editor, never forced to confront dissenting opinions before publication, he has become something of an autodidact. This may seem a bit harsh, but I urge the programmers in the audience to read the "How Programmers Stole the Web" article. It reveals a great deal about the didacticism of Tognazzini's thought habits, and will probably cast a very different light on his supposedly authoritative interface design ideas.
I once respected Tog. Occasionally, he comes up with some good insights. However, don't let his impressive resume blind you to his often misled assertions.
~k.lee(remove nospam for email)
My first impression upon activating the theme was the expected "that looks cool," and I also noticed that it was a bit brighter looking than the current "platinum" look of OS 9. Not that it was a bad thing, it wasn't blindingly bright, just a little unfamiliar at first. That soon changed however, as I began to actually use it. The theme isn't the most accurate representation of Aqua, for example it doesn't have the slowly throbbing default buttons, but it did have the same "traffic light" buttons on the windows. Some have expressed concern that the buttons are too close together and that someone could miss and accidently close a window, but that did not happen to me once. I got used to the new setup very quickly (to contrast, I never seem to get used to it when I have to use Windows). In fact, I took a liking to the buttons and that pinstripe background. They aren't noticable while doing work, but when you want them you know exactly where to look.
The other main thing that the theme altered was the icons. Even without Quartz and 128x128 (scalable) icons, the new icons look great! That's not one of the things anyone has really been arguing over though...
Unfortunately, the theme cannot simulate translucency, shadows or the "sheet" dialogs - although from the pictures the sheets look really good. The tranclucency might need some playing with, but again I could not try it in person. So on to the browser...
I found the browser useful for quickly navigating a heirarchy of folders - just move the arrow keys towards where you want to go. On the other hand, it wasn't so great for copying/moving files to other places - in most cases a new browser window must be opened. Of course the limitations of this browser might not be the same as Apple's, and the browser view is just an addition to the traditional icon, list, and button views. I'll probably end up using a combination them all, much like I do now.
Keeping all this in mind, it's imporant to remember that Aqua is still in development. Mac OS X is scheduled to be released this summer (not next year as Tog said, that's when it will be preinstalled on all shipping Macs), so there's still time to make any criticisms you might have heard - that is probably one of the reasons for showing Aqua so far in advance.
-Rafi Remove the Spanish to email me.
It's not hard, if the OS is designed with a single button in mind. You just weren't used to it.
I agree 100% with the round mouse thing. I think Apple was aiming toward little kids (which seem to be able to use it, due to its size), but they should never have shipped it with their higher end systems. Same with the keyboard.
For the record, I prefer 2 button mice, which work just fine on the Mac (you can simulate a second button on later revs of the OS by holding down control and clicking on the a file - contextual menus). On the other hand, I have been forced to support Windows users confused by the second button, so they may have a point.
In the end, it doesn't cost much to buy a better mouse. Apple should make it a build to order option, and support both equally.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
I must say, i learned a lot from the report the Arsificial Intelligentia over at arstechnica.com put up.
Check it here.
Its got a great deal of info on how MacOS X and Quartz are a 3rd generation GUI, relying on vectors, and a great deal of pdf technology to speed things up. This decreases the amount of power needed to run a transformation like the genie effect by great amounts.
Good stuff.
Actually, it's more like this:
1. Pay Xerox in the form of Apple stock.
2. Take a few notes on what Xerox has done. No code.
3. Mix in a large number of ideas by Jef Raskin and others.
4. Develop the Lisa/Mac.
5. Bill Gates takes a look, and...
6. The rest is history.
Hope that clears things up a little more.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff