Slashdot Mirror
OS X 10.1 Coming Today (Sorta)
usa35.com writes "News.com has a story detailing the release of Apple's 10.1 update. They say "unveiled" today, probably meaning actually disseminated to us general public folks sometime in the coming days." This is of course the release that regular users can actually use. Supposedly this is a free upgrade. Speed improvements, UI fixes, DVD stuffs. I can't wait to test it out a little. And those new iBooks are pretty reasonably priced (I figure that they can sell them cheap by cutting corners like most of the mouse buttons ;)
I'm sorry, but 10.0 was a very... incomplete release. It was sluggish, didn't have important things like DVD or CD-RW capabilities, plus it didn't always work correctly. 10.1, on the other hand, is just incredible. The speed increases are phenomenal (from 50-400%, depending on your CPU) and the added functionality and general GUI cleanup are much welcomed. 10.0 always had sort of a beta feel to it, but 10.1 feels like a sleek, finished OS. Kudos to Apple for the great job.
There is also talk of it finally fixing legacy appletalk support (not TCP/IP based). Yeah I know, move to NFS, be a real man, etc... But a lot of my co-workers are stuck in a MacOS less than 10. Makes it difficult. Not to mention that you can't communicate properly with a Linux server running netatalk. I can't wait!
Check out Althea for a stable IMAP email client for X. Now with SSL!
I've been using 5G64 since it was released to us ADC members, supposedly it's the GM. It's everything that Steve claims it to be,
'cause that's when Steve said we'd get DVD playback. :)
Paul
Sounds crazy, but it's Apple so nothing is ever out of the question.
Macslash has a thread going about the release and a lot of developers with Betas are reporting some significant improvements in speed - most notibly the time to load apps in native and classic modes.
Sound waves should be free!
I've been using OSX for a while, and it is a real dog on any chip other than a G4. It's always been usable, but the windows don't have the snap-into-action feel that they need to satisfy an old Win2k afficianado such as myself. Furthermore, the OS was missing a lot of essential features, DVD being the most prominent, that are coming in full effect. Also exciting is the movement of a couple of important indicators to the empty space on the apple bar...my dock quickly fills up and I can't wait to lose things like the battery indicator that don't really need to be so big. Here's hoping the developers of such great dock apps as LoadInDock, Memory Manager, TempInDock (immeasurably useful, so you don't put a 140 degree lappy onto your legs while wearing shorts) and so on. It seems most of the visibility "enhancements" are just the hidden options in OS 10.4, unlockable via tweak panels...but it'll be nice to have more efficient effects like the scale available from a System Preference.
Ahhh, 10.1...OSX is finally a real operating system. Thank you, blue fairy!
Hey freaks: now you're ju
Not OS X per se, but its core software, Darwin, is essentially an open source BSD release. Quite a lot of work has been done on it. You can't run OS X-specific apps (things that expect the Aqua interface), but Linux and UNIX apps should port as well as they do in OS X.
It's the power and integration of the Macintosh hardware and software that makes OS X shine. Even if Apple chose to port the Whole Thing to x86, you would need a much more fortified PC than you would normally buy off the street.
Better than nothing, or maybe just do FreeBSD. Try www.darwinfo.org.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
I see a pleonasm there. Shouldn't it be OS X.1?
I used to work for a company that had a mixed environment of Macs and PCs. The one thing we discovered was that some applications (notably Foxpro, etc.) worked far slower on the Macs. I'm not sure but I was guessing that this was an optimization issue... So is there a noticeable speed difference still between apps optimized on the PC and not for the Mac, and vice versa? In our office right now we mostly use PCs but have a couple of Macs for graphic design and audio work.
Nope. It's pretty damn speedy on my 400 MHz G3 and my iBook 2001. True, these machines have 512 MB and 256 MB of RAM, respectively, but RAM is so cheap these days....
This space unintentionally left unblank.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/newversion/
Tom.
Oh arse
However, one thing that worries me is whether or not they will include Dev Tools. I bought OSX 10.0 when if first came out, and it came with the disc. The Dev Tools include important things like a compiler for making other programs from the Terminal, and fun things like a Java browser, OpenGL stuff, etc. However, they were not included with my new computer. While I already owned them, so I just loaded them myself, I hope that people won't have to pay $129 just to get some tools that should come with new machines. Thanks Apple, you based the system on BSD, but don't forget the tools we need to really write with it!
Darnit Taco, please join the present. I'm currently using an Intellimouse Explorer on my Mac, and I've got five mouse buttons plus a scroll wheel. They all work quite well, thank you. If you really want a multi-button mouse for your iBook, just plug one into the USB port. You don't even have to reboot.
I know you meant it as a joke, but statements like that smell a lot like a troll. Please try not to taunt your audience.
This
Ok the 10.0.4 boxes I ran at work and home were slow in the aqua gui, truely, but as far as I/O,
/. most here would be pleased to know that it is not BSD/Darwin that is slow, but the Aqua gui that ppl are bitching and moaning about (with good reason, IMO).
processing, task switching, serving web/ftp...they all kicked ass to say the least.
For all the unix'ey love fests that take place on
Lack of features, nope, not for what I used it for: Surfing, SETI, FTP, pr0n watching, vcd (mpg1, naturally), ssh, classic apps...it did it all with nary a hitch (just don't leave a DVD in the drive...kernel panic w/o fail on my box).
So, yeah 10.1 is a drool inducer ooo-ooo, shiney *blue* objects!!! (kiki the ferret voice) and dvd, speed tweaks and some needed + native cocoa apps are well and good, but I hope the OS's speed does not suffer, gui be damned.
(can you tell I'm a CLI type?)
Moose.
la la laaaaaa
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
Which means you have to wait for the third release (10.2?) for it to be really useful.
Best Slashdot Co
I have 10.1 (5G64 - RC1) running on a ice-book with 256 megs of RAM, and it's yummy. The biggest problem I have found is that the subtitles/overlays in the DVD player are offset.
Performance feels on par or better than the Asus A7V/Duron/700/Mandrake 8.0/KDE that sits next to it.
I had been holding off using Mac OS X as my everyday OS until now. 10.1 will go on my TiBook as soon as it's released.
For those of us who also happen to own a multi-processor machine and have been unable to run Mozilla as a native OS X app, it looks like part of the problem was with 10.0.4's MP support and will be fixed in 10.1. For more info, check out this bugzilla bug.
Perhaps this could even mean an end to the dial-up disconnection woes, as those, too, were MP related. (For those of you blissfully unaware, MP machines with a dial-up modem connection had a tendency to randomly drop said connection.)
All in all, very good news, especially since Apple appears to have listened to its customers and will be making the upgrade free.
With 10.1 not only do I get dvd play back on a "Unix Based" os but MS is releasing a preview version of Word X. Now before you Anti-MS Dolts get your panties tied in a Knot. If you don't use Macs and haven't seen Microsoft's Mac software. You're missing out. MSIE:MAC Runs better than it does under windows. (There goes that whole its only "Faster" Cause its integrated into the OS Theory) And Microsoft Office for the Mac has consistently been the most useful Office Suite on the market. Star Office doesn't have anything on it. And Office:Mac has consistently blown the pants off of Office:windows For a long time.
But anyways. Check out the Microsoft mac stuff at www.microsoft.com/mac/ and just drool over screen shots of Office v X
And on a final Note. I love my TiPB I love OSX and I don't understand how I used anything other htan it for all those years.
--------========+++Dont Feed The Lab Techs+++========--------
I installed it on a G3/500 Blue and White over the weekend (build 5G64 - the GM) and it is wildly fast. Boots the computer from button-push to full in 45 seconds. Opens applications easily 15 times faster (I did a check against 10.0.4 on another partition). Makes my old G3 *feel* like a G4. All in all, I'd have to say they have outdone themselves in this release (or spoiled us by giving us a really slow one first). I invite all Linux-heads to give it a shot - you may be surprised!
I have used some of the earlier builds of OSX(though I haven't gotten the latest yet). It should be noted for build 5G64, which I have heard is the Golden Master, DVD playback will not work on Macs that use hardware DVD-decoding(ie. B&W G3 or Yikes G4/PCI with DVD piggyback card, Lombard G3/400 models and perhaps Wallstreet PB G3s with the DVD decoder PC Card). Since some of these computers are the very ones that would most benefit from an OS speed increase, potential owners should check with Apple, or they might have to be prepared to continue using OS9 a little bit longer. Newer macs that use software decoding work great.
I agree...where are the speedups? I was expecting major improvements out of 10.1.
On my Wallstreet G3/300 with 256MB of RAM:
- slightly faster, but not drastically so.
- Launching IS much faster, but this is due to
two-level namespace linkage, not due to any
innate optimization.
- OpenGL still is not implemented for Rage Pro.
- Skyline/Lucent wireless cards still do not work.
Skyline is Farallon's fault, but the Lucent *SHOULD* work, since it worked under OS 9 without
any 3rd party drivers.
- Still cannot eject PCMCIA cards without shutting down. Though it no longer kernel panics when you
manually remove one.
- PCMCIA-based hard drives still are not recognized.
- Still won't play DVD. Apparently they don't support the hardware DVD decoder cards (this IS an officially supported machine...where's the official support?)
- The compiler is godawful slow. I took a project
that built in 58 seconds under OSX Server 1.2, and it takes over 5 minutes to build on OS X 10.1 (on a G4/400 with 1.5GB of RAM!)
- On the plus side, sleep FINALLY works. It used
to turn on the fan when I put the machine to sleep, which would promply drain my batteries dry.
10.1 is finally USABLE, but it's still not what I wonder consider great.
10.1 was supposed to speed things up, Linux on the Mac is reportedly pretty fast, given the upgrade to 10.1, what' the "fastest" os for a new Mac?
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
When the hell did Apple ever have a monopoly?
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
...is the sound of 10,000 Slashdot moderators opening their dictionaries to learn what the word "pleonasm" means.
Or at least to see if there's a picture of it.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
--Ben
That is just a product page that has been up for weeks, if not months. The news about how it will be released today/friday/saturday morning is in fact, quite a recent development, and mentioned nowhere on the Apple site (except for maybe the support discussion boards :)).
You can send for a CD for $19.99, or you can go to an Apple retailer and get a free update there at no cost. Also, the CDs will be in stores this Saturday. I would list the URL of the site doing live coverage of the keynote today, but they are already swamped. /.-ing them would certainly bring them down for good. If you are Mac news savvy you can easily find it.
--- What?
[entropy:~] znu% uname -a
Darwin entropy 1.4 Darwin Kernel Version 1.4: Sun Sep 9 15:39:59 PDT 2001; root:xnu/xnu-201.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc
[entropy:~] znu% java -version
java version "1.3.1"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.3.1-root-010902-18:51)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.3.1, mixed mode)
The largest Java app I've tried is LimeWire. But improvements over 10.0.x seem to be significant.
This space unintentionally left unblank.
$ java -version
java version "1.3.0"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.3
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.3.0, mixed mode)
So, a reasonably up-to-date version of Java ships with the OS. I'm guessing they'll send out updates with Java's minor releases, but not the micro releases.
The good news is, it's just BSD. So, if you want to upgrade it yourself, you can with a little work. I've yet to find a java app that doesn't run OK on it. I'm currently in the process of downloading Sun's Forte for Java IDE (shipping for Solaris), just to see if I can get that running ;)
--Mid
Does anyone know if the update can be downloaded for free, or can it only be obtained on CD?
I'm using a USB Kensington 3 button mouse, with the wheel, on my TiPB without any special software loaded. All the buttons work fine, and support is even better in the X.1. Basically, the right button works the same as a control click, and the wheel scrolls the Finder windows and application windows. Functionality in Classic mode is dependent on software.
Oh, and the buttons work as intended in XFree86. Rootless X works really well.
X.1 is running great, as advertised. Even my G3 runs well. I have over 300Mb in each machine, so I'm sure that helps. My only complaint is that I need driver support for my older printers. I can use them from Classic, but that can be a pain since I'm pretty much using all OSX apps now.
- Don
I added a 256 Mb chip to my "icebook"-- everything is much faster-- although I spend most of my time running gnu software (installed through fink, sort of an apt-get for MacOSX).
I'm running 10.0.4.
512 Megs would be nice, but a 512 mb chip sells for ~$235. 256 Mb chips are only ~$36.
(Of course, if you buy memory from Apple, the prices skyrocket).
I want two buttons ON the laptop, not on an external mouse. What if I'm on an airplane, or on a car or train? An external mouse only solves the problem if you're sitting at a desk.
from macslash:
"OS X 10.1 will be available in stores this Saturday and a free upgrade for 10.0.x owners will be available in stores at no charge. As expected you can also order a CD containing the update for $19.99."
I have the MS Intellimouse with 5 buttons and a scroll wheel too. On a mac. Just install an extension [USBOverdrive.com], reboot, and voila. Plus you can configure all buttons too. This is a non-issue. Beginners like the simplicity of a zero-button mouse. 'Power users' can buy a multi-button mouse. End of the story.
Specifically, is it bearable on a new iBook? When I tried 10.04 on a new iBook it was like running Windows 2000 on a Pentium 133
Well, it wasn't that slow.. but it was slow.
The reason is very simple.
The finder sucked and they didn't use the graphic acceleration of the videochip.
They rewrote the finder and turned on the grpahic acceleration of the videochip.
Last weekend we had a local MUG meeting in which Apple showed both an iBook and a G4 with MacOS 10.1.
The speed difference was quitte noticable.
The speed was equal to a Pentium III 1 Ghz with windows 2000.
So, it could be a little bit better but it was quitte acceptable.
> MSIE:MAC Runs better than it does under windows. (There goes that whole its only "Faster" Cause its integrated into the OS Theory)
Perhaps not - is MSIE:Mac leaving some stubs running in memory all the time? If so, there's the answer. That's how Mozilla's 'turbo' mode works (only it's not so 'turbo' with v0.9.4).
> laptop because of it's lack of mouse buttons.
Not the fastest snail on the leaf, is he?
I was hardly an early adopter, but I had two buttons on my mac in '92 or so (ok, hardly an early adopter of the second button. I had a 128k mac brand new . ,
They're availalbe all over the place, and come with the software to make that second button do whatever you want . . .
hawk, who gets a kick out of folks with the button-deprived windows mouse mocking those only slightly more deprived
I've only been using OSX for about a month now (got my first mac then). And I love it. It's a recent Quicksilver model, so honestly, I don't know what people are talking about when they say it's slow, but I guess it probably is on less recent hardware. What I really would like it more customization for the GUI, there's really very little you can do to change the appearance. They have two sets of button colors, and you can change the magnification and size of the dock, as well as the size of icons. Gee, that's fantastic, but that's it! Also coming from X and Windows, it's hell of hard to keep track of applications (maybe just because I'm switching from a taskbar to a taskbar clone- dock). But I seem to get flustered when I have too many applications open. I really wish they'd incorporate multiple virtual desktops like in X.
As far as features and stuff, well honestly I haven't noticed any lack of them. The OS is the pinnacle of compatibility and versatility. I can open MacOS9 in classic mode to run Microsoft Office (ya ya, Microsoft sucks, but if you haven't tried their version of Office on a Mac shut up), Internet Explorer under OSX along with whatever else I need, and I with the click of a button I'm transported to a Gnome desktop running my *nix X programs (the ones I don't need to run from a terminal). Oh yeah, and it's got a terminal. Using Fink it's a snap to install Unix software (granted not all the ports I want, but more are coming). It's funny the way it works, Microsoft products are actually much better on Macs. Or of course I could just log out of Aqua all together and run pure Darwin alone, or with X.
I was going to install NetBSD or Linux on the computer, but now I don't think I'll need to.
LOL, join the club, it doesn't work on Windows either so you aren't missing much :)
...is the sound of 10,000 Slashdot moderators clicking this link because they're too lazy to go look at a real dictionary. :)
Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
> Now before you Anti-MS Dolts
>get your panties tied in a Knot.
>And Office:Mac has
>consistently blown the pants off of Office:windows For a long time.
Well, I suppose that explains it. With her pants blown off, the poor gal is tieing the knot just to get some more coverage . . .
:)
hawk, afraid he's giving someone an idea for another porn site . . .
In the state of the art iApple icar...you only have 1 foot peddle. both gas and brake. to go you just push the peddle. to stop, you have to press both the horn and stomp. briliant
I bet that neat intelimouse with 5 buttons didn't come with your computer, you bought it because you wanted all those features. You can do the same with a mac. Stop complaining, if you want a mouse with 6 billion buttons go out and buy one. Remember, a majority of apple customers have never used a computer before, one button is just easier to learn. Anyone that has tried to teach someone who has never used a computer before knows that they get the buttons mixed up.
WikiAfterDark.com It's a sex wiki, go now!
Let me know when I can install a multi-button mouse INSIDE the laptop, in place of the one button one, and then I'll be happy. I don't want to have to drag an external mouse everywhere, and I simply CAN'T use one in a car, bus, train, etc.
An idea whose time has come!
Instead of clicking with the button, you just think "click", your computer reads your mind, and clicks on the screen somewhere. :)
Oh wait. Did you mean a one-button mouse? ;)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
Somehow I think even Windows will be in constant development for decades, 'cause that's how long it's going to take to get the damn thing to run an app properly without crashing.
J
Oh wait. Did you mean a one-button mouse?
Maybe he did mean a zero-button mouse. The fantastic oblong optical mice that Apple delivers with with its desktop units does not have a button, per se. The whole upper carapace of the mouse is spring-hinged underneath to provide the kung-fu clicking action.
Wordnik, a dictionary project which aims to collect
That's because the interface that you're using is not well designed for a one or two button mouse. A well designed interface includes the hardware. You only REQUIRE one button to operate the Mac GUI. It's not a deficiency, it's design. It's really not an issue, so stop your arrogance, and fix the platform that somehow requires more buttons than I have fingers on one hand.
And if you go to the Mac OS X section on Apple's site, you can see the updated info. This discusses the $19.95 upgrade and the in-store free update.
Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
It's probably more expensive to manufacture single-button assemblies than two+ buttons, due to simple volume. Generaly, higher volume = lower price, this would likely prove esspecialy true in this case.
Well, if you order more than 2.000.000 mice a year from logitech it will be actually a lot cheaper.
The thing is, that almost all optical mice are made by logitech.
Yes, even the MS optical mice are made by logitech.
Last week I disassembled my ms optical mouse and on the print inside the mouse is the same agilent camerachip with intergrated controller as is used in every logitech mouse.
Second, printed on the small circuitboard is "made by logitech".
Second, all IBM, Compaq, Dell and Apple mice are made by logitech.
Even the first Apple mouse was made by logitech.
The 'official' workaround for right-click is to long-click (click-n-hold for a few seconds).
I was a bit annoyed at the lack of a 2nd button my new-to-me G3 laptop, but the long-click is easy enough to get used to.
What's really pissing me off is the lack of a proper keyboard -- you need to hold down Fn to get at PageUp/PageDown, which means that have to use both hands to browse the web. There's also no Forward Delete key, which frankly just sucks in this day and age.
When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
So it looks like it is possible to capture DVD video under Mac OS X 10.1...does the MPAA know about this?
-jon
Remember Amalek.
I for one would like to be able to right-click on the mac trash can and empty it like I can in Windows. In fact, many of the functions that require the command (or was it option) key in MacOS would work better as right-mouse clicks.
Of course I also wish that middle button would paste in windows like it does in *nix. Control-V gets old.
Then again, I could probably map that somehow... my Intellimouse Explorer is the best mouse I've ever used, and has quite a few options.
J
Look, you can't put a notebook on your lap and use your 5 button usb mouse. NUFF SAID.
Actually, I do it all the time. Admittedly, I don't have an ibook, but my Vaio is pretty nice - and I just plug my 5(7) button mouse into the usb port, and run it on the arm of the couch - couldn't be simpler. Optical mice make this much easier - although if I was stuck with a non-optical one, I'm pretty sure I'd work out a way to use a binder or something to stabilize it.
What I'd really like to see is more improvements in 3d chipsets for "desktop-replacement" laptops, for those of us who want to play the latest games (yes, I'm drooling over the new GeForce-equipped ones) and power-saving features for the subnotebooks. (make 'em run over 6 hours, and I'll buy one to compliment my hefty, power-hungry Vaio)
It is a completely different product, developed by a completely different development team, based in a completely different state. It just happens to be able to read the same file format. Saying it takes the Mac version a few months to catch up doesn't really make any sense. Some features come to the Mac version first, some come to the Windows version first. New versions aren't supposed to be synchronized in any way.
This space unintentionally left unblank.
The Developer Previews of Mac OS X Java (now unneeded with 10.1's release) should fix that problem.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
to empty the trash in os x, you just long-click on the trash can, and a little menu pops up: "Empty Trash."
More of a concern with the apple laptops is the lack of page up/down Home/End buttons.
And all the Explorer buttons are done in software. someone else posted about using them w/usboverdrive extension in macos (personally, i'd rather just use the trackpad).
I _do_ miss the middle-click paste-selection from X11...
Please, do use a product before you bash it.
-josh, slowly becoming an OS X fan (Real Transparent Terminals!)
1. If you have never bought OS X, it is $129.
;) -- you can get it for free from them, while supplies last.
:-)
2. If you own Mac OS X Retail now, it is a $19.95 upgrade (*including* manuals, developer CDs, the works).
3. If you have an Apple Store near you (not store.apple.com
Well worth it -- OS X is truly amazing (even for the biased- impared
The next comment I write will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
> THERE's the problem. If it were a $5 POS,
... it's an excellent pointing device for Mac OS X, which only requires one button. Mac OS X has a pervasive context-sensitive menubar at the top edge of the screen ... getting a second, limited, on-screen menu under your mouse cursor is just not that valuable. Mac users just slam the mouse cursor into the menubar and use the pull-down menus, which contain all of the options. Rather than right-click an item and choosing "Properties", you click on an item and choose File > Show Info from the pull-down menus (or press Command+I). Rather than right-clicking an image in a Web page and choosing "Save to disk", you just drag and drop the image from the Web browser window to the Finder (including Desktop) and it is saved as a file. All of the things that you may be used to doing with your second button have drag and drop or similar equivalents on Mac OS ... the user uses their one mouse and one button to move things around instead of using a second mouse button to display a text menu. Think about which is the best use of a mouse. After using a Mac, you might be pissed at Microsoft for all the broken drag and drop features in Windows (if you are a Windows user).
... it will last so long and get so much use that it will be almost free.
... very ergonomic. I did it, my wife did it, my brother did it. We all use Apple's mouse now. Try it and you'll see that there's more to it than meets the eye. Maybe you will even like it.
> no big deal, but you've already paid $60 for a
> hobbled, less functional mouse that you're just
> going to trash.
You are completely incorrect.
First, it's not hobbled
Second, you don't pay $60 for the mouse when you get it with a system. You can sell an Apple Optical Mouse on eBay and get $40 for it, which is likely more than you actually paid for it with a system. Use the $40 to buy whatever mouse you like. Any USB mouse works with Mac OS X. eBay can be operated with one mouse button on a Mac, so you will make it until the auction closes. If it was just a $5 POS mouse, all you would have is a $5 POS mouse, a non-biodegradable waste of space that you'd replace with a decent mouse later anyway. A good USB optical mouse is so compatible and has no moving parts
Honestly, it is CLASSIC for a person to get their first Mac after using Windows, complain about the one-button mouse, get out their old Windows USB mouse with two buttons, use that for a while, realize that they haven't hit the second button in three months, and go back to the Apple mouse, which you just cup in your hand and click with your palm
To get the upgrade, you have to fill out a form by hand and mail it in with Proof of Purchase. Then you get to wait 6-12 weeks for them to send it to you. Plus, they give no indications as to where you can get instant upgrades, nor does CompUSA's site have any info on it. Seems pretty unacceptable to me.
http://www.naildrivin5.com/davec
For the Windows and Linux bigots, relax. You don't have to get so tense. If you don't think OS X is worth your time, then just ignore it.
On the otherhand, if you have a bit of an open mind, you owe it to yourself to check it out. (Make sure you're checking out 10.1 and not 10.0.x)
It really is cool to have a mainstream commercial app like MS Word and say GIMP running rootless right next to it.
It really is cool to program with the Cocoa dev tools. (Yes, it requires you learn Obj C, but if you're a true geek, you love trying another language)
It really is cool to have a BSD-based system that even your grandmother could install and use.
It really is cool that the BSD-subsystem is available for anyone to hack on (Darwin).
It really is cool that there's a commercial company (Apple) guiding the OS and putting in all the most sophisticated plumbing (Aqua, IOKit, etc) that probably would never have gotten done or would have gotten done poorly otherwise.
It really is cool that all the major commercial app manufacturers have already pledged their support (many have already delivered) and that many apps which have never been on the Mac before are now coming over.
It really is cool that there's going to be a decent selection of games for this platform. Not Windows numbers by any stretch, but all the major titles and certainly more than Linux.
In short, if you take the time to look, it really is a very cool OS. Now, maybe you don't want to spend the extra money to buy a Mac. No problem. But that doesn't make it any less of a product.
Wade
>one button is better
How about the people who INVENTED it? Jef Raskin, originator of the Macintosh product, was often a visiting academic and consultant at PARC and joined Apple. He had done useability studies which demonstrated that NORMAL people (the target market for the "for the rest of us" Macintosh) found a ONE button mouse easier to use than the original Xerox mice (which had THREE buttons. Remember, not EVERYONE in the world has a PhD in CS. Hell, even people at PARC (plenty of PhDs there.. and plenty of human interface experts as well) and Raskin HIMSELF had mouse button errors, as he describes here.
Myself, I don't have Raskin's expertise, nor have I done any "useability studies". But I worked tech support and helldesk jobs when I was in college. And *I* can sure tell you the anguish of getting a call from someone who didn't understand "left-click" vs. "right-click", and trying to explain the difference.
cya,
john
Imagine all the people...
A: The one mouse button was thought up by a guy named Jeff Raskin who is largely responsible for starting the Macintosh project at Apple. He thought that mouses with more than one mouse button would be confusing for new users. This might seem like an oversight, but when you consider how uncomplex graphical interfaces were back than and the fact that virtually no computers in mass production had mice as an essential navigational tool, it really isn't.
A: Because we can use the regular pull down menus to bring up a menu. If you take a look at *NIX & Windows UI's, you often see that not all menu items for the program are in the pull-down menus. Often, there are some commands that you can only access through right-clicking (i.e. the contextual menu). When this is the case, you're going to need a 2nd mouse button. Contrast this with the mac paradigm, where is it a cardinal sin to have commands that are not listed in the pull-down menus.
A: No and yes. Unlike other platforms, macs have the pull-down menubar at the top of the screen instead of on each window, like you usually find on Windows or GNOME or KDE (yes, KDE does have a mac menubar mode, but not by default). A menubar at the top border of the screen has been proven in usability labs to be far faster to access than menubar stuck on a window, because the user can ram the mouse pointer into the top of the screen to click on the inital menu item and they can't overshoot. This illustrates a principle of Fitt's Law, which states that things on the borders are faster to access than things that aren't because they are infinitely large . To learn more about Fitt's law, go here . This being said, contextual menu (i.e. right-clicking) is faster IF you can do it anywhere to bring up the same menu anywhere on the screen, because the mouse pointer can be anywhere and the menu will appear right under it. Unfortunately, bringing up a contextual menu in windows/GNOME/KDE almost always requires that you first land the mouse on a tiny visual target. If you have to click on a tiny 15x10 pixel icon in an e-mail program to bring up a contextual menu for it, any speed advantage of right clicking is negated.
A: The reason that mac users use those keyboard strokes is because Apple was smart enough to have the keyboard complement the mouse instead of replacing it. Just like right-cliking is supposed to do on windows. Notice that the command key most often used on macs for the keyboard combinations is located in a spot that is in the center of the keyboard, so a user doesn't have to stretch their fingers 3 miles to hit an out of the way key. Also notice that keyboard strokes using the command key make use of the two most dextrous fingers of the human hand: the index finger and the thumb. The result is that keyboard shortcuts on a mac are easy to do, and they can be done easily with one hand. Why don't Windows users use keyboard shortcuts as often as mac users? Because microsoft was stupid and tried to have the keyboard replace the mouse instead of complmenting it. They added those underline thingies on all the menus (technically, they're called mnemonics), which are far less efficient because you have to hit two sets of keys "Alt+firstletter Alt+secondletter" to use them. This added so much visual clutter and so jammed the users mental keyboard-menu associations that most Windows users also filtered out the keyboard shortcuts (i.e. Ctrl+letter). There is even less incentive to use keyboard shortcuts on windows because the ctrl key that makes use of them is far at one end of the keyboard, which makes keyboard combinations with keys in the center of the keyboard very hard to do with one hand and impossible to easily with the two most dextrous fingers of the human hand (the thumb and index finger). One final advantage of mac keyboard shorcuts is that the command key is represented in the menu system by a symbol that take up one character's worth of menu real-estate as opposed to "Alt" or "Ctrl", which take up 3-4 characters of menu real-estate.
A: Yes. I don't think you'll find many mac users who are against having more than one mouse button, but they are against some dumb windows/unix geek who knows nothing about macs and who refuses to learn anything about the way they are designed arrogantly assuming that the machine is unusable in some sort of way.
Historically (pre- System 7.1) MacOS was free (as in beer.) You yould go to any Apple reseller with a stack of floppies and copy the installation disks, while the salespeople showed off their latest gewgaws. So this really isn't a new thing for Apple.
I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!
Windows has three main keyboard modifier keys (Shift, Alt, Ctrl) and two mouse buttons. Macs have four main modifier keys (Shift, Option, Command, and Control) and one mouse button. It works out to the same thing, because the single, straightforward "click" on the Mac is easy to execute in concert with a keyboard modifier key. Control+click, Option+click, Shift+click, Command+click are all easy to use and explain, regardless of left/right handedness, etc.
Mac OS X doesn't require you to use context menus. The Dock's menus can optionally be accessed with a right-click, but that is sensible shortcut for people who use a multiple-button mouse. You Control+click to see the menu, or Command+click to see the actual item that the Dock item refers to. You can also click-and-hold to get a Dock menu, and for most people this is just fine.
If you were running X-Windows on a Dell notebook, you'd have a much more serious problem, because X-Windows expects you to have three buttons. Mac OS X doesn't expect you to have more than one.
Actually, the GUI (as of 10.04, and I'm told as of 10.1 as well) gets fairly low priority. Plus you can always kill the GUI if you want to and just run Darwin (aka BSD). Depends on what you're trying to get out of the system.
--Nik
Much, much faster. The live window sizing follows the mouse in resizing a window with 130 icons.
:)
Oh, and better Quake framerates
> There's also no Forward Delete key, which frankly
> just sucks in this day and age.
What has this day and age got to do with it? I'm a writer and I managed to get out of the forward delete habit without even noticing when I got my first Mac. I found it to be easier to just use one kind of delete key instead of two. This is the kind of stuff that all adds up and enables you to see past the computer and get to your work. When I want to delete something, I just do it without thinking now, there's no need to decide which delete method/key to use (and you have to, at some level, decide which one to use every time).
If you really are hung up on forward delete, you can hold down Shift and press Delete to get a forward delete.
A DVD iBook with a 12" screen costs about $1500. An Intel-based laptop gives you an equivalent or faster processor, DVD and a 14" or 15" screen for a little less than that.
And it comes with firewire, ethernet and wireless antenneas? Is the processor actually faster, or just a higher clock rating?
Anyway, the point is moot. Apple has higher gross margins because it has an entire platform and various software products (many of which are free) to develop and market. Many grey box makers just slap a bunch of components in a box and compete to provide the lowest margins. That makes PCs more accessible financially, but it does not solve the problem of making them more accessible in terms of human interaction. It is a not an equation for evolving the concept of a personal computer. That takes product development. Forgetting that has undoubtably contributed to the huge downturn in the PC market.
The other problem is that you don't get much of a choice: if you don't like Apple's choice of peripherals (like their awful touch pad), you are out of luck.
How is the touch pad "awful?" And in terms of peripherals, the vast majority of wintel USB/FireWire devices work out of the box, or you can find drivers for them.
And, with its G3 processor, it's questionable whether the iBook is even fast enough to run reasonably complex OS X applications.
Is this based on personal experience with Mac OS X 10.1 on an iBook?
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
... X is unix underneath- about the only thing left from the NeXT computer-
Ahem. There is a lot of NEXTSTEP hidden under the hood of MacOS X. Cocoa is the NS API. The only thing missing is Display Postscript, which was replaced by Display PDF. PDF is a bit nicer than Postscript (IMHO) I am missing the NEXTSTEP Windowmanager, which was written in Postscript.. (/usr/lib/NextStep/windowPackage.ps anyone?)
-- If windows is the solution, can we please have the problem back?
Sorry. Monopolies are dangerous. I don't really care how good the software is, I don't want it.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
> stop the arrogance, and fix the platform.
Your MS Intellimouse works just fine on a Mac. You are the one who is being arrogant, assuming that you know how to make an iMac for Grandma better than Apple does. Survey after survey finds that the majority of Mac user are happy with the one button mouse. Survey after survey finds that most Windows users don't even use the second mouse button; a majority don't even know what it's for.
As for "fix the platform", you can navigate Mac OS X entirely using a stylus, even if the stylus has no buttons at all (you "tap" for a click). That's a feature, especially with so many artists using the platform. You can also navigate entirely with the keyboard, if you want to forgo a mouse altogether. You don't need to even double-click, because there is always a menu command (File > Open) and a keyboard shortcut (Command+O) that does the same thing. Further, voice commands are built in as well. This is not a broken platform or a broken UI, in fact, I think it is just the opposite.
My mouse comes with 16-buttons and four independent scroll-wheels, this allows me not only to scroll vertically, but horizontally, diagonally, and to zoom in and out. Other integrated features include a complete 128-key keyboard and surround-sound. Instead of optical technology, my mouse uses Extra-Sensory-Perception (R) to give better tracking. But it's most useful feature is the great satellite transceiver which allows me TRUE wireless operation from a distance of thousands of miles - which is great for when i'm away on business I can tell ya. It has a compartment for a miniature hashish plantation, glows neon, and hovers.
This sig has been deprecated.
I know at least one person who has specifically not gotten a mac laptop because of it's lack of mouse buttons.
That's the kind of people sho should not be using a computer anyhow. What kind of idiot would base his car buying decision on the number of buttons on the steering wheel?
This is totally besides the point anyhow. Mac OS X supports multi-button mouse, without having to install any drivers. This is the case for my McAlley OptiMouse. Even the scrolling wheel works fine.
Lemme ask one thing to those trigger-happy, button addicts out there... where's your other hand? Right atop 105 more buttons.
I really wish they'd incorporate multiple virtual desktops like in X
I believe what you want is Space.dock.
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
I don't know how many graphic designers on the mac there are out there, but someone HAS to mention that MAYA (you know the extremely badass 3d system used in final fantasy, toy story, shrek, et al) was recently released for the mac for the first time just a couple days ago. This is a MAJOR advantage for the mac.. A real reason for me to switch from NT based systems. At least now I'll have a decent photoshop to work with maya on. (on my sgi, I have PS 3. blech.)
rJames.org - illustration
Sony VAIO FX220K PCGFX220K | $1,569.00 | VAIO FX220K P3-750Mhz 128MB/15GB/DVD/15" TFT/10-100BT/56K/W2K PCGFX220K (www.onlinemicro.com); it also has USB and FireWire.
Is the processor actually faster, or just a higher clock rating?
A 750MHz Pentium is probably at least as fast as a 500MHz G3.
How is the touch pad "awful?"
If you do actual experiments comparing its effectiveness with other pointing devices, it's slow and not very accurate: it takes people longer to get work done. The reason is simple to understand: a good pointing device needs fast long range motions and slow fine motions. A mouse, a pointing stick, and (to a lesser degree) a trackball give you that. A touchpad doesn't really.
"it's questionable whether the iBook is even fast enough to run reasonably complex OS X applications." Is this based on personal experience with Mac OS X 10.1 on an iBook?
It's my impression based on experimenting with a bunch of different machines at a computer store, as well as reading reviews of OS X in the Mac press. I am (still) thinking about replacing my Windows laptop with an OS X laptop. But I have no illusions about the fact that I'll be paying a premium and that I probably need to get one of the more expensive Apple laptops to do so.
'When Microsoft does it, it's: Microsoft is a monopoly power!'
Not quite the same, actually. Yes, both demonstrate a monopoly hold on their respective markets, PCs and Macs, but Microsoft, in asserting their monopoly, use it to force out competitors and enter new markets.
So bundling a browser, or heck, integrating a browser into the OS, is fine, it's dandy. Heck, I use it to download Netscape. The problem isn't the bundling, it's using their aforementioned monopoly to force out competition; like Netscape. Not only did they bundle, which I think is fine, or integrate, which is still fine, they coerced OEMs with the threat of higher licensing fees if they shipped with Netscape as the default, or if they linked to Netscape on the desktop.
In similar veins, it's okay for XP to integrate with WMP, or offer CD burning, or whatever; it's not okay for them to use their monopoly on the desktop to coerce OEMs not to install, say, Real, or Quicktime, or Flash, as that might interfere with Microsoft's move into the media content and distribution arena.
GPL Deconstructed
I actually don't particularly care for either MacOS or Windows. The reason for me for getting a commercial system like that is that, between them, the Apple and Microsoft platforms have pretty much monopolized the digital media markets and banking software. It doesn't matter how good alternative software is, it just can't get into that market. So, to watch DVDs, web broadcasts, and do on-line banking, I want a small, unobtrusive, cheap machine. The question is really whether I want to pay $100 to Gates's empire, or whether I want to pay a premium of a few hundred dollars for a MacOS machine that I can at least telnet into.
Toshiba S203 $1079 (can get cheaper if you look around)
Sony Vaio FX150 ($1599) (can get $100 cheaper at Fry's)
But anyways, if Windows floats your boat, then by all means, save a few hundred bucks and stick with Windows.
I don't like either Windows or MacOS. Unfortunately, the Microsoft and Apple platforms pretty much have a monopoly on digital media and banking software, so whether one likes it or not, one has to own one or the other, or just not participate in the digital world. Mind you, this is not because software on those platforms is any better (Quicken actually sucks), it's because of the DMCA and numerous intricate business relationships.
I believe Mac OS X is the brand name, and 10.1 is the revision. The official name is:
Mac OS X 10.1
My guess is the X is to clearly distinguish this Mach/BSD platform from the earlier versions of Mac OS X. If it all seems strange, remember the whole Solaris/SunOS thing.
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
X plays nice with two-button mice by default.
Also, since peecees require a "feature" (second mouse button) that over 75% of their userbase doesn't understand how to use makes it a "design flaw" and not a "feature".
Who did what now?
10.1 runs ov er twice as fast as 10.0
There's 2 ways to get this upgrade.
Option 1, the so called 'instant upgrade'. Starting on September 29th, Apple resellers(including the Apple store and other retail outlets. probably CompUSA, MicroCenter, etc) will get CDs that will upgrade from Mac OS X 10.0.4 -> 10.0
Cost: Gas to get to the store
Option 2: The Apple Mac Up To Date program. You print out a PDF form and mail it to Apple. They mail you back the OS X 10,1 CD, as well as the Mac OS 9.2.1 CD and Developer Tools CD, I believe.
Cost: $19.99, a 6-12 week wait(according to the PDF form)
I think I'll swing by a CompUSA saturday, which is when they hand out the CDs(yes, saturday is the release date. Saturday is always the day retail Apple OS's go on sale it seems...)
-Henry
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
Er, that's not especially relevant, however.
1) Because mice themselves are not an example of an intuitive interface. No one really ever seems to know what it is, or how to use it, until they've seen it in action. (whereupon it also is revealed as a really easy to use interface)
2) Because contextual menus -- if implemented in a worthwhile way, with proper commands et al -- are the single best menus from a Fitt's Law viewpoint. The time to travel to the location where the mouse already is is 0, and that makes for a pretty infinitely large single pixel. (nb of course that the contextual menu at the cursor's current location may not be appropriate, but it's still a good idea)
3) Because Jef Raskin simply decided to go with a single button by fiat. IIRC he did no user testing. He had seen how multiple mice were used on one of the only other systems to support them widely, the Alto, and hadn't liked it. He was supported in this by only a few people, but they were the only ones who cared either way. I seem to recall reading in his book, or in something online that if he had done testing over a longer period of time, the desirability of modified clicks might have come up. (on the plus side, click-drag-release behaviors were a result of this)
4) Personally, I'd join the ranks of UI experts, not that I consider myself to be one, who advocate adding a second button. Personally, I'd probably have two additional buttons, for symmetry, so that it was useful for lefties. I'd have the software support left handed button assignments and cursors. The main button would be as large as possible, for ergonomic reasons, and the secondary buttons pretty small. For purposes of distinction, they'd be a different color and texture, and have a glyph -- perhaps an arrow cursor w/ menu, on them. If it had an optical sensor, it would be located as far forwards as possible, for maximum control. Even if a plastic periscope was needed. Perhaps I'd find a way to work in my thumb side-mounted jog wheel idea too.
Anyway, I like the Mac, but it's important to sort the legend from the reality.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
> 98->98SE was $5 shipping/handling/media
Maybe you are in the UK, where it became a free update after the government stepped in. Windows 98 to 98SE Upgrade was US$69. Then Windows Me (US$89) was so bad that Windows Magazine recommended to their readers that they don't use it at all.
If you are a 10.0 owner, all you have to do is walk into an Apple Store or other Mac dealer this weekend, and you can get a three disc 10.1 Upgrade set from them for free (maybe you have to give in the upgrade token from the 10.0 box or do some paperwork or whatever). Otherwise, you pay Apple $19.99 and they ship a three disc set and manual to your door by courier. You can use that three disc set to upgrade any Mac that's legally running 10.0.
Keep in mind, also, that both Mac OS 9.x and 10.x take care of minor updates themselves. People who are bitching about the $20 shipping/handling/media fee for a 10.1 three disc set have received numerous automatic updates (10.0.1, 10.0.2, 10.0.3, 10.0.4, a few Unixy security patches, more printer drivers, Classic stuff, an Apache fix or two) over the past six months. Every week/day/whenever the user wants, a little box pops up with new stuff and asks if it can download and install. Mac users are not getting screwed on OS updates, believe me.
Although there were things "missing" in 10.0, they are showing up late in 10.1, but they are also showing up much-improved in many cases. Mac OS 9's CD burning from the Finder has shown up late in 10.1, but now it also does DVD-R's, and it works seamlessly in the background. There are also a bunch of improvements that just come from user feedback. A really nice piece of work. I'm running it on a 2000 PowerBook G3/400 with 512MB of RAM, and it is really a pleasure to use.
"Um, you do realize that extensive user testing has shown that multiple buttons are in fact inferior from a usability standpoint?"
And medical testing has determined that peach fuzz causes cancer. Screw "testing"--what do people use and love, day in and day out? Multiple button mice. Even the people who are rabidly pro-Apple go out and buy multiple button mice to replace the "mistake" (yes, even these people use that word) that Apple has made.
324006
The nicest thing about running MS apps on a Mac is that they are just applications like any other ... they don't run extra programs in the background or change the OS or crash Netscape. You drag an app from CD to hard disk to "install" it, and if you don't want to keep it, you Trash it and that's that. I always Trash Entourage because jazzy email is less important to me than suffering from MS email viruses (the most common Mac virus is an Outlook virus and the second most common is a Word virus). No installers or uninstallers, no files littered around the hard drive. Word is one icon, Excel is one icon, etc.
... perhaps it is much easier for new users, I don't know (templates and whatnot).
As for what's running at any one time, Mac OS X includes an app called ProcessViewer that will show you exactly what your system is doing. Word X seems to use only use process (in other words, no trickery and running when it shouldn't be or whatever). I don't know if that answers the question about stubs.
Word seems to work just fine. I don't know about the Aqua toolbars, though. Panels are just bearable in Aqua, but toolbars look fancy enough to decorate a stagecoach. Luckily, you can turn any toolbar into a panel, and the most common features are already on panels.
Word X also has new app and document icons, much better than the last version. (The app icon also has car keys hanging off it for the "test drive".)
This is a version of Word I could actually like, rather than just being forced to use it by a publisher. In some ways, though, it's a bit depressing to see how little change there is between Word 5 and Word 10. Geegaws come and go, but 90% of your actions in Word are about the same in 10 as in 5. Maybe that's just from the perspective of someone who knows how to work with text
> if I'm in Classic all day, why upgrade.
... Final Cut Pro is an amazing story.
Because with 10.1 its possible to run a Web browser in an entirely different memory space than you're running Photoshop. Even Classic apps benefit from OS X's memory management, too, so "Classic" itself thinks it has 1GB of RAM no matter how much you really have. You can set your Classic apps to take advantage of this.
Right now I'm running Word X, BBEdit for Mac OS X, IE X, QuickTime Player X, a couple of betas I'm under NDA for, and no classic apps. If I start up Photoshop in Classic, then Photoshop is running in its own space (albeit along with Mac OS 9). If IE goes down, Photoshop doesn't, and vice versa. This machine itself also has only crashed once in the last six months, too, and that was with 10.0.1 or so and the repeatable bug has been fixed.
For most people, just getting their always-running browser and email client native can make a big difference.
Final Cut Pro is a show-stopper for you, though, because it doesn't run under Mac OS X at all. Apple announced that Final Cut Pro X will ship in the fall, though. It is almost ready. What a system that will be
1. It's the year 2001 now. UIs have moved on. The mouse should as well.
2. That's not the case in pretty much every app I've every used.
3. You don't have to do that. You just right click anywhere on the document window. ANYWHERE. That's not a tiny X by Y window; that's HUGE.
4. You obviously have never used a Windows system. Shortcut keys work the same way as the command key shortcuts. Mnemonics are mainly for ACCESSIBILITY/power user usage - they make the system easier to use by people with disabilities (eg. those who have difficulty using a mouse), and people who remember the keystroke combos. Usually a sequence will include both a mnemonic AND a control-key sequence. So there's actually more flexibility here than Apple provides.
Not only that, but your "Alt / Ctrl take up too much space on the menu" comment is insane. There's NO real-estate to take up - the menu is a separate window on both the Mac and Windows, and expands to fits its contents... ON BOTH SYSTEMS!
And no, most users remember the keyboard shortcuts and NOT the mnemonics. The mnemonics don't 'jam peoples minds' at all. Where have you been reading this claptrap?
As for your point 5:
5. [mac users are] against some dumb windows/unix geek who knows nothing about macs and who refuses to learn anything about the way they are designed arrogantly assuming that the machine is unusable in some sort of way.
Well, that's the pot calling the kettle black, because that's what you just did throughout your entire post, but against Windows.
Get a fricking clue.
Coming soon - pyrogyra
> Hello, have you ever used this little OS X program
... very fast. If you want to download a link to disk, you Option+click on the link and it is downloaded to disk. If you want to save an image to disk, you drag it from the browser window and drop it into a folder. If you want to save a URL for later, just drag it from the titlebar of the browser window and drop it into a folder in the Finder. All of these things are very natural to me, and the direct manipulation is more enjoyable than picking from similar items in a pop-up text menu. No dialog boxes, no waiting. If I do want the context menu, it is also just a click-and-hold away, or a Control+click. So, I already have two ways to access this menu, and it is not the best way to access the features on the menu anyway, and you are saying I need another mouse button so that I have a third way to access this menu that I rarely use.
... I'd rather press those. On desktop keyboards, Control is right at the bottom left corner and it is easy to Control+click. On notebooks, Fn is on the left, but it's still easy to hit Control.
... it's transparent. Also, I find Apple's "no-button" mouse to be very easy to grasp and use without looking or adjusting ... you grab the mouse and you can't go wrong ... a little time and trouble saved each time you grab the mouse goes a long way.
> called the "Dock" without hitting the contextual
> menus? The Dock is practically useless without
> them.
You can click-and-hold on a Dock item to see its menu, or you can Control+click. My left hand is on the keyboard anyway, where I am very, very used to hitting Shift, Option, Command, and Control to modify keystrokes or mouseclicks. Command+click on a Dock item and the original item is shown in the Finder. Command+click on a System Menu allows you to drag it around or out of the menubar entirely. These things are more intuitive and fun than pop-up text menus.
> Further, are you telling me you don't use
> contextual menus on hyperlinks in your web
> browser? Don't browse the web much, do you?
No, I don't use those menus very often. If you want to open hyperlink in a new browser window in IE, Netscape, or OmniWeb on Mac OS X, you hold down Command while you click the link
On the Mac, the pecking order for me is pull-down menus, keyboard shortcuts and modifiers, drag and drop, floating panels, and then context menus. I don't think I ever had to go to a context menu to get something that wasn't available any other way. If you are used to a pecking order of context menus, pull-down menus, keyboard shortcuts, floating panels, drag and drop, then maybe a right mouse button is a good thing for you. I don't think this is the case with the majority of Mac users, and neither does Apple, from what I've heard. If you don't like the Apple mouse, find one that fits your hand and has the right amount of buttons and away you go.
> Have you ever tried to use MS Office without
> contextual menus?
I wrote two 1000 page books in MS Word for Macintosh in 2000, and I used a one-button mouse. Everything I need is in the menus (which are always visible, and easy to quickly hit because you can't overshoot the top of the display) or in a floating panel. If it's not there, I can create a new panel or menu item if I want to, as well. I also do graphics and audio work with a one-button mouse, and the only time I miss the second button is with the pop-up toolbox in Cubase, but you can float it as well, and it also appears in a pull-down menu. It's just not worth making my fingers into a V again so that I can push two buttons on the mouse (I used Windows for quite some time, too, so I have logged my two-button mouse miles). The keyboard already has lots of buttons on it, and my left hand is always there
Word and Excel were originally Mac-only, and you can still get around in them just fine with one mouse button. The Mac Business Unit knows that Macs have one mouse button. If you have habits that make it easier to work in Office with a second button, then use a mouse with a second button.
> Face it, contextual menus have become an integral
> part of the Mac UI, particularly under OS X. It only
> makes sense to provide the easiest and most
> natural way to access them - a right mouse button.
That is your opinion. I use a Mac everyday all day for writing, songwriting, audio production, and heavy graphics work. I rarely use context menus, and when I do, I prefer to just hit the Control key with my left hand and click with my right hand (the whole hand on an Apple mouse) rather than click a secondary mouse button with one finger. Your right hand just becomes a big clicker when it's on the mouse
Also, it is a fine-looking, quality mouse that doesn't need a mousepad and tracks really well. It is easy to clean the top of it because there are no cracks for dust or whatever else to get into. You just wipe the top and you are done. All-in-all, I prefer it. It's fast and it's hands-on and I never, ever click the wrong button.
The 2d coward has correctly pointed out the flaw in your arguement. Fitt's Law has nothing to do with the edges of the screen per se. It is about target acquisition.
The _reason_ that targets at the corners and edges of the screen are so notoriously easy to acquire however, is that you cannot overshoot, because the mouse will move no further than the boundary of the screen.
For example, if you set up two monitors on a Mac, and positioned the 2d one logically above the 1st one, the Fitt's law advantage of the menubar is lost, because it has become possible to go above the menubar region.
If a target is already acquired as a target however, there is no travel time or target acquisition time needed at all! You are already there! Tog has an article on his website, asktog.com, called "A Test to Give You Fitt's" or something like that, which can go into this further if you like.
As for your comment regarding unused menu items in a contextual menu... First, what does this have to do with Fitt's Law? Second, a good contextual menu will only show appropriate options, with the rare exception. There really shouldn't be unusable menu items in a contextual menu.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Pleonasm - A term that is usually defined as the use of many more words and/or phrases than it would seem a person might ever need or require to merely express in a written or oral manner whatever simple idea or thought that person might be thinking.
Actually, the GUI gets exactly as much priority as everything else in 10.0.4, the kernel priority manager was not tied into the bsd priority scheduler until later kernel. I am guessing that this general oversight has been fixed, but don't hink it has much to do with the GUI speedup. My bets are on good old fashioned optimization.
> The following are some of the Dock tasks I use
... you are not doing her a favor. I have worked with lots of non-geek users, and I'm telling you: the majority of users who have right mouse buttons are not using their right mouse buttons, and the majority of people who don't have them aren't missing them. If you are going to use a two-button mouse, you are better off having to CHOOSE that mouse for yourself in order to answer a pressing need for a second button (such as a particular software app that you use, or an old habit) rather than having every user start out with two and ignore one, or hit the second one accidentally, or have to use context menus because the developer believes that you have a two-button mouse.
... then compare to your average Microsoft mouse. Kids often can't get a finger onto each button comfortably. Think about it a bit. Apple's mouse is the default mouse for a whole platform, not just for one brand of computers.
... you might discover new techniques that are unavailable on the less GUI-oriented platforms, such as a drag and drop where you didn't expect it, or a click-and-hold.
> contextual menus for constantly:
>- Browsing the contents of a docked drive or
> folder in a heirarchical menu. This is a biggie.
> Without it, you have to open a new Finder
> window and browse from there.
A click-and-hold gets you this, too.
> - Emptying the trash
I do this by going File > Empty Trash in the Finder, or using the Command+Shift+Delete key shortcut. If you click on the Trash, the Finder even comes to the foreground.
> - Quitting programs
Command+Q! Or Command+Tab (cycle through running applications) and then Command+Q.
> - Turning dock hiding on and off.
Apple Menu > Dock > Turn Hiding On/Off or Command+Option+D.
> - Managing (raising & lowering) multiple windows
> belonging to an application from the application
> icon.
Again, a click-and-hold works just as well for most people. And each app has its own Window menu as well.
> Yes, I can always access these menus by control-
> clicking. But the point is, why should I have to use
> such a workaround when a simple, easy, and
> obvious solution exists?
Why do you think of it as a workaround? Because Windows doesn't do it that way? What mouse button do you push for a Command+click on the Dock? Is that just a workaround for the "missing" third button?
I might seem crazy about this stuff, but it is my pet peeve when geeks push geek stuff on non-geeks. It's like taking advantage of them. It's like buying your graphic artist wife an x86 Linux box because you're a Linux kernel hacker and "Macs are toys"
If you had to ship only one car transmission by default, a geek would say "ship standard" because standard is flexible, but if your goal is to get non-drivers driving (so many more non-computer users than computers users, even today, remember) then it is better to ship automatic and let people who "know what they are doing" get a low-cost ($5-$50) standard upgrade (a two or three button mouse).
Another aspect to this that hasn't been mentioned here is that Apple sells a lot of computers for use by kids. Think about creating one mouse that's usable by 4 year-olds and 60 year-olds and everybody in-between. Look at an Apple Pro Mouse and think about how a kid would use it
> Chording is only going to be more difficult for them
> to learn.
"Chording" makes it sound hard, but it is quite common for a Mac user to know that Command+S is Save and Command+P is Print and Command+Q is Quit, etc. Command+click is common; Option+click is common; Shift+click is common; Control+click is common.
I could understand this debate if Apple still used ADB mouses and people were having to give up their Windows and X-Windows -style mouses to get a Mac. If you are happy with your current mouse and you use Windows, you can get a Mac and plug that same mouse right in and it will just work. Consider finding out how people have REALLY gotten along without a second mouse button for so long, though
Yes, I also think "chording" is better.
... that's all it has to do with the mouse is click or drag.
... that is when it starts to feel like "chording". The Windows thing where you can right-drag a file and see a context menu and choose Copy or Move is a nightmare ... try explaining that to someone ... people who have done it before often fumble through it.
... it is better to show the user to select an item and choose File > Open to get them started. Later, the double-click is easy to explain in the context of being a shortcut for "click, Open".
... there's no need to foist the second mouse button on people who don't want it or need it. Just because some people map double-click to a middle button on a three-button mouse doesn't mean that's the best way for every user to do tasks that usually result from a double-click.
On the Mac, Shift+click, Option+click, Command+click, and Control+click are common. It is easy. There are also modified drags, such as Command+Option+drag that creates an alias of a dragged file instead of moving it. You have one hand on the keyboard and it hits a modifier key, and you put your other hand on the mouse and click or drag as usual. Your right hand is used to doing this
It is MUCH harder to do a Shift+right-click or some other combination where you have to choose something with both hands
New users typically just point and click in the menus and select items in the Dock and they can get by just fine that way. There is no need to even learn a double-click on the Mac if you don't want to
This debate always comes down to geeks wanting more buttons and non-geeks living in fear of having more buttons forced on them. Two, three, four, and five-button third-party mouses are ubiquitous
The last button-related decision Apple made was to remove the eject button from all Macs and make F12 the eject button. Before that, they removed the power button from the desktop keyboard and combined its functionality with the power button on the display. They want less buttons, less noise, less to explain to each new user. The display is filled with virtual buttons; the keyboard is a huge bank of buttons. Web pages are filled with buttons; apps have huge button bars or lots of floating panels. We have way too many buttons as it is. A modern computer looks like a 747 cockpit to a newbie.
The last Mac-oriented store in the area went bust a few months back, so this is probably more of an ego trip than a profit center. Steve Jobs lives nearby.
If you have to click on a tiny 15x10 pixel icon in an e-mail program to bring up a contextual menu for it, any speed advantage of right clicking is negated.
You're forgetting something about contextual menus: the "contextual" part.
Say there are 20 of some object on the screen (maybe hyperlinks or textboxes), I want to tell the program which one I want to perform an action on (perhaps "copy link location" or "paste"). It takes less time to right-click on the object than it does to left-click on it and then go to the menu at the top of the window/screen. And with hyperlinks, clicking the object performs a different action than the one I wanted (following the link), so I'm stuck if I only have one mouse button.
The shareholder is always right.
Yeah this I have to agree with you. JUST because IE is installed by default doesn't mean you have to use it. This is why the DOJ pretty much dismissed the case. The thing was how does this bundling hurt users? It doesn't. I, personally don't care what they bundle, so long as if I like something better, I can still use it. I have Windows Media Player installed, but I still am able to use Winamp(all I use for MP3 and OGG). If Microsoft disabled Winamp with Windows Media Player, then I'd be pissed. Granted Microsoft isn't the only one on the platform that grabs file extensions. Apple will grab mp3's, wav files and mpeg files if you install quicktime. Their are others that do this kind of stuff plus the I HAVE TO RUN SOME BS IN THE SYSTEM TRAY programs like Real Audio. I mean does having the Real Audio program in the system tray REALLY speed up launching Real Audio streams? I think not! And why does every graphics card and sound card have to have a tray utility? I guess these tray utilities are for the dolts who HAVE to see something to make sure it's running instead of the program just launching or something just working. I am not saying all tray utilites are bad, it's just some aren't very good or not needed. IM's, Activesync indicators, Weatherbug (or other tray utilities) work GREAT in the tray. But why do you need anything more then the little yellow speaker for controlling audio?
Why shouldn't burning be supported by the OS? Do you have a separate utility to write to floppies or the harddisk? NOPE! It SHOULD be included in the OS and I applaud MS for including this in XP. Also, Linux does even more bundling then MS.
Gorkman
> interface. No one really ever seems to know what it is, or how to use
> it, until they've seen it in action.
The answer: 26 minutes.
The question: How long doe it take from cracking the shipping case on a new mac to set it up and have your secretary's first memo printing. [I believe the figure is now substantiall longer0.
The early mac interface was intuitive; it lost a lot over times (and even more in windows).
>3) Because Jef Raskin simply decided to go with a single button by
> fiat. IIRC he did no user testing.
HUH??? No. bzzzt. etc.
Apple did extensive testing before determining that training time was significantly less for one button. istr that raskin fought for mre and lost.
the MS mouse has two for the simple reason that apple has one. Three is a minimum for my tastes
hawk, still amused that the comment was moderated insightful rather than funny . . .
In the 32 years since UNIX began it's existence, the "consumer" we speak of has changed. In 1969 when UNIX began, my mother would never have had a computer. My father-in-law wouldn't attempt to use a computer to alter his digital photography work.
In the 70's, IBM had a huge mainframe with terminals they sold to the Washinton Post to replace typesetting. The typesetters union revolted, struck, and made a general mess of the place with ink. The system failed, not due to this, but due to the fact that, by the time it was completed, millions invested, microcomputers were beginning to appear, not running UNIX, that had the power to set type. A few years later, and desktop publishing became possible. Aldus marketed Pagemaker, got bought by Adobe, and hit one out of the park.
As much as I like UNIX, and I do, it was never meant for tomorrow's consumer, who no longer has to tolerate a steep learning curve.
I don't have to fool with punch cards, or physically adding platters to the hard drive- I don't have to wait for my printout at the chain driven lineprinter. The consumer is an ever moving target, and the Next Big product always makes it easier for that consumer.
For $1000, you get something that has roughly the same features as the iBook with a 13" screen. For $1500, you get something that has roughly the same features as the iBook with a 15" screen (!).
Why do you say that?
That's what the SPECmark results suggest (including those in the PowerPC FAQ), and it agrees with my experience with PowerPC (which I was using for a few years).
So plug in a mouse. :)
On a desktop, that's fine. For a laptop, it's not a realistic choice.
It's on University Avenue across from Borders, if anybody cares.