Slashdot Mirror
Maya for Mac OS X
drc writes "I http://www.macnn.com/feature.php?id=344noticed on MacNN that 'Maya 4.5 for Mac OS X was announced this morning when Steve Jobs revealed that the Maya update would offer feature parity in OS X when compared to other platforms. Jobs also mentioned that Alias|Wavefront has seen the Mac OS X version of Maya grow to 25% of their total market. I'm suprised that the Mac OS X version has such a market share in such a short period of time."
I don't know anybody who uses maya on mac.
I do think it will be a viable alternative some day, from what I understand, it is a bit slower still than it is on PCs.
Most Maya users I know are on SGIs or PCs (Linux or Windows).
-Tim
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
You're not serious, are you?
Mac 3-button mouse support explained:
1. Go to store.
2. Buy 3-button USB scrolling mouse.(Intellimouse explorer, etc.)
3. Plug mouse in.
Just because Apple ships a one-button mouse with Macintosh computers (ostensibly for newbie users, the core consistuent of their user base) doesn't mean mice with n buttons aren't supported. Dell ships machines with two-button mice. Does that mean that 3-button scrolling mice aren't supported on Dell machines?
I'm hoping you're not just trolling. Anyone who reads any story about Apple on slashdot inevitably runs across the whole multi-button mouse thing - and every single time, it gets explained that yes, OS X does support multi-button mice quite nicely right outta the box. I think it's been explained here about 100 times in the past month. Sheesh.
I've been dealing just fine with one mouse button, myself. With the combinations of 'shift', 'ctrl', 'alt', 'command', and pairs of these, I find I have access to 9 virtual mouse buttons.
And if I need more... I buy a three button mouse.
Your asking why Macs don't ship with more? The average consumer probably still doesn't need a second mouse button yet. If you're paying for Maya, a $30 USB mouse is small change.
GPL Deconstructed
First off, I'm not a Mac zealot. I've been very critical of Apple in the past, especially when I worked there. I never claimed anything about one-button mice being "better" because of some percieved lack of flexibility. It seems as though you'e the one with a problem.
/. I'm not trying to change your mind, but to explain WHY Apple continues to ship a one-button mouse. It's obvious you don't agree, but it's also obvious to me that Apple takes the least objectionable road to providing effective interaction with the interface for the majority of users.
Paying $15.00 for another button on the mouse? What's wrong with it? Nothing. I think Apple should offer a 2-button Apple-branded mouse as an option at the Apple store. I think it's a bit dunderheaded to offer only a one-button mouse.
However, most tasks in the classic Mac OS can easily be accomplished with one mouse button; the compliment of contextual menus is a recent (1998) addition, and a welcome one - but the goal at Apple has always been to deign the simplest interface to the task at hand, and one button is the simplest interface to most action tasks.
This changes in software like Maya, where contextual menus can be and are heavily used. The second and third buttons allow quick and easy access to commands too numerous to be assigned easy key combinations of one-click buttons. Apple shows their extensive interface knowledge here too; they don't handicap the user by requiring a one-button mouse, but instead allow users with more experience and knowledge to easily add pointing/action devices that take advantages of additional software capabilities.
I think a lot of people fall into the trap of thinking that Apple is heavy-handed in all respects - in some ways they are, such as their refusal to move to more, uh, accessible and commoditized processors. The one-button mouse isn't an example of this though - for the past 18 years, they'e used a one-button mouse. Most Macintosh customers are repeat customers. Switching to a two-button mouse requires a complete re-intuiting of the interface to these new users (what's the second button for?).
It's easier for Apple and Macintosh users to allow the user's knowledge to supercede the interface and included hardware than to supercedee the user's knowlegde with additional hardware that isn't _needed_. That's why they still ship a one-button mouse.
In fact, Apple has evaluated adding buttons to the standard Apple mouse many times over the past several years. The conclusion has always been that doing so would add too much complexity for the basic user.
Allow the user to make the choice to take advantage of additional capabilities; don't foist extra mouse buttons onto people who don't need them, but make sure that people who do need those extra buttons are able to take advantage of them easily.
I personally like having one button on my PowerBook G4, as I have to keep my left hand on the keyboard anyway; amaking he modifier Control an easy target. On my desktop machine, I use a two-button scroll wheel mouse from Logitech.
Apologies for misreading your question; it's the sort of thing one sees so often on
It's either (1) retrain every Mac user on the hows and why od two mouse buttons, or (2) provide the flexibility to use more mouse buttons at a slight extra cost when the user's needs call for that extra button. The choice seems simple to me.
I'm suprised that the Mac OS X version has such a market share in such a short period of time."
A killer app comes out for a killer OS running on just about the sweetest hardware most people are willing to pay for.
What this really points out is how we've come to expect that mediocity sells and state-of-the-art often goes unnoticed. e.g., pop quiz: Palm or Danger?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
No functionality is lost, simplicity is gained, BUT speed is lost. What was once a right click context sensitive option is now up at the top of the screen buried in a menu.
In the graphics market "apple once dominated" we are all using Wacom tablets. Photoshop (and most other graphics programs) without a pressure sensitive tablet is almost unusable (If you've gotten used to it without a tablet you just don't realise you're missing some basic functionality).
On the occasions we use a mouse the one that comes with the tablet has two buttons & a scroll wheel.
As for "maybe it will reign again" I think it's still dominating that market. Granted the it's not been strong in 3D. But in just about every other creative niche it either dominates (photography, art, design, advertising, pre-press) or has a very respectable presence (film/video, music and increasingly 3D)
TPS, you old troll...
In the PC world, since they were able to choose which mouse came with their computer. I have thrown away a handful of 1-button Mac mice, but when I get a PC I just get the mouse I want in the first place.
To each their own. I've replaced every mouse that
has come with my PCs with a Logitech Trackman
Marble FX (the old PS2 version) I hate stock PC
mice. and use them almost exclusively as doorstops.
I don't understand why people won't accept multiple buttons as an optional feature. It's flexibility: you don't have to use it, but someone might want to.
Some people do, those people simply buy new mice.
Why aren't you people complaining when Apple introduces a 17" iMac? After all, who needs a 17" iMac? Just get a 15" iMac and stick a 17" monitor in front of it!
Because iMacs can't have their monitors switched
out, perhaps? But you knew that, you just threw
that in in the hopes someone would bite. You win.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
In addition to being smarter, I've found that in my experience, my mac using friends are far more likely to actually pay for software than my windows using friends. This may account for the sudden numbers A\W is seeing, and why Adobe and Macromedia continue to see the mac market as being more important that its market share would indicate, despite the fact that just about everybody you know probably has a copy of Photoshop on their desktop somehow. Not a troll, just a thought. :)
___
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
I do not see 3D going the same route as video editing & 2D editing, simply because of the current road that most 3D studios are following. Increasingly linux is being used instead of NT or SGIs in these studios. Why? Because they're cheap. No licensing for the OS, great remote administration support, amongst other things. Macs do not succeed at the efficientcy vs money contest anywhere as well as a linux box would. Another issue is that Macintosh has yet to get a highend 3D development card where as the selection is quite large for PC. I am not talking about GF4's here, but about Wildcats, Quadros, Glorias, etc. Only recently did Apple finally get a real GF4 and not the hobbled GF4 MX, and a GF4 is far from a highend 3D development card. I will be surprised if Apple takes over the 3D development market unless they start trying a new strategy.
"What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing." -Bokonon
Good comment. I just sent Apple a comment off their website requesting a few improvements and my logic for my requests. It was tasteful, not harsh or angry, and *hopefully* will be implemented (I also mentioned that my wife is dead set on not upgrading until she sees a G5 processor - hopefully Apple will take notice and put the heat on Motorola, or switch to IBM).
Everyone who knows something Apple is falling down on, please contact them and let your voice be heard. You're the only one who can stop them from becoming another Microsoft, and you're the only one who can explain your point of view.
Let's flood Apple with "things to do" lists so they can gauge what their customers REALLY want.
Let's make Apple better.
Zoober
While this is a bit of a troll, it sure sums up my fealings for that guy.
Years ago, I tried to set him straight- explainign physics, how microprocessors are made, and urging him to use some common sense and past history (also known as judgement) before posting his rantings.
Finally, it was the constant "sources are certain that Apple will, introduce iMacs with 22 inch screens at an upcoming trade show- thought to be Sybold, and while this looks totally for sure, you never know and merely the mention of it here might make Steve Jobs pull one of his famous last minute switches and change the machine to a 21 inch display. Our source has seen the product, but Apple can turn its entire component supply chain on a dime so if it doesn't happen, its becuase steve heard we knew-- not becuase I'm pulling this rumor out of my ass!"
Not that the other rumor sites are much better. Think Secret at least nailed it so far-- but their'; idiots who think Apple's engaging in "censorship" by not giving people like ryan meaders a free ride and other goodies.
The state of mac fanboy sites has never been worse.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
First context menus have only been around for a little while, first appearing in OS8 IIRC. Secondly the design of context menus in Mac apps have usually been in line with MacOS command keys. Since Mac developers have been using one button mice for a million years they know how to design their context menus.
Most of the important Finder commands are on the left side of the keyboard, your left hand is typically on the keyboard while you're using your mouse. Apps that have commands dealing with mouse operations keep their hot keys on the left side of the keyboard so they are easily accessible when holding the shift, option(alt) or Apple keys with your thumb. When context menus were introduced the modifier keys were made to be the CTRL and Option keys which made using context menus in programs like Photoshop fairly quick for old Mac users.
Because the keyboard shortcuts are well in line with modifier keys extra mouse buttons would be quite a shift in many users workflows. People who come from backgrounds using X or Windows like to pick up multi-button mice and are greeted with context menus. Old skool Mac users don't need extra mouse buttons in most cases. They're comfortable using the keyboard/mouse combination because context menus have been designed to well compliment keyboard shortcuts. I think some hardcore Photoshop and Illustrator users would much rather just have a programmable keypad than a full fledged keyboard. I've seen some guys with some crazy deterity on the keyboard. I make it a rule to never play video games against such people.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
With a one button mouse, you have to control-click to get the popup menu. With two buttons, you just click... Not only is the right-click easier on the wrists...
What exactly are you doing with your other hand that makes the control button so inconvenient? Is it related to your concern about wrist problems?
Peak, Deck 3, Spark ... all out now. Cubase SX out soon. Logic and DP on the way...
When I say Photoshop, until recently, I heard "classic". Classic runs like a dog. OS X runs like a dog, classic on top of OS X runs like an old dog.
I run Photoshop 6, and Quark 4 in Classic, and on my meager G4 466 (I gig RAM) they run just fine. Photoshop actually seems to run faster (It does start up faster) so this is just FUD on your part.
Also it's not Apple's fault if some companies are taking too long to get their app running in OS X.
I have been running OS X at home for a year now as my default app, and except for running Cubase, never boot into 9. Even the old version of Peak runs in Classic ... but the new version is much faster in X.
-- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
-- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
Notice I said *need*?
:)
Does the average user, which you said was Windows, need a second mouse button?
Then you can extrapolate: Do they use the second mouse button?
Most folks I know don't, including my Dad
GPL Deconstructed