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."
Well, you are a sample size of one.
How many Mac users do you know?
Given that perhaps they form 4% of the US market but it is claimed they form 25% of Alias customers, that actually means there are more Mac Alias users percentage wise than there are PC Alias users.
Isn't that funny? If it's true, then it means Alias can grow it's market by helping Apple grow Apple's market. Which is very convenient, I think.
GPL Deconstructed
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.
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."
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)
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
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?