Tog Takes on Mac OS X 10.3

Two simple changes to improve the dock by ikewillis · 2004-01-14 05:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

Make it lockable
When icons are dragged off the dock, instead of going *poof* they should be moved to the desktop, unless they are dragged into the trash (and of course, the trash can't be removed)

Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by wankledot · 2004-01-14 06:08 · Score: 5, Interesting

The problem with that is the dock icons can represent at least five different things:

Running applications, non-running applications, folders, files, and open windows (minimized.)

So by moving things to the desktop... what are you asking it to do? Move the application? create an alias? move a window to the desktop (can't really do that.) move a document to the desktop? a folder?

Also, you can drag a dock item off to somewhere other than the desktop, such as a document or application window.

A fundamental idea of the dock is that it's not the actual file/program/window. It is just a representation of it, manipulating the dock icon of an object does not actually move, delete, edit, etc. the object. making the dock affect the actual item makes it dangerously powerful.

--
My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by oscast · 2004-01-14 06:12 · Score: 5, Informative

"If you notice in Windows XP, you can't change the size of the taskbar"

When items get added to it... something's got to give. You either need to make the items smaller or show less image data. Apple chose the wiser of the two options before it. The ability to lock the dock would be a step backwards IMHO.

"For the OS X dock this would be a good feature beacuse it is easy to accidentally remove programs from the dock by slightly dragging the mouse when you double click"

You don't double click items in the dock to launch/activate them. Its all single-click. Second, you have to drag an item relatively far outside the dock to remove it. If you slightly move it... (as per your analogy) the item snaps back to its origional position.

"and it is easy to change the size of the dock by accidentally dragging the mouse on the border."

You don't resize the dock by dragging the mouse on its border. You have to command-click the line-seperator and drag... (a combination you wouldn't be using otherwise when at the dock and so it makes the chance of accidentally re-sizing the dock almost impossible.
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by ikewillis · 2004-01-14 06:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

What does this mean? Using something like TinkerTool (as a convenience interface to writing the preferences) you can anchor it to the left/right edge at the bottom of the screen, so it only grows in one direction...which means applications are always in the same spot, if you anchor it to the left. Is this what you mean by 'lockable'?

No. A "locked" state would prvent accidental removal of dock icons. It would not be possible for ignorant friends using your laptop without your permission/cats/etc to accidently remove icons.
This is a poor idea, IMO. The dock is like a favorites list, not a storage location. Items don't get moved 'into' the dock, they just get pointed to from it. What do you want, items dragged out of the dock to create a new alias on the desktop? Ick.

Oh please, can we have a little less conceptual zealotry?
The reason why this would be an improvement is that, in its current incarnation, it's very easy to accidently carry out an irreversable operation; removing an item from the dock. When this happens there is no quick intuitive undo... the user is forced to hunt down whatever was accidently removed and readd it if they so desire... and this provided they actually saw what they removed by accident and therefore know immediately what needs to be replaced.
Moving the icons onto the desktop would make for a simple undo... it would also provide a sensible counterpart operation to dragging something onto the dock in the first place.
Or, if you're really such a conceptual fanatic, how about simply having icons return to the dock unless they're dragged explicitly into the trash?
The dock is, in its current incarnation, rather counterintuitive, and Tog certainly agrees:
"The Dock adds a whole new behavior: Object annihilation. Drag an object off the dock and it disappears in a virtual puff of smoke. This is the single scariest idea introduced to the Macintosh since the original bomb icon. How would you feel if you spent eight hours working on your first Macintosh document, only to have it disappear entirely when you try to move it from the dock to the desktop? Pretty disorienting, no? This is a completely unnecessary concept for the user to have to learn, particularly in such a painful way. Makes for a 'hot demo' though, doesn't it?"
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by Phrogz · 2004-01-14 06:27 · Score: 3, Informative

I'd imagine it the scaling and the clarity of the icons would look very bad because the UI is not vector based like OS X.

To be pedantic, while XP's 'resizing' is worse than OS X's IMO, OS X icons are not vector based. They simply have multiple sizes of graphics and choose the next-largest size and scale it down. It's still bitmaps.

SGI's IRIX is vector based. OS X is not.
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by daeley · 2004-01-14 06:27 · Score: 5, Informative

Enter in Terminal:

defaults write com.apple.dock pinning end defaults write com.apple.dock orientation right

Then restart the Dock. Enjoy!

--
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by venicebeach · 2004-01-14 06:28 · Score: 3, Informative

You don't resize the dock by dragging the mouse on its border. You have to command-click the line-seperator and drag... (a combination you wouldn't be using otherwise when at the dock and so it makes the chance of accidentally re-sizing the dock almost impossible.

Just to be picky, a regular click and drag on the line-seperator is enough to resize the dock. At least that's the way it works for me...
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by Bingo+Foo · 2004-01-14 06:48 · Score: 4, Funny

making the dock affect the actual item makes it dangerously powerful.
Not to mention the fact that if the critics were to succeed and actually strike down the Dock, it would become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

--
taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by wankledot · 2004-01-14 07:10 · Score: 4, Informative

Correct. They are simply very very large TIFFs. The UI in general is based on display PDF, so parts of it could very well be vector based (fonts, of course.) but the icons are not.

--
My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
Re:Two simple changes to improve the dock by prockcore · 2004-01-14 07:20 · Score: 4, Funny

Well, that was sure intuitive!

They should've never been let go by Valdrax · 2004-01-14 05:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

Apple should've never gotten rid of its HCI group, and Tog once again shows why. For all of its advancement in underlying technologies and reliability, Mac OS X has been a huge leap backwards in useability compared to the Classic Mas OS as designed by people who cared more about useability than "lickability."

I really think that Apple forgot why a lot of its users so tenaciously stuck with the platform in the first place despite higher prices and the little irritations of cooperative multitasking. The interface matters as more than just a pretty show. Classic Mac OS pundits have been kicking the Dock for years now, and it's good to hear one of the experts chime in. ...Not that Apple will listen, of course.

--
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").

Slashdotted... by signingis · 2004-01-14 05:56 · Score: 5, Funny

That's what you get for talking bad about OS X. Punkass.

--

I prefer a void in conversation to a vacuous one.

Mirror by delta407 · 2004-01-14 05:56 · Score: 5, Informative

After 1 comment, the site is definitely very slow, but I managed to get a mirror before the server went down in flames.

Dock by _PimpDaddy7_ · 2004-01-14 05:56 · Score: 3, Informative

I agree with him on the Dock issues on almost all of them. Some may be too nit picky.

But for the most part he is right. All documents look the same, no tagging, trash can in the dock, dragging from the dock erases what you drag. It's dangerous.

I don't agree with the dock taking too much space. If you make it the smallest you can still make out what programs are which.

Plus, if the dock bothers you so much, HIDE it :)

Re:Dock by oscast · 2004-01-14 06:00 · Score: 5, Informative

"All documents look the same" Um, no they don't. "But for the most part he is right. All documents look the same, no tagging, trash can in the dock, dragging from the dock erases what you drag. It's dangerous." No it doesn't. Dragging to the dock creates an alias (shortcut for you Windows users). Dragging away from the dock simply d-letes the alias

The Dock Sucking, and how it doesn't suck. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-14 05:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

Now I find this curious. I've been told by quite a few people (some of whom use OSX, some who don't) and many who're opinionated about it state it as -fact-.

"The Dock Sucks trust me I know, the KDE/Windows/BeOS/AmigaOS solution is better."

Now, that's well and good for them. Really good in fact, that they have the choice between one thing and the other. Personally, I find the dock simple, transparent, to me it sits invisibly, I never notice I'm using it, and it performs admirably. For others obviously, it's sucky. Duh. we're not all clones.

But to say, as many do, "This is why it sucks and why X, Y or Z is better and your opinion is wrong" is priceless, when clearly for me that isn't the case. It's like saying "You're such a fuckwit if you think Chocolate is better than caramel, here's why"

(Just so y'all know, when it comes to MY computing experience I do like to go with what works for me, and I WILL be opinionated about what works for me)

Re:The Dock Sucking, and how it doesn't suck. by transient · 2004-01-14 06:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

That's the thing about HCI people. They're part of an entire field devoted to telling you that your opinion is wrong. The trouble is, by their measures, you are wrong -- they just don't realize that their measures are an incomplete picture of the computing experience. There are people in HCI who are trying to change this and I applaud them, but until they succeed, you are absolutely right.
Or, to quote one of John Cusack's characters, "How can it be bullshit to state a preference?"

--

irb(main):001:0>
Re:The Dock Sucking, and how it doesn't suck. by Phrogz · 2004-01-14 06:22 · Score: 5, Funny

That's the thing about HCI people. They're part of an entire field devoted to telling you that your opinion is wrong.

Or, as the joke goes:

"Give an HCI person a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach an HCI person how to fish, and he'll give you a Visio diagram detailing why your way is all wrong." :)
Re:The Dock Sucking, and how it doesn't suck. by questamor · 2004-01-14 06:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

I think the entire Human Interface field is so completely different to the Early 80s, that it could be almost irrelevant in that form. Comparing a trashcan on desktop and a trashcan in the dock is getting a bit pedantic when both work, and to a new computer user they are both A Trashcan.

"Ahhh! That must be how you get rid of something!". That, and a trashcan with a 'full' or 'empty' look is as far as the "intuitive" level of an interface goes, all the rest is learned. As Steve jobs said in his MWSF keynote - "We had to teach people how to use a mouse". That was the time when initial UI intuitiveness was truly an absolute necessity, and what followed on from there was familiarity and consistency.

With children being taught how to use windowing systems, keyboards and mice from kindergarten (Age 3 or lower, if they're at home) the initial "intuitive" aspect of a UI is becoming less and less relevant, and for Joe Everydayuser, the most important part is consistency. After all, he's probably been using a computer of some kind for 10 years or more, probably 15.
Re:The Dock Sucking, and how it doesn't suck. by Gizzmonic · 2004-01-14 06:48 · Score: 3, Insightful

Are you kidding me? You don't think think that there's a body of research that goes into HCI?

Back in the day, when this dude worked for Apple, they had HCI research going on all the time. Nowadays at Apple, HCI has been replaced by "ego-driven design." I.E. Steve Jobs thinks brushed metal is cool, so it's taking over Quicktime, then iTunes, now the whole OS.

The point of HCI with regards to an OS is to make very complex tasks as simple and consistent as possible. Stating it's "just a matter of preference" is coming at it from the wrong angle. When it's gotten that high-level, it's beyond the HCI people.

For example, if I asked you "what type of door interface do you prefer-a copper knob or a steel one," unless you were neurotic, you probably wouldn't care. When it gets to that point, it's a matter of aesthetics, which is not really the point of HCI.

The HCI people work so you don't have to think about a doorknob, which one you prefer, or why it's there. They decided to put the doorknob there instead of a large sharp hook. If they went with the hook instead, you'd have to put too much thought into opening the door (watch those fingers) and then it would be an HCI issue.

And the underlying assumption with HCI is: There IS a better way to do something. There might not be a Right with a capital R but there is definitely a wrong and even more wrong way to do everything. The point is improvement, and "It works just fine," is damning by faint praise if I ever heard it.

Now I doubt this article has a body of research behind it, but it's not like the guy hasn't spent 20 years or whatever in his field. I think he's entitled to shoot from the hip about it, and I agree with most of what he says, even if it is too nitpicky. You're right about web pundits focusing too much on the negative and enjoying to point out UI missteps just a little too much.

--
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
Re:The Dock Sucking, and how it doesn't suck. by belloc · 2004-01-14 06:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

Or, to quote one of John Cusack's characters, "How can it be bullshit to state a preference?"

Because your "preference" may be uninformed, and therefore not really a preference at all. You might have what a connoisseur would call "bad taste" in something because you've never experienced the best. That's what Barry was talking about in the quote (to which Cusack's character responded the above); he had good taste in music. I know that concept sounds terribly undemocratic and elitist to our modern ears, but here's an example that many of us can relate to:

Several years ago, mid-nineties, I read about Linux. I thought, "what could some other operating system do that Windows doesn't do for me now? I'm perfectly happy here in Windows." A few years later, someone with better "taste" in operating systems suggested that I try Linux. He said I'd be convinced if I just tried it. So I did, and my computing world was transformed. I got out of my MS box, and explored, and found that I didn't really "prefer" Windows to the others, because I was uninformed about the others. So, my preference was bullshit. Or rather, it wasn't a preference at all.

Similar thing happened with good wine. I used to "prefer" to drink shit wine because the other stuff was expensive and I couldn't tell the difference. But someone with good taste in wine introduced me to how to tell the difference between good and bad wine, and now I mostly drink good stuff, and I'm damn glad about it.

Of course, granted there are endless arguments among connoisseurs about what the best is. But I'm just answering the question, "how can it be bullshit to state a preference?"

That said, Dick was right about Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels. :)

Belloc

--
I got more rhymes than Jamaica got Mangoes.

One thing Panther gets right... by mr_mischief · 2004-01-14 06:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

is that you don't have to trip through countless menus and windows to get to something a few keystrokes in a terminal window will do faster.

Pretty pictures for those who want it done easily, a terminal for those who want it done now (or more easily by a program). I like graphical interfaces for what they do well. I like command lines for what they do well.

With OS X, as with most other *nix implementations, I can have the best of both worlds.

Re:One thing Panther gets right... by Slightly+Askew · 2004-01-14 06:55 · Score: 4, Informative

With OS X, as with most other *nix implementations, I can have the best of both worlds.

I run Windows XP, and almost everything I do is done via a command. Create a folder called c:\shortcuts. Copy shortcuts to your favorite apps, vbscripts, whatever to this folder and name them whatever you want. Add C:\shortcuts to your PATH env variable. Now all I do is hit Windows+R (Same as start run), type in my new command, and hit enter. What used to take many seconds of menus, right mouse clicks, and options, now takes less than 2 seconds. I want to start Microsoft Word, I type "word". If I want to start iTunes, I type "itunes". If I want to start device manager and connect to a remote machine, I type "mg computername".

Not all Windows users are GUI freaks...some of us are pretty proficient with our workstations without the pretty pictures.

--
Public use of any portable music system is a virtually guaranteed indicator of sociopathic tendencies. -- Zoso

WindowShade Rocks by laird · 2004-01-14 06:04 · Score: 4, Informative

Most of TOG's suggestions weren't my cup of tea ( I like the Dock, but hey, I used to be a NEXTSTEP developer), but WindowShade is a wonderful program.

http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx/

Actually, these guys make a lot of cool, useful little app's, but WindowShade's "minimize in place" is wonderful. When you click on the 'minimize' control for a window, it's minimized down to an icon. But unlike the dock it's minimized right where the window was, so you can arrange the icons yourself. Also, the icon is a live version of the document's contents (so you can see a progress bar's progress, differentiate between two different Photoshop images, etc.) and has the application icon superimposed (so you know what kind of window it is). Apple should at least use these icons in the Dock.

--
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!

Re:Finder by WWWWolf · 2004-01-14 06:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

Never mind about wasted screen space.

Why oh why they have to stick brushed metal look everywhere? It was sort of tolerable in QuickTime Player and iTunes, since those aren't too "serious" applications, but... Finder???? I didn't know my files and directories were supposed to be eXXtrEME steel-molded things!

Wish the next iteration would look like Nautilus with some tweaks - that is, retractable or possibly even detachable sidebar, possibly with the locations, and the ability to use dynamic window resizing (or zooming) depending on how many items the folder has. And no brushed metal kewliness.

Tog's solution to Dock problems worth checking out by lysium · 2004-01-14 06:08 · Score: 3, Informative

This article on his site reviews a few pieces of software that fix the problems associated with the Dock.

--
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.

From an Old Mac User by Becho62282 · 2004-01-14 06:09 · Score: 4, Informative

I have used every single Mac OS since system 7.1 in 1993 and I think that Torg does have several good points.

1. I have to agree that the open and save dialogs are a bit obstrusive, I remember being able to move around the open and save dialog to see what was going on behind it at times. Now when I get an ICQ add request I can't see the request because the dialog box is sticking in the way. Perhaps Apple needs to implent ment a "Rip" button that gives you the option of ripping the dialog box off the window on a case by case basis.

2. I disagree with the trash can issue. I like it in the Dock and find it pretty usefull there. Not to mention the fact that I just rather hit apple+delete to trash things anyway.

3. Ok, so the UI is differant, but honestly I think it is the best one that apple has designed since I have used the mac. They removed a lot of the issues that plagued it in it's infancy. I love the single window option and I have not had an issue with screen density at all. Quite frankly I think the new finder is the most functional they have had since 7.5 (yeah it's flame bait but II loved 7.5). It provides everything that you would want to access quickly right there for you with minimal problems. Yeah things may be bigger, but I like that.

I like OS X's interface by flabbergast · 2004-01-14 06:10 · Score: 5, Insightful

*putting my flame proof jacket on* I like OS X's user interface, and I hated OS 9's user interface. I bought my iBook because OS X is based on FreeBSD (and I need a shell prompt and assorted other goodies), but I enjoy the user interface now that I've had time to adjust.

I think most of the problem is centered around "But the Dock is stupid because OS 9 did this instead." We have a natural tendency to resist change, and Finder and the Dock are huge changes to the Mac interface.

And yes, I did RTFA, and I do agree that there are some missteps (like all the Dock widgets looking the same) but a lot of the complaints here are "OS 9 is better! OS X sux!"

Re:I like OS X's interface by FireBreathingDog · 2004-01-14 07:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

I have some problems with the Dock, BUT...
If you force the Dock metaphor into a "process menu" versus "application menu" dichotomy, then you will be disappointed. The Dock looks at the world differently.
If a user wants to use a given app, he usually doesn't care whether the app is running or not. The user just wants the app. That's the metaphor of the Dock: "I want to use this app, so I click on the icon". Period.
Think of it this way: why should the user have to figure out: "I want to use this already-running app, therefore I look in the process menu" versus "I want to use this not-yet-running app, therefore I have to look in the application menu".
Most users don't think this way! They just want to use Application X, so they click the icon in the dock. That's it.
An equally powerful case can be made that splitting between running and non-running applications is an artificial separation.

--
Shame on Google.

Re:Finder by jared_hanson · 2004-01-14 06:11 · Score: 5, Interesting

I find the new Finder (10.3) to be better and actually take less space.

In Jaguar, I had to customize the toolbar to put buttons for my Documents, Pictures, Music, etc folders. This made the finder require more room vertically and horizontally. (I could save the horizontal space by clicking the button which shows a fly out menu of hidden tool buttons, but I don't like that)

Now, in Panther, it actually takes less space vertically and horizontally. The vertical space comes from the fact that the toolbar buttons are smaller in size. And, I don't have to have 5 different buttons taking up horizontal room for my most used folders. Those go in a convienient sidebar for access.

Granted, the folder sidebar may take up horizontal room if you don't use it much, but Apple is pushing widescreen displays, so it makes more sense to use horizontal area than vertical area. The finder does this well.

--
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.

Re:If the dock had been introduced back in the day by phrasebook · 2004-01-14 06:11 · Score: 3, Funny

Sigh. System 6! I love you!

Clearly best at interface design by Alrescha · 2004-01-14 06:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

When he talks about interface design, it's clear that TOG is in his element. When he starts talking about what applications should do, he seems more like he's just ranting.

I think this comments about the new Finder are right on target. When he complains about needing export from iPhoto, It makes me wonder if he's ever bothered to select a bunch of pictures and just drag them somewhere.

A.

--
...bringing you cynical quips since 1998

Article text by smellystudent · 2004-01-14 06:14 · Score: 3, Informative

Top Nine Reasons the Apple Dock Still Sucks

Apple Sales is in love with the Dock. You can't go into an Apple store without seeing it splayed across the bottom of the screen, in the very configuration least conducive to computing on a Macintosh. Why? Because it's sexy and it sells. It makes that bright, shiny new Apple look simple, approachable, and beautiful. It makes for a great demo.

The problem does not lie with the Dock itself?if it makes a great demo, leave it in?but with Apple's apparent belief that it is a complete solution. The Dock is akin to a brightly-colored set of children's blocks, ideal for your first words?dog, cat, run, Spot, run?but not too effective for displaying the contents of War and Peace.

Contrary to my previously-held position, I no longer believe Apple should get rid of the Dock. It's just too pretty there in the store, and it does help set Mac apart from the more utilitarian appearance of Windows (although Windows grows more attractive with every release). You want that in sales. You want a visibly-apparent manifestation of the personality of the underlying technology. That's why automakers spend milliions making the outside of the car project an image of what's underneath the skin.

A certain class of Apple users?those who check their email once or twice a week and sometimes need to print an attached photo?may need nothing more than the Dock.

The rest of us need more powerful tools, so, Apple, leave the Dock as the smashing demo it is, but also supply some serious, information-dense tools. You have the talent and wherewithal to make such tools as attractive as the Dock if only you will cease seeing this one single object as a complete solution.

Apple has made a few improvements to the Dock in the last three years. Items no longer jump around seemingly at random, although the size of the Dock continues to "wheeze" in and out without user control.. Items alsoi act like buttons, so clicking anywhere within their confines will open them. Apple also quickly gave us the ability to turn off magnification, a major improvement in day-to-day usability.

The other good news is that independent solutions now exist for getting around every limitation of the Dock. Read Make Your Mac a Monster Machine to learn how to turn your Mac into a high-productivity, but still fun workhorse. Meanwhile, here are eight continuing problems with the Dock, plus a new one, a decided lack of color. Most of these are inherent, and the solution is more and varied tools. A few can be directly addressed by design tweaks.

9. The Dock is big and clumsy
The Dock by default sucks up around 70 pixels square minimum, more than four times as much vertical space as either the Windows task bar or the Macintosh menu bar. (Yes, you can set it much smaller, but then you make it progressively more difficult to identify an icon without "scrubbing" the screen with your mouse to reveal its label.) Couple that with Apple's move to 16:9 wide screens (read: short screens), and you have a real problem. For good measure, add in the Dock's habit of floating on top of working windows, and you have little choice but to hide it.

8. Identical icons look identical
This was originally entitled "Identical pictures look identical." I pointed out that the Dock's use of thumnails in small sizes made all normal text documents look pretty much alike. Apple has now dumped thumbnails in return for identical icons. My original advice still holds: "We need information on data types, file sizes (as represented by the thickness of the icon), age, etc." They've now given us data type. We need more?any attribute that can help differentiate one object from another.
The better solution to this and many of these other limitations is to supplant the Dock with additional objects that are designed for representing groups of non-application objects, so that people aren't even attempting to put folders and documents in this already overloaded single object.

--
Predictive text is shiv!

Re:Finder by Golias · 2004-01-14 06:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apple has followed in Microsoft's footsteps

Actually, the finder's side-bar icons makes OS X 10.3 feel more like NeXT to me than it ever has. It may look kind of goofy, but I find it to be extremely useful. (Certainly more useful than any "explore" navigation window in any flavor of MS-Windows!)

YMMV

--

Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

Opinion... by jpellino · 2004-01-14 06:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

OK...
Bruce is historically very right about lots of things - mostly about how damaged Windows had to be to not infringe upon Apple's look-and-feel too much in those heady lawsuit-happy years...

But...
I'm not in agreement with his prolonged high-horse about Aqua/Finder and especially Dock.
If there were prime directive(s?) in those days, it was that modes are bad, and a good GUI is permissive and forgiving. OSX expands those and 99% abides by them.

However...
Yes, Aqua interface details do need to be smaller - Classic screen space seems gigantic compared to OSX, largely due to smaller controls. We hit them just fine before, and it's creeping towards Xp cartooniness;
The dock is still better than the Launcher or the Taskbar in that it does solve the problems of (1) real estate of floating things and (2) kinesthetic problems of aiming inherent in window-bound menus;
Dragging from the dock doesn't erase what you drag in the newbie/panic sense, it deletes the alias (which yes, is enough to invoke a newbie/panic) - your original is fine, MAYBE dragging it should place it on the desktop (or an alias or copy? what is wanted here?

I've been using MacOS since the 128K and have 17 years experinece in pre-OSX and three in OSX - I have to say that Classic now feels like Bambi-on-ice compared to what now can be done easier and with more forgiveness in OSX.

*sigh* ok - I do miss the Chooser.

--
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."

Re:Question by jason.hall · 2004-01-14 06:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

Do you drive the absolute cheapest car you can find? Buy the cheapest house? Get the cheapest video card and monitor? For some of us, Apple is higher quality than Wintel, and we're more than willing to pay more for it.

Re:Finder by Arielholic · 2004-01-14 06:25 · Score: 4, Informative

If the sidebar is too wide for your taste, you can make it smaller by dragging the separator bar, down to the size of the icons. If you hover over them the names will popup immediately. (This handy tip came from http://www.macosxhints.com)

At worst a trade-off, really by thefinite · 2004-01-14 06:32 · Score: 4, Interesting

Mac OS X has been a huge leap backwards in useability

I think this is an overstatement. Most of the functionality of OS 9 (and previous) is still there. The desktop, icons, windows, and applications' interface all behave essentially the same way. You can ding it for the dock and other such changes, but the truth is that many people (myself included) actually prefer those changes.

Now add improvements like centralizing control panels into the System Preferences (you could put many OS 9 control panels *anywhere*), the services menu (which is an awesome idea still highly underutilized), and greater uniformity in applications' menus (how many different places can you find an application's preferences in OS 9?) and you get some significant gains. That is not the end of list of changes for the better.

My point, I guess, is that OS X is progress, contrary to the small group of critics that is getting smaller as OS X continues to improve. In my opinion Panther is ahead of OS 9 in usability and the worst you can really call it is a trade-off.

--
Boom Shanka

Re:If the dock had been introduced back in the day by gamgee5273 · 2004-01-14 06:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

You know, though, Apple has been very responsive to feedback with the introduction of OS X. If the users make enough noise, Apple does pay heed to that.

Think about it: we yelled about those damn docklings in OS X PB - 10.0 and things moved back into the menu bar; the configuration apps are now accessible from the Apple Menu; there are numerous ways to configure the Dock and the Finder now, allowing a user to have the machine he/she wants.

I, personally, use the Dock as a waystation for: apps that I use regularly, or use regularly right now (like Keynote, which I use every six or seven weeks or so); for my staff schedule spreadsheet; and for my desktop printers.

Do I think it needs to evolve? Hell, yes. I want to see multiple desktops or workspaces (no, Expose is nice, but it doesn't serve my needs). On spanned displays I would like to see multiple Docks. Basically, I think Apple needs to make the Dock much more configurable so we can make the Dock our Dock...

Sorry by HarveyBirdman · 2004-01-14 06:33 · Score: 3, Interesting

But I can't take seriously the word of anyone who seems to think the Applications menu and Apple menu from OS9 were some sort of holy duality of perfection. And I rarely heed the word of grown adults who still use the word "sucks".

The Dock is not perfect, but his ranting against it comes across as just so much hyperbole. I get along with it just fine. The problem of identical icons is gone now that I can put my project folders in the Finder's side bar, and I don't minimize folders and documents much anymore thanks to Expose.

He may be a Guy Who Knows (or was at one time), but he's flat out wrong here, and there definitely a hint of an axe being ground. It also comes across as simply "I got used to this way. I never want to change. Whaaaaa!"

Some of the reasons can be combined (6, 7 and 8, for example). Some are purely subjective, like 5. I have zero problem trashing things.

The rest seem to read like "people's hands have minds of their own, and those minds are retarded, so they can never get used to the Dock. It's Fitt's Law, which is as immutable and perfect as the Laws Of Thermodynamics, dammit!".

And I love "Oh! I dragged something out of the dock and it puffed into smoke!" Wow. So call 911, you silly man, and tell them you need an IV with Zoloft or something. Sheesh.

--
--- Ban humanity.

Finder vs Browser by jaaron · 2004-01-14 06:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

It completely depends on the functionality you're trying to achieve. One of my favorite applications is konqueror. I don't care much for the rest of KDE (no offense), but I love konqueror. I wish I could run it natively on windows (which I have to use at work) but I sometimes run it through cygwin simply because it's a better browser. And it browsers EVERYTHING. It's probably a bit too much of a "power tool" for the average user, but for me, it's great. Of course, this is coming from someone who prefers emacs over just about everything else too. :)

--
Who said Freedom was Fair?

Memo to Tog: OS 9 is Dead by cmoney · 2004-01-14 06:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

Tog: Get over it. Start living in the present. Classic OS is gone, kaput. 3 years ago, I had many of the same reservations about OS X as the majority of long-time Mac users.

However, having solely used OS X for the past 2 years or so, I can safely say my reservations have been 95% unfounded. As it turned out, it was more a case of "I fear change" than anything substantial. My overall productivity is still much higher as a result of the whole of OS X's new features.

His Panther review reads more like a list of rants simply because Apple didn't do it exactly like he wanted.

Re:If the dock had been introduced back in the day by dasmegabyte · 2004-01-14 06:54 · Score: 4, Interesting

Whoa kid. The Dock solves a few problems the MacOS has always had, while maintaining very little screen real estate (none at all if, like me, you hide it). And it introduces so much new functionality that I can't imagine a mac OS without it.

The dock tells you:

What programs you have open, but that have no client windows left (without having to check the Application menu, which took up space in the already crowded program bar and had no keyboard shortcuts other than option tab)

Which programs are open, but hidden, again without having to check a menu.

Informs you when (and often why) a certain program needs your attention in a very noticable but inobtrusive way. And the bouncing can be seen even when the dock is hidden (the icon bounds up at the bottom/sides of the screen).

Programatic control of icons can offer all KINDS of useful information at a glance without needing to switch programs...everything from the date in iCal's icon to full memory and process indicators.

The dock allows you:

An easy way to start, stop and switch programs without having to browse the hard drive. Most programs have useful controls added to their dock icon as well...and you can access these functions with a single interface.

An easy way to access the trash bin without having to expose the desktop at all times (so annoying)

Access to the discs in a convenient cascading manner. This has allowed me to access common files and PROGRAMS without taking up resources at all times.

In short: The dock accomplishes all of the functions of most OS' taskbars, menus and so forth in a much simpler, much more powerful, much more intuitive and above all CUSTOMIZABLE fashion. It kicks ass.

And you're griping about the loss of the two most useless UI controls ever invented...oh my god, i just responded to a TROLL, didn't I?!?

--
Hey freaks: now you're ju

I must disagree strongly. by jellisky · 2004-01-14 07:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

I have found few of the changes to the Mac OS GUI to even be steps backwards compared to Classic. In fact, I find OSX's GUI to be much more usable than Classic's. I cringe at using Classic's GUI in the few times I've had to boot back to Classic.

I've been a fan of the Dock since I first saw it. For me, it's an indispensible piece of the GUI that really works. I always felt that the window-shading was a terrible solution in that each window STILL took up space, even when you didn't want it to. OSX, click the yellow minimize button to send the window to the Dock, and the whole window is out of sight until I want to see it again. (I have the Dock set to hide, obviously.) Granted, I could use the Hide Application option, but that always felt bad to me since I often have multiple documents open with each application.

Yes, OSX has some usability issues that I'd like resolved, but at least, from what I've seen, I find OSX to be the most usable of all the GUIs I've used (or am using on a daily basis like OSX, Gnome, Windows XP, KDE, and Windows 98). OSX looks good, works well and fairly consistently, and does things in a way that feels comfortable to me.

As for the articles, here's my rebuttal to Tog's nine points against the Dock:

9. The Dock is big and clumsy: Considering what it does, wouldn't it HAVE to be? And set to hide, it takes up no screen space until I want it to. The old Application menu still does that!

8. Identical icons look identical: DUH! Aren't they supposed to? New things are new, after all... and red things are red. The point he makes is easily countered by the fact that the dock will pop up textual information about the icon once you roll over it. And, sorry, few other GUI tools do any better, including the majority (maybe, all?) of the Classic ones.

7. Dock icons have no labels: This is an actual concern, but, again, rather than complain, how about propose a solution that works in the setup? I have little trouble with this, since I set up my Dock to such a point that I never have that problem. I have custom folder icons on important folders (which SHOULD BE the only folders to be in the Dock!). It's simple, and you'd have to use the same work-around in almost every other tool out there.

6. Dock objects need color: This would be a solution to #7, and, in fact, when you think about it, is only a more specific argument for #7. Thus, he should consolidate #6 and #7, then attack that. Again, this is a point that I agree with.

5. Trash Can belongs in the corner: Excuse me while I play a sad song on the world's smallest violin. My Trash Can, even in Classic days, was NEVER in the corner. I hated that position for it. Still do to this day. And, Tog... I use Command-Delete because it's FASTER and EASIER and makes more sense than the iconic Trash-drag to my mind... not because the Trash is in a "bad" position.

4. The Dock's locations are unpredictable: Excuse me, what? You minimize a document, it minimizes as the RIGHTMOST icon in the document side of the Dock (for a bottom Dock, that is). What's so hard about THAT? A little use of the Dock shows exactly how predictable things are there. And a new application that isn't in the Dock will pop up in the RIGHTMOST spot of the Application side of it. Is this THAT hard to comprehend?

3. The Dock is a sprawler: Yes, it is. Is that a truly bad thing? Instead of having to tell people that they have to move to a specific set of spots, I can just say, "Move your mouse to the bottom of the screen." Simple instructions, simple idea, simple implementation, and simple response. I don't have to tell them to sweep along the bottom until the Dock appears, or aim for a corner. Just go to one side and everything comes up.

2. The Dock replaced better objects: Huh? Tab menus were nice, but what did I do with them? Yeah, I had a folder with links to all my programs and document folders. It worked much like a static Dock. Only, it was a bit more of a p

How about a poll? by siskbc · 2004-01-14 07:07 · Score: 4, Interesting

It's still vastly inferior to the experience of Mac OS 9

I'm not going to say you're incorrect, but you're not exactly correct either, as that was a completely subjective statement. That said, I'd love to see some stats on people who like the new OS more/less compared to the old one, broken down into old Mac fans and those who came on the scene after the advent of OS X.

Personally, I love OS X and find it extremely usable. Additionally, I avoided previous iterations of Mac OS like a plague, and would have rather used an abacus than a mac back then. Bascially, the lack of a good foundation (compared to the BSD-based guts it has now) and a terminal was a killer.

That said, I guarantee that Apple will sell out its core fans to get new markets (ie, people like me). As you say, what else are you going to use? Windows?

(If there's one thing I can't stand more than anything else, it's the whole "like it or leave it" attitude. NOTHING would ever get improved if all people were like that.)

I do agree with your sentiment there. People usually do that when they can think of nothing intelligent to say. It's most commonly found among nationalistic morons (ie, America: love it or leave it!). As if criticizing features of one's government (or favorite OS) somehow means one should abandon it.

My one greatest compliment to OS X is that it has come so far (mind-blowing, really) in so little time. It's ceased being a toy OS for artsy people (so was the stereotype) and has become incredibly powerful. And I'll admit, there are some UI issues. I guess I'd say to give it time

--

-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

TIP: Drag using the command key by gobbo · 2004-01-14 07:16 · Score: 4, Informative

[panther] Try dragging docs or apps off the dock using the command key as a modifier. That moves the original item to the target window (including the desktop). You retain your dock icon that way, then you can drag it off to see the cool 'poof' effect (which justifies the whole thing if you ask me) :-) Pretty consistent, actually (the command key is a forceful modifier).

The trash stays where it is, need a haxie for getting it on the desktop.

--
Damn those pesky terrorists

Re:What about 2-3 Button mice? by Golias · 2004-01-14 07:20 · Score: 4, Informative

Wheel mouse buttons work in OS X by default. Just plug in nearly any USB wheel mouse, and you're scrolling away.

Middle-button text editing, a popular staple of Linux geeks, is not present, but the drag & drop features are powerful enough that you will never miss it, once you get used to the new OS.

--

Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

Feeding Frenzy by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-14 07:39 · Score: 4, Funny

It's cool to see Mac zealots turning on each other!

Re:If the dock had been introduced back in the day by shotfeel · 2004-01-14 07:43 · Score: 3, Funny

Yeah, you should have heard me when Sys 7 came out!

What the heck do we need all this eye candy for? 3D buttons just soak up CPU cycles and don't do anything useful...

Safari's hidden feature imports bookmarks! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-14 07:46 · Score: 5, Informative

Tog writes "The same problem is plaguing the Safari browser. You can't elect to import bookmarks into Safari, and there's no way to get them back out. No corporation would support a single-source supplier, and no individual should either"

There's a hidden Safari feature which allows you to import bookmarks ...

Type the following command in Terminal (while Safari is NOT running):

Quit Safari. Enter the following command in Terminal ...

defaults write com.apple.safari IncludeDebugMenu 1

Launch Safari -- you'll have a Debug menu added to the application's bar. Amongst the Debug menu options are two ways to import bookmarks.

To get rid of Debug, quit Safari and enter the following command in Terminal ...

defaults write com.apple.safari IncludeDebugMenu 0

"As crisp as 9.2.2"? by tholomyes · 2004-01-14 07:48 · Score: 5, Interesting

In the article he claims that Panther is as "crisp... as OS 9.2.2". In my experience, 9.2.x was just kludged together to make it forwards-compatible with OS X, and introduced a lot of undesirable behavior.

In fact, I found this to be true with MacOS 9, period. 8.5 seemed a lot more stable and user-friendly. What did 9 have that 8.5 didn't?

My only problem with the Dock is dragging, say, 20 or 30 picture files on to Preview so you can look through them all; if you miss the Preview icon and the button slips-- WHAM!-- 20 more icons added to the Dock. Well, that and accidentally clicking on a program that takes a while to boot.

--
When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk

Re:If the dock had been introduced back in the day by dasmegabyte · 2004-01-14 07:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

No. The article was "The Top Nine Reasons the Dock Sucks," and consists of nine petty things. Petty things don't make a control "suck. Maybe they make it less useful, but come on. After the first time you drag an icon representing a program out of the dock, you never again think that you just deleted it. Instead, you realize that there's a difference between the program and its representation, and without a long winded dialog (try deleting a shortcut in Windows to see the opposite). Plus, the grandparent post was waxing poetic about the APPLICATION MENU. If the dock is a Yugo, this guy's pining for the halcyon days of the rickshaw.

I don't think the Dock is a yugo...if anything, its flaws are a cause of its ambition and usefulness. Using the Dock, if anything, is like drivinga Cadillac with a 4/6/8. And Tog is sitting on the sidewalk complaining about my cruise controls.

--
Hey freaks: now you're ju

new year's resolution by divbyzero · 2004-01-14 09:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've never understood this surprisingly popular opinion. Nobody complains that printers have too high resolution. Why do they look at high resolution in a monitor as a bad thing?

Scalable fonts and vector graphics (both of which are used pervasively in OS/X) work even better at higher resolutions than they do at low ones. In other words, when you have more pixels per inch, you don't have to keep drawing your fonts at 13 pixels tall, making them too tiny to see. Instead, draw them at the same 12 point (1/6 of an inch) tall, but with more detail.

To answer your question, a 12 inch diagonal, 1200 dpi screen would be sheer bliss for me, and far preferable to something larger but with lower resolution.

--
But my grandest creation, as history will tell,
Was Firefrorefiddle, the Fiend of the Fell.

Re:Point-by-point by jellisky · 2004-01-14 10:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

5. The purpose of putting the Trash in the corner instead of the Dock is twofold. First, you want to have it in a consistent place so that you always know how to perform a common operation without a need for hunting as on the ever-shifting dock. This allows you to do it unconsciously without having to devote attention to it -- another good UI goal. Second, you want to use the corner because it's one of the easiest points on the screen to get to. You can't overshoot it easily since two edges of the screen act as a guide to direct your movement towards it.

------

Piffle! (I always did like using that word in an argument. It always lightens it.)

The corner is the easiest to get to, yes. However, the Trash was NEVER in the exact corner. You always had to come back to it, thus devoting visual resources to make sure that you hadn't missed. (And missing it was really annoying in Classic when you did miss and you had "Stick to grid" on... then your misplaced icon would end up ON TOP of the Trash, hiding it and further adding to the frustration by usually forcing two MORE drag-and-drops.) You have to do the same with the Dock Trash... move to the corner then correct from there. Yes, it's not in the same EXACT place, but the access is the same group of movements in the scenario you present.

The only time that a static Trash is actually more useful than the Dock's is when the Dock is perpetually small because of a lack of a user-defined static list (and if you're really using your Dock, it should almost always be the entire length of the screen most of the session, unless you're an extreme neatnik) or when you had the exact muscle memory to drag exactly to the static Trash every time. The chances of the latter are extremely small... the former, though, depends on how much the Dock gets used and customized. Mine is almost entirely the length of the screen thanks to a large number of frequently used programs that inhabit it.

------

4. That's good if you are only having to deal with a mental stack size of 1. However, as you work with minimizing and maximizing multiple documents, you constantly reorder the Dock.

------

No, it's fine for most people. Why? 'Cause you quickly learn that if you were JUST working on the document, it should be on the right-hand side. Any user with half-a-brain should be able to figure out which of the icons is the one they want without any trouble.

------

3. Wait -- you use the Dock in hidden mode all the time, and you never ever have to deal with it popping up when you drag your mouse down towards the bottom of an app that you're working with? I call BS.

------

Maybe because I never go down to the bottom of the screen because I manage my windows such that they're all near the top since I USE the Dock's minimization functions? Don't call BS unless you know it to be true. And I work with a smaller desktop: 1152 X 768, or whatever that one is... I've only once had trouble with the Dock's pop-up and that was after a monitor resolution switch which left my iTunes small window under the Dock. That was fixed quickly by clicking on the iTunes icon in the Dock to bring it to the forefront.

------

2. I honestly can't see how tabbed folders were harder to work with than the dock.

------

Well, first of all, it comes down to the way the thing is used. ALL of my common apps are in the Dock already, and the only way they reorganize is when I drag them to other places in the Dock. Thus, the Dock performs exactly the same function to me as the tabbed folder. However, the ability to take something off the "list" that the Dock provides by, literally, TAKING it off the list makes more sense than deleting an alias. Yes, you could do the same with the folder, but then you have the alias floating around elsewhere.

------

1. The point is that the Dock is the only thing in Mac OS X where you drag and item from it to destroy it (instead of moving or copying it).

-

Attention and Productivity by Devlin-du-GEnie · 2004-01-14 11:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

People are whinging about Tog's remarks because "the Dock works and has never done anything wrong to me."

That's not his point. Every behavior he criticizes requires you to take your mind off your work and concentrate on the UI for a few seconds. That time away is a painless little vampire sucking on your productivity. It's nontrivial.

Tog isn't daydreaming or bitter. HCI isn't voodoo. Many of its precepts are supported by empiric research. Go. Read some of it!

55 of 670 comments (clear)