Comments on: Mac OS X Annoyances http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances The Weblog of Erik J. Barzeski Wed, 23 May 2012 23:05:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Bobby http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18288 Bobby Mon, 13 Feb 2006 20:54:15 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18288 I actually think Mac OSX is cool. I've had no problems with it. Anything is better than Windows anyway. I actually think Mac OSX is cool. I've had no problems with it.

Anything is better than Windows anyway.

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18287 Erik J. Barzeski Mon, 13 Feb 2006 13:39:36 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18287 Richard, it was never - on a Mac - called "open apple." People mistakenly called it that. Jesse, you've misquoted me. Consistency and infinitely high trump whatever he thinks he has with menus on ever window. On a Mac, the menu is both in a consistent location and infinitely high. Richard, it was never - on a Mac - called "open apple." People mistakenly called it that.

Jesse, you've misquoted me. Consistency and infinitely high trump whatever he thinks he has with menus on ever window. On a Mac, the menu is both in a consistent location and infinitely high.

]]> By: Jesse Wilson http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18286 Jesse Wilson Mon, 13 Feb 2006 02:52:37 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18286 <blockquote>Separating Menu Bar from Window Is Stupid</blockquote> You say 'consistency trumps infinitely high' but consistency with what? Windows? A Mac isn't Windows, it's a Mac, and it's consistent with Macs. And I don't buy your usability studies and common sense BS.

Separating Menu Bar from Window Is Stupid

You say 'consistency trumps infinitely high' but consistency with what? Windows? A Mac isn't Windows, it's a Mac, and it's consistent with Macs. And I don't buy your usability studies and common sense BS.

]]> By: Richard Shaw http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18285 Richard Shaw Mon, 13 Feb 2006 01:57:33 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18285 I normally don'd mind commenting without reading an article, but did *anyone* even bother? He claims to use Mac and Linux, not Windows, and he likes Mac so much that he is thinking about using it and nothing else. Criticism is good, and it's silly to pretend that everything is perfect. Oh, and I'm a "dumbass" who remembers it being called open apple, too. I guess anyone who's been using Macs for a long time is now a dumbass? His list was OK. This commentary is braindead. I normally don'd mind commenting without reading an article, but did *anyone* even bother? He claims to use Mac and Linux, not Windows, and he likes Mac so much that he is thinking about using it and nothing else.

Criticism is good, and it's silly to pretend that everything is perfect.

Oh, and I'm a "dumbass" who remembers it being called open apple, too. I guess anyone who's been using Macs for a long time is now a dumbass?

His list was OK. This commentary is braindead.

]]> By: andy http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18284 andy Mon, 13 Feb 2006 01:06:27 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18284 The difference between IE/win and iPhoto is that IE offers a service to the system (MSHTML.DLL), which many apps use (for example, WinAmp offers a browser built-in for some reason), comparable to the WebKit. iPhoto does not offer any services to the system, so no app depends on its existence. The difference between IE/win and iPhoto is that IE offers a service to the system (MSHTML.DLL), which many apps use (for example, WinAmp offers a browser built-in for some reason), comparable to the WebKit. iPhoto does not offer any services to the system, so no app depends on its existence.

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18283 Erik J. Barzeski Sun, 12 Feb 2006 23:36:09 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18283 Matt, agreed, they're not part of the OS. They're bundled apps (though iPhoto's position as a "bundled app" is even quite tenuous as you do have to pay for upgrades). Software developers tend to be pretty picky about things like "part of the OS" and not. Lawyers, too, or Microsoft would have had an easy time saying that IE was not part of the OS when the truth that it was tied just a bit too tightly to the OS. Matt, agreed, they're not part of the OS. They're bundled apps (though iPhoto's position as a "bundled app" is even quite tenuous as you do have to pay for upgrades).

Software developers tend to be pretty picky about things like "part of the OS" and not. Lawyers, too, or Microsoft would have had an easy time saying that IE was not part of the OS when the truth that it was tied just a bit too tightly to the OS.

]]> By: Charles Plater http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18282 Charles Plater Sun, 12 Feb 2006 23:30:06 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18282 Well, those of us who used to use an Apple ][ used to call it the Open-Apple key, because we had two of them -- What's now labeled as Option / Alt has a Closed-Apple key in its place. Just a bit of history. I hate it when people assume that Windows is the right way, and everything else is wrong. A lot of these, if not all of them are design issues where Apple went one way, and Microsoft went another. Well, those of us who used to use an Apple ][ used to call it the Open-Apple key, because we had two of them -- What's now labeled as Option / Alt has a Closed-Apple key in its place. Just a bit of history.

I hate it when people assume that Windows is the right way, and everything else is wrong. A lot of these, if not all of them are design issues where Apple went one way, and Microsoft went another.

]]> By: jeff http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18281 jeff Sun, 12 Feb 2006 22:55:12 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18281 <blockquote>Alt-Tab to a Minimized App, and It Stays Minimized. Because you may want to make use of cmd-N to make a new window (or cmd-Q, or any number of other menu items and commands. Still, this is the most valid point he's had this far.</blockquote> I'd have to disagree that his point is valid at all... I'd say that he;s just used to Windows silly idea of minimizing applications, which i would say is more closely related to "hiding" applications in the Mac OS. Minimizing windows makes sense, but minimizing entire applications is simply a way to "hide" them... and when a hidden application is brought to the foreground (un-minimizing, or alt-tabbing to it) it does work exactly how you'd expect; it becomes visible. This is just a misunderstanding of the purposes (and differences between) Hiding and minimizing, to someone who's been raised on Windows funny idea of "sensical" ...and the rest of this list is pretty brainless, so whatever.

Alt-Tab to a Minimized App, and It Stays Minimized. Because you may want to make use of cmd-N to make a new window (or cmd-Q, or any number of other menu items and commands. Still, this is the most valid point he's had this far.

I'd have to disagree that his point is valid at all... I'd say that he;s just used to Windows silly idea of minimizing applications, which i would say is more closely related to "hiding" applications in the Mac OS. Minimizing windows makes sense, but minimizing entire applications is simply a way to "hide" them... and when a hidden application is brought to the foreground (un-minimizing, or alt-tabbing to it) it does work exactly how you'd expect; it becomes visible.

This is just a misunderstanding of the purposes (and differences between) Hiding and minimizing, to someone who's been raised on Windows funny idea of "sensical"

...and the rest of this list is pretty brainless, so whatever.

]]> By: Christian http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18280 Christian Sun, 12 Feb 2006 20:52:55 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18280 I've never seen someone who failed to understand the OS X UI paradigms that badly. Extended use of Windows seems to melt people's brains. This list could also be called "things I first considered strange because I just switched and then started to love them that much so I will never ever switch back". I've never seen someone who failed to understand the OS X UI paradigms that badly. Extended use of Windows seems to melt people's brains.

This list could also be called "things I first considered strange because I just switched and then started to love them that much so I will never ever switch back".

]]> By: Matt Simpson http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances#comment-18279 Matt Simpson Sun, 12 Feb 2006 20:18:45 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/02/12/mac_os_x_annoyances/#comment-18279 iPhoto and Safari are not technically part of the OS, but they do come with all Macs. Then again, I disagree with his reasoning re: Safari because you can enable full keyboard access in system preferences. iPhoto and Safari are not technically part of the OS, but they do come with all Macs.

Then again, I disagree with his reasoning re: Safari because you can enable full keyboard access in system preferences.

]]>