Re: ::scr tell me why you're using OSX, you big geek

[Simon Batistoni <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/12/01 04:25 -0800, matt jones wrote:
> 
> Yes, there is that, but at least you can now eject CDs without dragging
> the fucker to the trash.

This the the most Bad And Wrong thing Apple ever did. I'm glad they
sort of fixed it, and at least now when you start dragging a mounted
disk in OS X, the trash can has the decency to turn into an "eject"
button :)

> > 2) Ditto, a full power-down requires the OS to instruct the hardware
> > - pressing the "power" switch simply places the machine in standby
> > mode.
> 
> Is that really such a problem, though? Don't most modern OSes  prefer to
> shut down the machine themselves rather than just having the power
> disconnected?

Well, that'd be fine with me if modern OSes weren't prone to the
more-or-less occasional (depending on OS and machine) bout of
freezing up on shutdown, rendering the machine unusable.

> > I actually think it looks more grown-up, too. The earlier macoses
> > have always seemed twee to me, like computing in fairyland (I
> 
> You *must* be joking, Simon! *More* twee than aqua? I wayyyyyy prefer
> Classic interface - it seems so much more functional and simpler to
> use. Aqua, on the other hand ... well, let me tell you what I think about
> aqua vs OS 9- interface-wise:

This is interesting, cos you're the second person to say this. I've
booted back into Classic, just to see if I can define why I think
Classic is twee. Bear in mind that I haven't had much exposure to
macs in the past.

I think (at a quick glance), it's mainly down to the icons, which
seem overly cartoonish. And the dialogue boxes with that "easter
island statue speaks" graphic. I concede that the window decorations
aren't particularly twee. 

I don't know. You're probably right, Aqua is pretty fairyland-ish,
but it looks more polished to my eye, somehow. It's probably just
cos it's shiny and new. I can be a bit of a slut like that when it
comes to interfaces :)

You've inspired me to stay in OS9 for a while, and have a play.

> [ window widgets ]
> The coloured window widgets - it's not obvious which does what (well,
> not to me, I had to try them). 

> FFS, their functions are signified by colour! Isn't that a big
> accessibility no-no, if not a usability one? 

This is a very good point. Especially as one's red, and one green.

OTOH, whilst you may think the function icons in Classic are
intuitive, I think learning what they do is the single hardest GUI
brick wall I've ever hit. I just about have them down now, but I
still have to think carefully before I click sometimes.

> [ bells and whistles ]
> As Simon noted, OS X HAS A *shedload* of these, and it's *very*
> irritating, I feel. The gratuitous animation (especially of the dock when
> items bounce) just smacks of fricking clippy, to me, and the semiotics of
> that make it a complete turn off to me. 

I like the bouncing, not because it's bouncing per se, but because
it's a clear visual indication of exactly what's going on. Much
better than spinning pizzas or hourglasses or whatever, and the best
way of doing this that I've seen in an OS.

> [ the dock ] 
> The dock leaves me cold. I don't see what the dock does that
> I can't do with a tear-off apps menu and some windows at the bottom of the
> screen, and all for a lot less screen space. But then, better people than
> me have made critiques of the dock:

I'm okay with the dock, but then I'm a happy Windowmaker user, and
the functionality is pretty analogous. It Just Works, whereas, for
example, as an inexperienced OS9 user, I don't have a clue how to
buils a "tear-off apps menu" to do what I want.

Time to go learn...

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - -213.208.67.50
that pencil smell reminds me of school