What separates a Mac from a PC?

[Q Classic]

You really shouldn't knock Aqua, as Luna is obviously a second-rate copy of it. A lot like most of Microsoft's product on that point, being a ripoff of an Apple innovation.

best i've heard in ages.

you're just mad because microsoft did to apple what apple did to xerox--with the mice and the gui and all...

===

and ari, KDE is so much nicer than Gnome. I don't get where all these people say Gnome is less cluttered--KDE is simpler and quicker.

===

all of you who are so into this "mine is better than yours" are so painfully blunted that i'm glad you guys won't even give linux the time of day.

that's the last thing we need-- my red hat is better than your debian is better than your windows is better than your solaris is better than your mac is better than your tomsrtbt is better than your red hat.

[Ari Rahikkala]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
and ari, KDE is so much nicer than Gnome. I don't get where all these people say Gnome is less cluttered--KDE is simpler and quicker.

Well... actually, my desktop used to consist of IceWM and about ten to fifteen xterms . Dunno if that was cluttered - depends on the definition of the word - but it definitely wasn't as nice as KDE. I'm still not quite sure if I'm going to stay with KDE, though. I don't like the wait at login nor the numerous small glitches that tend to crop up from the almost-but-not-quite proper interoperations of the applications. Sure, I might have had to type a couple more words with the old configuration, but it's much less work than actually running KDE. I'll have to see - if the system proves to be more usable than expected (or if I fall in love with some of its apps - haven't yet tried out Kate, for example) I'll keep it in use.

that's the last thing we need-- my red hat is better than your debian is better than your windows is better than your solaris is better than your mac is better than your tomsrtbt is better than your red hat.

Hey, if I wasn'tso cynical about all operating systems, I'd have been singing the praises of Gentoo all day long on this thread and others .

[Q Classic]

kde is slower than wm, but i still find it quite good for my purposes.

i've found that kate and koffice are all right, but abiword beats kate hands down in loading speed. openoffice, is pure sh|te in terms of speed, so...

of linux, the one thing that irritates me the most is its inability to detect my usb palm cradle... they're working on it, but nothing's worked to this point--not even coldsync. oy.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher

Luna is in no way, shape, or form a copy of Aqua. In fact, the Whistler betas had a new GUI long before OS X even came out.

Yeah, them giving it a similar name was a complete coincidence.

And for the record, the general consensus in the HCI community (of which my uni specializes in) is the XP interface is the most functional out of the mainstream OSes.

Another vague appeal to authority.

Here's how dumb Windows is. If I stick a CD in my mac, it turns up on the desktop where I can access it straightaway. In Windows when I've used it I have to click on the "D-Drive" icon. There is absolutely no point in having drive icons, yet Windows has them.

And what happens if I want to stop Junk Mail with my expensive copy of MS Entourage?

Well I have to turn on the filter and guess which setting is going to work. Then I have to **** about with the help function to learn up how to set a rule, then I have to set up the rule and create a mailbox called junk. The initial filter is "dumb: so I have to keep checking up on it - and I still get a steady amount of junk mail that it can't catch.

In my free copy of Mac Mail I turn on the junk filter to training. If it marks only junk mail as junk (as it did for me) then I turn it on full so that the junk is deposited in the "junk" folder. If it doesn't catch something I highlight it and press the junk button. The program learns from my action and filters out similar messages in the future. Result, virtually no junk mail.

(the Dock is a design disaster, and I don't care if you're "used to it" and think it's fine -- it's not)

This is the dumbest thing you've said for a while Asher. If people get used to it and find it a useful and convenient addition to the interface then by definition for them it can't be a design disaster, can it?

If you would stop trying to use a Macintosh like it was a Windows PC you would get more done.

[MRT144]

agathon, if you stopped trying to use a mac like a windows PC youd get more done.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
Yeah, them giving it a similar name was a complete coincidence.

Luna dates back to Windows Neptune (hence the Luna name) back in 1998. It just was pushed back to Whistler (WinXP). Try again.

Here's how dumb Windows is. If I stick a CD in my mac, it turns up on the desktop where I can access it straightaway. In Windows when I've used it I have to click on the "D-Drive" icon. There is absolutely no point in having drive icons, yet Windows has them.

Again, you display a clear ignorance to how Windows works.
If I stick a CD in my PC, I can have it either:
* Show up on my desktop where I can use it straight away (open an Explorer view)
* Open up to the correct medium (ie, play in Winamp, play in WMP, play DVDs in WinDVD, etc)
* Do nothing

It's configurable, and in fact it asks you what you want to do the first time you insert it. You can check off "Always do this" or leave it so it prompts each time.

The drive icons exist because they tell you what kind of medium is in the drive and if it's loaded or not, and it's just a graphical touch.

And what happens if I want to stop Junk Mail with my expensive copy of MS Entourage?

I have no idea, I've never used Entourage. Outlook 11 has very intelligent Bayesian spam-filters, you can also get Outlook plugins if that's what you want. Or you can use the Outlook dumb filters, match keywords & sort...

In my free copy of Mac Mail I turn on the junk filter to training. If it marks only junk mail as junk (as it did for me) then I turn it on full so that the junk is deposited in the "junk" folder. If it doesn't catch something I highlight it and press the junk button. The program learns from my action and filters out similar messages in the future. Result, virtually no junk mail.

Mac Mail uses simple Bayesian learning filters as well, which were actually developed by Microsoft Research and made public domain. Just FYI. See this for more info: http://research.microsoft.com/mlas/

This is the dumbest thing you've said for a while Asher. If people get used to it and find it a useful and convenient addition to the interface then by definition for them it can't be a design disaster, can it?

I can get used to the stick shift being on the ceiling of my car, too, that doesn't mean it's not a very stupid design.

The Dock is a problem because:
1) It lacks consistency (the button icons change location as you mouse-over by default)
2) Lots of wasted screen realestate
3) Uninformative icons
4) Mixes both running apps and ability to launch apps to the point where it's needlessly confusing and the only way you can tell if something's running is if there's a little icon on the icon
5) It gets complicated with multiple instances of the program

The Dock's only purpose is to serve basic task functionality and look pretty. It does that, but it's a horrid design.

The experts agree, and 95% of computer users agree. You may be used to it and find it functional, but that doesn't stop it from being a bad design.

[Boris Godunov]

One need only point to the standard keyboard to show how bad design can be something to which people become accustomed. It's ludicrous!

Thankfully, most people realized that one does not have to just "get used" to bad design (the keyboard a seeming exception), as that is much of what has driven technological innovation in the first place: making things better.

[Sava]

what's wrong with QWERTY?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Sava
what's wrong with QWERTY?

It's an inefficient design by its nature...

Dvorak is far more efficient, but everyone uses QWERTY since it's the norm.

There have been some innovations in it that many people find helps their typing speed (like MS' Natural keyboard ), but Dvorak is still best.

[Boris Godunov]

Plus, "Dvorak" must be loved for the name alone!

[Sava]

Any links to sites that show why QWERTY is bad?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Sava
Any links to sites that show why QWERTY is bad?

QWERTY's not "bad", Dvorak's just better.

Dvorak puts all the most frequently used letters in the english language closer to the home row, so your fingers don't need to move as often or as far as QWERTY.

QWERTY:

Dvorak:

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher

Luna dates back to Windows Neptune (hence the Luna name) back in 1998. It just was pushed back to Whistler (WinXP). Try again.

Touche.

The drive icons exist because they tell you what kind of medium is in the drive and if it's loaded or not, and it's just a graphical touch.

It's a waste of space. I know what kind of medium is in the drive by looking at it. I don't have to look at a drive icon.

I have no idea, I've never used Entourage. Outlook 11 has very intelligent Bayesian spam-filters, you can also get Outlook plugins if that's what you want. Or you can use the Outlook dumb filters, match keywords & sort...

I haven't used outlook 11. Entourage is a good program apart from the silly junk filtering system.

Mac Mail uses simple Bayesian learning filters as well, which were actually developed by Microsoft Research and made public domain. Just FYI. See this for more info: http://research.microsoft.com/mlas/

You'd think that they'd put it in their own damn products then...

I can get used to the stick shift being on the ceiling of my car, too, that doesn't mean it's not a very stupid design.

Not what I said. I said I got used to it and found it to be more useful?

The Dock is a problem because:
1) It lacks consistency (the button icons change location as you mouse-over by default)

What are you talking about? Do you mean when you have magnification on? That should only be used when you have a huge amount of stuff in the dock. When that is the case it works very well. There isn't any point having it turned on otherwise.

2) Lots of wasted screen realestate

None wasted: if, like everyone I know you have the dock hidden until you pass the mouse pointer to the bottom of the screen.

3) Uninformative icons

Like what? The Mail icon is a stamp. It tells you how many new messages you have. If you are so dopey as not to recognise your own programs you can run the pointer over it and it will tell you what it is.

4) Mixes both running apps and ability to launch apps to the point where it's needlessly confusing and the only way you can tell if something's running is if there's a little icon on the icon

In other words, the only way to tell that it is running is by looking. That's really confusing.

5) It gets complicated with multiple instances of the program

I can't think of a mac program I'd want to open more than once. In fact I can't think of any reason to do this.

The Dock's only purpose is to serve basic task functionality and look pretty. It does that, but it's a horrid design.

Blah Blah.... It works if you bother to think about what you are doing with it/

The experts agree, and 95% of computer users agree. You may be used to it and find it functional, but that doesn't stop it from being a bad design.

Again an appeal to authority combined with a fallacy of majority belief. I really like the dock - I find that it works very well. In fact I'd be annoyed if Apple got rid of it.

A few mac people p*ssed and moaned about it when it came out, but I haven't heard many compaints lately.

[Zylka]

...but which company can offer me a portable, 17 inch dvorak

PREFERABLY CLIPPED

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
It's a waste of space. I know what kind of medium is in the drive by looking at it. I don't have to look at a drive icon.

If you think it's a waste of space, did you consider disabling them or changing the view so it doesn't show them? You know you can do that...

You'd think that they'd put it in their own damn products then...

It's in MSN 8 right now, and Outlook 11 will get it when it's released in a few months. They didn't think the early revisions were smart enough and had too many false positives (Apple disagreed, it seems), but they've refined it to the point where they think it's good enough for mainstream use.

Not what I said. I said I got used to it and found it to be more useful?

How can it be more useful?

None wasted: if, like everyone I know you have the dock hidden until you pass the mouse pointer to the bottom of the screen.

Wow, what a complete ripoff of an MS innovation.

In other words, the only way to tell that it is running is by looking. That's really confusing.

It's confusing because it doesn't easily separate it. Like for my Trillian conversations, I sometimes have 7-8 windows open at once. How do I easily tell these apart with the Dock and easily switch between them all?

I can't think of a mac program I'd want to open more than once. In fact I can't think of any reason to do this.

It's not just opening up programs more than once, but windows. The Dock doesn't understand that sometimes people want to flip between windows rather than just programs. Another reason why it's a bad design.

Again an appeal to authority combined with a fallacy of majority belief.

Appeal to authority: Experts who study this (psychologists, HCI specialists) and based on usability research and testing. I don't know, I think that carries more weight than a blind Mac zealot chanting "it's better cause I'm used to it", doncha think?

As for "fallacy" of majority belief, you may want to check your market share figures.