Re: Windows.. it's like coming home!

"Patrick Nihill" <pa_nihill@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1hk4jmv.9hntk2f5c49hN%pa_nihill@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Dan Johnson <danieljohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I also have a similar PowerBook, and the heat is an annoying thing,
especially as I'm very inclined to use it on my lap. I've heard the heat
from the new MacBooks might be even worse, and this is the biggest
factor that prevents me from upgrading to one right now.

So I have heard. There's clearly a problem
here for Apple, and it's not just one model
of laptop that's skanky.

While you're right about these 2 issues, there are some aspects of
Apple's laptop hardware that I like over the PC laptops I've also owned.
All ports down the side and none at the back, for one thing.

That is a nice touch. This Toshiba has some on the sides,
more on the back, and has the temerity to stick the audio
jacks in the front, which is just about the worst place.

Plus the
ambient light sensor and backlit keyboard are handy for those of us who
prefer to write Java in the dark, to hide our shame :-D

Ah, there's no shame in Java. There's sugar in it.
Two lumps.

But I had little use for the ambient light adjustments,
and none at all for the backlit keyboard.

[snip]
On Windows I just use Outlook Express
for this. Works fine, decent UI, no problem.

And here I was about to agree with what you'd posted, until you messed
it up with that last paragraph!

I can never figure out what it is about Outlook
Express that drives the Maccies away.

I basically can't stand all newsreaders, with the exception of MacSOUP.
The popularity of MT-Newswatcher, in particular, baffles me. I keep
trying it every few months, convinced that there must be something I'm
missing about it that everyone else sees. I've yet to find it, whatever
it is.

It's very functional and very mature. It's just the
UI is a throwback to the late Jurrasic.

[snip]
This was just an ongoing sore with the
PowerBook; never a insurmountable
obstacle, but always annoying.

I've never found this a problem with my PowerBook, but then 1280x854 on
a 15.2" screen is a conservative enough resolution. I can only assume
Apple is waiting to have a resolution-independent OS before they crank
the resolutions up the level of PCs.

I would not be comfortable with that UI, I think;
that's still above 100 dpi.

But resolution independance is coming to the Mac;
I just won't be waiting for it.

[snip]
I really, really don't like it that Apple is
dropping Classic now.

In a way, I'm surprised it lasted this long. It was undeniably "Old
Apple", the last remnant of the pre-Steve Jobs era. You could tell how
Apple felt about by making no attempt in all the time it existed to
integrate it a little better with native applications.

Yes, that's so. Perhaps I should have seen it
coming. But I did not.

[snip]
Now we have another band-aid transition (in the sense that it's quick
and painful), after which we will presumably have a stable platform for
the forseeable future (unless someone can contruct a plausible
transition for Apple to embark on in another few years. I can't,
thankfully).

I can- to x86-64. I wonder how long the 32
bit apps will be supported, after Apple's
entire lineup is 64-bit.

Of course, they'd be crazy to cut off the 32-bit
stuff while the Intel transition is underrway. That
may give 32-bit apps a extended lease on life.

[snip]
I think
it's fair to say though that Apple's curcumstances simply didn't allow a
gradual transition, especially in going from OS 9 to OS X. They started
from a position of severe weakness compared to Microsoft.

I do not really agree here. They lasted for many years without
making any transition; they should have spent that time
on the transition, rather than wait as long as they did.

They had a hopelessly outdated OS, dwindling support and sales, and the
air of a company heading towards an inevitable end.

In 1993 it wasn't that far behind, and by then the future direction
they needed was plain, and MS had already articulated their
strategy. And then dumped OS/2 and articulated their new
strategy. :D

Occasional hardware
hits like the original iMac couldn't sustain them when the basic
platform was in such poor shape. So, they rounded up 2 of every app and
plunged straight into the transition as fast as they could.

2 of every apps? You mean a male one and a female one?

Microsoft, on the other hand, had the luxury of taking their time moving
from DOS to NT. Windows 95 was insanely succesful, and NT 4.0 did a
pretty good job in the business market. Both were technically good
enough to compete in the markets they were aimed at, allowing Microsoft
to move them closer to each other and merge them at a much more
leisurely pace.

If you work it out, it actually took MS about as long
as Apple to get to their current OS. MS didn't
rush the transition, but they didn't sit still for
any extended period either.

[snip]
* Tools for the Previous Century
Objective-C has horrible syntax, and the memory
management in there is cruder than VB 6. And
you have to focus a lot more on optimization with
it, because it produces pretty slow code by
default.

Its syntax is a little nasty alright, but there are encouraging noises
that Apple has worked to address the memory management.

So I have heard. But a lot of effort has already gone into
MS's and Sun's memory managers at this point; Apple
has some catching up to do.

We'll see how well they do.

[snip]
MT/Newswatcher was a real poster child
for this. It may use the Aqua widgets, but it
doesn't behave like Aqua at all.

I refuse to let you use MT-Newswatcher as a barometer for Mac apps! It's
amongst the very worst I've encountered on the platform, and not
indicative of Mac apps as a whole.

It's the worst I've seen, but it's symptomatic; a lot of
the old OS 9 apps have at least parts of their UI that
remains very much as a it was. The preferences
dialogs are common culprits here, I've noticed.

MT/Newswatcher is special because they don't
seem to have upgraded *anything* in the UI.

Keep this up and I'll start
countering with a dicussion of Lotus Notes.

With pictures.

Go right ahead.. I can take it! :D

(Famous last words, eh?)

[snip]
The latest I've seen of Leopard suggest Apple is cutting down on all the
wacky variations.

We'll see. Don't forget that Apple's applications
are also culprit's here.

[snip]
One spiffy thing about Windows is that
MS gives away a lot of the little stuff
for free download. Microsoft's Spotlight-
clone is one I've installed. It's as convenient
as the real thing, and quite a lot quicker.

Yes, but it relies on periodic re-indexing rather than hooks to the
kernel code that modifies the filesystem, so new files that you create
don't show up until some unspecified time in the future. This is a bit
of a problem.

Experimenting with it, I observe that it does not do this;
it reindexes only changed files.

It does not need any new kernel code for this; XP already
has the NTFS Change Journal, which lets you
watch for changes volume wide. You only need to
reindex fully if it missing changes, because there
were too many changes while it was shut down,
and the buffer overflowed.

However, it does avoid indexing while the computer
is in use, which will presumably mean greater delays
that Spotlight shows.

Apple isn't into freebies, I notice.

What about all the updates to iTunes!

:D

[snip]
And the taskbar blows less real-estate, so
I can leave it visible. It can also hold more
items; it can be more than one tile tall,
and it auto-combines tiles into menus
when necessary.

The taskbar can hold more items if you resize it, but then you lose all
that Fitt's law goodness for all the items that are not on the bottom
row, and are left aiming at some very vertically thin targets.

Yes. I don't do this until I need to; but it's better
than scrolling, or squashing the buttons to very tiny
sizes (which is the only thing the Dock can do).

The taskbar also suffers from the completely unstable program placement.
Over the course of half an hour, the position of every single item in
the tasbar can and will change, leaving you hunting down items. If you
open a new instance of an already-running app, it opens somewhere in the
middle of the taskbar, whereas if there wasn't another instance already
running it opens at the end.

This is true. The taskbar's buttons have unpredictable
placement in this way; but at least the buttons do not
*always* move when another one is added.

The Dock, on the other hand, has nice and predictable program placement.
Programs stay in the same order all the time they're open, regardless of
what window management you do.

They stay in the same order, but shift to the side as
new items are added, to keep the Dock centered.

[snip]
Plus the start menu offers all sorts of system
configuration and control stuff, like the Apple
menu in Mac OS X. But the start menu can be
customized.

I don't see how you can say the apps in the Dock move around all the
time, because, quite frankly, they don't.

They do. Watch more closely while launching an app
not already in the dock- the icons move to make
room for it, and it maintain centering.

The Start Menu is a great solution as a complete repository for all your
applications, but for quick-launching the most common apps the Dock
beats it easily.

I prefer the Start Menu; it does require an extra click to
summon it, but that allows it to both contain a lot more
functionality, and also use less real estate when inactive.

The big reason for this is that the Dock pretends it's
not a launcher at all, and that all programs, running and non-running
are treated equally.

I know. I have long prefered document-centric UI to apps
centric, however, which is one reason I prefer working
with windows to working with processes.

I have the programs I use 95% of the time all sitting in the Dock. Their
positions and order do not change, no matter what windows I open and
close, or whether or not any of these apps are open at any particular
time. I click on an icon in the same place all the time, and I get the
app I want.

As long as you never launch any app not in the dock,
and never minimize a window, you are safe!

I don't need to perform any mental gymnastics to remember whether or not
the app is running (in Windows, the answer to this question determines
whether or not I use the Taskbar or the Start Menu) and I don't need to
wonder if it'll open alongside other similar windows in the middle of
the taskbar, or whether it'll appear appended to the end of my existing
application list. It's just always in the same place.

It may just be different mental models at work here; I'm
never concerned about whether an app is running- that's
Windows problem. I am looking for a window.

For the less-common apps that are launched now and again, the Start Menu
is better than the Dock. But Spotlight (and, in fairness, MSN Desktop
Search) is better than either.

There's something to that, but I found Spotlight
surprisingly slow on my PowerBook G4; annoyingly
slow to use as a program launcher. Windows
Desktop Search doesn't have that problem, but then,
this isn't a G4 either.

[snip]


.