I've watched 3 pages of this and have come to the conclusion that those touting MC are using iToys or laptops and not a desktop system with a mouse. And who the hell uses "full screen" on a 27" screen??
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mission Control - Still A Failure
- Thread starter wikus
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, you can't classify technology as AN INDUSTRY per se... it should exist to help you perform tasks that sometimes are done by someone working in an industry.
You shouldn't need to adapt to technology, technology should adapt to you don't you think? Technology didn't create itself you know? It was WE, as humans, that created it (and constantly continue to create new technologies and improve old one's)! Sometimes (most of the times really) new one's don't have a purpose and old one's are ruined instead of being improved...
... witch takes me back to the topic, mission control sucks big time because, as someone already mentioned, it doesn't work for visually oriented persons (like me)! And Spaces+Expose probably sucked big time for language oriented people! So, would it be that difficult to have AN OPTION to choose between two modes of window management?
KnightWRX said:
Why in the hell should I have to "adapt to the system I'm using"? The goal of window management is to increase productivity... if I have to adapt to what Apple (or Microsoft, or Linux, or Google) think is more productive to me it will DEcrease my productivity big time, specially if they keep changing the way it works every two years!
I was more than happy with the "cheap implementation of virtual desktops" found in 10.5 (and even with the one in 10.6) precisely because I didn't have to adapt nor to learn anything... (And frankly that's why, for me, Apple products are normally better than it's competitors). I started using it and easily found out how I could take advantage of the features it provided. And I'm sure it's not because it was implemented MY one and only way of doing things, I'm pretty sure many other people use it differently than me and it works great for them too.
Now, if it didn't work for you, why couldn't Apple keep what was working for so many people and on top of that find a way to implement something that will work for you and the others who like the Mission Control way of doing things?
So don't tell me I have to adapt my workflow, my workflow is what it is because that's the way I manage to be more productive, because it fits my personality and my capacities perfectly, and naturally. If you like to (re)adapt your workflow every two years just to fit what the OS maker thinks is the best why didn't you adapt to Spaces+Expose?
For now I'm staying with 10.6 and I love it... I certainly would like to try versions, auto-save and the "keep your desktop like it was before shutting down" thing, but I value Spaces+Expose more than those things so... ReSpaceApp for Mountain Lion PLEASEEEEEE!!!
Quite a few people I would imagine. Full screen is a convenient way of getting apps that I have running all the time (like mail, parallels and iTunes) out of the way. I'm not running a multi monitor system so the limitations of full screen don't apply to me and it means I don't have to stuff around creating spaces for each application and assigning the app to that space.
For a lot of people mission control/app expose works, for a lot of others it doesn't. Hopefully this ReSpaceApp fixes the problems for those people so they can stop posting the same tired threads every week.
This post has gotten old fast. MC works for some and it doesn't for others. But those of us who do enjoy MC are of course chalked off as iToy users and aren't qualified to make an argument for MC. The grouping of windows can be annoying but it gives a cleaner look at all of what the user has open and is using. While Apple is all about a clean computing experience MC makes sense however, as a trade off for a clean and organized UI some have lost the functionality that exposé and spaces offered. To each his own I guess.
The only other thing to complain about in Lion is 'Versions' (a ridiculously STUPID method of saving files).
If only Apple knew what the word OPTIONS means, we'd have the OPTION to turn on or off anything we didn't like in System Preferences. There would be no complaining. Its fine if to give us new features, but Apple is obsessed about forcing consumers to do things their way and ONLY one way without giving us some choice.
What is so wrong with adding some options in System Preferences? Why are so many Apple fanboys so devoted to a brand that they object to even having choice? It doesnt take away their glorified and inefficient use of Mission Control.
Block level snapshotting of documents is stupid now ?
You must not be a profesional. All the Pros need block level snapshotting. It's built in to the big boy toys like NetApp's OpenFiler, Windows Server with Volume Shadow Copy, LVM2 in HP-UX/Linux, ZFS in Solaris/FreeBSD, etc..
But I understand why you would think that, Versions is very much a pro-feature. You need to be a pro to understand.
Block level snapshotting of documents is stupid now ?
You must not be a profesional. All the Pros need block level snapshotting. It's built in to the big boy toys like NetApp's OpenFiler, Windows Server with Volume Shadow Copy, LVM2 in HP-UX/Linux, ZFS in Solaris/FreeBSD, etc..
But I understand why you would think that, Versions is very much a pro-feature. You need to be a pro to understand.
No. Apple's implementation of it is though.
1) Duplicate instead of Save As adds extra, unnecessary steps. Now I have to close the original window and move the new window to the correct location instead of just creating a new document in its place.
- Extra steps = Not well thought out = Poor design
2) The assumption that all document modifications are to be saved is a poor assumption.
- Preview used to be a great application to open a quick image, rotate it to look at it from a different angle and close without saving because the original orientation was fine. Now this workflow and other similar workflows used by others is no longer valid
- There is no good reason why it MUST work this way. Apple did not take the time to properly design Versions to be robust. A simple solution would be to treat locked documents like the traditional document, where changes could be made without extra alerts popping up, without duplicating, without re-closing windows.
- Extra steps = Not well thought out = Poor design
Versions could be great, but lately Apple is not taking the time to think things through. Although, I doubt you would understand because, surprise, surprise, someone working in IT blames the user first.
I'd rather a few extra steps on setup that save me a whole lot of extra steps on restore.
Again, pros understand. It's the click monkeys who count productivity as number of clicks that don't.
Setting up Continuous Access between 2 LUNs in my XP arrays takes a few extra steps. Losing my primary datacenter site and still having my SAP instance up and running with no data loss though... that's priceless. Those first few initial steps that you call poor design just saved 15 hours of restoring files and bringing the system back up.
No, adding a few extra steps is not poor design if those steps make a lot of sense. Again, only something Pros understand. Keep using those iToys my friend, keep using them with their few steps and little versatility.
(2 can play at this "Pros" game you see...).
I'd rather a few extra steps on setup that save me a whole lot of extra steps on restore.
Again, pros understand. It's the click monkeys who count productivity as number of clicks that don't.
Setting up Continuous Access between 2 LUNs in my XP arrays takes a few extra steps. Losing my primary datacenter site and still having my SAP instance up and running with no data loss though... that's priceless. Those first few initial steps that you call poor design just saved 15 hours of restoring files and bringing the system back up.
No, adding a few extra steps is not poor design if those steps make a lot of sense. Again, only something Pros understand. Keep using those iToys my friend, keep using them with their few steps and little versatility.
(2 can play at this "Pros" game you see...).
Poor design is when there are extra steps that don't need to be there. With a little more thought Versions could be more powerful, just as restore happy, take fewer steps, and easier to use.
You can try and avoid the issues all you want, but you can't argue as to WHY Apple's implementation is perfect.
Versions = Poor Design
is there anything good in lion and mountain lion according to you?
youre at 10.3, i recon?
i wish i could see all the posts from you about 10.5 and 10.6
No, I run 10.6 with the 10.5 Expose hack and 10.7 on my portable. The only negative critiques of 10.6 you will see is the grid spacing of Expose. Until Lion I was a big Apple fanboy.
Yes, there are good things about Lion. The new gestures are nice, I use Launch Pad a lot but it would be better if Apple fixed the bug that causes icons to move on their own. I like the new Mail but it would be improved if it showed the entire conversation the way gmail does, but it is still a big improvement over 10.6 mail. The new symbol browser is nice.
Other than that, Lion doesn't offer improvements but is rather annoying and I stopped recommending Apple Computers to people for the first time in 8 years since I got my Macbook Air late last year.
I find 10.7 to be filled with poorly thought out software. iCal sucks and is filled with bugs, Address Book is annoying, Mission Control is crippled, Versions is half-assed and messes up some great programs when it could have been amazing with a little more thought put into it.
In summary, the major changes in Lion were all negative and have well-earned their negative critiques.
After reading quoted text I wish the same dude!
----------
Come on, its not that bad until it comes to Mission control, that really sucks IMHO.
I haven't seen any extra steps that don't need to be there in Versions. How is it poor design ? Duplicate forces you to "save" the new duplicate copy ? Forces you to manually close the old, duplicated one ?
You assume that everyone that duplicates wants to close the old version. And saving the new duplicated copy makes tons of sense.
I'm sorry, I just don't see the "poor design" there... I see a lot of uffing and puffing about nothing. Things real Pros don't have time to do, because they're busy working with Pro tools, not iToys like some of you click-counting people do.
(I sure like throwing back those "Real Pros!" comments. I can see why some of you try to do it everytime you talk about features).
Really, how often do you need two Versions open at the same time as compared to just saving as in a new location or with a new file name to send to someone? Personally, I've never once needed to have two Versions open at the same time but I routinely save as to make it explicitly clear to people I'm collaborating with which version I'm sending out.
If Versions was perfect then there wouldn't be so many complaints. Just like if Mission Control was better than 2/3rds of people at Macrumors wouldn't prefer the old Expose/Spaces.
Maybe you prefer to be mediocre and are okay with mediocre software.
You need to learn that what works for you doesn't work for everyone else. Just because you think Mission Control is mediocre doesn't mean that everyone feels that way. Some people feel that it is superior. It's all about how you use your Mac. I personally feel that Expose/Spaces was mediocre when compared to Mission Control. Mission Control makes everything work smoother for me, yet I can accept why others would prefer Expose/Spaces. Why can't you do the same? Liking Lion's features does not make the mediocre.
I don't think that there are as many complaints as you think. People who are satisfied usually stay silent, whereas people who aren't happy are the ones to speak up/vote in the polls. When it comes to Lion's features, I've always felt that the people who complained were just a vocal minority. Most Mac users probably either like it or are indifferent to it.
Here you go:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1346288/
Now you can help make Mission Control popular. Currently 2/3rds of respondents find Mission Control lacking, you can add you voice to those that like Mission Control and not feel oppressed by those of us that hate it.
+1. This is exactly how I feel too. Mountain Lion is how Lion should have been really, but I still don't like it. The merger of iOS and OS X features brings an inconsistent feel, as though the software has not been very well thought out. The new features are either pointless, a reskinned/bloated version of a feature we already had, or intrusive and unintuitive.
for a survey you need a representative sample
imagine the results if i post a pool in bmw forum which car is the best.
here, on forum, you only meet people searching for solutions to their problems or posting complaints, and maybe 20-30 percent of people like me who just like reading, i.e. nothing near average, e.g. go on imac forum, you'll only see problems, faults etc., one could easily come to the conclusion that imacs are the worst computers ever.
its the same with those ODD removal pools, theres no representative sample here on forums...
if you took a representative sample from the whole mac community (both pros, prosumers, consumers) it would probably be around 5 percent against MC (thats how apple sees it)
bottom line, that pool you mention in your every 3rd post is completely irrelevant. mission control is probably the one of the more popular features among the vast majority of mac community. how many threads have been here about MC? except this one?
in the end, you have two options:
first stay with 10.6 (which doesnt make sense, but since you dont like (even hate) the new features, thats the only way to go
second, wait for third party, but their impact is limited if you dislike so many features in lion/mountain lion/what ever comes next
and most important of all, there is no reason for you to justify yourself and your opinion here on forums, someone will constantly attack you and you'll constantly defend your stance, nothing good can come out of it.
unless youre looking for people who think the same as you to give you some 'comfort' and approval of your opinion and stance because basically thats all you can get.
i hope you find a way to overcome your MC problem
for a survey you need a representative sample
imagine the results if i post a pool in bmw forum which car is the best.
here, on forum, you only meet people searching for solutions to their problems or posting complaints, and maybe 20-30 percent of people like me who just like reading, i.e. nothing near average, e.g. go on imac forum, you'll only see problems, faults etc., one could easily come to the conclusion that imacs are the worst computers ever.
its the same with those ODD removal pools, theres no representative sample here on forums...
if you took a representative sample from the whole mac community (both pros, prosumers, consumers) it would probably be around 5 percent against MC (thats how apple sees it)
bottom line, that pool you mention in your every 3rd post is completely irrelevant. mission control is probably the one of the more popular features among the vast majority of mac community. how many threads have been here about MC? except this one?
in the end, you have two options:
first stay with 10.6 (which doesnt make sense, but since you dont like (even hate) the new features, thats the only way to go
second, wait for third party, but their impact is limited if you dislike so many features in lion/mountain lion/what ever comes next
and most important of all, there is no reason for you to justify yourself and your opinion here on forums, someone will constantly attack you and you'll constantly defend your stance, nothing good can come out of it.
unless youre looking for people who think the same as you to give you some 'comfort' and approval of your opinion and stance because basically thats all you can get.
i hope you find a way to overcome your MC problem
While the poll I linked to is not representative of the entire Apple community, it is the only real set of data that is available. I could talk about my friends and family that dislike Mission Control, but that is, in my opinion, an even worse sample set. So I use what is available. You could look at the App Store rating and between 17% and 30% of users dislike Lion (All versions and current version respectively). Unfortunately, this does not break it down into what they disliked nor their views on Mission Control, but a 1 in 3 people disliking a version OS X seems pretty large.
You are more than welcome to provide a link to a survey backing up your claim that Mission Control is "probably the one of the more popular features among the vast majority of mac community."
Thanks, I'm aware that some people in this forum will constantly attack my position on the issue and am fine defending it as this is an issue that needs to be discussed. Silence gets you nothing and since I'm running the AFM right now I have small 45 second windows of downtime between scans that need to be filled and are, unfortunately, are horrible for reading journal articles or writing papers, so I might as well discuss an issue that is important to me.
I understand the some people like MC. That is great. There is also a large contingent of people that find MC and Lion lacking the level of polish we've come to expect from Apple products. Thus, it needs to be brought into the light, discussed, submitted as feedback, submitted to Tim Cook, etc. These discussions and criticism are often heard by Apple and can result in meaningful change.
Also, these discussions also serve to demonstrate support new software products by outside developers, if we stay silent then it looks like no one has a problem and that there is no market for an outside developer.
Personally, I use a lot of products by outside developers to enhance OS X, including TotalFinder, SugarSync, Typinator, etc. These products serve to enhance, augment, or replace OSX services and without a clear market, these products may not come to existence and my process flow would not be nearly as seamless as it is (on 10.6 at least). Thus, these forums serve a useful and necessary function regardless of if Apple changes anything.
Just this morning. Yes. Really. Was a pain since Gimp doesn't have duplicate. Had to save as my first image to another file, then re-open the original to keep working on it and the new version.
Again, the extra clicks are there for a reason. Versions brings so much goodness to the table, the few extra clicks on Duplicate hardly matter in the big picture scheme. You just want to be a contrarian to everything in Lion.
Just go to File -> Open Recent -> FileName
Or use Photoshop:
Image -> Duplicate
Gimp is Open Source so it should be pretty easy to copy that functionality from Photoshop.
So we agree Duplicate is not poorly designed! Great! Good to see you being positive for a change.
I wouldn't use Photoshop though for what is essentially a hobby project. I'm off from work today, waiting on UPS.
Actually, I disagree, Duplicate in 10.7 is poorly designed. Duplicate in Photoshop is a separate command from Save As because it is so rarely used. In fact, it is so rarely used that Gimp, the open source alternative, did not even bother implementing this minor feature. If Duplicate was widely used, then it would have been implemented by now.