I wouldn't mind seeing a small change for the green button. The button behaves like a toggle that switches between user-sized and optimum-size versions of the page. Maybe some indication of which mode the app is in would be nice, like a pushed in version of the button. That way, we can predictably tell what the app is going to do when we hit it.
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.
Apple Seeds Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) Build 9A500n
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, I am definitely not running a pirate copy. I can start Safari and it goes to the home page. If I type ANY address in the address bar and hit enter, I get the beach ball and the app freezes and I have to force quit it. I have the OS on an external LaCie drive although I am not sure if that has anything to do with it. I figured I might reinstall or just wait for the next seed.
Well, even Apple does it. See iPhoto. There really needs to be consistency here. The UI-elements should behave in similar way across different applications. It simply make no sense for the exact same UI-elemt to behave in different ways in different apps, without giving the user any idea what it would do.
Yes it is, which is why it shouldn't do it. Hopefully someone will tell Apple that closing apps from the reb button is not a good idea.
It does make sense.
It was already pointed out in this thread which apps close with a click of the red button. And it makes perfect sense there.
The idea is: An application that can never have more than one window (iPhoto, Photobooth, System Preferences) closes when closing the main window.
Whats so hard to understand in this simple concept? Are you a fresh switcher
Whats so hard to understand in this simple concept? Are you a fresh switcher
The fact that it needs to be explained means that its too confusing. And no, I'm not a fresh switcher. And do you want to know what you could do with that elitism of yours?
Windows application don't always actually.. quit...
As somebody else pointed out; there's no real need to actually quit applications all the time as the OS X virtual-memory mechanism handles running, but inactive, applications quite well. They won't 'steal' many CPU cycles only some space on your harddisk as inactive applications will be 'suspended' to disk. (and, yes, I agree that it is not allways clear what the behaviour of the 'red' button is.. close or quit?).
I don't think Windows is really different in this in many ocassions. For example;
The difference is really that Windows make it look like you've closed an application, where you actually didn't.
I do think there's room for improvement, for example:
As somebody else pointed out; there's no real need to actually quit applications all the time as the OS X virtual-memory mechanism handles running, but inactive, applications quite well. They won't 'steal' many CPU cycles only some space on your harddisk as inactive applications will be 'suspended' to disk. (and, yes, I agree that it is not allways clear what the behaviour of the 'red' button is.. close or quit?).
I don't think Windows is really different in this in many ocassions. For example;
- 'Quiting' Internet Explorer will NOT quit the application, it simply keeps running all the time because 'Windows Explorer' is actually ... Internet Explorer. Internet Explorer is running all the time (which explains why IE starts up a whole lot quicker than Firefox)
- Recent versions of Adobe Reader (5.5 and above) are also quite fast to start .. simply because they are also running all the time; they are automatically launched when you log in ('Adobe Reader Fast Start')
- Outlook ... is it ever really closed? Notifying you that a new email has arrived? (even when I do close Outlook, minutes before, I still get error messages many times telling me that 'the applicaton Outlook is not responding' when I try to log off)
- Also have an item called Microsoft Office in your 'startup' directory on Windows?
The difference is really that Windows make it look like you've closed an application, where you actually didn't.
I do think there's room for improvement, for example:
- Add a maximize option to the green button, for example holding down the 'shift' key when clicking the green button will maximize instead of zoom
- Recognize this? Open iTunes and click the green zoom-button to switch to mini player view... the red..yellow..green buttons are 'rotated' and now vertically, however not in the way you'd expect (rotate your head to the left... green..yellow..red. exactly the opposite as they were horizontally). Many times I've quit iTunes instead of 'zoomed' the window.. especially since I use the 'graphite' look.
Reading the manual and help text might help but the zoom button is application dependent. It doesn't have to work exactly the same way. Besides, Apple, since NeXT was merged, has been the most inconsistent of Mac OS X developers.
It does make sense.
It was already pointed out in this thread which apps close with a click of the red button. And it makes perfect sense there.
The idea is: An application that can never have more than one window (iPhoto, Photobooth, System Preferences) closes when closing the main window.
Whats so hard to understand in this simple concept? Are you a fresh switcher
No, it doesn't make sense to close some applications with the close button and not others. It's inconsistent and the guidelines from Apple specifically state not to do that.
[*]Recognize this? Open iTunes and click the green zoom-button to switch to mini player view... the red..yellow..green buttons are 'rotated' and now vertically, however not in the way you'd expect (rotate your head to the left... green..yellow..red. exactly the opposite as they were horizontally). Many times I've quit iTunes instead of 'zoomed' the window..
[/LIST]
OK, now turn your head to the right.... red, yellow, green, just like when they're horizontal.
Okay...but..
Yup, however, I turn -left- because that's where the edge of the window is. I know, maybe it's just me, but I find that it's much easier to locate the 'red/close' button, because it's on the corner of the window, than it is to click the green button ('locate' the window, activate it to make it active and -see- the colors (otherwise they're grey), then click on the bottom button. IMO toggling back to full-size from the mini-player is the most important of the three (green, yellow, red)?
Yup, however, I turn -left- because that's where the edge of the window is. I know, maybe it's just me, but I find that it's much easier to locate the 'red/close' button, because it's on the corner of the window, than it is to click the green button ('locate' the window, activate it to make it active and -see- the colors (otherwise they're grey), then click on the bottom button. IMO toggling back to full-size from the mini-player is the most important of the three (green, yellow, red)?
Exactly! It is inconsistent between applications and is confusing. Look at all the people here who have said they don't touch the zoom button, after years of being Mac users, because they are never quite sure what it will do. That should be telling us all something. The red and green buttons are both inconsistent and confusing - even to seasoned Mac users.
It is true that Apple will probably never fix this - I mean they claim to have made all their GUIs use a consistent theme for Leopard, but iPhoto/iTunes begs to differ. But we can still discuss the way things should be and hope that one day Apple fixes the problem.
The Trash needs a Shred option:
http://curmi.com/blog/2006/11/18/improving-mac-os-x-trash-and-shred/
I really can not understand why people have such a hard time with the red button. It is very intuitive if you are not stuck in the windows mindset. Some people who haven't used a computer before who do not get it, are those that are slow to learn computers.
It is not inconsistant. It is just smarter than some users. Take system preferences for example. You can not open multiple windows and more importantly not a different window that does a different thing. There is Zero reason to have system preferences running without a window. Same as iPhoto. The main window is the only window you can use, you can not for example open up 2-3 windows showing different albums or libraries. So again there is no reason to keep the application open when you close the only window possible. Photoshop or Safari on the other hand you can have other windows, you may very well want to have the program open without a document Open. I use Photoshop and Illustrator. I do not want to have to keep a window open to keep the program open. If they changed the red button to work as some people are saying it should, thats how it would be. Closing the last window open would close the program. I also do not want the desktop space waste that is windows which has 2 seperate menu bars all the time. One for the program and one for the document. I like the fact That Mac OS uses the main sytem menubar for all applications, it means I can hide most of the interface for a program and just deal with my document instead of having to have a "frame" For each item i work with. It is much more pleasing to the eye to have my documents hovering over my desktop instead of a gray background shell that traps it just so I have the option of clicking one button to close the program.
I really do wish those that have nothing better to do than nitpick over how "Apple should do this because this is how it works in windows" would just shut up and go back to using Windows and leave Mac OS X alone for those of us that can appreciate a good OS.
It is not inconsistant. It is just smarter than some users. Take system preferences for example. You can not open multiple windows and more importantly not a different window that does a different thing. There is Zero reason to have system preferences running without a window. Same as iPhoto. The main window is the only window you can use, you can not for example open up 2-3 windows showing different albums or libraries. So again there is no reason to keep the application open when you close the only window possible. Photoshop or Safari on the other hand you can have other windows, you may very well want to have the program open without a document Open. I use Photoshop and Illustrator. I do not want to have to keep a window open to keep the program open. If they changed the red button to work as some people are saying it should, thats how it would be. Closing the last window open would close the program. I also do not want the desktop space waste that is windows which has 2 seperate menu bars all the time. One for the program and one for the document. I like the fact That Mac OS uses the main sytem menubar for all applications, it means I can hide most of the interface for a program and just deal with my document instead of having to have a "frame" For each item i work with. It is much more pleasing to the eye to have my documents hovering over my desktop instead of a gray background shell that traps it just so I have the option of clicking one button to close the program.
I really do wish those that have nothing better to do than nitpick over how "Apple should do this because this is how it works in windows" would just shut up and go back to using Windows and leave Mac OS X alone for those of us that can appreciate a good OS.
iPhoto 8 has multiple windows
Apple seems to have overlooked this feature, as it still 'quits' the application if you click the close button in the main window (in my case, it -did- cause an error 'the application iPhoto exited unexpectedly')
Unfortunately this is no longer true in iPhoto 8; there's a new setting in the preferences 'edit photo in new window', which will open in a new window.
Apple seems to have overlooked this feature, as it still 'quits' the application if you click the close button in the main window (in my case, it -did- cause an error 'the application iPhoto exited unexpectedly')
Well, I have been talking about inconsistency inside OS X. I have NOT asked for the red button to work like it does in Windows. What I have complained about is the fact that in some apps it works in certain way, and in other apps it works in different way.
I have used computers since 1983 or so. And I do "get it". What I don't get is why it behaves differently between different apps. Because some apps have just one window? Well, iTunes has just one window, yet it doesn't quit from the red button. Yet iPhoto does. Where is the logic here? IIRC, Aperture doesn't quit from the red button, even though it too has just one window. Hellooo-o?
Yes it is. In some cases it works in one way, in other cases it works in different way. Is that "consistant"?
Sure there is. It loads faster if you leave it running in the background. And besides: when user starts an app, how is he to know that could that app have more than one window or not? Why can't you just admit that it's inconsistent?
There has been talk about inconsistency inside OS X. Even you talkde about how it behaves differently in different apps. Where exactly does any of that touch how the button works in Windows? I couldn't care less how it works in Windows, what I do care about how it works in OS X! Why do you keep on bringing up Windows to the discussion? Windows is irrelevant.
iTunes by default has only one window. But you can in fact have multiple windows. Try clicking double clicking on a playlist, and will wonders never cease, hold your breath now, we get a new window. You may want to check some of those other majorly confusing applications and see if they do, before listing them. As for non Apple products, perhaps there is some inconsistancy, but then, they are made by different companies and can set their own function.
What you see as inconsistant I see as designed with a purpose. Apple does not randomly choose wich of their applications close with the red button. And I thoroughly doubt it is because they do not think these things through.
Congratulations on having used a computer for 24 years, and still being novice enough to post incorrect information about a very simple application as your proof and assuring us that you in fact do not get it.
As for windows, it seems everyone who has mentioned why it is "wrong" behavior seems to use windows as their proof of how it should work. Apple designed it their way. It makes sense the way they did it and no it wasn't a random decision. Had people never used windows, never got used to the way it works there I am sure more people would have less time getting used to how Apple does it.
What you see as inconsistant I see as designed with a purpose. Apple does not randomly choose wich of their applications close with the red button. And I thoroughly doubt it is because they do not think these things through.
Congratulations on having used a computer for 24 years, and still being novice enough to post incorrect information about a very simple application as your proof and assuring us that you in fact do not get it.
As for windows, it seems everyone who has mentioned why it is "wrong" behavior seems to use windows as their proof of how it should work. Apple designed it their way. It makes sense the way they did it and no it wasn't a random decision. Had people never used windows, never got used to the way it works there I am sure more people would have less time getting used to how Apple does it.
Your download package is corrupted. Go to /Library/Packages/ and delete the folder titled 'Mac OS X Leopard 9A499 Seed Update'. Start up Software Update and you will be able to download again.
Try to take notice of the download process, it does get corrupted from time to time. Once that happens, the installation(update) process will get stalled when you restart you Mac.
Hope this helps!
The red button closes the window. If there is no function an app could perform in a windowless state, it should quit. Just think: Imagine how awful it would be if closing a Safari window completely quitted the application, or if you closed System Preferences and accidentally left it running, performing no function whatsoever?
iTunes mustn't quit on close, as that would stop your music. Same with Mail, etc. How about we just accept that, apart from with iPhoto, Apple really got this right.
And I don't think they did anything wrong with the minimize button at all.
iTunes mustn't quit on close, as that would stop your music. Same with Mail, etc. How about we just accept that, apart from with iPhoto, Apple really got this right.
And I don't think they did anything wrong with the minimize button at all.