Mac OS X Leopard Support Issues and Cool Features

[HLdan]

Yes, but when the icon changes to show only the first item in that stack (and for example if that stack is your "documents" folder") and you have more than one stack in your dock and they're all set to show the first item in that stack/folder, how can you tell them apart without opening them up? I work for Apple as well, and have had training, but it's an issue customers have addressed as well as fellow mac specialists, geniuses and creatives. It doesn't make sense, Apple should allow for the option to change the stack icon as well as "sorting by name" so that the stack icon still shows what folder is in the dock.

But if you think about it, the way Stacks works is logical. To have the the stack resemble a folder isn't. Think of when you stack papers into a pile. The first document on top of the stack is what you see. That's exactly how Stacks works.
Sorry but too many people on this forum are picky (not saying you are) all the way down to the dock separator not being in perfect perspective or the reflections from the dock icons not reflecting correctly.
If Apple did not set up Stacks in the logical way the forum members would really complain even though it's the way they want it.

Stacks behaves properly as it should. Any other way is illogical.

 

[meagain]

I dissagree - I want folder icon options to choose from to place these items in an easily identifyable folder. Identifyable at a glance. I have multiple websites open with multiple minimized at all times and I need something to stand out. I don't want a stack of papers, I want the stack of papers in a marked folder. I would try to download/install my own if the darned 3rd parties would have prepared for Leopard.

 

[HLdan]

I dissagree - I want folder icon options to choose from to place these items in an easily identifyable folder. Identifyable at a glance. I have multiple websites open with multiple minimized at all times and I need something to stand out. I don't want a stack of papers, I want the stack of papers in a marked folder. I would try to download/install my own if the darned 3rd parties would have prepared for Leopard.

See but what you are talking about is a folder with documents in it and that's not a "stack". A stack of papers in a folder is not a "stack". That's where everyone is getting it backwards. Yes, before we could stick folders in the dock and unfortunately Stacks replaced that but when you pile things in a stack the top document is suppose to show.
What you are going after is a standard folder and at this point it's going to have to reside in the Finder and not on the Stacks floor.

 

[meagain]

Well, I made folders for all my stacks so they don't look like the rest of the icons in my dock. I like it that way. If I see a folder in my dock, that means to me that it's a stack.

 

[bboyredcel]

Does anyone else love the new "Help"?

I love the way it shows Menu Items, and where they are. Thats fantastic... I guess some people over in cupertino went "Where is that? hmmm... view? no... tools? nope... File? Noo... WTF!" one too many times.

lol

Check it out in finder as a good example.. just click help then type "View" or something else like "Copy" that is usually found in the menubar... And Voila!

now, submit... where is that? hmmm... oh, this will never work.

 

[panagiotisgr]

I got a PowerBook G4 1.5 17' and 'till now Leopard runs just fine. The only problem i got is the 3d party application. They need updates for 10.5. Adium apears to be buggy on me, I can't install PS CS3, aMSN got problem too and i hate the new desktop pic. I missed the blue one

 

[Porco]

But if you think about it, the way Stacks works is logical. To have the the stack resemble a folder isn't. Think of when you stack papers into a pile. The first document on top of the stack is what you see. That's exactly how Stacks works.
Sorry but too many people on this forum are picky (not saying you are) all the way down to the dock separator not being in perfect perspective or the reflections from the dock icons not reflecting correctly.
If Apple did not set up Stacks in the logical way the forum members would really complain even though it's the way they want it.

Stacks behaves properly as it should. Any other way is illogical.

Can I refer you to https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/375615/ ?

I have no idea why anyone actually likes Stacks right now to be honest, because unless I'm missing something, there isn't anything functional that it can do that you couldn't already do in Tiger (or even in Panther for that matter!!). I already have, in Tiger, my downloads folder in the dock, from which I can get to any recently downloaded file. The difference is, if I have a folder in the downloads 'Stack' (as it would be forcibly converted to in 10.5) I would have to open a pointless finder window to see what was in that folder. That takes one click more. That's just stupid, not "logical"

I'm quite happy to concede that with the old functionality added back, and an easier way to apply an icon of your own choosing Stacks could go from being a step backwards to a step forwards. If it's not fixed in 10.5.1 I'll be looking for a 3rd party solution, which would just be ridiculous. Hopefully Apple are getting lots of feedback on this issue from people who've been using folders in the dock for years. Stacks as a metaphor for creating a pile of documents is fine (personally I think the icons look a right mess all piled on top of each other, much MORE cluttered), but it shouldn't have come at the cost of such a great feature, it's just silly.

 

[irahodges]

I got a PowerBook G4 1.5 17' and 'till now Leopard runs just fine. The only problem i got is the 3d party application. They need updates for 10.5. Adium apears to be buggy on me, I can't install PS CS3, aMSN got problem too and i hate the new desktop pic. I missed the blue one

You can still use the blue one. Check your "Apple Images" in Desktop under System Preferences.

 

[freeny]

See but what you are talking about is a folder with documents in it and that's not a "stack". A stack of papers in a folder is not a "stack". That's where everyone is getting it backwards. Yes, before we could stick folders in the dock and unfortunately Stacks replaced that but when you pile things in a stack the top document is suppose to show.
What you are going after is a standard folder and at this point it's going to have to reside in the Finder and not on the Stacks floor.

OK fine, I get it, Stacks are "stacks".

So where are my "folders with documents" IN MY DOCK option that Ive been using for the past 5 years?

See where we are getting at?

 

[HLdan]

Can I refer you to https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/375615/ ?

I have no idea why anyone actually likes Stacks right now to be honest, because unless I'm missing something, there isn't anything functional that it can do that you couldn't already do in Tiger (or even in Panther for that matter!!). I already have, in Tiger, my downloads folder in the dock, from which I can get to any recently downloaded file. The difference is, if I have a folder in the downloads 'Stack' (as it would be forcibly converted to in 10.5) I would have to open a pointless finder window to see what was in that folder. That takes one click more. That's just stupid, not "logical"

I'm quite happy to concede that with the old functionality added back, and an easier way to apply an icon of your own choosing Stacks could go from being a step backwards to a step forwards. If it's not fixed in 10.5.1 I'll be looking for a 3rd party solution, which would just be ridiculous. Hopefully Apple are getting lots of feedback on this issue from people who've been using folders in the dock for years. Stacks as a metaphor for creating a pile of documents is fine (personally I think the icons look a right mess all piled on top of each other, much MORE cluttered), but it shouldn't have come at the cost of such a great feature, it's just silly.

You do have a good point about a folder with items inside not being convenient to access from Stacks. To answer your question about how Stacks could possibly be useful? I like the fact that I can now just click and my app choices show up in the grid and I click and my app opens and then the Stack closes. How's that better than before?
Well I hate to say it but the Start menu in Windows was "functionally" better than what could be done in Tiger. In Tiger I could drag my Applications folder to the dock and access my files but I had to either "right click" or "control click" to get the menu to shoot up and access my files. If I just clicked then a whole Finder window would open, I choose my app then I still had to close the Finder window.

Friends would come over and never knew to right click on my Applications folder and once again a Finder window would open. Having Stacks to access my files using a standard left click is much easier but I agree Stacks is not perfect for folders residing inside the stack.

 

[Doctor Q]

Perhaps when you click a folder in a Stack the contents of that folder should replace the Stack, as if that folder had been the Stack in the Dock.

I admit that this design doesn't include an elegant way to set the Stack-display preference for that folder (fan, grid, automatic) or a way to move back up to the enclosing folder/Stack. That will require some more thought.

 

[Porco]

In Tiger I could drag my Applications folder to the dock and access my files but I had to either "right click" or "control click" to get the menu to shoot up and access my files.

Are you serious? Stacks is better because you can left click instead of right click?! C'mon, you must see how silly that looks as a justification? I really don't think the loss of sub-folder access is worth it for changing the right/ctrl click button to the left button.

I actually do think moving everything (the stack/folder including subfolder access to the left button would be better, because you could still add an alias of a folder to the dock to open the finder window instead of a stack instead I guess.

Anyway, here's hoping for 10.5.1

 

[HLdan]

Are you serious? Stacks is better because you can left click instead of right click?! C'mon, you must see how silly that looks as a justification? I really don't think the loss of sub-folder access is worth it for changing the right/ctrl click button to the left button.

I actually do think moving everything (the stack/folder including subfolder access to the left button would be better, because you could still add an alias of a folder to the dock to open the finder window instead of a stack instead I guess.

Anyway, here's hoping for 10.5.1

I don't think you even read my previous posts. I was making the same point you just made. I was saying that Stacks IS better because I don't have to drag my Applications folder to the dock anymore and right click to expand the contents. I prefer the Stacks way.

 

[Doctor Q]

If you fill in a form on a web page and try to close the Safari tab, you now get the message

Are you sure you want to close this tab?

You have entered text. If you close the tab, your changes will be lost. Do you want to close the tab anyway?​

Maybe that will prevent somebody from losing a valuable forum post!

 

[Doctor Q]

I've been finding Tiger-Leopard differences by accident, when something doesn't "feel right."

Here are a couple of examples in the Finder:

When you open a window that you previously scrolled within, the scroll bar is positioned at the same place it was before. Without ever realizing it, I was expecting my windows to be at the top every time I opened them. I thought some of my files were missing since the alphabetically early files weren't shown! Then I noticed the scroll bar... duh!

When you Connect to Server, and have a scrolling list of previous connections, it scrolls to the last server used. My instinct to click the one that's first in the display didn't work.

These features will be convenient in the long run, but cause little pauses as I work since I'm not used to them yet.

 

[Porco]

I don't think you even read my previous posts. I was making the same point you just made. I was saying that Stacks IS better because I don't have to drag my Applications folder to the dock anymore and right click to expand the contents. I prefer the Stacks way.

Oh, I know that, I was agreeing with you that a left-click is probably more sensible to access the Stack in the first place than a right click, I was just underlining my opinion that I think that change is a tiny and trivial one which was not worth doing if it meant throwing out the extremely useful ability of being able to browse through several layers of folders in one click (whether left or right, it makes no difference). I think I'd rather they had left Stacks, as is, an optional extra at most until they put back the sub-folder access back in.

 

[Doctor Q]

If you have the "Show all file extensions" option enabled in Finder Prefereces, then when you press enter to rename the selected file in a window, the filename is highlighted but not the extension. This makes it easier to rename the file without changing the extension.

To rename the file and extension, press command-a before you type the new filename.

 

[3282872]

See but what you are talking about is a folder with documents in it and that's not a "stack". A stack of papers in a folder is not a "stack". That's where everyone is getting it backwards. Yes, before we could stick folders in the dock and unfortunately Stacks replaced that but when you pile things in a stack the top document is suppose to show.
What you are going after is a standard folder and at this point it's going to have to reside in the Finder and not on the Stacks floor.

Makes sense, but the original implementation of stacks was for creating them on the "Desktop", not the Dock. I would much rather have stacks as Smart folders, similar to smart mailboxes, in which you can have a "Stack" of PDF's (for example) gathered on your desktop (much like you would have a stack of files on your desk organized). Let's say you have a ton of documents on your desktop; jpeg's, doc's, pdf's, etc. It would be AWESOME if you could have your desktop automatically organize all your files in STACKS according to file type. THAT makes much more sense to me then the stacks that are currently implemented in the doc. Having a stack in your dock organized by name just throws a random object in your dock, and if you have a lot of stacks in your dock (such as I do) coupled with open Safari pages and other applications it only makes for a muddled dock rather than an organized desktop. Plus, if the idea of stacks isn't to have an organized folder, than why does Leopard come pre-programmed with a downloads stack in the dock with a downloads folder icon (until the stack is changed to "Sort by Name" that is)?

I agree that the concept of stacks is antithetical to what they have turned out to be, but personally I would have liked to have seen Leopard implement a "Smart Stack" option for the desktop rather than what Stacks has turned out to be in the Dock. I'm not nitpicking, I like Leopard a heck of a lot, but if consumers don't make objections and comments, then how will anything improve?

 

[German]

Apple petition to support open-source FLAC lossless audio codec

Apple petition to support open-source FLAC lossless audio codec

I encourage all people who are interested in iPods, iTunes, iPhones and Apple TVs being able to natively support FLAC to contact Apple (politely) and ask for Apple to adopt this open-source free lossless standard format (FLAC) in all their audio products. That way Apple will truly have open, standard (read non-proprietary) support in their popular iPod, iTunes and other products that can freely be read by other competitior's software and hardware products.

The more open formats that Apple adopts, the better we all are. Being tied into proprietary Microsoft WMA (DRM and non-DRM) and Apple ALAC formats is not wise in the long run and will require audio conversions in the future. Better to support a popular, non-proprietary, free lossless format now.

More: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=53975&st=0

Would you like iTunes to support FLAC? So would we!

Due to the design of iTunes, only Apple can add support for FLAC [1]. And why wouldn't they? FLAC usage is accelerating, many bands like Pearl Jam, Phish, Dave Matthews Band, Metallica -- the same hip, influential people whose fans Apple courts -- are already distributing music in FLAC format, and users are clamoring for it in the iTunes forums:

* [2] "I have seen a lot of people on live music message boards turn away from the iPod because there are other music players that support FLAC. I am on the verge... and I am an Apple die-hard!"
* [3] "If your source material is FLAC (as many bands have gone this way to distribute online music) your choice is to use another music player ..."
* [4] (many more requests)

Make your voice heard! Fill out the iTunes feedback form (politely!) and let them know. Feel free to also direct them to this page. We at the FLAC project stand ready to help as well. http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html

XiphQT, through tremendous effort by developers, goes as far as possible in allowing some playback capability via QuickTime. But proper iTunes support -- tag handling, no import delays, etc. -- is not possible without Apple.

http://flac.sourceforge.net/itunes.html

FLAC support in Mac OS X 10.5 “Leopard” SDK?
What does it mean "supported (...) via its developer SDK"? That's a quite inaccurate statement and I don't think word "supported" can be used with what there is in the Leopard developer SDK. An example implementation of an AudioCodec built on top of libFLAC is all there is. Without any attempts to support any container file format that is used for FLAC (native FLAC, Ogg FLAC) it's of no use to normal users, and of little use even to developers. And there are no "FLAC tools embedded in the Leopard SDK".

For interested a bit more details on that subject in my post here. => http://barelyfocused.net/blog/2007/10/28/flac-support-in-mac-os-x-105-leopard/

http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html

 

[freeny]

Apple petition to support open-source FLAC lossless audio codec

May I assume you work for the FLAC people?
Half of your posts pertain to forwarding the FLAC codec

You can already play lossless file formats on the ipod.
What makes the FLAC codec so special?

 

[diamond.g]

What makes the FLAC codec so special?

AFAIK the F(ree) is what makes it special. Not much else. Are Apple Lossless encoders free?

 

[Doctor Q]

Not Now

This is nice. After a software update requiring a restart, I can postpone the final step.

 

[72930]

This is nice. After a software update requiring a restart, I can postpone the final step.

And the progress bar during a restart caused by updating...

 

[Doctor Q]

And the progress bar during a restart caused by updating...

I wasn't as impressed with that feature. The progress bar moved a bit, then sat there making no progress for a while. It never reached the halfway point, and then it disappeared, leaving me staring at a blue screen for many seconds, wondering if the Mac was still doing anything.

 

[72930]

I wasn't as impressed with that feature. The progress bar moved a bit, then sat there making no progress for a while. It never reached the halfway point, and then it disappeared, leaving me staring at a blue screen for many seconds, wondering if the Mac was still doing anything.

Worked well for me...should be fixed for good in an update...its a proof-of-concept if nothing else...