Mac OS X Lion Notes: iOS Scroll Bars, Any Corner Resizing, Dock Changes

[twilson]

By your definition, OS9 multi-tasked. Suspending apps in the background is cooperative multi-tasking. It's what OS 9 and earlier used, it's what Windows 3.1 used.

Do I need to go on ?

Please don't! I can see a lot of apps on OS X still being fully multitasking, but realistically if you haven't looked at an app for a while, why can't it suspend it to disk and make the RAM available AUTOMATICALLY to a program that needs it?

"Automatically as needed" is the key. Most users have no idea what will and won't need memory, so let the OS decide, after all it is in the best place to make such a decision. Even geeks don't have enough info at hand at any given moment to make that kind of decision, regardless of what they might think.

Yes, it is. Sometimes when the GF is yelling asking me to come downstairs to help her with something, if the page I'm reading has 5% left, I'm going to finish. If it has 50% left and I know the first 50% were long, I'm going to go help her.

Quick. Visual. Cue.

Scrolling ever such a small amount, to satisfy this almost irrelevantly proportioned use-case (versus day-to-day use) is hardly a big deal. And if the 50% was that long for it really to matter, you'd have noticed that fact the most recent time you scrolled, wouldn't you?

Realistically the scenario laid out by you will happen less than 0.5% of the time, it isn't really worth wasting any time giving thought to. Remember the 80-20 rule.

 

[QuarterSwede]

Personally I'd like to have the option to have the dock show the active marker below icons (or not if that is preferred). Not for myself so much but for many users that are unsure what they are doing half the time it is a visual reminder to quit apps not in use. Many coming from Windows still forget many apps don't close when the window is closed.

And they still don't know what the dots mean. Just ask my mother.

 

[iBug2]

Btw, I have an idea. For every poster here claiming that he/she will not upgrade to Lion, based on the features been shown, let's make a list of them and check after Lion ships if they actually do upgrade or not

 

[HLdan]

Wow, that's innovative. KDE, Gnome and Windows have had that since... Ever?

It's not that it's innovative, but it just shows that Apple is finally listening to their customer's concerns.

IMO, the absence of the indicator light makes sense. When you close the window and the app remains running it's barely using any ram anyway. I'm sick of having to explain to a newbie that closing the window doesn't quit the app when it's a multi-windowed app. I hate saying this but that's the only thing that's easier on Windows. I'm not saying it's better, but it's more cut and dry, close the window and the app just quits, there's nothing to explain. We don't really need an indicator on Mac OS X, we really never did, so I think this is a step in the right direction.

 

[phpmaven]

Fresh open? It's not going to remain the the RAM forever. I doubt Apple will do that. It's completely stupid unless RAM prices drop like rocks. Most likely, it'll save the application state in some kind of cache and then use that to run the app the next time you open the app instead of a fresh start. Sure it'll take some space, but not like GBs or anything. Probably a few MBs is all it needs for 1 app's cache file.

RAM is already ridiculously cheap. There's no excuse for not having plenty of it in your system.

 

[Digitalclips]

When an app is about to crash, the OS will let it crash and saves your document, then relaunches with your document. Users hate to see when an application crashed. This way they can claim OSX is crashproof.

As you say, this way they can claim ('state' would be a better term here) OS X is crash proof (or damned close). This has been a huge improvement in the computing experience compared to the situation when a badly written app can crash the entire OS.

 

[MacHiavelli]

With love and respect to everyone for their views, I think some of the comments really say more about people's attitude to change rather than whether Lion really will be better than Snow Leopard or not.

First of all, we don't really know what Lion will be in its final release, so much of the speculation is rash.

Second, some people really seem to be averse to change: they like the way certain things work and are used to doing things in a particular way.

If Apple makes fundamental changes, you can either rue those changes and wish for it to always be 2010 for ever more, or you can give the changes a chance to see if you really like them or not.

The fact is, Apple will listen to its user base to some extent, but it isn't going to halt progress just because some people want their computer usage to stay pretty much as it is now - apart from wanting it to be for ever faster.

Ways of working change. Hardware and software change. And the people using the hardware and software are given the chance to change.

In the end, "we" old Mac users don't matter. If Apple gets rid of the "apps are running dots", the next generation of Mac users (people who perhaps until now have only used iPods, iPads and iPhones) won't care as they won't know that they ever existed.

Being a reactionary against change is to hold up a banner of age and intransigence.

So wait until the full version of Lion is out before you judge it.

If there are things you don't like, just try to embrace them.

Strive to be like your children (by embracing the technology of their age), but don't seek to make them be like you.

Life doesn't go backwards. Forget the ways/technology of yesterday and embrace the ways/technology of tomorrow.

You may regret the passing of some things along the way, but you'll be richer if you live in the future and stop hankering for the past.

Apple may give you something much better that the "apps are running dots'. Something that will make you realise the dots were nothing to get agitated up about.

 

[iSee]

It tells you about user processes that have a user interface. If something is running in the background and has no UI, what exactly do you plan to do with it if it showed up as running in the Dock? Quit it and suddenly have Bonjour or printing stop working? 99% of Mac users wouldn't know what to do if there was a process sucking up resources that shouldn't be there, but most would know they can quit Word if there aren't using it and get a little SNAP back when it releases all of those resources and Rosetta (I use 2004) shuts down.

I repeat: iOS does show you whether an app is running or not (iOS 3.x doesn't have this feature because it doesn't multitask! You need iOS 4.x to see the multitasking bar.) Unless Apple suddenly has reinvented UNIX to be light years better than it is now, the distinction in MacOS cannot be erased either. This is all a FANTASY. Apple adds frameworks; they aren't radically reinventing UNIX, and never have.

I don't think you understood the point of my post. I did not suggest that background tasks should go in the app bar and I didn't mention iOS at all?

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I think that's what Mission Control is for. It shows everything what's running.

If that is the case it's making the simplest "quick glance" task unnecessarily more complicated. Maybe you can see everything running w/ one click w/ Mission Control, but you can do that now with zero clicks w/ the dot on the dock.

 

[Philotech]

iOS 3.2 doesn't have the multitasking bar (or any multitasking). It came with iOS 4.0. You will see it with iOS4.2 on your iPad next month. Unlike Apple's implementation of Cut/paste which was insanely great, the multitasking bar in iOS kind of sucks. I find it hard to believe Apple couldn't have come up with something better given the beautiful finish of the rest of iOS.

Point made is: Apple shows the state of running apps on iOS 4.0; why does it make sense to drop this from the MacOS X Dock when the OS being copied (iOS 4.x) does make the distinction between running and not running?

Yes I know that of course. But I think your're wrong here, the multitasking bar does not show what apps are "running" but the apps that you have most recently used (which of course includes apps that are actually running).

 

[cohibadad]

wouldn't that be confusing? Not knowing what's running at a glance?

If they are keeping with the iOS theme maybe there is a swipe or something to reveal running apps and individually shut them down. As others have said it isn't really necessary to know what apps are running most of the time if the system can handle them.

 

[Philotech]

Getting rid of the concept of running is long overdue. When apps aren't actually being used, their memory is swapped out and they consume no CPU cycles. Are they still running? Who cares? I think apps should just fade away from lack of use, and pop back to life when needed. Sounds like that's where it's headed. Will still need a way to force quit or restart malfunctioning apps, but most of the time the OS should just take care of it without me even thinking about it.

100% agree. Exactly what I was trying to explain here in several posts above. "Running" or "Not running" is a technical and programming issue, but nothing the user should have to care about.

 

[QuarterSwede]

It's not that it's innovative, but it just shows that Apple is finally listening to their customer's concerns.

I think Apple innovates so often that if they add something that isn't innovative and is taking from other OS's people jump down their throats.

I'm sick of having to explain to a newbie that closing the window doesn't quit the app when it's a multi-windowed app. I hate saying this but that's the only thing that's easier on Windows. I'm not saying it's better, but it's more cut and dry, close the window and the app just quits, there's nothing to explain. We don't really need an indicator on Mac OS X, we really never did, so I think this is a step in the right direction.

Actually, Windows apps can run windowless. Most of them have icons in the systray if they do. It's really not that great of a way to do it as it's almost hacked on. I'm still not sure whether I like the indicators being gone yet. I'll have to wait till Lion is here and I can actually use it to determine how I feel.

 

[GroundLoop]

If that is the case it's making the simplest "quick glance" task unnecessarily more complicated. Maybe you can see everything running w/ one click w/ Mission Control, but you can do that now with zero clicks w/ the dot on the dock.

Just out of curiosity...

With this new full-screen app capability, will the full screen apps automatically hide the dock? If so, then you are losing the ability to see the dock as a whole and not just the indicators. Looks like Apple may be in the early stages of getting rid of the Dock entirely to get that screen real estate back. It could be the evolution of Apple computing. If you don't like that evolution, don't upgrade or switch so something else.

I am not fully convinced whether or not I am going to upgrade yet as I need to see what the full feature set of the OS is and make my decision on all of the facts. It the tool doesn't work for me, I will continue using the tools that I have.

GL

 

[twilson]

Initial viewing doesn't matter after spending time reading the document. And I see no reason for Apple to change the current desktop behavior which provides added benefit on top of the iOS method. iOS devices have limited screen real estate, Mac devices don't.

If a document is sufficiently long, as per your implication, you're going to be scrolling quite a bit and will get your memory refreshed of your position each scroll.

Uh ? You're twisting my words. The information is relevant. They are moving backwards, removing this relevant information.

But why do you see it as relevant? The dot in real terms adds nothing of significant value.

You're making the classic egotiscal mistake : Because you don't use it doesn't mean no one else does.

Honestly, I use Cmd-Tab more. I occasionally reference the light (very rarely) and it's almost impossible to see anyway. The only time you NEED the light, by yours and others admission, is when you are going to quit an app. In this case you're generally Cmd-Tab + Cmd-Q it anyway, at least that's the method that requires the least effort and precision.

Sure there are, by why remove one of the most efficient ways ? Visual cues that are "just there" and don't require action are superior to any ways that requires keystrokes or gestures.

But iOS and it's even more limited memory footprint, with less CPU/RAM resources available to it has already PROVEN that an indication of a background app, and particularly suspended apps is irrelevant. You can't argue with that simple fact.

What iOS has proven is important is fast load/resume time of applications. And the new Lion way of doing things will do that perfectly. Running or not is irrelevant, if it's running and you are low on RAM then chances are some hefty swapping will be involved. And in my experience, this takes significant longer, and is way more annoying, than a "quick resume from suspend".

 

[MacHiavelli]

If that is the case it's making the simplest "quick glance" task unnecessarily more complicated. Maybe you can see everything running w/ one click w/ Mission Control, but you can do that now with zero clicks w/ the dot on the dock.

I think we're more likely to see icons that provide MORE (rather than less) information.

Just as mail shows the number of messages waiting and iCal shows the right date, I think other icons will probably provide more informative content than the simple "is-running-dot" that we have now.

They will show if an app is running and give additional status information.

 

[KnightWRX]

Please don't! I can see a lot of apps on OS X still being fully multitasking, but realistically if you haven't looked at an app for a while, why can't it suspend it to disk and make the RAM available AUTOMATICALLY to a program that needs it?

I actively look at stuff like Transmission, MSN, Skype, Mail about once a day. However, I like knowing I don't have to because they will notify me when something happens.

Scrolling ever such a small amount, to satisfy this almost irrelevantly proportioned use-case (versus day-to-day use) is hardly a big deal.

But again, this is a step backward. Before : no action required, information is there. After : Having to do a keystroke/gesture.

But iOS and it's even more limited memory footprint, with less CPU/RAM resources available to it has already PROVEN that an indication of a background app, and particularly suspended apps is irrelevant. You can't argue with that simple fact.

Why do you think I care or like how iOS does things ? They are not as efficient from a usability standpoint. The trade off is due to limited ressources.

 

[Philotech]

By your definition, OS9 multi-tasked. Suspending apps in the background is cooperative multi-tasking. It's what OS 9 and earlier used, it's what Windows 3.1 used.

Do I need to go on ?

Although correct, this is not was anybody is talking about. of course OS X will remain a multi-tasking OS, so if you have a virus scanner or some number-chrunching app in the background, it will continue searching for viruses or calculating prime numbers.
We are talking about what is done to apps that just wait there for user input. And from a user perspective, it is totally irrelevant if that app is (1) running in RAM (2) running but paged out to disk or (3) not running but suspended with saved state and restored upon user interaction. The only difference between the three is the time it takes. But the huge difference here is between (1) and (2) because it involves external memory (harddisk), and nobody complains about it. (3) or (3) is most likely much less of a difference.

 

[Žalgiris]

I'm sure dots in the dock will be a hidden preferences just like many things are or it can be that Apple is now lloking how we are reacting to this and will work accordingly.

 

[Bolteh]

Snow Leopard was a welcome addition but sat next to Windows 7 its hard not say that Windows 7 looks a bit more attractive.

Wat?

Windows 7 and Vista look like a complete mess.. If I have 2 windows open in Win7, I'm already lost because everything looks like the result of a toddler eating a whole boxes of multicolor crayons and then vomiting all over the screen.

90% of the reason why I'm still using Mac(OSX) is because it's miles ahead of any other OS in terms of GUI.

 

[Philotech]

I repeat: iOS does show you whether an app is running or not (iOS 3.x doesn't have this feature because it doesn't multitask! You need iOS 4.x to see the multitasking bar.) Unless Apple suddenly has reinvented UNIX to be light years better than it is now, the distinction in MacOS cannot be erased either. This is all a FANTASY. Apple adds frameworks; they aren't radically reinventing UNIX, and never have.

Actually it doesn't. It only shows you a recent most run list. There is absolutely no indication that it is actually running or not. You have to install SwitcherMod in Cydia (jailbreak) to give you that indication.

Exactly. Jon the Heretic proving himself wrong and proving that it is totally irrelevant if an app is technically running or not as long as it's back again when it's needed.

I can't understand the rage here against this anyway. When people coming from Windows complain that an app is not closed when clicking the X button but stays in memory they will tell you that their memory is conveniently swapped out and thus it doesn't make a difference compared to the Windows world. Now, when Apple tries to take this concept to an end and get rid of the difference of running and not running apps altogether they cry out. Mystery.

 

[macdaddy57]

I'd Be Happy If...

I'd be happy if the only thing they did was make it easy to create a folder within the currently selected folder (instead of at the top level) and then change the Save As dialog boxes so that files can be saved to the folder a file was last saved to. Forget all the glitter. Just make the OS you have do the basics right. For a company so concerned with usability, it's amazing what Apple can't get right!

 

[KnightWRX]

Although correct, this is not was anybody is talking about. of course OS X will remain a multi-tasking OS, so if you have a virus scanner or some number-chrunching app in the background, it will continue searching for viruses or calculating prime numbers.

I don't really have apps that sit there waiting for user input. They are either waiting for network input (so it's important they are listening and up, or using something like inetd to manage launching them when they receive packets) or they are polling something at regular interval (which should be up to the app, not the OS).

 

[QuarterSwede]

Honestly, I use Cmd-Tab more. I occasionally reference the light (very rarely) and it's almost impossible to see anyway. The only time you NEED the light, by yours and others admission, is when you are going to quit an app. In this case you're generally Cmd-Tab + Cmd-Q it anyway, at least that's the method that requires the least effort and precision.

Same here. I find it much faster that way as well.

What iOS has proven is important is fast load/resume time of applications. And the new Lion way of doing things will do that perfectly. Running or not is irrelevant, if it's running and you are low on RAM then chances are some hefty swapping will be involved. And in my experience, this takes significant longer, and is way more annoying, than a "quick resume from suspend".

Exactly. In iOS4 I don't care if the app is running or not (unless it's music, etc but then there is always some indication) as the apps restart from a saved state. It may as well have always been running. Lion is obviously headed this route and I'm very happy about it. It looks like Apple will change the face of desktop computing again.

 

[twilson]

RAM is already ridiculously cheap. There's no excuse for not having plenty of it in your system.

Well my Macbook can't go above 2GB, it's not always a matter of the cost of RAM. I'd have to buy a new machine, as would many others I dare say.