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

[KnightWRX]

I think that the absence of the multitasking/"Recently Used" bar on older devices is more down to managing user expectations than any comment on it's basic usefulness. Apple have identified the bar with multitasking; if you could get to the bar on older devices then a lot of users will assume that they have multitasking. By not showing the bar Apple removes that source of confusion and encourages people to upgrade their devices.

In reality I would say that multitasking and the "Recently Used" bar are mostly unrelated features. You can get the benefits of quick App resuming and having stuff running in the background without touching the "Recently Used" bar. Conversely a list of "Recently Used" Apps would be useful without multitasking if only to make switching back quicker (e.g. I've opened a link in an email, how do I quickly get back from Safari to Mail?)

Thank you, at least you get it. The "Task Manager" is completely ineffective for managing tasks because it offers no indication is to what is an actual task in need of managing.

However, as simply a shortcut bar, well, it gets crowded quick but it does fine.

I think Jon just doesn't want to admit he's wrong about it. He thought that it was a running task list and now that he knows it isn't, he just doesn't want to admit he was wrong.

 

[Philotech]

I understand just fine. I just violently disagree with you on every count.

Just because Apple chose to mix in some truly 'recent' -- not running apps -- in that list doesn't mean fundamentally it is not essentially a task list. It just makes it, arguably, a bad one. But if an application is running, it is in that list. Period. They mixed some other crap in. There is no harm in cancelling an app that isn't running, but this is where you go to cancel apps that are running.

It is an EXHAUSTIVE list of all running apps, the ONLY such list on the device even though you may have hundreds of apps installed that are capable of multitasking.

And that, Virgina, is why Apple chose not to include this so-called list of recent apps on iOS 4.x devices that don't support multitasking---because its primary use is for managing running apps. If its only use was for recent apps, Apple would have it put it on more devices, but they didn't. For 'recent app' functionality alone, it wasn't useful enough to put on non-multitasking iOS4.x devices, which got oodles of other iOS 4.x features. Multitasking was cut because of performance. I doubt showing the last several apps you ran falls into the bad performance category.

Think outside the box: Apple has hidden a task list by swizzling in some recent apps and calling it something else, but it doesn't change fundamentally what it is. Actually it is clever way of hiding conceptual complexity, but that fact it is only useful when you have multitasking tells you Apple is under no illusions about what this really is (showing just Recent apps would be 'useful' regardless of whether you had multitasking). So why are you?

Ignore away; it'd make my day!

Is this so hard to understand?!?

Jon: Yes, the list DOES show all apps that are running. 100% agreed. But it ALSO shows apps that are not running. Actually, after a while, 90% of the apps shown in the bar are not running. In particular, it also shows apps capable of multitasking that have been started and shut down again, either by the user or by the system.
So the bar does NOT tell you which apps are running. If my bar has 20 apps in it and I am under the impression that I need to free some resources, I may well "shut down" 19 apps from the bar and don't gain anything because none of the 19 apps were actually running.

KnightWRX: Thanks for supporting me in explaining how the bar actually works. And yes, by conception it's useless for showing what apps are running and for task management (although, of course, by chance you might even close a running app and gain some resources when pressing the X badge).

Both: Actually, I don't care how iOS works. My reasoning was that IF the indication whether an app is running or not has no useful meaning to the user, the blue dots (which ONLY tell you that an app is technically "running") is wasting the user's limited resources of attention. Of course, for the geek in all of us, the purely technical information might be "useful", but only for the sake of our technical interest. Look at all the other threads listed in Activity Monitor. Why aren't they being shown in the Dock with a blue dot? Because that's not conveying any useful information, for many possible reasons: either the thread is required by the system and must always be running, or it belongs so an app so always runs along another thread, or whatever. In any event, you all agree that it would be a waste of resources to show all those threads in the dock.
And now please understand that a dot indicating that an app is running conveys (will convey in Lion) no useful information to the user because it doesn't tell you that the app uses a noticeable amount of resources (this entirely depends on what the app does and how OS is managing resources. E.g. Photoshop
1. processing a batch of Photos takes 90% CPU and 80% memory, or
2. not processing any more = 1% CPU 80% mem,
3. with just a few open photos 1% CPU and 20% mem,
4. working on a photo but with others paged out 90% CPU and 40% mem,
5. not working with everything paged out 0.1% CPU and 2% mem
6. "suspended" with state written to disk 0% CPU and 0% mem
7. shut down 0% CPU and 0% mem.

So why on earth do you need the blue dot in cases 1-6 (or 1-5?) but not in 7 (or 6 and 7)?? This is totally beyond me. The blue dot doesn't even give an estimate of how long it would take to switch back to PS. 1 and 4 probably pretty long because of the heavy CPU load, 5-7 probably pretty long due to the amount of date to be read from disk, 2 and 3 probably pretty short because neither is the case. Again, the blue dot does not convey any relevant information.

 

[Philotech]

Good, glad we finally agree that Mission control is not an alternative to the blue lights then.

Yes. Never said anything like that (I do know that this might have been the idea of others when they brought up MC in this thread).

The blue lights, again, are simply a visual cue as to which app is running. Removing them makes no sense if you're not going to offer an alternative. No, the existing CMD+TAB, Expose, Spaces (now mission control), Activity monitor, etc.. aren't alternatives. That's why we have the blue lights in the first place.

Again, fully agreed. What I'm trying to explain is that no alternative is required because the blue dots are useless as they do not convey any USEFUL information.

What about non Document centric apps ? Not all apps deal with documents (think instant messenger, torrent clients.. oh wait, exactly my examples when saying the blue lights are practical!)

No, not even in your concept. You don't care if iChat or Torrent is running, you only care if you are online with iChat or if Torrent is transmitting data. None of this is indicated by the lights. NONE!
Now of course you could suggest to modify the blue light indicators' meaning. In that case I'd support you, but that would be mostly an app feature (see the new mail badge in Mail.app). Personally, I am very much missing an online indication in iChat similar to the tray area in Windows. On the other hand, maybe there's a way to have a menu item, haven't really investigated into it. Or a change of iChat's icon color in the dock, whatever.

 

[G4DP]

WARNING : The logic you are using in the context of this rumor paints Apple in a negative light. As such, the poster you are responding to won't be able to justify to Apple's action without resorting to the reality distortion field.

WARNING : Prolonged use of the reality distortion field has many side effects. It is not recommended.

WARNING : Discontinue any activities that apply logic in a way to try to explain why Apple would be wrong to prevent any unnecessary use of the reality distortion field.

Seriously, just accept it. None of the Apple apologists will admit that Expose/CMD+TAB/whatever requires more action than the dock lights. They will say Mission Control will solve all, you just have to hit... etc. It's fine. We know the truth. It's not a showstopper truth, just one more annoyance added on top of the pile.

Spot on, just to add.

WARNING : Continual use of logic to prove Apple have broken something that was already fixed will resort in being labelled as a troll.

 

[KnightWRX]

No, not even in your concept. You don't care if iChat or Torrent is running, you only care if you are online with iChat or if Torrent is transmitting data. None of this is indicated by the lights. NONE!

Actually, that's false in my case. I care if they are running because while they might not transmit at the moment I'm looking if they are doing something, they might later on. If they aren't running, there's no chance they will.

As such, the blue lights indicate whether I need to quit the app or not before plugging into a network where usage of such apps while cause me billing problems (tethering on a limited plan) or grief from security (unapproved apps on the network).

Again, for me, the lights are useful. Removing them makes no sense. Either they sit there unused and thus causing the user no harm (all the people saying it's ok that they got removed said that users don't notice them) or they sit there and get used bringing happiness to that user. As such, I really don't see why people are trying to even defend Apple on removing them. It makes absolutely no sense with the information we have currently. It might make sense later on when Apple provides more pieces to the puzzle. I for one will wait. I only reply here because people keep coming back with bunk about the blue lights.

 

[GnillGnoll]

Seriously, as it stands, the task manager on iOS is useless.

That's because it's not meant to be one. It's meant to let you switch quickly between your most recent activities, and I think it does so quite well, though not without flaws. Since apps are supposed to continue where you left off the distinction between "running" (process in memory and ready to run) and "not running" (process not in memory) is of little consequence to the user anyway. The latter just means switching to the app takes a little longer.

Yes, the "task manager" lets you kill running apps, but the vast majority of users won't ever need to.

They tell me when my computer has acknowledged me telling it to open a program (command tab only shows it once it's opened up, not when it's opening). Or when maybe it didn't acknowledge or randomly quit after trying to open. Yes, I've had issues like that (particularly with Word or Firefox that takes a while to start up).

So... for all those bitching we can just command apple or that we don't need to know what programs are open, what is your solution for me then?

What about the icon bouncing when the program starts? If an application randomly quits during startup, you have to start it again, dot or not. The only "solution" is a bugfix for the problem.

Unfortunately I don't yet have any practical experience with iOS4 multitasking, however I don't see why the multitasking bar is lame in theory. If iOS is managing tasks automatically for me I don't see why I should care what is in memory or not. What I really care about is what services are currently working in the background. Some of that looks obvious (eg. if I don't want music playing then I should stop the music, big VOIP bar) and some looks less so (eg. tiny location services icon, task completion)

In practice I think the iOS approach rides or falls on how good iOS is at automatically managing tasks. Can iOS4 be used while never manually removing anything from the multitasking tray?

Yes, absolutely. And you're right, what you should care about is whether an app is working in the background, not whether it's running. Unfortunately iOS does not provide good indicators for this, and neither does OS X, though some applications do by using a dynamic icon (e.g. Adium). Windows 7 has taskbar buttons that can show a progress bar, which I think is an interesting way of showing background activity. It only makes sense for certain kinds of tasks, though.

Actually, that's false in my case. I care if they are running because while they might not transmit at the moment I'm looking if they are doing something, they might later on. If they aren't running, there's no chance they will.

As such, the blue lights indicate whether I need to quit the app or not before plugging into a network where usage of such apps while cause me billing problems (tethering on a limited plan) or grief from security (unapproved apps on the network).

Many network applications have an offline mode where they will be "running" but not transmitting data or automatically establishing connections. It seems like the precise information you're looking for is whether such an application is in online or offline mode.

 

[KnightWRX]

Many network applications have an offline mode where they will be "running" but not transmitting data or automatically establishing connections. It seems like the precise information you're looking for is whether such an application is in online or offline mode.

Managing an offline mode that might or might not exist is more complicated than just quitting the app. You people try way too hard to justify the missing lights.

 

[Steve Ballmer]

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

But now Mac OS X has it so clearly it's yet another innovative idea that was stolen from Apple 15 years before they invented it!

 

[iEdd]

Managing an offline mode that might or might not exist is more complicated than just quitting the app. You people try way too hard to justify the missing lights.

Lol. We may not always agree, but I'm with you on this one. It would be more annoying than those calculators without off buttons.

 

[aggri1]

I wonder whether the concern about knowing what's running and what isn't stems from a lack of confidence that "the system" will be able to manage resources optimally.

If someone doesn't trust the system, I expect he/she would probably want to manage things him/her-self, starting and stopping tasks/programs/applications manually.

Conversely, someone who trusts (without connotations) that the system will manage all tasks/applications optimally, will make optimal use of available resources, is (I expect) less likely to care about what is and what is not running.

Is this one of the fundamental differences here, the level of control one likes to feel that one has over the machine?

Perhaps those people (like me) that don't 'trust' the system will 'get over' the lack of status lights and the like when we've seen for ourselves that the 'new way' of doing things doesn't result in an inferior user experience.

Sorry for the waffling... A.

 

[KnightWRX]

I wonder whether the concern about knowing what's running and what isn't stems from a lack of confidence that "the system" will be able to manage resources optimally.

Not this again. In my case it has nothing to do with the computer's ressources and everything to do with outside factors that the system cannot manage like network rules or limited data quotas. See my other posts.

 

[aggri1]

Not this again. In my case it has nothing to do with the computer's ressources and everything to do with outside factors that the system cannot manage like network rules or limited data quotas. See my other posts.

Yeah that's cool. Makes sense (I did read what you've written). I was thinking more generally.

 

[Thunderbird]

Again, fully agreed. What I'm trying to explain is that no alternative is required because the blue dots are useless as they do not convey any USEFUL information.

I would say knowing which apps are running is pretty useful information.

No, not even in your concept. You don't care if iChat or Torrent is running, you only care if you are online with iChat or if Torrent is transmitting data. None of this is indicated by the lights. NONE!

I would agree. This goes back to my post about the difference between general and more fine-grained information. People are not as worried about what app is open as they are about what window is open since the window is where the work actually happens (they could have apps and downloads running in the background in which case they would want that kind of general app information too).

The shortcoming in Mac OS X is that to get to more detailed information you have to keep clicking (or swiping or typing). Apple needn't copy Microsoft, but if Apple could just come up with an elegant way of displaying the more detailed information (what specific apps, windows, files and documents are open, and where they are should you wish to move to them) at a glance without having to do anything, then that would go a long way in streamlining the whole workflow for people.

Now of course you could suggest to modify the blue light indicators' meaning. In that case I'd support you, but that would be mostly an app feature (see the new mail badge in Mail.app). Personally, I am very much missing an online indication in iChat similar to the tray area in Windows. On the other hand, maybe there's a way to have a menu item, haven't really investigated into it. Or a change of iChat's icon color in the dock, whatever.

They could add information to the blue lights, for example, or re-do the dock so that more detailed information is part of each dock icon. I'm sure there's a way, perhaps many ways, but I think it's Apple's obssession with minimalism that is preventing this. Mission Control at this stage at least just seems like an elaboration of Expose, not a rethinking of the GUI ergonomics.

 

[moderately]

This is important because of the baseless assertions that iOS doesn't give you any indication of which apps are running and that Apple will carry this beneficent philosophy to MacOS X. Funny thing is that it isn't even true of iOS so why would it be of MacOS X in the future?

Jon- I do hope you haven't gone away yet, I am still back a page and wanted to join the fun.

I am running 4.1 on my 4g touch. Early on I thought there might be some benefit to closing out programs in the "multitasking bar" or whatever it is supposed to be called. So I did some of that. But I couldn't tell if an app was running or not and I didn't notice any improvement in speed after closing things. So I quit using it for that. Every once in a while I want to jump back to a recently used app and it is useful for that.

iOS doesn't give you any indication of which apps are running
This is the case. It takes me 19 swipes to get to the end of the "multitasking" list. So I have 76 icons in that task bar. and 56 apps installed on my device. "Useless" is a fair descriptive. Or to use your words:

----showing only recent apps is pointless.

 

[AidenShaw]

But now Mac OS X has it so clearly it's yet another innovative idea that was stolen from Apple 15 years before they invented it!

A so-so post - but brilliant when combined with the username!

But why can you only resize from the corners - rather than from any place on the border of the window? It boggles the mind that Apple only took a half step on this.

 

[KnightWRX]

Jon- I do hope you haven't gone away yet, I am still back a page and wanted to join the fun.

I think the biggest obstacle Jon is facing is that he doesn't have a multi-tasking capable iOS device. So he doesn't quite know how useless the "multi-task" bar is for "managing tasks". If the phone/ipod acts slow (I've had mine do that several times), you just end up cleaning out everything from there, because you really don't have a clue which app is running in the background causing the phone to act up.

On that they failed. But again, I use that bar as a glorified shortcut. It's shorter to use it to switch between recently opened apps like Safari/Mail/iPod/Phone then hitting home and browsing my home screens/folders, as long as it doesn't get too cluttered (if I have to scroll through 5 pages of icons in there, it's starting to fail at even being a shortcut bar and it's in need of cleaning up).

 

[Mike225]

A so-so post - but brilliant when combined with the username!

But why can you only resize from the corners - rather than from any place on the border of the window? It boggles the mind that Apple only took a half step on this.

Completely copying Microsoft which has had it (All corner + top/sides) for 15 year would probably give Steve a heart attack. This way (Corners only) he can tout it as an improvement to OS X and play with himself at night while everyone bows down to him for such an intuitive improvement.

I wonder if they will suck it up and add native "Aero Snap" ("Docking Station"?!) to OS X which is one of the best new features of W7 IMHO.

 

[KnightWRX]

I wonder if they will suck it up and add native "Aero Snap" ("Docking Station"?!) to OS X which is one of the best new features of W7 IMHO.

I remember when KDE introduced that. Circa 1999. New feature indeed.

Let's face it, most GUI features you see today are from different Window Managers that ran on Unix in the 90s. Spaces ? Hai CDE!

 

[Mike225]

I remember when KDE introduced that. Circa 1999. New feature indeed.

Let's face it, most GUI features you see today are from different Window Managers that ran on Unix in the 90s. Spaces ? Hai CDE!

AFAIK the snap feature came in KDE 4.4 (2009 after Win7). You may be referring to something else. Truth is, few care who took what from whom. Real users just want the best software.

 

[KnightWRX]

AFAIK the snap feature came in KDE 4.4 (2009 after Win7). You may be referring to something else. Truth is, few care who took what from whom. Real users just want the best software.

Nope, snap feature. It didn't actually resize windows back then, only snapped them to the edges of the desktop when you dragged them in close, so you never were left wondering if your window was properly aligned to the edge of the screen, the system had positionned it right for you.

It actually annoyed the hell out of me at first since I just wanted the window a few pixels from the edge, not on the edge and it would keep snapping it to the very edge when I moved it.

Of course, I was coming out of Enlightenment at the time, the most configurable WM there was.

 

[Mike225]

Nope, snap feature. It didn't actually resize windows back then, only snapped them to the edges of the desktop when you dragged them in close, so you never were left wondering if your window was properly aligned to the edge of the screen, the system had positionned it right for you.

It actually annoyed the hell out of me at first since I just wanted the window a few pixels from the edge, not on the edge and it would keep snapping it to the very edge when I moved it.

Of course, I was coming out of Enlightenment at the time, the most configurable WM there was.

Aero Snap refers to moving the window to the top, right or left edge and having it resize to full, half, or other half respectively, but I digress.

 

[Zc456]

Managing an offline mode that might or might not exist is more complicated than just quitting the app. You people try way too hard to justify the missing lights.

Sigh... That's a fact. Not like they work for Apple.

 

[amanset]

You nailed it. This is where I see Apple going. QuickView was the start. Do you remember seeing/using that feature for the first few times? It was amazing to see a Word doc without Word being open.

Yes, I do vaguely remember using Multiview on my Amiga back around 1992.

 

[Fraaaa]

Jon- I do hope you haven't gone away yet, I am still back a page and wanted to join the fun.

I am running 4.1 on my 4g touch. Early on I thought there might be some benefit to closing out programs in the "multitasking bar" or whatever it is supposed to be called. So I did some of that. But I couldn't tell if an app was running or not and I didn't notice any improvement in speed after closing things. So I quit using it for that. Every once in a while I want to jump back to a recently used app and it is useful for that.

iOS doesn't give you any indication of which apps are running
This is the case. It takes me 19 swipes to get to the end of the "multitasking" list. So I have 76 icons in that task bar. and 56 apps installed on my device. "Useless" is a fair descriptive. Or to use your words:

And clearly you don't have to do that. I stopped quitting apps the second day I had my iPhone4 and I don't have any issue with peformance.

You are trying hard on managing something that has been managed and has no need to be done.

 

[tigress666]

What about the icon bouncing when the program starts? If an application randomly quits during startup, you have to start it again, dot or not. The only "solution" is a bugfix for the problem.

The icon only bounces a few times after you open it. With programs that take a while to load up (i'm looking at mainly you, Firefox. You too Word), you then are reliant on that dot to see if they are still loading up or if they quit.

And yeah, if it quits you do have to start it again. That's the point! They take a while to load and I need to know if I have to try to start them again or if they are still loading! Without that dot, how do you propose I do that?