New Mac User 1st Impressions of OS X

[whooleytoo]

i dont care what you find it. it is absolutely poor design to not have it as an option. how would it harm you if it was an option? exactly it wouldnt. it is not a difficult thing to acheive and many people find it useful. I know OS X isn't windows, but there is style, and then there is just plain bad design.

The zoom button (green button in OSX, was different in OS 9 etc) used to function in a similar fashion to maximise. At least, clicking zoom would resize the window to be large enough to display all content, click again to return to previous size; and if you held Option, it would zoom to fullscreen (bar the menubar).

Nowadays, the zoom button is so inconsistent between applications, I end up never using it.

 

[ksgant]

i dont care what you find it. it is absolutely poor design to not have it as an option. how would it harm you if it was an option? exactly it wouldnt. it is not a difficult thing to acheive and many people find it useful. I know OS X isn't windows, but there is style, and then there is just plain bad design.

PLEASE NOTE: The following is with the understanding there are no add-ons or OS hacks tacked on that change the "out-of-box" behavior of either OS X or Windows.

What I can't understand is the Windows crowd that comes to Mac and complains about this, and always spouting the "give us an option". Last I checked, there was no option in Windows that would resize the window to fit exactly what was in the folder...if so please correct me.

The thing is, people in the Windows world are USED to it going full screen, so they're put off when they come to Mac and it behaves like this. There is no (to my knowledge) option in the Windows world, so why is everyone so flabbergasted that there isn't one for the Mac world? All the years I had to use a Windows machine it always bugged me that I couldn't just hit the expand button in a window and it just expands to the size of what's there...no, it goes FULL SCREEN. If I wanted it full screen, I would have made it full screen.

To confirm, I just fired up my wife's XP machine and I couldn't get it to expand a window to contain just what was in the folder no matter what keyboard combo I held down and clicked on the expand button. So it looks like your "poor design" extends to both platform...of course if someone is used to the Windows way they would find the Mac design poor and vice-versa.

Biggest thing I use it for is in Safari. I just click on the expand button on the window and it fills to JUST how big the web page is. In Windows it fills the whole screen no matter what and you always have to resize by hand. That always bugged me.

Again, it all comes from where you came before and what you're used to. Please understand I'm not saying one or the other is better. Bottom line, there SHOULD be an option on BOTH platforms built into the OS that allows for either scenario.

 

[devilot]

Note: when I only used Windows, I always made all of my windows (for apps or browsers, anything) smaller than full screen. Hated full screen. I loved that so much about OS X. That said...

Maximize - sometimes I want a full screen view, this is not available in most apps unless you drag the window around...

Not exactly the same I think, but still pretty good and something I do use: Command + click green button. Should pop those windows bigger quick-like.

 

[clevin]

What I can't understand is the Windows crowd that comes to Mac and complains about this, and always spouting the "give us an option". Last I checked, there was no option in Windows that would resize the window to fit exactly what was in the folder...if so please correct me.

Biggest thing I use it for is in Safari. I just click on the expand button on the window and it fills to JUST how big the web page is. In Windows it fills the whole screen no matter what and you always have to resize by hand. That always bugged me.

Apple is happy that windows crowd are coming to OSX, so, there comes along with complains, sorry, its not the time to pick and choose what comes along.

why osx need an option while windows doesn't? coz windows didn't brag it on TV and compare itself to OSX, coz windows users are majority and we are discussing Windows users who switch to OSX, not the other way. Is that so difficult to understand? If u switch from OSX to windows, and complain on a windows forum, I will support you too. Why? coz in that case, you have the right.

PS, I do agree, windows users like options. and to be honest, since when options become bad? I thought everybody should like to have more options.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

page width? for exapmle, goto msnbc.com, the width is probably 800px, to washingtonpost, its 1024px, would safari resize to 800 or 1024px then?

Safari is very good at knowing how wide to go to get rid of a horizontal scrollbar, whether its 800 pixels or 1000. I've never had it do the wrong thing with the zoom button.

Camino does the wrong thing, which is one reason I don't use it any more. It just goes full-screen. (Ick.)

i dont care what you find it. it is absolutely poor design to not have it as an option. how would it harm you if it was an option? exactly it wouldnt. it is not a difficult thing to acheive and many people find it useful. I know OS X isn't windows, but there is style, and then there is just plain bad design.

Can you make a logical case why working in full-screen mode has any usability advantages, if all the data will fit in a smaller window?

Making an automatic "maximize" button when there is no quantifiable usability advantage is just "plain bad design".

In specific and rare apps like Aperture where there is a reason to work full-screen, that is added as a special function by the programmers.

 

[ChrisA]

We see this whenever people change programs. Long time Photoshop users when they try Gimp complain that Gimp uses completely different menus and puts functions in different places. Basically they say "it sucks because it is not an exact clone of Adobe PS." The people who designed Gimp say not being an exact clone is a "feature"

It's interesting to hear from people who come to Mac OS X from different backgrounds. Most are former MS Windows users but a few have wider, more rounded backgrounds. People who are used to using a half dozen systems don't care that some little check box is moved

Look at the overall system. For example if you think the finder has limited funtionality you need to think if maybe with Mac OS that functionality is not in the finder. Maybe Spotlight or Disk utility

Actually when it comes right down to it, why do people care so much abuot how the desktop works? I use applications and care more how things like Final Cut and Photoshop work

Another good option is Linux. There, if something is not the way you like it you can change it. everything is open and changeable.

 

[ksgant]

We see this whenever people change programs. Long time Photoshop users when they try Gimp complain that Gimp uses completely different menus and puts functions in different places. Basically they say "it sucks because it is not an exact clone of Adobe PS." The people who designed Gimp say not being an exact clone is a "feature"

It's interesting to hear from people who come to Mac OS X from different backgrounds. Most are former MS Windows users but a few have wider, more rounded backgrounds. People who are used to using a half dozen systems don't care that some little check box is moved

Look at the overall system. For example if you think the finder has limited funtionality you need to think if maybe with Mac OS that functionality is not in the finder. Maybe Spotlight or Disk utility

Actually when it comes right down to it, why do people care so much abuot how the desktop works? I use applications and care more how things like Final Cut and Photoshop work

Another good option is Linux. There, if something is not the way you like it you can change it. everything is open and changeable.

I have to agree with you. But with Linux it can be a double-edged sword as I found that I spent a lot of my time configuring and customizing and switching window managers around...and I never did find one that worked exactly the way I wanted. But I didn't fret too much about it. I find that I'm more easily adaptable than most other things. I can change myself to fit a UI better than a UI can change to fit me. Call me a Zelig I guess.

 

[dejo]

PS, I do agree, windows users like options. and to be honest, since when options become bad? I thought everybody should like to have more options.

At some point too many options bewilders the end user, especially when it becomes hard to differentiate between choices and the consequence of those choices. I'm not saying no choices; but too many choices can be just as bad as too few, sometimes even worse. For a great book on this topic, check out Barry Schwartz' "The Paradox Of Choice".

 

[matttrick]

Can you make a logical case why working in full-screen mode has any usability advantages, if all the data will fit in a smaller window?

Making an automatic "maximize" button when there is no quantifiable usability advantage is just "plain bad design".

In specific and rare apps like Aperture where there is a reason to work full-screen, that is added as a special function by the programmers.

sure can. i dont like seeing anything else when i am working in a window. it is distracting.

.

At some point too many options bewilders the end user, especially when it becomes hard to differentiate between choices and the consequence of those choices. I'm not saying no choices; but too many choices can be just as bad as too few, sometimes even worse. For a great book on this topic, check out Barry Schwartz' "The Paradox Of Choice".

we are talking functionality options on how windows are sized. i dont think it is anything on a grand scale here.

 

[petvas]

Maximizing a window to full screen lets you concentrate to that single app without having to look to all other information on the screen.

Working with MS Word in a zoomed window is for me unproductive. I can see all the apps behind it and that makes me maximize the window to full screen.

Most of the programs I use are in full screen. If I want to drag n' drop between apps I can use the Command Tab to switch through the apps whilst draging the file or text with the mouse.

 

[dejo]

we are talking functionality options on how windows are sized. i dont think it is anything on a grand scale here.

So, if there were a hundred different ways to resize a window, you'd be okay with that?

Because that's where taking the "too many options are not a bad thing. ever." stance leads...

 

[clevin]

Safari is very good at knowing how wide to go to get rid of a horizontal scrollbar, whether its 800 pixels or 1000. I've never had it do the wrong thing with the zoom button.

Camino does the wrong thing, which is one reason I don't use it any more. It just goes full-screen. (Ick.)

well, I guess I visit msnbc too much, safari seems can't do that website well tho.

anyway, I was just working on my excel, looking for a file in a folder, the folder have a lot of files, i clicked this fabulous auto resize green button, guess what? the finder become twice the width of the screen, I can't resize it, coz its out of the screen, I have to close it and re-open finder, I don;t think this is any better than windows's option. This might be special case, coz i can't repeat it, but to me, this does show OSX's green button is kinda chaotic.

So, if there were a hundred different ways to resize a window, you'd be okay with that?

what good would that do to exaggerate the situation? im sure 2 options is quite different than 100 options, right? is two-options "too much"?

 

[flyfish29]

I agree with some of your negatives...all of your positive, but I happen to like everything about the dock- except I want three docks...all hideable (is that a word?) and on three sides of the computer. Then I could group things better.

I actually turn off many of the little animations and such- don't like that it slows things down...even if it is slightly it still does on my iMac and probably on my iBook.

One thing often overlooked is the integration of all the apple software into and across OSX. It just all works (usually) and there are not compatibility issues between apple software (usually). I know it is not all directly in OSx but you only get it by using OSX!

 

[dejo]

what good would that do to exaggerate the situation? im sure 2 options is quite different than 100 options, right? is two-options "too much"?

You asked the question "since when options become bad?" and followed with the statement "I thought everybody should like to have more options". I'm giving you an example where too many options is bad and I doubt everybody would like it.

And yes, 2 options is quite different than 100 options.

 

[Cybergypsy]

I have been using OS X on my MacBook at home for a little over 6 weeks now. I have used every version of Windows from 3.1 to Vista. I am a Mac newb, but not a computer newb. I have re-installed Mac OS X twice since I bought the MacBook - just to have a fresh install after trying as many apps as possible and deciding what I like.

Here are my first impressions:

Finder - not enough functionality, major room for improvement in this thing.

GUI - rubish, would be nice if it all looked like iTunes 7. I used to think it looked really nice in screenshots and such, but the first thing I do when I load up the OS is install shapeshifter. Too much inconsistency between apps. I don't care for the rainbow pinwheel or candy cane progress bars either (first thing I do after install windows is install the uxtheme.dll hack so I can get rid of the fisher price gui)

Dock - hate it, try to hide it, but always end up needing to use it

Menu Bar - I wish I could auto hide this thing or make the bar/font smaller.

Maximize - sometimes I want a full screen view, this is not available in most apps unless you drag the window around, which leads me to

Resize Windows - bottom right corner only, why?!

Those are some of my negatives, I will post some positives later.

I have been using windows vist for the last few weeks and the Gadget sidebar rocks, I must sy apple need to do this....much nicer...

 

[chicagdan]

I have been using windows vist for the last few weeks and the Gadget sidebar rocks, I must sy apple need to do this....much nicer...

Ugh, I HATE the gadget sidebar ... it was the first thing I turned off after installing Vista. At least OS X lets you hide the widgets and call them up with a hot key. Vista forces you to clutter up your desktop with these stupid gadgets.

 

[clevin]

You asked the question "since when options become bad?" and followed with the statement "I thought everybody should like to have more options". I'm giving you an example where too many options is bad and I doubt everybody would like it.

And yes, 2 options is quite different than 100 options.

well, i would rather discussing real issue that OP and many ppl really care. u got my logic flaw, thats fine, since i don't think anybody would misunderstand what I meant.

 

[dejo]

...thats fine, since i don't think anybody would misunderstand what I meant.

And I'm sure everyone appreciates you speaking on their behalf.
Have a nice day.

 

[clevin]

And I'm sure everyone appreciates you speaking on their behalf.
Have a nice day.

huh, did i?

 

[miniConvert]

Wow, this thread really highlights how OS X suits some people better than others.

I came over to Mac OS X completely open-minded, and prepared to learn new ways of computing that differed from those I'd grown up with in Windows. All of the OP's original post contradicted how I feel about OS X, which seems to fit my computing needs like a glove, but that's just testament to everyone's differing experiences and personal preferences.

OS X is another way. You either love it (like me), learn to like it (like some of my staff are having to do), or reject it.

 

[Diatribe]

Why is this distraction reason for the screen maximizing coming up again and again?

If you can't focus go do something about it, don't cater to your disabilities and especially don't blame others for them.

 

[clevin]

OS X is another way. You either love it (like me), learn to like it (like some of my staff are having to do), or reject it.

well, imho, if apple wants to expand, better give ppl no excuse to "reject it". Its not difficult for apple to do so anyway.

 

[Skrilla™]

wow I didn't think I would start such a big thread

one more thing - floating menus SUCK! - gimp, office, etc...

I don't get all the fuss about not having a true maximize feature. One example - I look at plenty of excel workbooks that are so big you have to zoom out, maximze the screen and then you still can't see enough info at one time. For me it is not so much about being distracted, but being able to utilize the entire screen; and if I am not able to do so, then that real estate is a waste.

I am not sure if the Mac Office 2004 had a full screen view or not, I didn't use it long enough to find out. The floating menus were a big turn-off.

 

[Diatribe]

I don't get all the fuss about not having a true maximize feature. One example - I look at plenty of excel workbooks that are so big you have to zoom out, maximze the screen and then you still can't see enough info at one time. For me it is not so much about being distracted, but being able to utilize the entire screen; and if I am not able to do so, then that real estate is a waste.

The green button will automatically expand the window until you can see the entire information. If there is more information in the window than your screen can display it basically maximizes it.

 

[Skrilla™]

The green button will automatically expand the window until you can see the entire information. If there is more information in the window than your screen can display it basically maximizes it.

I think that is what it is supposed to do, but it doesn't always work that way