OS X 10.2 Minimized Windows

EngimaX

macrumors newbie
Mar 7, 2002
1
0
I think this is fake...

I think the image for the minimized windows is fake. The reason I say this is because of the iTunes icon. Unless Apple is reverting back to its old icon for the next revision (or in Mac OS X 10.2), the image should use the new icon, right?
 

mgescuro

macrumors member
Feb 19, 2002
39
0
Silicon Valley
Re: Window Shade

Wasn't "Window Shade" originally a 3rd party application before being integrated into MacOS?

If those moveable minimized windows are in fact an upcoming feature, then that would take the place of the window tabs and window-shading. That works for me.

I still miss the window tabs from OS 9. :(
 

crassusad44

macrumors 6502a
Nov 30, 2001
546
0
Scandinavia
blah

These pics are useless. What I really want to know, is what the BIG differences in 10.2 will be. Will it be faster? Will there be new features (big features, not old ones like spring loaded folders...)...

Anywayz. We'll probably know for sure this summer......
MWNY I guess
 

cmoney

macrumors regular
Feb 4, 2002
108
0
Minimized Windows on Desktop Bad!

Why would they wanna introduce more clutter to the desktop? I could understand if there was no "desktop" and you couldn't put files there but now they're adding these non-differentiated icons right on the desktop. It also messes up consistency with other dock behaviors. Drag an icon from the dock, it goes poof. But drag an open window from the dock and it goes on the desktop. How many people are now gonna be asking why they can't drag any other icons from the dock onto the desktop?

At least they should have a little indicator icon on the minimized windows. Something like the little alias arrow Finder already uses. Most Unix X Windows window managers, NextStep, Solaris, even Windows 3.1 made it plainly obvious that it was a minimized window. Sure these look like small windows but that doesn't differentiate it a regular icon. Example: look at the QuickTime icon in the dock right now, it's a small QuickTime window with the QuickTime Logo inside. What's to differentiate the "app launcher" icon with a "minimized Quicktime window" icon? Nothing. That's just one example and it's from Apple. Terminal icon has the same problem.

As it is, the desktop in OS X right now has a link to the file system. People understand that, they drag files and other objects to the desktop all the time. Allowing minimized window icons on the desktop confuses things, especially since there's already a place for minimized window icons.

BTW, for those wanting window shading, goto http://www.unsanity.com . They've got one for $7 and it's pretty good.
 

Beej

macrumors 68020
Jan 6, 2002
2,139
0
Buffy's bedroom
I think the minimised windows are cool. I will use them for sure. What a great idea... I bet in 6 months time we all wonder how we did without them!

And cmoney, the thing that differentiates minimised windows from app icons is where they are in the dock. If icons are on the same side of the dock as the trash, they're files or minimised windows, otherwise, they're apps.
 

King Cobra

macrumors 603
Mar 2, 2002
5,403
0
I like the idea of bringing back spring-loaded folders (as in back in the OS 9 days). But I was wondering if Jaguar (OS X 10.2) will support all major third party candidates for USB Microphones. I saw that in an earlier forum that OS X does not support certain microphones.
 

cmoney

macrumors regular
Feb 4, 2002
108
0
Originally posted by Beej
And cmoney, the thing that differentiates minimised windows from app icons is where they are in the dock. If icons are on the same side of the dock as the trash, they're files or minimised windows, otherwise, they're apps.
Yeah but if you drag them out of the dock, onto the desktop, there not in the dock anymore. What then differentiates this new icon from a file with a small window as its icon, like Quicktime or Terminal?
 

cleo

macrumors 65816
Jan 21, 2002
1,186
0
Tampa Bay Area, FL, USA
Originally posted by cmoney


Yeah but if you drag them out of the dock, onto the desktop, there not in the dock anymore. What then differentiates this new icon from a file with a small window as its icon, like Quicktime or Terminal?
I just minimized a Terminal window and it doesn't look anything like the icon in the dock. I mean, yeah, both are black, but one's all cartoon-y looking and one's just a square little box.

My objection to the alleged feature is... it just seems pointless. In what possible situation would it be helpful?

I'd rather see Apple invest their time and talent into helpful improvements (including more responsive window resizing!).
 

cmoney

macrumors regular
Feb 4, 2002
108
0
Originally posted by cleo


I just minimized a Terminal window and it doesn't look anything like the icon in the dock. I mean, yeah, both are black, but one's all cartoon-y looking and one's just a square little box.

My objection to the alleged feature is... it just seems pointless. In what possible situation would it be helpful?

I'd rather see Apple invest their time and talent into helpful improvements (including more responsive window resizing!).
My only point was that there should be explicit differentiation between the two different icons. Yes, in this particular case (terminal) the two icons are different enough that there's not as much confusion, but it's just one case. Quicktime was another example where it's probably more apparent.

I do agree that the feature seems kind of pointless. I watched the movie and they demo it with a Finder window. When the icon was dragged to the side, it snapped to the side of the screen. It sorta reminded me of tabbed folders, but then why implement it for all windows? And why use the icon of the minimized window?

Yeah, instead, they should make window resizing faster, but also scrolling, especially in PDF documents. I really like how fast things scroll in Windows. I can use the scroll wheel in Acrobat in Windows just like I'm scrolling through a text document, it's that fast. But OS X, whose entire display is based on PDF, can't do the same thing?!
 

3G4N

macrumors regular
Jan 24, 2002
123
0
3rd star to the right
Oh, the Humanity!

When will they stop with the senseless eyecandy, bells, and whistles,
and add some old tried-and-true UI elements that we NEED!!?!

I NEED UI MEAT AND POTATOES!! NOT FLUFFY CANDY!!!

I don't want to have to pay extra $$ for shareware hacks that
mimic functionality that should be there from the beginning!!?!

I want windowshading native in OSX! I don't like having to move
my mouse from the top of the screen, to the bottom, REPEATEDLY,
just to temporarily minimize and maximizing windows!

I still can't navigate lists of files using my keyboard!!!
(like typing an "s" to get to files that begin with "s")

Would Steve and others at Apple, please dust off that BIBLE
that is/was the "**Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines**",
and friggin USE IT!?!?!
 

porovaara

macrumors regular
Mar 7, 2002
132
0
sf
This could be good.

What is so *wrong* with this?

What is wrong with treating a minimized window like any other object? Obviously OSX has entered the realm of stability where you can leave apps open and that tends to mean you will leave documents open as well. So why not treat an icon of a running app just like any other doc? Extend the everything is a file format like it is under other os's.

Personally I leave apps open all the time with docs in them. I wouldn't mind just dragging that onto a spot on my desktop so I could be reminded by a quick gander at it. This ultra fascism that the desktop must be CLEAN and pure seems to be by people that are either neat freaks or have never really worked in an office environment.
 

mjtomlin

Guest
Jan 19, 2002
384
0
A matter of preference...

Ummm... if minimized windows are indeed a new feature and you don't like it - DON'T USE IT!!! I don't particularly care for or ever used the Window Shade feature of OS 9, but I didn't run around saying it was a waste and there's no reason for it to be there and it should be removed!

It's all really a matter of preference. Do I think Apple should include Window Shade into OS X ... what do I care, I won't use it anyway.

None of these small enhancements are at all intrusive, so there's no reason to whine about them being there. And the one's that are missing, give Apple some freaken time to put'em in. This OS is only 4 years in the making ... it took about ten years for them to show up in the other system!!!

:rolleyes:
 

macfreek57

macrumors 6502
Jan 1, 2002
378
0
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Originally posted by cmoney


My only point was that there should be explicit differentiation between the two different icons. Yes, in this particular case (terminal) the two icons are different enough that there's not as much confusion, but it's just one case. Quicktime was another example where it's probably more apparent.
another bad example - the quicktime icon has a big fricking Q in it. unless you only watch the sample movie that comes with quicktime, this should not be problem
and i don't know about the functionality of the minimized window thing. but apple better re-implement the window shade feature and make it about as customizable as windowshadeX. i'm soo mad at all the OBVIOUS things they still haven't put BACK in or the DUMB ideas they've used to replace them.
 

Beej

macrumors 68020
Jan 6, 2002
2,139
0
Buffy's bedroom
Originally posted by cleo
My objection to the alleged feature is... it just seems pointless.
I'm sure it will provide hundreds of man-hours of fun to people across the world... "Hey, look! You can throw these little windows around! Cool!"

Ahem.
 

cmoney

macrumors regular
Feb 4, 2002
108
0
still missing the point

Originally posted by macfreek57
another bad example - the quicktime icon has a big fricking Q in it. unless you only watch the sample movie that comes with quicktime, this should not be problem
shoot down every example, who cares. the point is there should be a clue as to what the icon represents. apple has guidelines for icon designs (at least they used to, it seems they're not following them as strictly anymore). even os x has this to a point. utility icons are black and white. document icons have the page corner turned. aliases have a little arrow. once upon a time, application icons had guidelines (for example, textedit's icon is a text document with a pen implying you can write text documents, whereas project builder's icon has what looks like a source code document with a hammer, implying building of code or programs...). control panels in classic mac os had a specific look. etc etc.

this was once important enough that they made guidelines for it! is it any less important now? no. photo quality icons (including the ability to show miniaturized versions of windows), while great looking, haven't reduced the importance of this concept. once somebody learns the different types of icons (and some are intuitive: documents have the corner turned for example), they're able to look at a jumble of icons and quickly get an idea of what each icon does or represents, without having to discern what the picture is, or read a file name or worse, double click to open it.

you personally may be able to discern that a minimized quicktime window icon is significantly distinguishable from the application icon. will your grandmother? your father with bad eyesight? will those small differences make a difference to someone with less computer experience? or will they just see another minimized window icon?
 

porovaara

macrumors regular
Mar 7, 2002
132
0
sf
Icons that look different?

I don't think they need to appear different.

Why? We have already experienced much blurring of the lines between content and app with context launching. So why not take it the next step? And is there really even a difference. Okay so I have a minimzed movie playing in an icon. When I click that icon what do I get?

I get the movie back.

I also get the control of the *application* back via keyboard shortcuts and the menu at the top. So why should it look any different? I'm back in the application.
 

rainman::|:|

macrumors 603
Feb 2, 2002
5,438
2
iowa
Re: Minimized Windows on Desktop Bad!

Originally posted by cmoney
Why would they wanna introduce more clutter to the desktop? I could understand if there was no "desktop" and you couldn't put files there but now they're adding these non-differentiated icons right on the desktop. It also messes up consistency with other dock behaviors. Drag an icon from the dock, it goes poof. But drag an open window from the dock and it goes on the desktop. How many people are now gonna be asking why they can't drag any other icons from the dock onto the desktop?

At least they should have a little indicator icon on the minimized windows. Something like the little alias arrow Finder already uses. Most Unix X Windows window managers, NextStep, Solaris, even Windows 3.1 made it plainly obvious that it was a minimized window. Sure these look like small windows but that doesn't differentiate it a regular icon. Example: look at the QuickTime icon in the dock right now, it's a small QuickTime window with the QuickTime Logo inside. What's to differentiate the "app launcher" icon with a "minimized Quicktime window" icon? Nothing. That's just one example and it's from Apple. Terminal icon has the same problem.

As it is, the desktop in OS X right now has a link to the file system. People understand that, they drag files and other objects to the desktop all the time. Allowing minimized window icons on the desktop confuses things, especially since there's already a place for minimized window icons.

BTW, for those wanting window shading, goto http://www.unsanity.com . They've got one for $7 and it's pretty good.
Absolutely agree. I am used to the minimized windows being in the dock, and I suppose with time, i could get used to being able to move them outside of the dock... But what real purpose would it serve? It'd be another layer of things, and they'd probably each be their own layer, so you've got a few windows on screen and all these little tabbies floating between them... How annoying... I just can't see how they'd be any more convenient on the sides of the desktop, as opposed to the dock. It's not like you're going to run out of dock space, with magnification and everything...

And if they did it, yeah I think there'd have to be an indicator... like a gray frame around them, or a little icon in the corner, or something. It's just... Apple. Less confusion, not more, right??

paul