What do you like and dislike about Mac OS X?

[hyddan]

Nope. I like using my thumb much better than my pinky to hit the modifiers. I have long fingers so it's easier to curl my thumb under than squeezing my pinky in. Plus, that way I can leave my thumb on command while I'm working and hit any other key on the keyboard.

Maybe you're used to the pinky version and like it?

Yea its just another habit. When you're used to macs after a while you're going to hate windows position everytime you hit alt+c instead of ctrl to copy things.

The Finder is the main and only thing I dislike in OS X. I hear it's getting an update in 10.6 that's great.

I like everything else

 

[zync]

Yea its just another habit. When you're used to macs after a while you're going to hate windows position everytime you hit alt+c instead of ctrl to copy things.

Or you remap the keys to OS X style like I did when I used to work at a job where I had a PC. Now I've got a beast of a Mac Pro and all is right with the world.

The worst is that annoying Windows key. I hate it now and I hated it then.

 

[DoFoT9]

Or you remap the keys to OS X style like I did when I used to work at a job where I had a PC. Now I've got a beast of a Mac Pro and all is right with the world.

The worst is that annoying Windows key. I hate it now and I hated it then.

the fix is simple: turn the PC into a hackintosh then the keys remap to apples

 

[joaoferro37]

the fix is simple: turn the PC into a hackintosh then the keys remap to apples

I am new to Mac Wanna be PC. Can I use Apple keyboards instead remap the pc keyboard?

 

[rwilliams]

Only had a Mac for two weeks now so this list could contain stuff in the "Why doesn't it do it like ..." category.

Cons
Finder - This is so clunky compared to pretty well anything on Windows or Linux. It's the main program on any Mac so it should be good, but it ain't. Surely it's time for an update - if this was the main effort in Snow Leopard then that would be worth an immediate upgrade for me.

Yeah, I am definitely not a fan of Finder.

 

[joaoferro37]

I am new to Mac Wanna be PC. Can I use Apple keyboards instead remap the pc keyboard?

Post at the worng thread. Sorry....
OS X is running real good other than Kernal Panic.
Did not have that problem on my OS.9.22
Other than that, OS X is the best.

 

[jacg]

Printing to multiple printers

I love pdf strengths but I hate printing.

Why don't cocoa apps (like iWork, iLife, Preview) remember print settings? I print a test copy of something, it works, now I have to enter all the settings again!

Yes I could save a preset but how many of those am I going to end up with? And why do presets appear there for every printer? I have a preset for stapled, folded booklets, but only one printer I use can actually do that. Surely the preset should (optionally) change the printer or choosing a printer should filter the relevant presets?

Alternatively, apps like Pages should have a checkbox 'remember print settings for this document'.

Oh, Word, Excel, for all your multiple sins, you make this part of my life very easy. Albeit slow.

 

[zync]

the fix is simple: turn the PC into a hackintosh then the keys remap to apples

OSX86 wasn't really around then as it is now, but if it were and it were my PC to do with as I pleased, I'd have probably taken the simpler approach—throw it out the window and buy a new Mac

 

[DoFoT9]

OSX86 wasn't really around then as it is now, but if it were and it were my PC to do with as I pleased, I'd have probably taken the simpler approach—throw it out the window and buy a new Mac

yea that would be the best option hahahaha

 

[soldierblue]

Good:

1. The UI.
2. The Dock.
3. Terminal.

Neutral

1. Dashboard.
2. Expose.
3. Spaces.

I can understand the usefulness, but I don't use them. Ever. And when I don't, I don't miss them.
Bad

1. Safari.
2. Mail.
3. iChat.
4. Finder.

Safari/Mail/iChat are apps that I immediately replace whenever I do a fresh install. I just cannot use them. Finder is archaic at this point.

 

[268144]

Why do you guys hate the Finder? i find that its far better than Explorer on Windows.

 

[soldierblue]

Well, I find that Explorer is far better. Matter of opinion I suppose.

 

[zync]

yea that would be the best option hahahaha

Quicker too!

Why do you guys hate the Finder? i find that its far better than Explorer on Windows.

I don't really get it either so don't feel too bad. I just wish that the OS itself allowed delete and rename in save dialogs. Of course, it somewhat makes sense that you can't (saving is the antithesis of deleting and renaming isn't saving either). But, it would be nice to have, like cut.

 

[alumac]

This is well late but thanks!

Look here:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4337[/QUOTE]

Thanks for pointing that out dude! I'm grabbing the update now..

 

[Riverbird]

It's Adobe's fault. They really need to recode the damn plugin.

This! Imagine how much longer your battery would last on youtube if the CPU wasn't being murdered!

I am new to OS X.. but so far I like all of its features. I thought not being able to defrag my hard drive was weird. And I am still getting used to it.. but apparently OS X doesn't need it?

 

[DoFoT9]

This! Imagine how much longer your battery would last on youtube if the CPU wasn't being murdered!

I am new to OS X.. but so far I like all of its features. I thought not being able to defrag my hard drive was weird. And I am still getting used to it.. but apparently OS X doesn't need it?

nah meh dont worry about it. all files under 20mb are defragged by the OS automatically. anything bigger then that is too much effort and not worth it!

 

[sammich]

nah meh dont worry about it. all files under 20mb are defragged by the OS automatically. anything bigger then that is too much effort and not worth it!

I think it's 10mB and smaller are defrag'd.

That aside: I wish that HFS+ would somehow make it so that the fragments aren't also less than 10mB. I was running low on space and had to copy a disc image, and guess what, iDefrag showed me that file in about 9000 pieces across my drive. The file was about 6 gigs from memory. Boy, was it fun to use that image.

 

[DoFoT9]

I think it's 10mB and smaller are defrag'd.

That aside: I wish that HFS+ would somehow make it so that the fragments aren't also less than 10mB. I was running low on space and had to copy a disc image, and guess what, iDefrag showed me that file in about 9000 pieces across my drive. The file was about 6 gigs from memory. Boy, was it fun to use that image.

now that i think about it it may be 20kb.. i cant really remember but haha!

it would be good to be able to set the fragment size (i guess you could somehow do that when you format the disk?)

you HAVE to have fragments less then 10mb - if you have a 5kb document then that will need a 10mb chunk.. wont it? (if i understand this properly).

 

[sammich]

now that i think about it it may be 20kb.. i cant really remember but haha!

it would be good to be able to set the fragment size (i guess you could somehow do that when you format the disk?)

you HAVE to have fragments less then 10mb - if you have a 5kb document then that will need a 10mb chunk.. wont it? (if i understand this properly).

Well no. What I mean is that if I had no contiguous 100mB of space on my drive, and a 100mB was written to that drive into 100 pieces, it would be horrible to access in the whole. What I'm suggesting is that each fragment of that file can only be a minimum of 10mB, except for the last peice obviously. Question now is, what would happen if there was less than 10mB left on the drive?

 

[DoFoT9]

Well no. What I mean is that if I had no contiguous 100mB of space on my drive, and a 100mB was written to that drive into 100 pieces, it would be horrible to access in the whole. What I'm suggesting is that each fragment of that file can only be a minimum of 10mB, except for the last peice obviously. Question now is, what would happen if there was less than 10mB left on the drive?

well thats how it works but, the hard drive is always jumping around - even after you just defrag piece immediately get moved (be it from VM or swap or what have you).

if there was elss then 10mB available it would tell you, and trust me - you would notice it WELL before there was 10mB left

 

[sammich]

well thats how it works but, the hard drive is always jumping around - even after you just defrag piece immediately get moved (be it from VM or swap or what have you).

if there was elss then 10mB available it would tell you, and trust me - you would notice it WELL before there was 10mB left

As far as I know, files with a total size (not the fragment size) of less than 20mB (i'll give you this one apparently it was 20mB in Panther) are defrag'd. A 19.9mB file can only be in 1 fragment. A 20.1mB file can be in a thousand fragments. What I propose is that the max fragments of a 20.1 mB file be 2 fragments.

runaway syslogd = no space = grab a coffee while you wait for activity monitor to open.

 

[DoFoT9]

As far as I know, files with a total size (not the fragment size) of less than 20mB (i'll give you this one apparently it was 20mB in Panther) are defrag'd. A 19.9mB file can only be in 1 fragment. A 20.1mB file can be in a thousand fragments. What I propose is that the max fragments of a 20.1 mB file be 2 fragments.

ahh well that makes perfect sense then! that wastes so much space, because each of those thousands of fragments needs an additional logfile to tell the computer where it is.. have it in 2 large pieces and its much easier! i like your thinking! i wonder if ZFS does this?

runaway syslogd = no space = grab a coffee while you wait for activity monitor to open.

thats why i leave activity monitor open 24/7 and upgraded to the largest possible laptop HD i could find

and WOW where did you get those pictures from!?!? i want!

 

[sammich]

ahh well that makes perfect sense then! that wastes so much space, because each of those thousands of fragments needs an additional logfile to tell the computer where it is.. have it in 2 large pieces and its much easier! i like your thinking! i wonder if ZFS does this?

thats why i leave activity monitor open 24/7 and upgraded to the largest possible laptop HD i could find

and WOW where did you get those pictures from!?!? i want!

I'm sure they've thought about this, I'm just curious as to the technical reasons why they wouldn't do this.

And those pics I attached are from iDefrag's list of fragmented files. Notice how there are miniscule files that are fragmented? Where is this HFS+ supposed auto-defrag here?

 

[DoFoT9]

I'm sure they've thought about this, I'm just curious as to the technical reasons why they wouldn't do this.

And those pics I attached are from iDefrag's list of fragmented files. Notice how there are miniscule files that are fragmented? Where is this HFS+ supposed auto-defrag here?

ahh ill have to give that app a check

not sure about the auto defrag. apparently it does it on the fly. a quick google yielded this and this. they will explain a tad more.

 

[sammich]

ahh ill have to give that app a check

not sure about the auto defrag. apparently it does it on the fly. a quick google yielded this and this. they will explain a tad more.

Thanks for the links. According to the KB page:

Note:Mac OS X systems use hundreds of thousands of small files, many of which are rarely accessed. Optimizing them can be a major effort for very little practical gain.

Which lead me to think that there might be particular directories or a lower bound to not defrag, but that doesn't make any sense with that iDefrag is telling me.

Linky - very good info describing HFS+ defragging. If anyone can explain to me why not all small files aren't actually defragged on my drive, I'll be willing to drop this defrag run here.