Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What does Windows do right?
- Thread starter .fred
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is not how Time Machine works. Unchanged files do not get new copies made. If Time Machine worked the way you claim, my TM drive would've filled up days ago. My main drive is 160GB and contains about 100GB of files. My TM drive is 160GB. How would it not be full in two hours?
Here's something else you can do in Windows but can't do in OS X: Point to focus. It's the ability to switch windows without clicking on them, but merely by pointing to them with the mouse. This way, you can type, scroll, or otherwise fully use a window/program without bringing it into the foreground; the focus automatically follows your mouse. Sound cool? Yeah, it is. And it's something Windows users have had for ages. Unix users too. But apparently, there isn't a way to enable this in OS X. And that's a shame.
So if you accidentally move your mouse while working in another window, a separate window becomes active without coming to the front and you end up working in the wrong window? How is this good?
Or is there something that stops this from happening?
So if you accidentally move your mouse while working in another window, a separate window becomes active without coming to the front and you end up working in the wrong window? How is this good?
Or is there something that stops this from happening?
Its not good. Its also not in all Unix window managers. Mouse over focus has existed in some window managers over time, but has not been used as a default nor encouraged, not does it operate the way heatmiser described.
What heatmiser is probably referring to is where in Microsoft Windows, if you click on a field or text input on another Window, that item will accept focus. On OS X if you click on a field, the Window itself will first grab focus, but a second click will be required on the field or text input for it to be accept input. This is NOT mouse over focus. Its an odd Windows-esque behavior.
So if you accidentally move your mouse while working in another window, a separate window becomes active without coming to the front and you end up working in the wrong window? How is this good?
Or is there something that stops this from happening?
You can set the time delay for how long it takes to switch focus, all the way from an instantaneous switch to a couple of seconds. I usually left mine at 200ms, and at that delay I didn't have the accidental mouse movement issue.
I've been searching google for any way to do this on OS X - heck, even a paid program - but nothing yet. It really made my work more efficient, as you could keep track of something in one window while working in another, instead of having to resize or click and bring another into the foreground.
Even right now, as I'm typing, there's a corner of iTunes visible below my Firefox window. With point-to-focus, I could simply hover my mouse over that portion of iTunes and pause the music with the spacebar, or switch tracks with the direction keys - all without bringing it into the foreground. From there, it would only take moving the mouse back into the text box to continue typing. It sounds really simple, but there are a thousand uses for it that only become apparent once you have it. And I miss it terribly!
WildPalms said:
You're clearly talking about something other than what I'm talking about, because I'm exactly sure of how point-to-focus operates.
Nope. This isn't what I'm talking about at all. There's *no* clicking required in this. None whatsoever.
Again, this has nothing to do with what I'm referring to. Please read my post again, and visualize it (or install Tweak XP on Windows XP and find the point-to-focus option). It's nothing like what you described, and is everything like what I described in my post above.
Mr. Light, read my post above yours. What WildPalms described had nothing to do with the function I'm talking about.
Yeah, I know things like that exist, but these are individual application tweaks. I'm not looking for a way to control iTunes from Firefox, but a way to control any program or window without bringing it into the foreground of whatever I'm working on...
Heatmaster I have been reading your postings and the more I read them the more I truly appreciate the way Apple designs OS X. It's really based on a logic system and Windows is not and please be open to what I am saying because your defenses are on overdrive right now.
While it's true that it wasn't until Leopard that I could mouse over a web browser and scroll without the window being active (and believe me that feature it should have been there long before Leopard) the rest of what you are talking about Windows doing is illogical which is probably why Apple didn't implement it.
Here's a scenario why OS X's way is logical:
I have Safari open with 2 browser windows side by side and iTunes in the background. In Leopard I am able to mouse over both browsers, scroll, highlight text and perform functions on either window rather they are active or not. "Logically" this is as far as it should go. (Don't start calling me a fanboy) just try an visualize.
In Windows if the user can just mouse over an open window active or inactive and do ALL functions especially typing text then what's the point of calling it an "Active Window".
So in this case the "Windows way" there really is no such thing as an "Active Window" and that's not logical, it's really retarded.
There's a point where the window needs to be active and that's when you want to perform all functions.
Now as far as iTunes I don't know how old your Mac is but my iMac has full keyboard functionality for pause, play and change songs without iTunes even being on the desktop as I always keep it hidden so I don't need to mouse over iTunes.
Again, there's a point where a window should be active when you need to go beyond very basic functions.
While it's true that it wasn't until Leopard that I could mouse over a web browser and scroll without the window being active (and believe me that feature it should have been there long before Leopard) the rest of what you are talking about Windows doing is illogical which is probably why Apple didn't implement it.
Here's a scenario why OS X's way is logical:
I have Safari open with 2 browser windows side by side and iTunes in the background. In Leopard I am able to mouse over both browsers, scroll, highlight text and perform functions on either window rather they are active or not. "Logically" this is as far as it should go. (Don't start calling me a fanboy) just try an visualize.
In Windows if the user can just mouse over an open window active or inactive and do ALL functions especially typing text then what's the point of calling it an "Active Window".
So in this case the "Windows way" there really is no such thing as an "Active Window" and that's not logical, it's really retarded.
There's a point where the window needs to be active and that's when you want to perform all functions.
Now as far as iTunes I don't know how old your Mac is but my iMac has full keyboard functionality for pause, play and change songs without iTunes even being on the desktop as I always keep it hidden so I don't need to mouse over iTunes.
Again, there's a point where a window should be active when you need to go beyond very basic functions.
HLDan, you can defend OS X's lack of FFM for as long as you'd like. However, this is a feature available in almost every OS besides OS X, and hopefully someday Apple will catch up in this field. Arguing about the need for X-Mouse on OS X with someone who's never used it natively is like trying to explain µTorrent to people on OS X who can't see why Transmission/Azureus wouldn't be enough. It's not worth the trouble.
Every OS huh? There aren't that many OS's. You can count one hand and as far as home use you can count on two fingers.
Oh well, my mistake I thought you would be more open minded, I did ask you to try and understand what I was saying about logic but you're too closed minded.
Well, there's nothing you can do, either accept it or move on but as far as the rhetorical question of the forum topic it doesn't mean Windows does it right because it's just not logical. I think you need to take a look back at the meaning of the words active/inactive.
The biggest thing I can think of is that Microsoft actually puts resources into games. Like it or not, some people do use their computers for games and just ignoring that is frustrating.
What about cmd + n? Opens a new finder window.. or Cmd + Space. Opens the spotlight search field. I can find even a remote file on my hard drive in OSX in just a few seconds, and I've only been using OSX a few weeks..Seems just as convenient as the key that brings up the start menu, even though I don't like the Start menu all that much.
I do like Spotlight and Cmd+N, but Cmd+N requires the Finder to be highlighted, or else it just brings in a new window of whatever app you're in. It would be nice if the key combo always worked (a la Win + E for My Computer), regardless of what you were doing...
Yeah, that's true. Atleast cmd + tab works to switch app focus so that it's not too much of a hassle, but it'd still be nice. Can't you set up something like that in Quicksilver, though?
Since we're talking about features now...Anyone know why you can't stretch icons on the desktop anymore? I love that feature...
Not correct. Modern graphics cards are EFI compatible. OS X just doesn't have drivers for them. So now we have to wait on Apple to support the cards (which is why "3rd party" drivers can be an advantage). Another part of the problem is Apple doesn't have a machine cost less $2500.
Plus MS actually helps game makers make games. MS sees gaming as an advantage, Apple needs to get on board. Especially if Apple has plans on getting back in the console game.