"X" does not close applications?

hdsalinas

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Aug 28, 2006
397
0
San Pedro Sula, Honduras
I was playing with a Mac the other day and I noticed that the red ball with an X does not actually close a program. If this the way it works or there is an option to make the X close or minimize them?

Thanks
 

yippy

macrumors 68020
Mar 14, 2004
2,087
3
Chicago, IL
The red X is to close the window only. To minimize hit he yellow -. If you want to quit a program hit command+q or choose the applications menu and quit.
 

RacerX

macrumors 65832
Aug 2, 2004
1,504
2
hdsalinas said:
I was playing with a Mac the other day and I noticed that the red ball with an X does not actually close a program.
This is because on Macs the applications aren't restricted to a root window (nor are windows "instances" of an application on a Mac). Most apps present the user with document windows... which are documents in an application and not the application itself.

The default behavior in Windows stems from it's origins as a shell for running GUI apps. Since that time most Windows apps have been rooted in a main (root) window and closing that window closes the application.

This rooted application environment is actually a limitation of Windows rather than a feature. Other operating systems (some going back to the 80's) avoided this limitation, but it has followed Windows from it's earliest incarnations.
 

emptyCup

macrumors 65816
Jan 5, 2005
1,482
1
yippy said:
If you want to quit a program hit command+q or choose the applications menu and quit.
Applications can also be quit from the Dock. Just click and hold on the application icon until a menu comes up. Quit will be an option.
 

zap2

macrumors 604
Mar 8, 2005
7,241
1
Washington D.C
Some are..smaller one sometimes are..but most are not, at first it seemed like a bad idea, but i've grown to like it more then Windows' method
 

Frisco

macrumors 68020
Sep 24, 2002
2,475
69
Utopia
You got a Mac, no need to close an application when you are only going to open it later. Macs are great with having many applications open at the same time.
 

iMeowbot

macrumors G3
Aug 30, 2003
8,636
0
zap2 said:
Some are..smaller one sometimes are..but most are not, at first it seemed like a bad idea, but i've grown to like it more then Windows' method
The inconsistency these days is annoying though. The iLife programs (except iTunes, we need consistency in our inconsistency) like to quit on window close. System Preferences is weird like that too.

Then again, maybe the inconsistency in the close button is necessary to complement the same random definitions given to the zoom button across different apps.
 

solvs

macrumors 603
Jun 25, 2002
5,684
1
LaLaLand, CA
Right click and quit works ok, but yeah, I'd like a button that closes the app too. Some things you can leave open, like QT or Preview, but some things like PS or an app I'm only going to use for a few minutes can be closed. Would be convenient, even if there was some kind of option or 3rd party add-on.
 

treblah

macrumors 65816
Oct 28, 2003
1,285
0
29680
iMeowbot said:
The inconsistency these days is annoying though. The iLife programs (except iTunes, we need consistency in our inconsistency) like to quit on window close. System Preferences is weird like that too.

Then again, maybe the inconsistency in the close button is necessary to complement the same random definitions given to the zoom button across different apps.
Per Apple's Human Interface Guidelines:

Closing Windows
Users can close windows by:

Choosing Close from the File menu
Pressing Command-W
Clicking the close button
When a user closes a document window, your application should:

Decide what to do with unsaved data (see "Dialogs for Saving, Closing, and Quitting")
Store the window’s onscreen position and size (so they can be used when the window is reopened)
In most cases, applications that are not document-based should quit when the main window is closed. For Example, System Preferences quits if the user closes the window. If an application continues to perform some function when the main window is closed, however, it may be appropriate to leave it running when the main window is closed. For example, iTunes continues to play when the user closes the main window.
They are sorta consistent. :rolleyes:
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,199
6
Adelaide, Australia
Frisco said:
You got a Mac, no need to close an application when you are only going to open it later. Macs are great with having many applications open at the same time.

Excellent point. Memory management on the Mac is brilliant so we can afford to keep lots of apps open. Having said that, I quit all my apps before sleeping at night. I guess this is out of habit although Mail and Safari can sometimes act strangely if left open for too many days. :)
 

maxrobertson

macrumors 6502a
Jun 15, 2006
581
0
Jakarta
iMeowbot said:
The inconsistency these days is annoying though. The iLife programs (except iTunes, we need consistency in our inconsistency) like to quit on window close. System Preferences is weird like that too.

Then again, maybe the inconsistency in the close button is necessary to complement the same random definitions given to the zoom button across different apps.
But they're consistent in that they do what you'd expect. An application that has just one window (Like iPhoto and System Preferences) should behave the way it does. A document-based application should stay open in case you want to create more documents.
 

iMeowbot

macrumors G3
Aug 30, 2003
8,636
0
maxrobertson said:
But they're consistent in that they do what you'd expect. An application that has just one window (Like iPhoto and System Preferences) should behave the way it does. A document-based application should stay open in case you want to create more documents.
That's where this falls apart. iTunes and iPhoto, side by side, certainly look like they have the same kind of interface and act in much the same way. iTunes happens to have a feature that can open playlists into separate windows, while iPhoto happens to have left out the feature to put an album into a separate window. It's entirely arbitrary and inconsistent, and Apple patch it up by changing their interface guidelines to make up for their blunders.
 

Felldownthewell

macrumors 65816
Feb 10, 2006
1,053
0
Portland
It may be a carryover from my recent windows days, but I always quit an app when I'm done with it, exception being Safari, which I try to leave open so I don't have to log back into myspace ( :eek: :rolleyes: :D ).

I find it nice to be able to close a window, and I am now a firm addict to command-whatevering when I need to close or minimize something.

To the OP- I think that you may find the easiest way to quit an app is command (the key with the apple logo on it) Q, which kills the app, and is similar to windows "x"ing in its ease.
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,562
631
Cork, Ireland.
The way I see it, with all the most applications already in people's Docks, and with most launch times being so short, it doesn't really matter that much any more whether the program is in RAM (i.e. running) or launching from the hard disk, either way it comes up within a couple of seconds.
 

dpaanlka

macrumors 601
Nov 16, 2004
4,868
6
Illinois
iMeowbot said:
The inconsistency these days is annoying though. The iLife programs (except iTunes, we need consistency in our inconsistency) like to quit on window close. System Preferences is weird like that too.
That is because those programs cannot have more than one window open at a time.

It is perfectly consistent.
 

iMeowbot

macrumors G3
Aug 30, 2003
8,636
0
dpaanlka said:
That is because those programs cannot have more than one window open at a time.
Holy circularity, Batman! Yes, the programs are inconsistent because they are inconsistent! It's not what the programs can do, but what Apple didn't bother to do.

To put a finer point on it: those single window apps don't need to be that way, as other applications with similar interfaces demonstrate. They act strangely only because they act strangely.
 

poppe

macrumors 68020
Apr 29, 2006
2,199
32
Woodland Hills
Ok heres a really dumb question, and right now I wish my macrumors status said newbie so this didn't lok so bad.

On a Mac What is the difference between hitting the red butting (closing it) and minimizing it?

The times i'm on a Mac I always just hit red button if I'm not quite done yet, and command + Q all the others.
 

Felldownthewell

macrumors 65816
Feb 10, 2006
1,053
0
Portland
poppe said:
Ok heres a really dumb question, and right now I wish my macrumors status said newbie so this didn't lok so bad.

On a Mac What is the difference between hitting the red butting (closing it) and minimizing it?

The times i'm on a Mac I always just hit red button if I'm not quite done yet, and command + Q all the others.

The best way to illustrate this is to have you do it. After you finish reading this, copy the address of this thread, and paste it to a new safari window. Minimize the first one and close the second. The minimized one will be in the dock, so that you can access the same site later. The closed one is gone- of you want to get back to this thread you will have to open a new safari window, go to macrumors, and find this thread again.
 

atszyman

macrumors 68020
Sep 16, 2003
2,437
1
The Dallas 'burbs
iMeowbot said:
That's where this falls apart. iTunes and iPhoto, side by side, certainly look like they have the same kind of interface and act in much the same way. iTunes happens to have a feature that can open playlists into separate windows, while iPhoto happens to have left out the feature to put an album into a separate window. It's entirely arbitrary and inconsistent, and Apple patch it up by changing their interface guidelines to make up for their blunders.
Here's the difference.
1. Open iTunes and iPhoto side by side (make sure your sound is on).
2. Start playing a song in iTunes. Now close the window.
3. Now look at a photo in iPhoto. Now close the window.

You'll notice that after step 2 the song keeps playing which means iTunes is perfectly capable of doing something without a window. You can't look at photos when there are no windows so quitting iPhoto when you close the window makes sense, however since playing music requires no visual feedback having iTunes open with no windows makes sense.

This does fall apart with TextEdit and Preview ad other apps like that when all of the windows are closed they keep running despite the visual nature of the applications. However the fact that the apps are typically more of a multi-window interface than iPhoto probably has something to do with that.
 

dpaanlka

macrumors 601
Nov 16, 2004
4,868
6
Illinois
iMeowbot said:
Holy circularity, Batman! Yes, the programs are inconsistent because they are inconsistent! It's not what the programs can do, but what Apple didn't bother to do.

To put a finer point on it: those single window apps don't need to be that way, as other applications with similar interfaces demonstrate. They act strangely only because they act strangely.
???
 

QuarterSwede

macrumors G3
Oct 1, 2005
9,170
1,148
Colorado Springs, CO
Personally, I agree with Apple. I don't think all app windows should act the same way. It just depends on what the app does and how people use it that makes a difference.

Of course, there is a part of me that wishes they would just make all apps follow the Command+Q to quit philosophy and not allow app closing by "x" button.
 

Tymmz

macrumors 65816
Jan 6, 2005
1,439
180
Bild 1.jpg

The three buttons I (almost) never use.

x - command + Q or W
- - double click on the window
+ - ??? (i never use the zoom-function)
 

mahonmeister

macrumors 6502
Jun 9, 2006
297
0
Redlands, CA
atszyman said:
This does fall apart with TextEdit and Preview ad other apps like that when all of the windows are closed they keep running despite the visual nature of the applications. However the fact that the apps are typically more of a multi-window interface than iPhoto probably has something to do with that.
Preview is the one app I always find running when I thought it was closed. Heck, its open right now and I can't remember when I last used it.