My colleague's Mac is TRWTF
-
anything with Cherry MX Blue switches should be a good analogue.
i like das keyboard, but wasd is also a good one.
-
Most Windows users
?=
@noland said:Mac power user
Emphasis mine.
Also not sure what your point is with that post.
Nothing's stopping you from using Windows in the same fiddly way as Mac. The fact that most users work the way you described tells you something about which workflow is better.
QFT!
-
What is the deal with all this talk of different coloured cherries? It always comes up in mechanical keyboard discussions and seems to be one of those things that people assume everyone understands
-
Cherry MX colours their switches based on specs.
the blues are a tactile click key with a medium activation force.
there's a fair few different keys available
amazon sells a set of 6 for $16 so you can test the different common switches before you buy a full keyboard
-
Does today's Cherry have anything in common with the Cherry that used to make nice keyboards for S-100 machines a decade before the One True Keyboard even existed?
-
I have a Cherry keyboard, it's awful. Keeps inserting random keypresses. The Cherry mouse is even worse though, it regularly loses the wireless connection for a few seconds, the cursor sometimes decides to go on a wander and the scroll wheel is as likely to scroll down as up when rolled in either direction
-
Does today's Cherry have anything in common with the Cherry that used to make nice keyboards for S-100 machines a decade before the One True Keyboard even existed?
AFAIK, no they don't
-
Just looked this up, and it does in fact appear to be the same corp.
-
Oh, and just because "this is how it originally works", doesn't make it right.
QFT.
Also doesn't apply: 'this is how it works in the latest version'.
Correct operation should probably be found through peer review.
-
anything with Cherry MX Blue switches should be a good analogue.
Yeah, no. Or so it seems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZZkE5BjO2k
Pity.
-
Just looked this up, and it does in fact appear to be the same corp.
huh. TIL
Yeah, no. Or so it seems.
good luck finding anyone making a buckling spring keyboard in this day and age.... Cherry MX will have to be good enough.
-
YouTube to the rescue!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4ERdrsvQkE
-
not a bad price either.
bet that sucker is loud as anything.
-
I've got a razer blackwidow mechanical keyboard at home. it's nice typing, but occasionally duplicates keypresses (particularly o and c). Not sure whether that's related to my typing or a hardware issue.
-
-
I like the cut of their jib!
-
Now I feel for the first time in my life the urge to start a kickstarter campaign... Must.... Resist.....
-
there needs to be anotehr set that reads "DON'T PANIC"
with a bonus one that reads "TOWEL"
-
The Reasonable Ideas that Somebody Should Get Started On thread is :librandomarrows.so:
-
http://pckeyboard.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/Classic104 white1000x1000.jpg
Does anyone know what that dark blue print below the indicator LEDs is? I can't find a zoomable image on the site.
-
I'm pretty sure it's UNICOMP's logo: http://www.pckeyboard.com/
-
-
> Oh, and just because "this is how it originally works", doesn't make it right.
QFT.
Also doesn't apply: 'this is how it works in the latest version'.
Correct operation should probably be found through peer review.
Please mind that this isn't my quote. (Became mixed up somehow.)
Accidentally, that's my point, too, let everyone be happy as she likes. (This includes, sticking to habits and workflows.) If this is how a system works, why bother and make it work like an other system? Since the other system is probably using some different metaphors, what would be the sense in doing so?
-
why bother and make it work like an other system? Since the other system is probably using some different metaphors, what would be the sense in doing so?
Standardization. Ease of transfer. Making people who have to deal with multiple systems regularly not have multiple personality disorder by switching systems.
-
noland:
Mac power user
Emphasis mine.
Also not sure what your point is with that post.
Please note that the term "power user" has a rich tradition in the Mac user basis, denoting the kind of users dealing professionally with the system and tweaking it to their needs.
Traditionally, Mac users were more prone to have settled for this system due to some deliberation, while, on the other hand, some of the Win-users were confronted with the system, because this is what you got, when you asked for "a computer" – both in offices and shops. And, since Macs used to be systems for professionals, this kind of approach makes a bit of a difference. But, since Mac is chique nowadays, this changed a lot.
-
So that's my post, not @Cartman82's... But anyways...
I was pointing out that you compared Windows users (IE: not power users) doing one thing to Mac power users doing something else. That's not a valid comparison for obvious reasons...
Also I like that you're trying to say Macs are the professional computer system when their relevance in business is fairly non-existent.
-
-
Also I like that you're trying to say Macs are the professional computer system when their relevance in business is fairly non-existent.
"the professionals’ computer system" as in for professionals.
Everyone knows that Macs are very bad for gaming etc. Macs used to be found in the graphic industries, scientific visualization, and the like.
(There were some reasons for that, like it being first system with square pixels, color management, applications like Photoshop, the better integration of the mouse by having a truly graphical shell – as in always responding to user input, SCSI drives, PostScript, etc. Notably, none of this is a unique selling proposition for some decades by now. But, say, in the early 1990s, there wasn't much of a choice. Even the MS applications were better, Excel, PowerPoint, and Word as we know it started at the Mac platform before they became available for DOS/Windows. )
Compared to this kind of usage, Windows was always the system for offices and private markets.Resulting from this, Apple is selling in the first line to individuals, while MS is selling (in large volumes) to corporations (not that Apple wouldn't have wanted to do this, too, but they never managed to achieve some market share in this segment). There are some traces due to this in the ways the systems are organized.
-
Standardization. Ease of transfer. Making people who have to deal with multiple systems regularly not have multiple personality disorder by switching systems
Imperialism. Let's stick to vintage DEC systems for standardization. VAX/VMS is the way to do it! ;-)
(Notably, what was to be the next VAX/VMS is what became Win NT. So, this is probably the gold standard.)
-
zooming to the full size of the screen as in Windows is a cargo cult
And pretty much instinctive behaviour for a lot of Windows users. Some years ago when I regularly had to deal with people who thought they knew their way around computers, just about any time they wanted to show me something (using my computer) they’d immediately maximise whatever window they had to use to do this, even if this meant they ended up with an Explorer window with three 32-pixel icons in it. On a 51-cm monitor. And then they’d have to click in the task bar to bring up other maximised windows with similar contents.they might have just realized their original idea was stupid and Microsoft's idea was better.
You still don’t offer any explanations of why the Windows method is so inherently better. Pretty much everything you say in this thread boils down to “Windows’ way is better because that’s what I’m used to” rather than “I prefer the Windows way.” Nothing wrong with the latter, but the former makes you sound like you, as the saying here goes, think you have the lease on wisdom.Mac usability has degraded ever since after OS X 10.6.
Agreed. It’s that I do like several of the features that were added since, and I own a Mac released after 10.6, else I’d probably go back to that.
-
So that's my post, not @Cartman82's... But anyways...
Sorry.
Messed up by the comments system, I became associated with a foreign post, too.
-
You still don’t offer any explanations of why the Windows method is so inherently better. Pretty much everything you say in this thread boils down to “Windows’ way is better because that’s what I’m used to” rather than “I prefer the Windows way.”
Imagine trying to work here.
Surrounded by all this garbage, your elbows brushing against staplers and yesterday's lunch. You desperately try to find whatever piece of work you were focused on a moment ago, but get distracted by a tax return to the left and the pack of candies to the right. Oh look, that document slid under the desk half an hour ago, and you didn't even notice.
That's how working on (unmodified) Mac feels to me.
Also, "Windows maximizes everything" is a strawman, no one does that. Full tiling WM is IMO just as crippled as full stacking. That's why Windows feels so productive. It's a hybrid. It can stack things for which that makes sense (eg. calculator, dialogs) and maximize (or split view) things that are the current focus of attention. And it can do this quickly and efficiently.
It's like you suddenly got a magical cabinet, that can suck in all the crap from the desk above, and spit out just the items you are currently working with (but you can still take out more if that makes sense). The best of both worlds. I love it.
And why the fuck am I trying to convince you anyway? Once Apple drops their current turd of a workflow and steals Windows tiling (like all Linux distros did), you Mactards are gonna eat it up and forget the old way ever existed. I'll just wait a few months and we can pretend this debate never happened.
Nothing wrong with the latter, but the former makes you sound like you, as the saying here goes, think you have the lease on wisdom.
No lease, I fucking own that shit.
-
That's how working on (unmodified) Mac feels to me.
That's probably because you're using only those parts of the workflow that are also present at the Windows platform. There are many tools for this on the Mac, Expose for application windows, for the windows of a single application, shortcuts for cycling through windows, means to organizing things in stacks, on-the-fly collections ("smart folders"), virtual desktops, etc, etc. Sorry, but I can't deem your example as representative.
Personally, I've tried some tiling managers in the past and soon abandoned them for not being that productive (more on the contrary). They just didn't fit to the other parts of the workflow / use pattern.
[Edit] Again, it boils down to the desktop metaphor. Redrawing "regions" as required for efficiently managing overlapping windows was the trade secret of Apple. (Since machines have become faster and memory cheap, this isn't of much importance anymore.) Accordingly, Apple built its OS around overlapping windows, while Windows became very good at managing split views and switching.
-
numerous add-ons (including free ones) to add riling to Mac OS.
OS X doesn't need the help.
-
I'll never stop ranting on how Mac usability has degraded ever since after OS X 10.6.
AFTER 10.6?
It's been degrading since OS 9.
-
> I'll never stop ranting on how Mac usability has degraded ever since after OS X 10.6.
AFTER 10.6?
It's been degrading since OS 9.
OS X was awful before 10.3 and became usable with Tiger (10.4). But 10.6 was actually a neat and very productive system.The power you had over the system in OS 9 was beyond comparison. The one thing was the missing UNIX subsystem, but on the other hand, MachTen launched in just 20 secs (into X) on a G3 …
-
OS X was awful before 10.3 and became usable with Tiger (10.4).
Tiger's about when I gave up on Apple shit. I got sick of them canning features that were in OS 9. Then bringing back the fucking useless ones (like marking files with colors). Meanwhile, half the software I owned didn't run any more because "no more Classic mode, haha fuck you".
-
That said Ctrl+A and Ctrl+E work in most of the modern applications.
emacs isn't a modern app.
-
-
Apple built its OS around overlapping windows
I . Do. Not. Want. My. Windows. Overlapped.
Either I am using a window, and I want to see all of it, or I'm not, and it can die in a fire. Apple is an idiot for building their OS around this misfeature.
-
That's how working on (unmodified) Mac feels to me.
Yes, I get that. It’s also a lot like how working on (unmodified) Windows feels to me. And that’s my point: you kept talking in absolutes, whereas what you’re actually talking about is your subjective experience with it. I have no problem with someone saying “I don’t like $OS because I can’t find my way around” — it’s the absolute statements along the lines of “$OS is shit because I can’t find my way around” that I’m on about here.Also, "Windows maximizes everything" is a strawman, no one does that.
I never said Windows maximises everything, I said a large number of the people I had to deal with some years ago did that. And it annoyed the hell out of me because it made it very difficult to compare things such as two directories or to keep track of what they were trying to do.And why the fuck am I trying to convince you anyway?
Beats me, but you’re sure as hell trying to convince me of something else than what I’m trying (and equally failing) to convince you of.Once Apple drops their current turd of a workflow and steals Windows tiling (like all Linux distros did), you Mactards are gonna eat it up and forget the old way ever existed. I'll just wait a few months and we can pretend this debate never happened.
Yeah, right. Did I mention I liked my OS X UI and some of its conventions better the way it was some years ago than the way it is now? I think I did. I think I didn’t say that I only see the point of maximising windows for things like watching movies, not for working on word processor documents. I doubt I’d have much use for tiling, looking at the way the windows on my desktops are currently laid out.
-
-
I think I didn’t say that I only see the point of maximising windows for things like watching movies, not for working on word processor documents.
It can be useful for an IDE to have it occupy an entire screen, but then it's useful to have a second screen for displaying ancillary stuff (browsers, email, stuff like that) at the same time.
And I've just counted. I've currently got 33 windows open at once on this display. Tiling that would be Not A Good Idea. I've another 27 minimised windows, and almost all of that is stuff I currently need. Yes, I also have many tabs per browser window, why do you ask…?
-
Either I am using a window, and I want to see all of it, or I'm not, and it can die in a fire.
You are entitled to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree. On both Windows and Linux I tend to have 17000 windows open. I find it generally easier to switch between windows by clicking on part of the partially visible window than finding the window in the task bar. On Linux, where focus-follows-pointer is a thing, it's not unusual for me to be typing into a window that isn't completely visible (sometimes it's even intentional
).
-
And I've just counted. I've currently got 33 windows open at once on this display. Tiling that would be Not A Good Idea.
That inspired me to do a quick count as well, and I get to 25 non-hidden windows plus another six hidden, neither of these counting tool windows that hide automatically when the app they belong to loses focus. Oh, and one minimised. All this spread out over two virtual desktops (“Spaces” in Apple terminology). Of all these, 17 are browser windows and most of those have between two and seven tabs open, and so do the document windows in InDesign and Illustrator. I don’t even want a “Tile windows” menu command that I could click by accident I can see how such a command would be useful in some circumstances, but not in the way I organise the things I'm working on.
-
Either I am using a window, and I want to see all of it, or I'm not, and it can die in a fire. Apple is an idiot for building their OS around this misfeature.
You would have liked the Xerox PARC. Overlapping windows is something they added to the PARC ideas, the PARC didn't have 'em.
-
focus-follows-pointer
I know some people like it, but that can Die In A Fire so far as I'm concerned. I've hated it since approximately 1 hour after I started using a GUI that had it.
-
I like it for mouse-based interactions, particularly the scroll wheel, but not for keyboard based ones.
I do occasionally wish I'd be able to set a separate focus somehow for my G13 than for my normal keyboard.
-
@HardwareGeek said:
focus-follows-pointer
I know some people like it, but that can Die In A Fire so far as I'm concerned. I've hated it since approximately 1 hour after I started using a GUI that had it.
I'm one of the people who like, obviously. What can DIAF is focus-follows-pointer + window-to-front-when-focus. That's bat-shit crazy.
-
A bit tangential to current topic, I guess, but does anyone know a way to stop Visual Studio's each-and-every-bloody-window-to-front - behaviour when Focus is set to Follow Pointer in Win7?
Amazon.com
