Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 18th Nov 2007 15:46 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces This is the sixth article in a series on common usability and graphical user interface related terms [part I | part II | part III | part IV | part V]. On the internet, and especially in forum discussions like we all have here on OSNews, it is almost certain that in any given discussion, someone will most likely bring up usability and GUI related terms - things like spatial memory, widgets, consistency, Fitts' Law, and more. The aim of this series is to explain these terms, learn something about their origins, and finally rate their importance in the field of usability and (graphical) user interface design. In part VI, we focus on the dock.
Thread beginning with comment 285025
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
hobgoblin
Member since:
2005-07-06

thats one blurry line imo...

Reply Parent Score: 2

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

The dock is more tailored to the Apple UI ideas. In windows/linux, you launch an app and it runs fullscreen. At that point, you want as little OS interference as possible. This effectively embraces the idea that applications are Modes. The taskbar provides a way to switch modes.

The Apple way says that applications arent modes, they are operating system objects. The traditional mac approach is you never run windows fullscreen, you run them as large as they need to be. Transitions between one application and another are more seamless, they all look and act the same, have the same menubar, you can often see the work you are doing in one even if you are in another. It is a concept that is very hard to explain to someone who has never really worked with it, but anyone who grew up on mac classic not only gets it, but finds the fullscreen approach kludgy.

Reply Parent Score: 6

hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

in linux you can work the way you want to, there is no set desktop in linux.

but gnome and kde use a lot of windows elements as that is what most potential users are used to.

btw, did you just call non-apple users stupid without being direct about it?

anyways, i would say both ways have its issues, and its related to using windows the way they do. i wonder if not one should take a step back to the days before apple introduced free-floating windows.

some of those wm's on *nix seems interesting in that regard.

Reply Parent Score: 4

dbodner Member since:
2007-07-01

The dock is more tailored to the Apple UI ideas. In windows/linux, you launch an app and it runs fullscreen. At that point, you want as little OS interference as possible. This effectively embraces the idea that applications are Modes. The taskbar provides a way to switch modes.


Huh? The Xfce I'm using even has smart window placement, so if I open up 4 terminals simultaneously, not only are they not maximized, but they're automatically placed in separate corners of the screen so all 4 are fully visible at the same time.

Lumping all *nix DE's/WM's together might be a bad idea.

Reply Parent Score: 2

alcibiades Member since:
2005-10-12

"In windows/linux, you launch an app and it runs fullscreen"

They don't, surely? They launch at whatever size you set them to the last time you opened them. They don't even start out full screen do they? Now you have me scratching my head and trying to remember how they worked in Win 98 - someone I do work for is still running W98 on one machine, and I don't think even there the apps open full screen.

I just fired up a whole bunch in Linux, and not one opened up full screen. What is this about?

Is there any difference between MacOS and other OSs in this respect? The tiling or tabbed window managers of course, in Unix/Linux, but they are a rare breed.

Reply Parent Score: 3