Your approach forces the user to always read the full text message and then select yes/no, merely out of fear of redundancy. The Apple approach focuses on the

Your approach forces the user to always read the full text message and then select yes/no, merely out of fear of redundancy. The Apple approach focuses on the action targets first, which 99% of users will go to (i.e. after they've done it the first time). The verbose message is only there as a point of clarity. When you get into user-interaction design, you learn that redundancy is important. You don't put something in one place and make them look for it. You put it where they'd naturally look. For example, if you go to a large store, masking tape won't be only in one place because people are seeking different "core" uses. So the same brand/package of tape will be found in the hardware section, the painting section, the crafts section, and school supplies. The fallacy with Boolean yes/no buttons for every dialog window is that if the user doesn't read the message, they may not get the results they expected. For example, you try to print, and the computer freezes and wants to shut down. You think you're printing, so you hit "yes" and shut down the computer instead. A slightly ridiculous example, but you get the point...