4 ms·
> The difference is largely a historical artifact of the Macintosh operating system not originally supporting "multitasking." This is a nice story, but reading
by klodolph 4y ago
> The difference is largely a historical artifact of the Macintosh operating system not originally supporting "multitasking."
This is a nice story, but reading on it seems like you're saying that the way app switching works on Windows as the Obvious and Correct thing to do, and that the Macintosh way of doing things is nothing more than a choice that was made too long ago to change.
Honestly, that's absurd.
The Macintosh has a menu bar at the top of the screen which belongs to the foreground application. This is a reasonable place to put a menu bar, because it is easy to click on things which are at the edge or (better yet) corner of the screen. This is a perfectly reasonable justification for having a foreground application.
Windows places the menu bar inside each window. So there is no need for "foreground application", only foreground window.
That's all that you need in terms of explanation. The Mac puts its menu bar at the top of the screen, Windows puts it inside each window. There's no need to tell some story about how the Macintosh was created during a more primitive era of computing history, because that story has no explanatory power.
- alphachloride 4y agoWith window-specific menus, I can directly click on and open the menu button of another app/window without first having to focus it first to see the menu options. I find that to be more intuitive. I have always been a windows user and my intuition was shaped accordingly. So to me that is the obvious and correct thing to do.
- klodolph 4y agoI find it faster to use the keyboard. On the Mac, I can switch to the browser or terminal and open a new window with cmd-tab and followed by cmd-N.
- oneeyedpigeon 4y agoIt's actually surprising to me that the behaviour you describes works as it does. I would expect the first click to focus the window, then a second click to be required to open the menu. Does that mean that, if you want to focus a window, you have to find 'dead space' to click on if you don't want some other side effect?
- banana_giraffe 4y agoyes, on either MacOS or Windows, if you click on an area in a window that doesn't have focus that triggers some action, that action will be triggered. There are exceptions on both platforms, games being common because of how they grab input. I've long since gotten in the habit of using the title bar or window-resizing area to safely activate a window .. when I'm using the mouse to change focus.
- digisign 4y agoGet ready to have your mind blown because a used-to-be common setup on the X Window system is to be able to fully interact with a window without having to bring it to the foreground. Great for terminals and a few other use cases. I still use it.
- Shacklz 4y ago> This is a perfectly reasonable justification for having a foreground application. Except when you start having multiple monitors. Then it's an utter mess, and I have no idea how the Mac-enthusiasts are putting up with it. And as far as I'm aware, most actually kind of don't - the few mac-enthusiasts that I know all use their customized setup that heavily relies on third-party-tools.
- klodolph 4y agoBeen using multiple monitors with macOS for at least a couple decades at this point. I switch back and forth between macOS, Windows, and Linux regularly—so I don’t feel like I’m missing out on experiences from other OSs. My macOS setup is completely stock these days. I don’t see what the problem is, could you elaborate?
- dudewritingcode 4y agoMacOS is built for people that use pointing devices, is not optimized for keyboard usage, it makes no sense for example to show Finder when you alt+tab even if is closed. If you use 2 active apps only and a bunch of background apps (a developer setup) it makes zero sense to show you these in alt+tab. This app is also configurable to decide which apps you show, not to add that will show a screenshot which is way better than an icon. This app, advertised here is godsend for Linux and Windows users that are forced to use macs at work.
- klodolph 4y agoWhat background apps do you have? When I'm developing on macOS, the apps open are, like, Chrome, Terminal, Finder, and some music app.
- wlesieutre 4y agoUsing a couple of virtual desktops and "show all windows" is more efficient for switching between windows than alt-tabbing through a linear list. I can't speak for mouse people, but the trackpad gestures are very good for getting around quickly.
- zamadatix 4y agoWhat's the connection between the menu bar and window switching?
- klodolph 4y agoOn a Mac, you want to be able to switch the foreground application. This is what command-tab does, it switches the foreground application.
- zamadatix 4y agoI'm on a Mac right now but I'm still having trouble understanding the relation. Say I want to switch the foreground application so I press command-tab, I get that, but how does that relate to menus being inside or outside the application?
- klodolph 4y agoBecause the menu bar is associated with the application, not with the window. An open application does not need to have any open windows at all.
- yodon 4y agoThe concept of "an open application with no open windows" is a very OSX thing that other windowing OS's manage to avoid without effort or difficulty. There are lots of ways to represent background tasks, services, VPN's, etc, that don't require the concept of "an app without windows" in a windowing OS (and without polluting the app switching experience as other commenters have complained about).
- oneeyedpigeon 4y agoHow does the file manager work on non-macOS in this context? That's probably my most common use case for an app with no (current) open windows.
- nick_ 4y agoA stack of the most-recently-in-focus windows is more practical than a stack of the most-recently-in-focus apps. The absurd thing to me is that macOS didn't adopt this simpler workflow model. No one is trying to throw out the baby with the bathwater here. macOS is a very good OS. Windows does this one aspect better.
- flenserboy 4y agoOnly seen as such when coming from a Windows background. The Windows paradigm is maddening when approached from the perspective of someone who has used Macs for decades.
- nick_ 4y agoIt is seen as such when both approaches are compared, point by point.
- flenserboy 4y agoYou assume the conclusion.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- nsonha 4y agothis is actually quite an objective matter, most humans think visually and they will create a mental map of the WINDOWS in their mind, not the APPS. So making the subject of the action an abstract thing they can't see (the app, sometimes) would be the absurd thing.
- nick_ 4y agoExactly. When I have some files open, I don't actually care what the application is. I don't care to keep a hierarchy of the owning applications in my mind. Whether a docx file opened in Word, Libre, Pages, TextEdit, or whatever... that doesn't matter. The file/document is the context. The application which opened it is just an implementation detail in the "app" paradigm. I may have chosen the applications on my machine for many reasons, but ultimately I want to switch between files/documents because they are the real context. The rest is noise.