4 ms·

> - Application-centric (as opposed to window-centric) task management Thanks, but MacOS can keep that. It was one of the more frustrating parts of using a Mac

> - Application-centric (as opposed to window-centric) task management Thanks, but MacOS can keep that. It was one of the more frustrating parts of using a Mac in my opinion. It would be cool if MacOS offered an option to chose. Probably from your point of view it would be cool if other platforms offered an option to chose.

zitterbewegung 4y ago
I agree with you that it is annoying but it is also still in there because macOS was designed as Application centric. To have a new way to choose would involve to add a new feature and have all of the developers port the design pattern to do so which is non trivial/
simula67 4y ago
This is also my biggest frustration with macOS because you can use same application for multiple activities. A browser can be used for researching a problem in the code you are writing and at the same time to play music from Amazon Music. Wy not allow those activities to be grouped seperately in different windows and desktops? macOS seems averse to allowing this and Windows and Linux seems to be much better at allowing them.
- alwillis 4y ago
  Wy not allow those activities to be grouped seperately in different windows and desktops? macOS macOS has had virtual desktops for like 8 years [1]. And there are lots of utilities to tweak the windows behavior to pretty much anything you want. [1]: https://www.macworld.com/article/226448/hands-on-with-spaces-mission-control-and-split-view-in-el-capitan.html https://www.macworld.com/article/226448/hands-on-with-spaces...
rollcat 4y ago
It's a part of Mac's design philosophy, probably goes all the way back to 1984. Since we're discussing making XFCE act more like a Mac, I would find the experience incomplete without this important detail. It might boil down to preference, but - trying to be objective - this paradigm makes more sense, especially as you watch apps on other systems struggle to achieve the same goals (e.g. via tray icons), which usually don't work consistently, or require setting additional preferences. If I close a music player window, I want the music to keep playing. If I close the activity monitor window, I want the app to continue accumulating stats to make a graph - unless I quit the app entirely. Closing the window/tab (Cmd-w) and quitting the app (Cmd-q) are distinct actions. Now why would a note-taking app work differently? This is a more coherent design, that puts less cognitive load on the user. It works because each app tries to stick to one task - you're switching between tasks, not windows. The counterexample that illustrates how bad can this problem get, is the terminal apps: every window with mutt, vim, ncmpc, top, or irssi looks the same, has the same icon, BUT has different keyboard shortcuts! Madness. > It would be cool if MacOS offered an option to chose. I will argue that having a more thought-thru and consistent paradigm is more important than having more options - especially if all the options still can't get you a decent experience. It's definitely achievable through third-party applications; you can probably DIY something using Hammerspoon.

zitterbewegung 4y ago

I agree with you that it is annoying but it is also still in there because macOS was designed as Application centric. To have a new way to choose would involve to add a new feature and have all of the developers port the design pattern to do so which is non trivial/

simula67 4y ago

This is also my biggest frustration with macOS because you can use same application for multiple activities. A browser can be used for researching a problem in the code you are writing and at the same time to play music from Amazon Music. Wy not allow those activities to be grouped seperately in different windows and desktops? macOS seems averse to allowing this and Windows and Linux seems to be much better at allowing them.

alwillis 4y ago
Wy not allow those activities to be grouped seperately in different windows and desktops? macOS macOS has had virtual desktops for like 8 years [1]. And there are lots of utilities to tweak the windows behavior to pretty much anything you want. [1]: https://www.macworld.com/article/226448/hands-on-with-spaces-mission-control-and-split-view-in-el-capitan.html https://www.macworld.com/article/226448/hands-on-with-spaces...

rollcat 4y ago

It's a part of Mac's design philosophy, probably goes all the way back to 1984. Since we're discussing making XFCE act more like a Mac, I would find the experience incomplete without this important detail. It might boil down to preference, but - trying to be objective - this paradigm makes more sense, especially as you watch apps on other systems struggle to achieve the same goals (e.g. via tray icons), which usually don't work consistently, or require setting additional preferences. If I close a music player window, I want the music to keep playing. If I close the activity monitor window, I want the app to continue accumulating stats to make a graph - unless I quit the app entirely. Closing the window/tab (Cmd-w) and quitting the app (Cmd-q) are distinct actions. Now why would a note-taking app work differently? This is a more coherent design, that puts less cognitive load on the user. It works because each app tries to stick to one task - you're switching between tasks, not windows. The counterexample that illustrates how bad can this problem get, is the terminal apps: every window with mutt, vim, ncmpc, top, or irssi looks the same, has the same icon, BUT has different keyboard shortcuts! Madness. > It would be cool if MacOS offered an option to chose. I will argue that having a more thought-thru and consistent paradigm is more important than having more options - especially if all the options still can't get you a decent experience. It's definitely achievable through third-party applications; you can probably DIY something using Hammerspoon.