3 ms·
> If you haven't, then it makes absolutely no sense. In the Lion era I was issued a Mac as a work laptop on a contract. Plugged into an external monitor, and t
by dcminter 4y ago
> If you haven't, then it makes absolutely no sense.
In the Lion era I was issued a Mac as a work laptop on a contract. Plugged into an external monitor, and that worked fine. Maximised one screen and... the other one displayed only the brushed metal background. Because, obviously, intuitively, you would only be able to have one maximised app at a time, right? Right?
For a Linux (by choice) and Windows (under duress) user who'd totally bought the "Macs have better usability" myth before that it was astounding.
My father had a lot of trouble getting used to his Android phone (he came to smart phones late) despite a highly technical background, just because a lot of stuff wasn't obviously something you could tap on. He did get used to it, but it was a slog for him to figure out. The death of skeuomorphism was a tragedy and I hope it comes back.
Personally I also miss proper manuals. There's so much software I use where googling around for someone who was trying to solve the same task is a more productive solution than reading the meagre documentation.
- Tsiklon 4y agoLion was a bit of a stinker in that regard, prior to that there was no “full screen” applications in that more traditional sense, only borderless full screen for video and games - anything else used “smart maximise” where the window size would increase to fit the content (again a bit of a poor choice, but that’s my personal opinion)
- dcminter 4y agoThat makes sense in context - but I think it reinforces the parent's point; if you don't arrive with that context it's just plain weird!
- Tsiklon 4y agoOlder mac applications used to have the running state of an application utterly divorced from the windows the application presents. This has fallen away with time now, which saddens me.