4 ms·

I never understood the enter for rename shortcut. People open (or "execute", which is the general understanding of the action for the "enter" key) files far mor

by JoBrad 2y ago

I never understood the enter for rename shortcut. People open (or "execute", which is the general understanding of the action for the "enter" key) files far more than they rename them.

jwells89 2y ago
It makes sense if one considers the angle of how single-key shortcuts are much more disaster-prone. For example, if the user has a large number of files selected and accidentally triggers the open shortcut by hitting enter, their computer is going to be stuck spinning its wheels for a while (the more files involved and the heavier the applications they open in, the worse it'll be) unless they force restart. Involving a modifier key filters for intention pretty well, and so while this scenario is possible with ⌘O, it's far less likely. Most Mac shortcuts seem to follow this, with those that are single-key by default doing relatively harmless and easily reversible things.
- tivert 2y ago
  > It makes sense if one considers the angle of how single-key shortcuts are much more disaster-prone. > ... > Most Mac shortcuts seem to follow this, with those that are single-key by default doing relatively harmless and easily reversible things. The enter-to-rename behavior has been in Mac OS since near the beginning, when versions were just named something like "System N.M"). IIRC, I've heard they had very detailed UI design documents back then, that explained their choices (e.g. I've heard they explained the reason for the menu bar being at the top of the screen rather than the top of a window was the cursor will just stop there, requiring less mousing precision). So if that's the case, there should be documents confirming or denying your speculation.
  - int_19h 2y ago
    http://interface.free.fr/Archives/Apple_HIGuidelines.pdf http://interface.free.fr/Archives/Apple_HIGuidelines.pdf (you can compare to the current ones and similar docs for other platforms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_interface_guidelines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_interface_guidelines)
- dkga 2y ago
  Thank you, now I finally understand why the difference between "enter" and cmd+O!
Cockbrand 2y ago
The Mac didn’t have a CLI in the first 16 years or so, so there’s no traditional “execute” meaning for the Enter key. I’d argue that the thought here was that by pressing that key, you’d want to enter a new name for the selected file.
- hoistbypetard 2y ago
  That's not a bad thought, but traditiona Mac keyboards didn't even have an "enter" key. (And nor do their current tenkeyless ones.) They just had a "return" key. The "enter" key only came around when the 10-key numpad was introduced, and it gave a different key code than the return key (which lives/lived where "enter" lives on PC keyboards). I don't recall whether "enter" renamed files, and I can't check whether it does at the moment because all my mac keyboards within reach are tenkeyless, but "return" always has.
  - mrkstu 2y ago
    Just checked- both 'enter' and 'return' active the rename action.

by JoBrad 2y ago

I never understood the enter for rename shortcut. People open (or "execute", which is the general understanding of the action for the "enter" key) files far more than they rename them.

jwells89 2y ago

It makes sense if one considers the angle of how single-key shortcuts are much more disaster-prone. For example, if the user has a large number of files selected and accidentally triggers the open shortcut by hitting enter, their computer is going to be stuck spinning its wheels for a while (the more files involved and the heavier the applications they open in, the worse it'll be) unless they force restart. Involving a modifier key filters for intention pretty well, and so while this scenario is possible with ⌘O, it's far less likely. Most Mac shortcuts seem to follow this, with those that are single-key by default doing relatively harmless and easily reversible things.

tivert 2y ago
> It makes sense if one considers the angle of how single-key shortcuts are much more disaster-prone. > ... > Most Mac shortcuts seem to follow this, with those that are single-key by default doing relatively harmless and easily reversible things. The enter-to-rename behavior has been in Mac OS since near the beginning, when versions were just named something like "System N.M"). IIRC, I've heard they had very detailed UI design documents back then, that explained their choices (e.g. I've heard they explained the reason for the menu bar being at the top of the screen rather than the top of a window was the cursor will just stop there, requiring less mousing precision). So if that's the case, there should be documents confirming or denying your speculation.
- int_19h 2y ago
  http://interface.free.fr/Archives/Apple_HIGuidelines.pdf http://interface.free.fr/Archives/Apple_HIGuidelines.pdf (you can compare to the current ones and similar docs for other platforms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_interface_guidelines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_interface_guidelines)
dkga 2y ago
Thank you, now I finally understand why the difference between "enter" and cmd+O!

Cockbrand 2y ago

The Mac didn’t have a CLI in the first 16 years or so, so there’s no traditional “execute” meaning for the Enter key. I’d argue that the thought here was that by pressing that key, you’d want to enter a new name for the selected file.

hoistbypetard 2y ago
That's not a bad thought, but traditiona Mac keyboards didn't even have an "enter" key. (And nor do their current tenkeyless ones.) They just had a "return" key. The "enter" key only came around when the 10-key numpad was introduced, and it gave a different key code than the return key (which lives/lived where "enter" lives on PC keyboards). I don't recall whether "enter" renamed files, and I can't check whether it does at the moment because all my mac keyboards within reach are tenkeyless, but "return" always has.
- mrkstu 2y ago
  Just checked- both 'enter' and 'return' active the rename action.