[loren s]

What I mean is that the small windows like Finders View options floating window and photoshops toolbar menus they all disapear when I use expose. I dont want that I want to use them to as a selection. For one to find them easily and two I like that hack that lets you freeze the expose windows small and still useable. I was thinking photoshop would be very good for this when I am running out of space. Also text edit and omnigraffle would be sweet with this... Please say I can hack something to make it work

[Boondoggle]

You can hack something to make it work.


Caveat 1: You will need to be a very good hacker.
Caveat 2: This is not a very helpful post.

[rjenkinson]

-r.

[Boondoggle]

Almost nothing is impossible... It is the probability that catches you...

[loren s]

eh? Why is it that EVERY stupid thing I ask for when it comes to OSX hacking cant be done ? Or someone allways tells me it cant be done...

Lets seee

isight following your fingers as a mouse...no
css tweak tool ...no
3d design tool made from cocoa that uses all sorts of super fast core stuf ...no
a faster cleaner photoshop ...no
a hide the top menu bar like the dock ...no
a system prefrences fider like structure ...no
A oneclickinterface instead of the useless two clicks to open stuf ...no
Tabbed finder ...no
piles finder features ...no
two mice input and two mice on screen ...no
and on and on.....

[Chuckit]

Because you don't have a very good idea of what's involved beyond just "Hey, wouldn't that be neat"? Seriously, when I saw a better Photoshop on your list, I just about choked on my drink. You may as well ask an oceanographer to make the sea not so salty.

Your requests range from pointless-but-doable (hiding the menubar) to the absolutely-ludicrous-for-anyone-but-Apple-and-maybe-even-them (two cursors) — and then, of course, the Photoshop thing. I think the point is that, even for the ones that can be reasonably done, nobody with the requisite skill wants to go through the trouble of making these happen. It just ain't worth it.

To answer the question at hand: Yes, there probably is something that can be hacked to make panels Exposé. Can you do it? If you have to ask, probably not.

[loren s]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Because you don't have a very good idea of what's involved beyond just "Hey, wouldn't that be neat"? Seriously, when I saw a better Photoshop on your list, I just about choked on my drink. You may as well ask an oceanographer to make the sea not so salty.

Your requests range from pointless-but-doable (hiding the menubar) to the absolutely-ludicrous-for-anyone-but-Apple-and-maybe-even-them (two cursors) — and then, of course, the Photoshop thing. I think the point is that, even for the ones that can be reasonably done, nobody with the requisite skill wants to go through the trouble of making these happen. It just ain't worth it.

To answer the question at hand: Yes, there probably is something that can be hacked to make panels Exposé. Can you do it? If you have to ask, probably not.

Beh. What happened to the days of someone giving a challenge? I mean I could go into cleaner details of why and how. But I just dont get how coders deside what a user can and can not use. It makes me grumpy most of the time. Question how much does a coder make per hour? I know it's hard work but you have to help me understand why (whatever idea) I just cant find a coder that wants a challege instead of lots of money. What does one have to do to build stupid software dreams..

Eh.. As for photoshop. Come on you have to see that photoshop could sooo upgrade their stuff. The filters are so 80's Dispacment mapping is still only using a PSD greyscale photo that you can not see or interact with while placeing it. Most all filters are still destructive and not layers yet.
Zooming out at 33's 66's 23's and so pixalates the images, while other apple made apps nicely interpolate the images to smooth out their look no matter what the zoom. The tool bars are still non float pull out and stick like illustrator.

I could go on but it is clear that photoshop is good but since they have no real competition they wont really advance anymore, CS gave us nothing breathtaking, it is time someone really put together something punchy just made for OSX. Gimp does not count it is still to cross platform to use the zippyness of osx. My hope is that Tiger will bring lots of this kind of stuff around, but what ,, will I still be bugging devs to make something? Will they just give me answers like *thats pointless* or *that is so stupid* BA humbug.

[Chris O'Brien]

Loren, the difference between you and the developers who are saying that your ideas can't be done, is that the developers understand the underlying technologies and their limitations.

It's fine that you are having ideas, but when people who know what they are talking about tell you it can't be done, then you pretty much just have to accept that.

Also, it's not just even limitations in technologies that cause people to nay-say your ideas; it's also whether the idea is worthwhile.

As for photoshop, when it zooms in, I imagine it looks pixelated because the graphic artists want to see that, so they can manipulate the image properly. They wouldn't want to see a representation of the image that has been smoothed out - that defeats the purpose. Also, there's a lot to be said about familiarity - people who used previous versions likely don't want massive changes, as they have yet another learning curve to climb which gets in the way of immediate productivity.

That last point leads on to the need for an understanding of the business models involved with creating software. In an ideal world, software would work in exactly the way you want with all the features you want. But then that piece of software would only be ideal for you - what of the thousands/millions of other users? It's something that needs a lot of thought and does get in the way of creating great software. I imagine Windows is a rather good example of this. The coders aren't thick, but they don't have free reign of what they want to do, and deadlines are a bitch.

Keep voicing your ideas if you like, but there are very good reasons why they can't be implemented, and it's just something you'll have to live with.

[loren s]

Originally posted by Black Book:
Loren, the difference between you and the developers who are saying that your ideas can't be done, is that the developers understand the underlying technologies and their limitations.

It's fine that you are having ideas, but when people who know what they are talking about tell you it can't be done, then you pretty much just have to accept that.

Also, it's not just even limitations in technologies that cause people to nay-say your ideas; it's also whether the idea is worthwhile.

And yet at some point it either is built or was built but is now lost to either a version upgrade or change in the tech. Case in point Adobe removing dynamic support for golive, just up and ripped it out. Or Adobe streamline vector tool just poof gone no osx version, though I do hear they are building it into illustrator some day.

As for photoshop, when it zooms in, I imagine it looks pixelated because the graphic artists want to see that, so they can manipulate the image properly. They wouldn't want to see a representation of the image that has been smoothed out - that defeats the purpose. Also, there's a lot to be said about familiarity - people who used previous versions likely don't want massive changes, as they have yet another learning curve to climb which gets in the way of immediate productivity.

Sorry I meant the other way. Zoom out , at 10 it looks fine, zoom out to 66% and it looks jagged and at 33 and forth.

That last point leads on to the need for an understanding of the business models involved with creating software. In an ideal world, software would work in exactly the way you want with all the features you want. But then that piece of software would only be ideal for you - what of the thousands/millions of other users? It's something that needs a lot of thought and does get in the way of creating great software. I imagine Windows is a rather good example of this. The coders aren't thick, but they don't have free reign of what they want to do, and deadlines are a bitch.

Keep voicing your ideas if you like, but there are very good reasons why they can't be implemented, and it's just something you'll have to live with. [/B]

I can't I am on the verge of trying to find a developer my own little smarty boy or girl. I must know what they want what they need and what makes them happy doing code. Same as I am happy painting and thinking of stuff I want to see. I must know what they like about coding and then give that to them..

Thank you though this isvery helpful and just what I was seeking

[Boondoggle]

Originally posted by loren s:
What I mean is that the small windows like Finders View options floating window and photoshops toolbar menus they all disapear when I use expose. I dont want that I want to use them to as a selection. For one to find them easily and two I like that hack that lets you freeze the expose windows small and still useable. I was thinking photoshop would be very good for this when I am running out of space. Also text edit and omnigraffle would be sweet with this... Please say I can hack something to make it work

I didn't see it mentioned before but the reason the default Expose behavior is not like this is because the palettes and toolbars are a dependent on, or modify the properties of "regular" editable windows. Hence, they have little or no meaning on their own. This is also why they disappear when you change to another app, but the editable PShop windows remain in view. This helps reduce clutter dramatically, while maintaining the bulk of the benefit of Expose.

[Boondoggle]

Originally posted by Black Book:
Loren, the difference between you and the developers who are saying that your ideas can't be done, is that the developers understand the underlying technologies and their limitations.

It's fine that you are having ideas, but when people who know what they are talking about tell you it can't be done, then you pretty much just have to accept that.

Actually as a general rule, when an engineer says something cannot be done he means, He doesn't want to, or he does not know how, or it would take longer and cost more than he thinks is reasonable.

Many engineers like to preface any project by claiming it is impossible. This is one of the best forms of CYA as if you succeed, you are a hero, and if you fail, you are prescient.


I'm quite sure that this hypothetical project falls in the "possible" range. However that does not mean it is either practical or profitable to try.

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by loren s:
Beh. What happened to the days of someone giving a challenge? I mean I could go into cleaner details of why and how. But I just dont get how coders deside what a user can and can not use. It makes me grumpy most of the time. Question how much does a coder make per hour? I know it's hard work but you have to help me understand why (whatever idea) I just cant find a coder that wants a challege instead of lots of money.

Bear in mind, most of what you're asking for is fairly hard. Anybody with the skill to create difficult hacks probably already has challenges that are either closer to his areas of interest or more profitable.

Originally posted by loren s:
As for photoshop. Come on you have to see that photoshop could sooo upgrade their stuff. The filters are so 80's Dispacment mapping is still only using a PSD greyscale photo that you can not see or interact with while placeing it. Most all filters are still destructive and not layers yet.
Zooming out at 33's 66's 23's and so pixalates the images, while other apple made apps nicely interpolate the images to smooth out their look no matter what the zoom. The tool bars are still non float pull out and stick like illustrator.

Yes, Photoshop could stand to be better. But it is still a best-of-breed app with nearly two decades of development by some very talented men. It would be easy to make Photoshop better, but making a better Photoshop without the Photoshop codebase is just plain quixotic. It may happen someday, but it won't be soon.

[loren s]

well ok and all fornow I see that i wont be seeing panel expose anytime soon... But a little idea of the old.. I wanted the expose windows to be able to freeze and use them small.. I got the same answers before.. But later on it seems someone figured out how to make it so anyway... Somaybe some day someone will figure this part out to.. till then

[shortcipher]

Originally posted by loren s:
What I mean is that the small windows like Finders View options floating window and photoshops toolbar menus they all disapear when I use expose. I dont want that I want to use them to as a selection. For one to find them easily and two I like that hack that lets you freeze the expose windows small and still useable. I was thinking photoshop would be very good for this when I am running out of space. Also text edit and omnigraffle would be sweet with this... Please say I can hack something to make it work

loren, your posts do make me smile...BTW the reason Photoshop does what it does is because of performance, its zooming code just does a fast shrink which works best at 50% or 25% as its merely a question of drawing every other pixel - peformance is mostly more important to users in this case. there, now you know.

Interestingly, Apple recently demoed a technology that may help you: resolution independent UI, this would enable you to shrink the entire UI down, much like Expose does, or indeed make it bigger.

[Big Mac]

There is nothing wrong with making a feature request. There are many things that we as individuals would like to see Apple or another developer do with our favorite piece of software. Many of us still believe that the OS X Finder is immature, but Apple apparently is not too concerned about that issue. Many of us want a more customizable dock as an option, but the Dock has remain unchanged since 10.0. If a request being made is echoed by a significant amount of users, that means it has general appeal and is much more likely to be implemented. Take the case of the Apple menu in OS X - DP 4 did not have one, but a collective outcry brought it back. It still wasn't exactly what users were asking for, though, but Apple compromised. That wasn't a very difficult compromise to make, either - it was easy for Apple to add it. But Apple has it's own priorities, and our concerns are not usually their concerns.

Let's just say most of your requests subjective and not very reasonable. 1) I think you're saying you want expose windows to be the same small size. I think a preference for such a thing in the Expose pane would not be a bad addition. But Expose works really well for most - it is one of the only features that everyone agreed was a great addition to the OS. Send Mac OS X feedback to Apple, and possibly you'll be heard. But in Expose's case Apple probably doesn't see any need to modify it. 2) I really don't understand your point about wanting iSight to track your fingers as a mouse. 3) Cascading Style Sheets are the domain of web applications rather than the OS, although I do agree that Apple could make a killer web development environment. 4) Apple very actively develops OpenGL so that developers can do wonderful three dimensional things, and perhaps there is a 3D app somewhere in the bowels of the Mother Ship. 5) Your Photoshop complaint has already been covered by others 6) A global auto-hide menu bar is a very bad idea. Auto-hide menu bar is only appropriate for certain games; otherwise it should be on the screen at all times. I would say you're definitely in a tiny minority if you're upset about that issue; I have never seen such a request before. 7) You would have to elaborate on a Finder-like System Preferences view. Do you mean nested folders for panes and sub-panes? 8) A one-click Finder interface should be an option for Limited accounts, as it was in OS 9. But if you're saying Apple should make that the default, thereby tossing a twenty-year GUI standard, you'd best rethink that one. 9) I assume a future version of the Finder may well get tabs. It would make the brushed metal Finder windows much more useful. 10) Piles is an archaic Apple idea that has never been expressed in software, to anyone's knowledge. It looks interesting as a patent, but as software it may not work out well. 11) Show me how you could effectively use two identical input devices simultaneously to accomplish any task, and if you do I'll rally to your cause. Until then I'll remain skeptical.

After going through your list, it's apparent that what you want in each case is not a hack or simple tweak. With most of your requests, you're asking for substantial internal software modifications to the OS, all of which only Apple could accomplish. No third party developer has ever attempted to make changes on the scale you desire, even if you look back at OS 9 mods. Another reason why Apple is the only entity that could do anything of the sort is that OS X is in many ways not very amenable to external alteration. No one has been able to replace the Dock because third parties cannot replicate certain requisite features. Now if you want to try to create something superior, you're going to need to make your own application. A developer who was dissatisfied with the Finder coded Path Finder. Unfortunately, the last time I tried Path Finder I found that although it was powerful it also lacked the design sensibility of Apple's flawed Finder. It was just plain unintuitive in comparison. Even though I have major beefs with the Finder, the third party alternative was not compelling. That's just my opinion; I imagine Path Finder has improved since then.

The other posters have long since beat me to my long-winded point. Programming is pretty difficult. There are constraints and tradeoffs to be made. When it comes to operating systems, people have varying preferences, and a balance has to be struck. Complicating this is the fact that developers are at a disadvantage if they want to compete directly against Apple on its home turf. Finally, Apple writes software for the general public, so particularistic recommendations aren't high priorities.

[shortcipher]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Big Mac:
Take the case of the Apple menu in OS X - DP 4 did not have one, but a collective outcry brought it back.

actually I think Apple had other reasons for reinstating the Apple menu, if I remember rightly DP4 had an Apple logo in the center of the menu bar, obviously this wasnt going to work as it would often get in the way or get covered up, I think Apple reinstated the Apple menu because it was more concerned about branding and because the central position just wasnt sensible.

What Im saying is that in that case the public outcry coincided with something Apple was going to do anyway.

[Chuckit]

The centered Apple logo didn't get covered up — menus would just jump from one side of it to another. And if Apple planned on making the change anyway, why did they put this in in the first place and then leave it there for three iterations of the system, right up to Public Beta? I think it's pretty certain Apple made the change because everybody was complaining about how they wanted "an Apple menu."

[shortcipher]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
The centered Apple logo didn't get covered up — menus would just jump from one side of it to another. And if Apple planned on making the change anyway, why did they put this in in the first place and then leave it there for three iterations of the system, right up to Public Beta? I think it's pretty certain Apple made the change because everybody was complaining about how they wanted "an Apple menu."

my mistake, it was a long time ago...

anyway, as an interface designer it seems obvious to me that it was a bad idea, the very fact that the menus had to jump over it just demonstrates that it was in the wrong place to start with, I dont doubt for a minute Apple would have moved it of their own accord, why they left it so late is anyones guess, perhaps opinion was always divided at Apple? Lets not forget that it was a beta, the centred logo never made it into a finished product. I just dont think we should kid ourselves that public opinion really changed anything.

[Anubis IV]

Originally posted by loren s:
Beh. What happened to the days of someone giving a challenge? I mean I could go into cleaner details of why and how. But I just dont get how coders deside what a user can and can not use.

Just a quick comment...they often DON'T decide those things...their bosses/clients do. Blaming the coders for a lack of features would be like blaming the construction workers for making a bridge that was poorly designed. It's not their fault that it was designed poorly, they just did as they were told.

Now, when it comes to freelance hackers/coders, I think other people have already covered the majority of the points. Programmers have more profitable ways to spend their time. They tend to think about what they need and what they perceive most other people as needing and then work towards fulfilling those needs. If one person suggests an idea (which you have done) that is not generally accepted by the community, it's unlikely that a profit-minded programmer would do it just for the sake of doing it. Plus, there aren't too many people that actually know the underlying structure of the Mac OS well enough to even execute your suggestion. It's not impossible, but it'd take many hours of research and many hours of coding to see what worked, and in the end you'd get nothing more than a nifty feature that can't really be sold since it's so small. The end effect is rather insignificant but the amount of time required to succeed is rather significant.

[Amorya]

Originally posted by loren s:
Eh.. As for photoshop. Come on you have to see that photoshop could sooo upgrade their stuff. The filters are so 80's Dispacment mapping is still only using a PSD greyscale photo that you can not see or interact with while placeing it. Most all filters are still destructive and not layers yet.
Zooming out at 33's 66's 23's and so pixalates the images, while other apple made apps nicely interpolate the images to smooth out their look no matter what the zoom. The tool bars are still non float pull out and stick like illustrator.

You might want to check out xRes or Live Picture. I don't know if either of them are still going, but they seem like they'd be more to your taste than PS.

Amorya