Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > Stacks usability

Stacks usability (Page 5)
Thread Tools
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 02:11 AM
 
Ah, the plaintive cry of the Apple apologists, like loons in the wilderness, calling me back to the days of my youth.

It's pathetic, frankly--I have no idea what percentage these wankers have in objecting to a simple preference (undocumented, even, like the one that makes the Dock not look like reflective ass) so that people could continue to get on actually working. Stacks clearly doesn't remotely replace hierarchical menus--you can go all of ONE LEVEL DEEP. We shouldn't even need to debate further, or do asinine tests while online "usability experts" explain what's right--this is a simple matter of stacks vs. hierarchical menus, and there is little reason there couldn't be a choice of either.

Some apologist will cry about Apple having to maintain the code base for the menus--which can't be too ****ing hard, as they've had it since 10.0--but that's apologists for you: they'll use any logic to be in favor of Apple and against any actual human being. We all know Stacks is there to be eye candy, and it's got Steve's fingerprints all over it--it has nothing to do with usability any more than my semi-translucent menu bar.

Many of you apologists need to wake up and learn to think for yourselves.
     
mjankor
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 02:13 AM
 
Sooooo, about them results. Looks to me like Hierarchic menus just kicked column view in the nuts.

Now for rebuttals
I'm not going to argue the overshoot and click point, because it's insignificant. It's an issue throughout the whole OS, not just Menus.

Final folder view is not irrelevant for the reason I explained above.
As for why the final window has to be something other than column view. Two reasons, first, a lot of the time people sort stuff by date, and second, because icon view or coverflow is best if you're looking for an image.
My project views are all determined by what's in the folder. My plans are all in list view format, my searches are all in icon (Soon to be coverflow). I suspect a lot of people use something similar and you cannot preclude them from the test. Using Hierarchic menus their folders would be in the same view they left them in. You can't say the same for using column view.
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 02:14 AM
 
Only on MacNN can you be called an apologist in one thread and decried as a "whiner" in another.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 02:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by mjankor View Post
Sooooo, about them results. Looks to me like Hierarchic menus just kicked column view in the nuts.
Errr. No. How do you figure that? Which is the most important metric here? The mouse travelled less in one case and clicked less in the other. Huh?

Originally Posted by mjankor View Post
I'm not going to argue the overshoot and click point, because it's insignificant. It's an issue throughout the whole OS, not just Menus.
Hardly insignificant. Menus are way more fickle than a stable Finder window.

Originally Posted by mjankor View Post
Final folder view is not irrelevant for the reason I explained above.

My project views are all determined by what's in the folder. My plans are all in list view format, my searches are all in icon (Soon to be coverflow). I suspect a lot of people use something similar and you cannot preclude them from the test. Using Hierarchic menus their folders would be in the same view they left them in. You can't say the same for using column view.
So you admit to a testing bias then? We are testing for the time it takes to find a particular file, not it's final presentation based on your "suspicions" of common usage.

You can never have a valid test based on your moving targets, vague metrics and outcome bias. I said kudos for doing a test, you do not get any kudos for your conclusion though. Sorry.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 02:21 AM
 
"Only on MacNN can you be called an apologist in one thread and decried as a "whiner" in another."

I can't speak for the other thread, but I will point out that hypocritical people often easily land in both categories--also there's always some apologist even more ready to accept whatever Apple does, and they're often fastest to punish their own kind as heretics.
     
Maharaja
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 02:26 AM
 
Stacks look pretty but sucks in functionality. Bring back the old navigatable folder! i use to have my application folder at the dock and launch apps under sub-folder like Utilities from there.

     
mjankor
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 02:46 AM
 
Alright eric, seeing as my first test and results wasn't enough for you lets do this again. This is a test for columns vs docked folders in a production environment.

Same setup as before
5 folders deep
25 subfolders in each folder
You must start in another application, such as Pages.
I'll let you have a Finder window visible out the side of your application and I'll let you have a column view window already open in Finder and showing the start folder, though this is no way guaranteed in real world usage.
We'll go Start Folder -> Folder 2 -> Folder 23 -> Folder 16 -> Finishing at Folder 23
Final folder view must be something more appropriate than column view (for reasons you've ignored so far)
Measurements required will be numbers of clicks, keystrokes and mouse distance travelled.
Also time if you can objectively provide it.
For timed runs, start the mouse in the top left corner of the screen.

I'll use Tiger's Heirarchic menu (which as I mentioned earlier will probably have a shorter mousing distance) and I'll use column view from Leopard, with a column width of 31 chars, and a window deep enough to show all 25 sub folders.

You will also do the same
Report back with your findings.

You up for it eric?
( Last edited by mjankor; Oct 29, 2007 at 03:19 PM. )
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:04 AM
 
Stacks are some Serious Business™.

I like the functionality as it is, but I'd like if they stuck a "folder content" menu just underneath "Sort by." I've found myself reaching down towards the Stacks to right-click, only realizing I can't do that. I used to have a few folders I would navigate about 2-3 folders tops deep. But! That was because I had my apps arranged in sub-folders within the Applications folder. I've since changed the way I manage my apps (I just stick 'em all in the Applications folder like Apple thinks you should). Seems this "issue" would be solved with my menu underneath "Sort by." I'm just sayin'!

Hey, is there a thread about Leopard stuff people actually like? I've found a few things I'm rather impressed with.
( Last edited by MindFad; Oct 29, 2007 at 03:11 AM. )
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:22 AM
 
Another thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that Dock folder menus can be operated with only one hand, whereas with Column View you either need the other hand on the Option key to close the window after you double-click something, or you'll have to spend time switching back to the Finder in order to close the window, and then back again.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
MartiNZ
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:40 AM
 
Wow, it's gotten serious in here. I was thinking about it walking home, and realised that the issue of stacks vs. navigable menus is basically one of requiring us to predict what folders we will want to open vs. giving us complete free range.

The example of putting folders in the sidebar (although I didn't read the full discussion around it) again requires some amount of prediction, and requires a lot more clicks than the -one- of the navigable menus. Another plus of the menus was access from any application without going to Finder and finding the folder that you wanted to start from in the first place.

I had network shared drives in the dock in tiger, which took some getting to if they weren't there or in the sidebar. Clicking the icon woke up the network in the morning, and then gave me much appreciated deep-level access for the rest of the day. Now I have just put a stack in the dock after careful consideration of what to make aliases of, and construction of an appropriate front icon. With this I can still wake up the network with two clicks (although the need to do this seems to have gone with Leopard!), or get to various project directories, but finding files is now going to require use of the stacks, followed by extensive use of Finder navigation, and using the irritatingly small default Finder window at that, as I imagine it still won't save .ds_store files on to the network drives.

I'm going to work out a relationship with stacks though; it seems to be challenging me to .
     
mjankor
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by MindFad View Post
Stacks are some Serious Business™.

I like the functionality as it is, but I'd like if they stuck a "folder content" menu just underneath "Sort by." I've found myself reaching down towards the Stacks to right-click, only realizing I can't do that. I used to have a few folders I would navigate about 2-3 folders tops deep. But! That was because I had my apps arranged in sub-folders within the Applications folder. I've since changed the way I manage my apps (I just stick 'em all in the Applications folder like Apple thinks you should). Seems this "issue" would be solved with my menu underneath "Sort by." I'm just sayin'!

Hey, is there a thread about Leopard stuff people actually like? I've found a few things I'm rather impressed with.
Yeah there's a few good ones, including a tips and tricks one over on Mactalk.

I'm loving Leopard. With the exception of an annoying finder bug, stacks and menu bar transparency, Leopard is bloody awesome.

I did just have a thought though. What would be nice is if they took the current transparent blur from the menu bar and applied it to the sideways dock. Then the dock wouldn't be so dark and would use the nice blur effect the menu bar has.
     
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:50 AM
 
Yes, yes, Leopard is great. Sacks are terrible, but Leopard is great.
     
thunderous_funker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beautiful Downtown Portland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 04:00 AM
 
Personally I despise navigating through hierarchical menus with a passion so I don't miss that kludge one bit, but I certainly think its reasonable for it to be an option. I suspect Apple or a 3rd party will offer it soon enough.

And it seems obvious to me that stacks was never supposed to replace the "functionality" that hierarchical menus held for some people. Comparing them seems retarded to me. The download Stack strikes me a perfect example of the intended purpose (quick access to a specific, commonly used folder) and it does that nicely. Do you really think the design of Stacks indicates that Apple thought it would replace navigating through 5, 6, 7 levels of folders?

Honestly. I don't think the removal of one featured and the addition of the second implies that Apple believed that one was a direct replacement of the other.

Stacks is great for grabbing a file out of a folder that you frequently access. Its usability might not scale beyond a certain number, but then again I'm pretty sure they never intended it to. Why would it? The Dock is not the Finder nor does Apple want it to be.
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die." -- Hunter S. Thompson
     
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 05:23 AM
 
"And it seems obvious to me that stacks was never supposed to replace the "functionality" that hierarchical menus held for some people. Comparing them seems retarded to me."

Please don't put functionality in quotes--it's snide. I'm not sure why it would be retarded not to compare them--we lost the menus, and were given Stacks, so it seems elementary to compare them.

"Do you really think the design of Stacks indicates that Apple thought it would replace navigating through 5, 6, 7 levels of folders?"

No--I don't think Apple, in this case, thought very much about serious users of their system at all. My grandmother will probably like Stacks, though, as will soccer moms.

"Honestly. I don't think the removal of one featured and the addition of the second implies that Apple believed that one was a direct replacement of the other."

Oh, I quite agree--because I think this is a Jobsian move, and I don't think anyone thought very deeply about what was being removed or replaced.
     
thunderous_funker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beautiful Downtown Portland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 05:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by mrmister View Post
Please don't put functionality in quotes--it's snide. I'm not sure why it would be retarded not to compare them--we lost the menus, and were given Stacks, so it seems elementary to compare them.
Damn right its snide. Isn't this whole thread about presuming superiority over those that have a different comfortable workflow? In years past you couldn't swing a dead cat in here without hitting a post deriding the nasty 6,7,8 tier hierarchical menus in Windoze. Now, apparently, its the height of UI design.

I think its pretty obvious Stacks were not designed to browse down to deeply nested folders so comparing them to hierarchical menus is pretty f*ing pointless, but far be it from me to deny you the pleasure of kicking those bricks.

Originally Posted by mrmister View Post
No--I don't think Apple, in this case, thought very much about serious users of their system at all. My grandmother will probably like Stacks, though, as will soccer moms.
And I'm the snide one? Sheesh. Well count me among the unwashed, I find Stacks pretty damn useful for their intended purpose.

Originally Posted by mrmister View Post
Oh, I quite agree--because I think this is a Jobsian move, and I don't think anyone thought very deeply about what was being removed or replaced.
I suspect that removing the hierarchical menus was Jobsian, I can't imagine that kludge sat well with him or a lot of other people at Apple. If they wanted a Start menu, they'd have one. Personally, I don't see why they don't make it an option but then again Apple has always been pretty rigid about what they feel is aesthetically or ideologically "superior".

Stacks adds functionality to the Dock that wasn't there before within the same design paradigm. And it works quite nicely even if it doesn't scale to infinity. I think the clever people at Apple knew damn well it wouldn't scale to infinity. I think its silly that you think they added this feature without realizing that it would suck for navigating 4 levels down or for folders with hundreds of items. Like somehow they missed that in their testing.

If Apple is being UI nazis about Leopard by removing your beloved hierarchical menus (and they might be, wouldn't surprise me) they aren't trying to make you use Stacks to do the same thing. They want you to use Column View in the Finder.
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die." -- Hunter S. Thompson
     
mjankor
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 05:55 AM
 
What really annoys me about stacks is what they could have been. My first post in this thread summarises what I hoped they'd offer. If we could drop anything in them, from anywhere, at our whim they'd be awesome. Hopefully this functionality, as well as the hierarchic menus will be added back in soon.
     
thunderous_funker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beautiful Downtown Portland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 06:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by mjankor View Post
What really annoys me about stacks is what they could have been. My first post in this thread summarises what I hoped they'd offer. If we could drop anything in them, from anywhere, at our whim they'd be awesome. Hopefully this functionality, as well as the hierarchic menus will be added back in soon.
Absolutely. Custom Stacks seems pretty central to the idea in the first place. I'd be shocked if that functionality didn't show up in the near future. Hell, I didn't realize that didn't work until I read it here.

I can live with the hierarchical menus. I hate them. But I'm all for letting people have them if they want them. I suspect Apple will add them soon, or if they really have made a design choice to eliminate them in the name of Purity (wouldn't put it past them), I suspect a 3rd party will make it happen.
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die." -- Hunter S. Thompson
     
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 06:04 AM
 
"Isn't this whole thread about presuming superiority over those that have a different comfortable workflow?"

Not in my mind--it's about Apple not leaving in a simple preference for using a system it had previously supported for six years. I'm not calling for Stacks to be removed; I just think it's a foolish wholesale replacement.

"Well count me among the unwashed, I find Stacks pretty damn useful for their intended purpose."

I find them useful for their intended purpose, too--browsing one level deep into any folder. I was serious, not snide--from the way my grandmother uses her Mac, Stacks will work out a lot better for her.

"Stacks adds functionality to the Dock that wasn't there before within the same design paradigm. And it works quite nicely even if it doesn't scale to infinity."

I can agree with you, though you don't have this quite right--it should read: Stacks adds functionality to the dock that wasn't there before, though it removes a great deal of functionality to do so. It obeys some degree of the design paradigm of the dock, but since objects can be directly trashed and icons are non-persistent it pretty much changes that paradigm. It works quite nicely even though it doesn't even scale above 70 or so items.

"I think its silly that you think they added this feature without realizing that it would suck for navigating 4 levels down or for folders with hundreds of items. Like somehow they missed that in their testing."

You aren't reading me carefully. I think they didn't give a ****, or that people who did give a **** got overruled.

"They want you to use Column View in the Finder."

So far they've succeeded in making me use the dock less--once again, on these Jobsian matters I suspect they don't give a **** what I'm doing.

For the record, I'm not an incredible fan of hierarchical menus--I just can't believe we lost them and got this half-assed implementation in its place. I'll certainly deal--I just feel bad for Apple, because it isn't a good sign when I need to patch their **** ups after the fact.
     
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 06:07 AM
 
"I suspect Apple will add them soon, or if they really have made a design choice to eliminate them in the name of Purity (wouldn't put it past them), I suspect a 3rd party will make it happen."

I would be SHOCKED if Apple listens to any of this--I think they love the flash of Leopard. I'm looking forward mightily to a menubar fix from a 3rd party, for example--that's an abortion of a decision, and one that in my mind condemns a lot of folks at Apple to the moron pile. I suspect Stevey loves his transparency.
     
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 07:09 AM
 
John Siracusa explaining in perfect detail what is wrong with Stacks. Required reading:

Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard: the Ars Technica review: Page 13
     
Cipher13
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 07:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by Geobunny View Post
I've thought for ages that if you want a stack of documents in the Dock, then that's what you grab and put into the dock; whatever your Finder selection is at the time, that becomes the stack. If you want a navigable folder like the functional Dock in OS X pre-Leopard, then drag the folder.
Yeah, funnily enough, that's how I assumed it would work. I haven't kept up with Leopard development and just assumed that was the whole point... being able to grab a few specific files from one location and drag them to the Dock (or use them like smart folders).

Given that, I also didn't realise that Stacks would sacrifice sub-folder navigation through the contextual menu.

This is a huge disappointment really, considering Leopard's other key features don't interest me apart from Spaces (which I'd essentially had via 3rd party apps previously, anyway).
     
jasonsRX7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 08:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cipher13 View Post
This is a huge disappointment really, considering Leopard's other key features don't interest me apart from Spaces (which I'd essentially had via 3rd party apps previously, anyway).
Same here. I can't use Stacks for the obvious reasons, I can't use Time Machine because it corrupts Aperture databases, Spaces is cool but I already had that functionality. Beyond any under-the-hood improvements, iChat screen sharing is the only thing I'm getting any use out of.
     
Steve Bosell
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:04 AM
 
I actually like Stacks, LOL. I only had 5 or 6 items in my "dock folder" in tiger, so now it is actually nicer not to have to right click. I do not like the icon being the first item in the folder however, so now I have to waste a space with an empty folder named 1 with the icon I had before. I think the download stack is great!
     
rubaiyat
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 11:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by jasonsRX7 View Post
I still can't believe they took this:
How did you do that? I just vaporised my Home icon when I tried to drag it on the Dock and can't even figure how to get it back?
I look forward to a future where the present will be in the past.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 11:47 AM
 
That's a Tiger screen shot.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
rubaiyat
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 11:49 AM
 
I know that. I'm using Tiger.
I look forward to a future where the present will be in the past.
     
JonoMarshall
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 11:53 AM
 
Heh.

1. Navigate to Hard Disk -> Users -> "Your User Name" and drag the icon back to the dock.
2. Right click (or CTRL + left click) the icon and navigate the content.
     
jasonsRX7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 11:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by rubaiyat View Post
How did you do that? I just vaporised my Home icon when I tried to drag it on the Dock and can't even figure how to get it back?
You just drag it to the dock, but make sure that the trash can moves out of the way, and you don't actually drop the folder IN the trash. Same goes for making a stack.
     
rubaiyat
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 12:16 PM
 
Thanks jasonsRX7!

I tried to drag it to the Applications side of the Dock from the sidebar, forgetting that that trashes the alias.

I've been using OSX forever and here I learn something new!

btw You are right as this arrangement beats the pants off the Leopard "solution". Steve's either getting into his megalomaniac dotage or he's gone back to taking Acid again. Here's hoping he listens to the hue and cry as eventually he did when he tried to force exclusive column views on us in the original OSX.
I look forward to a future where the present will be in the past.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 12:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by thunderous_funker View Post
Damn right its snide. Isn't this whole thread about presuming superiority over those that have a different comfortable workflow?
Well, I'm certainly picking that up from one side of this discussion.

In years past you couldn't swing a dead cat in here without hitting a post deriding the nasty 6,7,8 tier hierarchical menus in Windoze. Now, apparently, its the height of UI design.
Actually, I seem to remember far more posts lamenting the removal of the old Apple menu, something I frankly never understood since Dock folders provided the same functionality (and better implemented, IMO). Now, of course, they'd have a point.

No one is saying that hierarchical menus are the height of UI design. That's just a straw-man argument. Are they appropriate for every situation? No. Are they appropriate for most situations? Probably not. Are they really handy for a few of the things they're good at? Yes. Are they more useful than Stacks? Damn straight.

You guys are comparing Column View and hierarchical menus, but you're forgetting something else - Stacks aren't a good way to get to the Column View either. You used to be able to just click the folder's icon in the Dock - now you've got an extra mouse click to click the "Show in Finder" icon. Sure, you can click a folder in the stack... if you can see that folder and if its name is intelligible (rather than letting you see nothing more than two letters and an ellipsis). In other words, if there's only a small number of items in the folder. That's often not the case. Stacks are useful for the Downloads folder (although the icon thing still bugs me - when I download something I tend to look over at the Dock and go, hey, what's that DMG icon doing in my Dock? Oh, that's the Downloads folder), but I'm not sure what else. Its effect on my workflow was to cause me to take out all the folders I had in the Dock as they are no longer useful.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
mjankor
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:13 PM
 
Thanks CharlesS. That just reminded me.

eric. I forgot to consider that in real world scenarios you won't be starting in the Finder. You can add to our little test at least one more keystroke to access the Finder assuming that you already have a finder window open, in column view and can see the start folder. I've updated the proposed test to show that.

Of course, you made the claim that
Sidebar + column views are much more efficient. This is not a matter of opinion, but objective and verifiable facts.

Just because you are used to doing something a certain way, even quite apt at doing it that way, by means of training, does not mean that it's good usability or that superior methods does not exist.
It's up to you to back up you claim. I think I've done a decent job disproving it.
     
Geobunny
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:21 PM
 
Well well well, it seems you can use the Dock from 10.4 which gives you navigable contextual menus back! There are a few caveats but in my opinion it's well worth the loss.

1) You lose Spaces. Happily there are a number of free 3rd party apps which still work to a certain extent although you can't move windows between different virtual desktops after the window is open but I can live with that.
2) The Dock doesn't hide automatically when you go into Time Machine. Happily, command-option-D takes care of that (and the desktop icons are still dock-aware).
3) Dashboard loses the speed increase brought about by the Leopard Dock, but you only notice that on first entry to Dashboard.
4) iCal's icon goes back to being static. Meh, easy come easy go.

Obviously you need access to a copy of 10.4's Dock, but I'm not at liberty to give you that. You also need to use the Terminal. Anyway, here's how you do it.

First, copy the old Dock into the same folder as the new Dock.
cd /System/Library/CoreServices/
sudo cp -Rp /PATH_TO_YOUR_TIGER_INSTALLATION/System/Library/CoreServices/Dock.app ./DockInactive.app
Now, in your favourite text editor, create a plain text file containing the following code
sudo mv /System/Library/CoreServices/Dock.app /System/Library/CoreServices/DockTmp.app
sudo mv /System/Library/CoreServices/DockInactive.app /System/Library/CoreServices/Dock.app
sudo mv /System/Library/CoreServices/DockTmp.app /System/Library/CoreServices/DockInactive.app
killall Dock
Save the file somewhere. Anywhere. It doesn't matter where you save it as long as you've got easy access to it and that it's a plain text file. Give it a meaningful name and make sure the extension is .command not .txt or anything else. My file is called "toggleDocks.command". Now go back to the terminal and type "chmod u+x " (without quotes), drag your file into the terminal window and hit return.

You now have a double-clickable icon on your computer which allows you to toggle easily between using the Dock from 10.4 and 10.5.

I'm now away to scour through all the pre-release builds to find the last one in which contextual menus were still available and working mighty well indeed.
( Last edited by Geobunny; Oct 29, 2007 at 03:25 PM. Reason: Just goes to show how long it's been since I used the [code] tag!)
ClamXav - the free virus scanner for Mac OS X | Geobunny learns to fly
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:41 PM
 
OLD:

NEW:


I am scared for the sanity of Apple's UI design team.
     
MartiNZ
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 03:51 PM
 
Gogo Geobunny. Even losing the look could be classified as a feature of your back-tracking there. But the functionality of the pre-release Leopard, even in terms of the old form of stacks, would be cool.
     
jasonsRX7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 04:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Geobunny View Post
Well well well, it seems you can use the Dock from 10.4 which gives you navigable contextual menus back! There are a few caveats but in my opinion it's well worth the loss.
This is awesome, thank you! I didn't like the glossy dock, and the no-glass dock wasted more space, so I liked the look of 10.4 better anyway.

Losing Spaces is kind of a letdown, but yeah, it is no problem to just go back to using Virtue Desktops (which I liked because I could set it to double click screen edges). I can't use Time Machine because I have Aperture, so that is no big deal either. Honestly, the iCal icon is the biggest loss for me.

Going to do the fix now! Thanks!
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 04:26 PM
 
You can use the old Dock???? WOWOWOWOWOWOW WOOT WOOT WOOT!!!!!!!!!!!!

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Hal Itosis
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 07:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by thunderous_funker View Post
In years past you couldn't swing a dead cat in here without hitting a post deriding the nasty 6,7,8 tier hierarchical menus in Windoze. Now, apparently, its the height of UI design.
 
How soon they forget...
  • Inline Software: PopupFolder (circa System 7.1?)
  • Now Software: FolderMenus and NowMenus (circa System 7.1?)
  • Fabien Octave: BeHierarchic (circa System 7.5)
  • Turlough O'Connor: FinderPop (circa Mac OS 8)
-HI-
     
Mixotic
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 08:07 PM
 
Grid
Fan




List?


Duh.
     
arcticmac
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 08:42 PM
 
I'd even settle for the fan or the grid if they'd just come up with a way to have it so that when I click a folder it opens that folder in the fan/grid instead of dumping me into the finder. And they need to fix the icons, cause it's just stupid the way they stack up right now.
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 08:43 PM
 
What should happen when you click on a folder in "fan" mode, is it opens up a grid with the folders contents.
     
jasonsRX7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 08:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by arcticmac View Post
I'd even settle for the fan or the grid if they'd just come up with a way to have it so that when I click a folder it opens that folder in the fan/grid instead of dumping me into the finder. And they need to fix the icons, cause it's just stupid the way they stack up right now.
I made an alias to my Applications folder, and put the alias in the dock because it will open the Finder window which is at least more useful than the grid, and because it doesn't show the STUPID preview icon. I got really tired of having two address books in my dock.
     
jasonsRX7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 09:08 PM
 
Here's a thought. Imagine if they had left hierarchy view, and let it work with Quickview. You could just mouse over your selection and hit spacebar to preview it.
     
mjankor
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 09:13 PM
 
Good Idea
     
Charles Bouldin
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 09:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hal Itosis View Post
 
How soon they forget...
  • Inline Software: PopupFolder (circa System 7.1?)
  • Now Software: FolderMenus and NowMenus (circa System 7.1?)
  • Fabien Octave: BeHierarchic (circa System 7.5)
  • Turlough O'Connor: FinderPop (circa Mac OS 8)
And just a reminder: FinderPop works with Leopard. I'm using a beta right now. It's fine replacement for folders in the dock. Better in some ways, doesn't take up dock space and is completely invisible until you need it.

Folderglance is similar. I haven't tested it under Leopard, but it was essentially identical in function to Finderpop under Tiger.
     
mjankor
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 09:39 PM
 
Thanks Charles. I've been using Xmenus but it's not quite as good as Tiger (It really stalls badly if the server isn't mounted). I'll check out those others.
     
monkeybrain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:18 PM
 
Don't forget you can also use Butler to get lovely menus everywhere. It's completely free too. I don't actually use it now because I've switched to Quicksilver (only because it can do fancy searches of multiple websites with one click).
     
meadorg
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:23 PM
 
Just chiming in to say that I'm a former user of Docked folder hierarchical menus, and that I now prefer Stacks. There, I said it.

I also realize that it's probably due to the way I organize my files. I don't nest many things beyond one level. My Applications folder, and consequently my Applications Stack, contains all my Applications in one level with the exception of those apps that aren't self-contained and therefore require their own folder (Adobe CS3, for example).

For me, using hierarchical menus entailed:

1. A right click or a click+hold on the Applications folder icon. Both are ever so slightly less efficient than the single left click required by Stacks, given that I typically work on my trackpad which requires 2 fingers or a Ctrl+click for right clicking.

2. A single left click on the desired application.

3. A nested application required the additional step of either hovering over the containing folder on the menu (or clicking on it for speed) then clicking on the app. A nested app in Stacks requires the same click to open the nested folder in a Finder window, then clicking on the app.

The same process works for my Documents organization, in which my docs are contained within a single layer of organization (such as Documents/Work, /Personal, /School, etc.).

So for me, the amount of "effort" required by either method is the same and Stacks provides an additional layer of "wow" plus bigger icons than the hierarchical menus ... not to mention that I don't have to do the two-finger click on my trackpad to instantly launch the menu.

While I understand that those of you with deeply nested folder structures may be inconvenienced by this change, I simply wanted to point out that the "everyone loathes Stacks, everyone mourns the loss of hierarchical menus" attitude prevalent in this thread is simply not accurate. Those of us who remain silent are satisfied, or even slightly excited, at the change brought about by Stacks.

I do wish you all the best of luck, though, in convincing Apple to bring about the glorious return of the menus through a prefpane. Wouldn't hurt me at all

Cheers.
( Last edited by meadorg; Oct 29, 2007 at 10:42 PM. )
     
awaspaas
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:30 PM
 
I (and I imagine the majority of Mac users) NEVER used the hierarchal Dock menus - I just used them to open a Finder window. Stacks are a nice improvement for me. Remember Apple has to consider the needs of the majority of their userbase, not a vocal message-board minority. And unlike Microsoft, Apple sees value in limiting feature bloat and apparently didn't want to keep hierarchal functionality as an option. I don't see that this would hurt to have in the Dock preferences. If the vocal minority keeps making a stink about it perhaps Apple will put it back in as an option. It doesn't happen much but it has happened before.
     
jasonsRX7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by meadorg View Post
While I understand that those of you with deeply nested folder structures may be slightly inconvenienced by this change, I simply wanted to point out that the "everyone loathes Stacks, everyone mourns the loss of hierarchical menus" attitude prevalent in this thread is simply not accurate. Those of us who remain silent are satisfied, or even slightly excited, at the change brought about by Stacks.
Even if I did like stacks, fanned stacks still look horrible when displayed in front of anything but a plain background, and the grid view truncates filenames and is painfully hard to read when there's more than 30 or so icons.

Google a little about stacks and see how many people are trying to find ways to get rid of them. It's ok to like stacks if they work for you, but it's also ok to prefer hierarchal menus and want to get them back. Don't forget that stacks don't really do much that couldn't already be done in previous versions of OS X. Just because Apple didn't put them in the dock by default, many people just didn't know about them, or they think that it makes them "wrong" to use.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2007, 10:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by awaspaas View Post
I (and I imagine the majority of Mac users) NEVER used the hierarchal Dock menus - I just used them to open a Finder window. Stacks are a nice improvement for me. Remember Apple has to consider the needs of the majority of their userbase, not a vocal message-board minority.
Oh, I doubt that they were unused by the majority of Mac users... the hierarchical Dock menus were quite helpful in easing the transition for switchers, for reasons that should be fairly obvious.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:25 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,