[Sven G]

... BTW, an eloquent example of user-definable customisability for single window + internal framed palettes vs. multiple windows + external floating palettes is Apple's own Project Builder, with its positively impressive interface (IMO): here, you can choose which window layout you prefer...



This should really become a system-wide option in the future, allowing the users to define the basic behaviour of their apps from the GUI point of view: so you could choose a classic (OS 9-like) layout, a modern (OS X-like) layout, a Windows-like layout, etc...

FYI, the Macromedia (paned) interface option I talked about previously is also called the integrated workspace - sofar, available as an "automatic" option only on Windows (on the Mac you can approximate it manually, anyway). In this Dreamweaver MX screenshot it's even more evident how well organised it is (� la Project Builder in single window layout):

[cowerd]

P.S.: The Macromedia (paned) interface option I talked about previously is also called the [b]integrated workspace[/i] - sofar, available only on Windows (on the Mac you can approximate it manually, anyway). In this Dreamweaver MX screenshot it's even more evident how well organised it is (� la Project Builder in single window layout):

Don't confuse the appearance of organization for organization. DW MX interface takes up too much room and leaves with with little left for editing/viewing. I prefer BBEdit AND DW MX in combination. The Mac platform with its window==document paradigm is easier to work with multiple apps, and Adobe UI workflow is a shining example. Tab key disappears/reappears palettes. Drag and drop is facilitated between most apps, and I can put things where I want.

All you have shown us is Windows apps which take a portion of your precious screen real estate. MS is moving towards this on the desktop as well with Longhorn. I don't like the UI paradigm of the OS or app co-opting screen real estate.

Here's a clue--if you used these apps for many hours a day screen real estate is MORE important than neat windows.

[Sven G]

Originally posted by cowerd:
All you have shown us is Windows apps which take a portion of your precious screen real estate. MS is moving towards this on the desktop as well with Longhorn. I don't like the UI paradigm of the OS or app co-opting screen real estate.

It's only a theoretical discussion, of course (and I also use some of those apps, albeit not in a so full-time manner).

Anyway, if you look better at the internal panes, you'll see that they are collapsable (to save screen real estate) - like the Mozilla sidebar, for example.

It's all about customisability: as Apple also understood with Project Builder, some prefer one layout, others prefer another one; and some prefer the classic, direct manipulation drag-and-drop and the mouse, others maybe prefer copy-and-paste and keyboard navigation - and so on...

[ratlater]

Originally posted by Sven G:
It's only a theoretical discussion, of course (and I also use some of those apps, albeit not in a so full-time manner).

Anyway, if you look better at the internal panes, you'll see that they are collapsable (to save screen real estate) - like the Mozilla sidebar, for example.

It's all about customisability: as Apple also understood with Project Builder, some prefer one layout, others prefer another one; and some prefer the classic, direct manipulation drag-and-drop and the mouse, others maybe prefer copy-and-paste and keyboard navigation - and so on...

Windows MDI and the examples from Macromedia and Adobe have a number of serious drawbacks. The only time I can see them being useful is on a very small screen. Enclosing the whole app in a single window is severely limiting. What happens when you want to edit and SEE multiple documents at the same time? What do you do if you have multiple monitors? I can't move the palettes to the other monitor, or have a document open on each monitor. They are all constrained to one rectangular window. What happens if I use Virtual Desktops and want to have 2 documents open on 2 different 'desktops'? Oh I guess I can't.

The Mac approach is much better and more versatile. When the app isn't frontmost all the palettes disappear leaving only a neat document window. It also allows me to utilize all of my screen. I can have multiple documents open and the palettes and still be able to see sections of my screen. This allows me to stick an iChat window in the corner, or have a movie playing in the corner, or see a terminal window's results. On windows the app covers everything. MDI worked before people had mice, or computers fast enough to run more than one app at a time. Now people have high resolution monitors and powerful machines capable of doing many things at the same time and the MDI style totally limits configurability. I think I would actually cry if I saw MDI come to OS X.

-matt

[Sven G]

Actually, two of Apple's own apps - Project Builder and Safari - are examples of a "modern" implementation of MDI (loosely speaking): they extensively use tabs (albeit differently in each program).

Here, BTW, is an article about MDI and SDI in the Mac context (a little outdated, as Safari didn't have tabs then, yet, but anyway interesting).

It seems like the extension of the tabbed viewing/browsing metaphor could be an interesting perspective on OS X, also towards a better, more efficient and "modern" window management (together with the "classic" one that many of you seem to prefer, of course)...

P.S.: Of course, many iMac, iBook and PowerBook users are some of those who would most benefit from a form of new "tabbed MDI", as the screens are often rather small (see 1024x768).

[Michaelm8000]

Originally posted by Sven G:
Actually, two of Apple's own apps - Project builder and Safari - are examples of a "modern" impementation of MDI: they extensively use tabs (albeit differently).

Here, BTW, is an article about MDI and SDI in the Mac context (a little outdated, as Safari didn't have tabs then, yet, but anyway interesting).

It seems like the extension of the tabbed viewing/browsing metaphor could be an interesting perspective on OS X, also towards a better, more efficient and "modern" window management (together with the "classic" one that many of you seem to prefer, of course)...

P.S.: Of course, many iMac, iBook and PowerBook users are some of those who would most benefit from a form of new "tabbed MDI", as the screens are often rather small (see 1024x768).

Tabbed viewing/browsing is great! But only for viewing and browsing. If PhotoShop were like that I would shoot my self. In apps were you are creating things, not viewing them you need to be able to drag and drop and interact with multiple documents at the same time. I know for me I VERY rarely have one thing open in Photoshop. I love having multiple things open at a time and moving between them via drag and drop.

[BuonRotto]

To me, this discussion of the benefits of either single-window applications or multi-window apps points to the obvious (and diplomatic ) conclusion that either may be appropriate depnding on the context. However, I would think that the developer would be better to decide whether his or her app is one or the other, not the end user, not at least in such a theoretically fundamental decision. Ideally, I would say that an application that uses one UI would take advantage of the setup such that the other option would ruin the abilty to use the app effectively, that is, the app is tailored to its purpose such that any other way to set it up would only get in the user's way. I have a fundamental belief that while many UIs fail the user, the user should not have the expertise that the application's designer would to make such basic decisions.

I think Apple is also interesed in this idea of "themes" in a much more substantial sense, not theme as appearance, but themes as a conceptual or functional model.

[milhouse]

An ON Topic post...

Just did an OG3 pro import from a Visio 2002 vxd file. The import was absolutely perfect. Not a pixel out of place.

Super cool.

[Guy Incognito 2]

Originally posted by Sven G:
Actually, two of Apple's own apps - Project Builder and Safari - are examples of a "modern" implementation of MDI (loosely speaking): they extensively use tabs (albeit differently in each program).

Here, BTW, is an article about MDI and SDI in the Mac context (a little outdated, as Safari didn't have tabs then, yet, but anyway interesting).

It seems like the extension of the tabbed viewing/browsing metaphor could be an interesting perspective on OS X, also towards a better, more efficient and "modern" window management (together with the "classic" one that many of you seem to prefer, of course)...

P.S.: Of course, many iMac, iBook and PowerBook users are some of those who would most benefit from a form of new "tabbed MDI", as the screens are often rather small (see 1024x768).

Rubbish!