[curmi]

Hi All,

I've complained in a few threads about some odd user interface changes in Panther. Some people seemed to agree - so I thought I'd put a big list of them down in a web page.

Rather than just complain, I've also included mockups and suggestions for improvements. The result is a little rough, but I thought I'd share it anyway.

http://homepage.mac.com/curmi/what/

Maybe someone will find it interesting, even if Apple choose to ignore it.

[richardb]

A great read! Sure hope Apple picks this up...

I agree with most of what you wrote.

[chris v]

All excellent points. I've personally experienced the interface confusion with the Accounts pref pane, and I whole heartedly agree that the Finder should at least have an Aqua option.

CV

[gheff]

I like most of it, but for some reason I feel strongly that on the desktop the disk and removable devices should appear on the right side, and the incidental items should come in from the left. The reverse smells too much of Windows.

What can I say? Even on my Windows desktop I drag "My Computer" to the right side of the screen.

[Developer]

Icon Selection

Good point and very good suggestion. You should file a bug.

Finder Window

Good point and good suggestion. However Brushed Metal is not going away.

The Desktop

I'm not convinced the order would increase just because volumes are shown on the left. I like it the way it is currently.

Print Menu

Your sugestion "Print / Fax / Save as PDF..." looks very ugly. At least this should be "Print, Fax or Save as PDF..." but that's silly also. Everybody understands that faxing is remote printing, so it's obvious that it's just under the Print menu. Save as PDF is just a goody. Applications should offer this as a format choice in the save as dialog if they want to really support it.

Buttons

You're absolutely right. But there appears to be someone in the say at Apple who holds style over usability (see brushed metal Finder), so there's no hope for it getting better.

Fast User Switching

Why do you think this must be in the menu bar at all? Why isn't it in the Apple menu like the other session menus?

Tabs

Apple says the new tab style is much better. Until we hear from them why that is the case, we should refrain from judgement.

Colo(u)r Labels

The color label menu thing demonstrates the new capabilities of HIView based menus.

Internet Config

Use MisFox:

http://www.clauss-net.de/misfox/misfox.html

[tooki]

Overall great article, just two little things: nix the word "stunning" -- no desktop icon selection is so amazing that it actually leaves me in motionless, speechless ecstasy.

The other is the rant about your printer icon -- that's Epson's fault, not Apple's. My Canon printer's icon is fine, as are the ones for laser printers and whatnot. If the Epson icon sucks, well, complain to Epson!


It's funny that you noticed the Panther "tabs", too... they're one of the very first things I noticed when I first ran Panther, that it's not at all obvious (esp. in graphite) which tab is selected.

tooki

[Moonray]

Unfortunately, Apple chose to also display an icon that is "selected" in the Finder with a blue coloured oval background

It is not necessarily blue but some darker shade of the chosen highlight color.

-

[cryon]

Even though i've switched to mac so recently i've never used other versions of osx than panther your article make a lot of sence to me.

[curmi]

I've made some minor modifications to the page based on some of the feedback here. Thanks for the input guys.

If you like the suggestions, tell Apple (send them the link).

[mikelauder]

In your accounts panel mockup I think that making the lock into a button is a poor idea (at least in the implimentation shown). A button should give an indication of what will happen when it's clicked rather than showing a status.

I'd pretty much agree with everything else in your article.

Not only does the finder need a way of selecting whether it's brushed or not there should also be a global option to have it in 'Browser Mode' or 'Spacial Mode' rather than the mix that happens at the moment.

[curmi]

Originally posted by mikelauder:
In your accounts panel mockup I think that making the lock into a button is a poor idea (at least in the implimentation shown). A button should give an indication of what will happen when it's clicked rather than showing a status.

This is a good point Mike - something I hadn't thought about since I was basically putting functionality back to how it was in 10.2. Needs more thought - but I believe it being a button is better than 10.3 where it is a button but doesn't look like it...

[CharlesS]

The Desktop icons definitely belong on the right.

The Windows user says: How do you read? Left to right. Therefore, the icons should be on the left, where your eye first scans. My reply: Exactly! That's why the icons should be on the right. Since you read from left to right (in most Western languages, anyway), where do you normally have your windows oriented? On the left edge of the screen, I'm willing to wager. Considering this, the Desktop icons have a much larger chance of being visible, and therefore clickable, if they are on the right, whereas if they're on the left they're almost guaranteed to be covered up by something.

The Windows user replies: But I always keep all my windows maximized, so it doesn't matter anyway because everything is always hopelessly covered up. To that, I reply:

[Hop Pocket]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
The Desktop icons definitely belong on the right.

The Windows user says: How do you read? Left to right. Therefore, the icons should be on the left, where your eye first scans. My reply: Exactly! That's why the icons should be on the right. Since you read from left to right (in most Western languages, anyway), where do you normally have your windows oriented? On the left edge of the screen, I'm willing to wager. Considering this, the Desktop icons have a much larger chance of being visible, and therefore clickable, if they are on the right, whereas if they're on the left they're almost guaranteed to be covered up by something.

The Windows user replies: But I always keep all my windows maximized, so it doesn't matter anyway because everything is always hopelessly covered up. To that, I reply:

Interesting, I had never heard that perspective. But I'm typing this on a mac with the window all the way to the right. of course, that's because the more important big lebowski is playing to the left

[Brass]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
The Desktop icons definitely belong on the right.

The Windows user says: How do you read? Left to right. Therefore, the icons should be on the left, where your eye first scans. My reply: Exactly! That's why the icons should be on the right. Since you read from left to right (in most Western languages, anyway), where do you normally have your windows oriented? On the left edge of the screen, I'm willing to wager. Considering this, the Desktop icons have a much larger chance of being visible, and therefore clickable, if they are on the right, whereas if they're on the left they're almost guaranteed to be covered up by something.

The Windows user replies: But I always keep all my windows maximized, so it doesn't matter anyway because everything is always hopelessly covered up. To that, I reply:

It's an interesting issue. I kind of think that the Desktop is very poor for this kind of use anyway, since you can never guarentee that it's items will be easily accessbile... even the right part of the desktop can often be covered up.

In fact, having every window maximised all the time (as is more common in Windows) should not cause problems if there are good window management tools available. And a good alternative to leaving things on the Desktop.

The Dock can partially replace the functionality of the Desktop, but it doesn't do it very well.

There was a time in the OS 8 and 9 days where I did keep all my desktop items on the left, and that way I knew that any items that appeared on the right were either removable media or new/unsorted documents (ie, like my IN tray).

This suited me very well except for one problem. I was on a PowerBook 540c at the time and whenever I plugged into an external monitor (and changed the size of the Desktop implicitly) the icon arrangement got screwed up when I unplugged the monitor.

[curmi]

As I mentioned in the article, the idea is to make it an "option". You could also have an option for them to appear on the right not left as someone suggested, or just the current mess we have today.

As for getting to them to click on them, with Expos� this isn't actually a problem now. In fact, Expos� is all the more reason we should be improving the use of the desktop, rather than just using it as a junkyard or finding alternatives because it doesn't work well.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Developer:
Fast User Switching

Why do you think this must be in the menu bar at all? Why isn't it in the Apple menu like the other session menus?

Excellent point.

Why the hell does Apple think this needs to be in the menu bar?

The menu bar is always too small. The only stuff that belongs there is the stuff you need to see at all times. Most humans are intelligent enough to know their own name or their own login session. No need to see it all the time.

The Apple menu holds all the session information and control. That's where FUS belongs.

I'm filing this a bug report. Maybe they'll at least give us an option.

[rjenkinson]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
The Desktop icons definitely belong on the right.

yes, because most people, regardless of their native language, are right-handed.

-r.

[Jim Paradise]

Very well written and well-thought out ideas. I absolutely detest the Panther Finder, and you raise some of the main issues I have with it eloquently.

Would it be alright to link that on a feedback to Apple? There are some good ideas there.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Simon:
Excellent point.

Why the hell does Apple think this needs to be in the menu bar?

The menu bar is always too small. The only stuff that belongs there is the stuff you need to see at all times. Most humans are intelligent enough to know their own name or their own login session. No need to see it all the time.

The Apple menu holds all the session information and control. That's where FUS belongs.

I'm filing this a bug report. Maybe they'll at least give us an option.

I disagree to a point. While people don't have to stare at their name all day long it is less confusing to start using a computer that is used by others if you see immediately who is logged in. That way you know if it is you, or someone else. Some people don't keep custom desktops so it all looks the same. Only when you are going to your document folder you'd realize it wasn't your document folder.

CharlesS: LMAO! Good post.

[Simon]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I disagree to a point. While people don't have to stare at their name all day long it is less confusing to start using a computer that is used by others if you see immediately who is logged in. That way you know if it is you, or someone else. Some people don't keep custom desktops so it all looks the same. Only when you are going to your document folder you'd realize it wasn't your document folder.

You have a point. But I just requested for an option, so I think we'd both be happy.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Simon:
You have a point. But I just requested for an option, so I think we'd both be happy.

If you're happy I'm happy.

[curmi]

Originally posted by Jim Paradise:
Would it be alright to link that on a feedback to Apple? There are some good ideas there.

For sure. Link away.

[Millennium]

Icon Selection
That's a great idea; as others have suggested, you should file a bug. I prefer your "alternate" solution (with the border around everything, and the labelled text remaining as it currently is) to the one where you color the border the same as the label.

Finder Windows
Agreed.

The Desktop
I disagree that the icons should be on the left. However, it would be nice if the Desktop had "Keep arranged by kind" as the default behavior. This solves your problem neatly without being as disruptive to the experience.
Then again, I also have my icon labels to the right of the icon, and I turn on Extra Info. These, too, are quite useful, and perhaps would make better defaults than the current set?

Print Menu
Disagree, if only because your solution almost triples the width of the menu. Some clarity is certainly needed, but I'd break them into their own menu items, personally, each with a dialog better-suited to its task.

Drag and Drop Printing/Faxing
More or less agreed. Though I do take issue with blaming Apple for something which is Epson's fault.

Buttons
I've been disturbed about this trend for a long time (it's not just Apple and Microsoft, either). Apple, at least, has a responsibility to make its UI more consistent. Unfortunately, I don't think that the concept of "buttons that look like buttons" is going to last much longer outside of Apple, because idiot UI designers don't think that it looks Cool Enough if UI elements actually look like what they're supposed to be.

Fast User Switching
Agree on the menu. Disagree strongly and violently with the idea of fast-switching without a password. Bypassing security should never be an option; "convenience over security" is precisely the attitude that got Microsoft to its current Swiss-cheese state.

Tabbed Windows
There does need to be some consistency in the darker/lighter thing. However, the pill-buttons have now been tested in OSX for almost three years, and the paradigm has been shown to work. It seems the metaphor may not have been quite so important after all.

Miscellaneous
Agreement on all three of the issues you bring up.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Tabbed Windows
There does need to be some consistency in the darker/lighter thing. However, the pill-buttons have now been tested in OSX for almost three years, and the paradigm has been shown to work. It seems the metaphor may not have been quite so important after all.

Huh? The new "tabs" were introduced in Panther. In Jaguar, it was something that actually looked like tabs. Panther hasn't been around for three years.

I must admit that my reaction to seeing Panther's tabs was also somewhat

[Gankdawg]

Agree with everything you wrote. Love changing the Print.... to Print/Fax/Save As PDF. Slashes may not be the most visually appealing way to do it, but agree 100% with the concept.

The buttons in the Accounts pref pane (+ and -, add/delete user) are terrible. Your thought is right on.

Nice job!

[Millennium]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Huh? The new "tabs" were introduced in Panther. In Jaguar, it was something that actually looked like tabs. Panther hasn't been around for three years.

I must admit that my reaction to seeing Panther's tabs was also somewhat

Panther hasn't been around for three years, but the idea of the "pill button" for selecting out of a list of things existed before Panther, and several people were using it where tabs might otherwise be used. Panther was the first to actually replace tabs with pill buttons, but the widget itself had been around.

[curmi]

I would say there is nothing wrong with the "pill" widget itself. The problem is removing the "tab" widget and replacing it. Panther actually removed a metaphor (the tab metaphor).

[curmi]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Print Menu
Disagree, if only because your solution almost triples the width of the menu. Some clarity is certainly needed, but I'd break them into their own menu items, personally, each with a dialog better-suited to its task.

My first thought was to propose three different menus. However, that is something Apple are unlikely to do in a hurry. Changing a menu name is something they could do easily. I'm quite happy if they can come up with a simpler, less wide, menu name.

Drag and Drop Printing/Faxing
More or less agreed. Though I do take issue with blaming Apple for something which is Epson's fault.

Apple are responsible for the OS. They may use third party drivers, but there should be some requirement on their third party vendors to deliver a certain quality. And someone has to check that.

Fast User Switching
Agree on the menu. Disagree strongly and violently with the idea of fast-switching without a password. Bypassing security should never be an option; "convenience over security" is precisely the attitude that got Microsoft to its current Swiss-cheese state.

Perhaps you misunderstand my comment. Keychain allows you to store passwords, so having user switching able to use the keychain would be a possible solution Not everyone who users fast user switching has multiple users, they sometimes just have multiple accounts for the same user. If you are a developer, with multiple test accounts for testing developments, say, being able to switch between them quickly would be a godsend.

[Developer]

Originally posted by curmi:
My first thought was to propose three different menus. However, that is something Apple are unlikely to do in a hurry. Changing a menu name is something they could do easily.

They can't. The menu name is under the control of the application. And your suggested name is ugly.
Then, faxing is nothing else than printing to a remote printer. So it's obvious that it's under the print menu.

[Brass]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I disagree to a point. While people don't have to stare at their name all day long it is less confusing to start using a computer that is used by others if you see immediately who is logged in. That way you know if it is you, or someone else. Some people don't keep custom desktops so it all looks the same. Only when you are going to your document folder you'd realize it wasn't your document folder.

CharlesS: LMAO! Good post.

Well here's an idea, for which I'll be called a heretic...

Replace the Apple menu's title (the Apple itself) with the username, then have the user-switching menu somewhere withing the user-name-apple menu.

Doesn't save much space, though... only an apple's width

[Brass]

Originally posted by voodoo:
If you're happy I'm happy.

Group hug everyone?

[Brass]

Originally posted by Developer:
They can't. The menu name is under the control of the application. And your suggested name is ugly.
Then, faxing is nothing else than printing to a remote printer. So it's obvious that it's under the print menu.

I do agree, in part with this. Faxing is fairly obvious to most people as a "Print" option.

The Save as PDF idea is a difficult one to handle though. Technically, it is very similar to printing, from the OS' perspective, but from a human perspective, it's entirely different.

A completely separate Save as PDF (or print to PDF) menu item would be a good thing, I think. However, this is not Apple's responsibility - it is up to the developer to add such a menu item.

Apple COULD make it easier for developers to do so, and produce a pseudo-standard to do so by adding such a menu item to their default templates that most application developers use when beginning to build a new application.

[Developer]

Originally posted by Brass:
The Save as PDF idea is a difficult one to handle though. Technically, it is very similar to printing, from the OS' perspective, but from a human perspective, it's entirely different.

A completely separate Save as PDF (or print to PDF) menu item would be a good thing, I think. However, this is not Apple's responsibility - it is up to the developer to add such a menu item.

Developers should add PDF as a format their documents can be saved as in the Format popup menu in their Save As dialog. That's where it belongs, and that way it doesn't waste an unnecessary extra menu item. For applications that do not save but can print the Save As PDF should remain in the print dialog, but Apple could suggest in a guideline that those applications add Save As for PDF anyway.

[Brass]

Originally posted by Developer:
Developers should add PDF as a format their documents can be saved as in the Format popup menu in their Save As dialog. That's where it belongs, and that way it doesn't waste an unnecessary extra menu item. For applications that do not save but can print the Save As PDF should remain in the print dialog, but Apple could suggest in a guideline that those applications add Save As for PDF anyway.

If it were to be done using the standard Save As facility, then that should be an Apple responsibility to make it a default part of the Save As API (perhaps with a switch so developers could enable/disable it's inclusion in Save As options).

However, the problem with doing it this way, would be that all the printing options that apply to saving as PDF would not be available in the Save As window - or there would have to be some integration of these items into the Save As window when the PDF option was selected by the user.

Ie, Some applications do not have a simple series of pages, and when printing or saving as PDF, these options are essential. Eg, when printing from database applications, the user generally has to specify which record(s) are to be printed. Many of the other print options also apply to PDFs, such as page orientation, etc.

[JCS]

Saving and printing are different things. "Save as PDF" is a kind of printing, not a kind of saving. Think about the difference between printing an Excel file and saving an Excel file. For developers, check the WWDC session on this topic (I forget the number, sorry). The presenter goes out of his way to explain the distinctions.

[curmi]

Originally posted by Developer:
They can't. The menu name is under the control of the application. And your suggested name is ugly.
Then, faxing is nothing else than printing to a remote printer. So it's obvious that it's under the print menu.

As usual Developer, thanks for the constructive criticism.

I'm always amazed by the things you feel are "obvious". And yes, the menu is under control of the application, but if Apple start using a more suggestive name, people will update their apps to follow.

[Developer]

I don't understand why you get personal when I agree with almost all your criticism.

I just don't want my print menu cluttered with rarely used stuff when it's obvious to most users that it is print related.

[curmi]

Sorry Developer. I just thought your last reply was overly critical with the bold "ugly"...

[Developer]

Originally posted by curmi:
Sorry Developer. I just thought your last reply was overly critical with the bold "ugly"...

I'd like to apologise for the bolding. It was inappropriate.
You are well known for four thoughtful and valuable criticisms of OS X. And let me emphasise - constructive criticism at its best. And your mockups always show taste and great artistic talent.

However, I wanted to comment that adding the rarely used features to the print menu adds too much clutter to the menu and is less visually pleasing. In part this might be due to cultural differences. The slash is rarely used in German, so it really sticks out to me.

[Big Mac]

I too must commend you on an excellent page, curmi. I am especially impressed by the high quality UI mock-ups, which I wouldn't have the time nor talent to create. I've taken the time to share my thoughts in response:

Icon Selection - Your criticism of the highlighting color during selection is valid. However, am I the only one who believes that the semi-translucent border placed over selected icons isn't transparent enough? It definitely conveys the fact the icon is selected, but it seems to be a bit too conspicuous for my taste, almost as if it's overpowering the icon itself. I wish there were a way to hack its translucency level.

Finder Windows - Most everyone hates Metal Finder, and those who don't really should. The only place it works for me is Safari, but everywhere else it feels unnecessary and is distracting to a certain extent. I do, however, understand Apple's rational for applying metal to the browser portion of the finder. If you look at the new guidelines for Metal, there's a line that states it is appropriate for file browsing, which is exactly how apple applied it. I wish Apple would have stuck with its old criteria for applying metal - it was for consumer applications that approximated real world devices. Alas, Apple seems fixated on Metal despite user protestations, which leads me to believe that its being pushed by the top - i.e. SJ...

The Desktop - I cannot agree with you there. If only for sentimental reasons, desktop icons all belong on the right hand side. Another poster commented that when he worked with Windows he would drag the machine�s desktop icons to the right; he wasn�t the only one to do so. It�s just a Mac thang, baby. If the user prefers to put files on the left side, by all means drag them there.

Print Menu - I also must disagree on this point. Menus should not have multiple labels, and people can easily find the functionality as it is.

Buttons - As far as pictures serving as buttons is concerned, I mostly agree. But I actually like Panther�s lock because its purpose is pretty obvious, and, as you noted, it also comes with a descriptive label. What�s more problematic to me is the new �wheel� (or cog, what have you) action button, which doesn�t seem very intuitive to me at all. And while we�re on the subject of unlabeled buttons, I should state that Apple�s old UI guidelines shunned their use. Except when we�re referring to button pallets or cramped spaces, buttons should be labeled! I seem to recall that OpenStep used a number of unlabeled buttons, so it could have been even worse in OS X.

Fast User Switching - You�ve made great points here as well. Apple is using the plus and minus buttons derived from iTunes playlists, and it works pretty well there. Yet, for more complex interfaces, one has to spend a few brain cycles trying to figure out what exactly those plus and minus signs add or subtract. On the whole I think it works out acceptably well, but I would agree that old fashioned, labeled buttons are far more understandable. Your ideas for reducing the size of the FUS menu are terrific. I'm pretty sure that Apple would have included such a preference if it had additional time, since that menu certainly takes up too much space. I got rid of it (thankfully it allows you to) and replaced the general functionality with a faceless application called FUSkey. It is not as efficient (nor is it easier for less experienced users), but I desperately needed the menu bar real estate.

Tabbed Windows - I suppose I�m part of a distinct minority of users who actually like Apple�s replacement of tabs. The new buttons may not be as distinct, but they�re obvious enough to me. Besides, I always felt that tabs were too bulky. It�s really a judgment call based on one�s own preferences, but I like the change.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by curmi:
Perhaps you misunderstand my comment. Keychain allows you to store passwords, so having user switching able to use the keychain would be a possible solution

Then I did understand your comment, and I still disagree. Frankly I opposed the Keychain from the start, and I think Apple is right to not use it for important system functions like this.

Not everyone who users fast user switching has multiple users, they sometimes just have multiple accounts for the same user. If you are a developer, with multiple test accounts for testing developments, say, being able to switch between them quickly would be a godsend.

Convenient? Yes. But that convenience is not worth the security problems which would inevitably come. The second you allow someone who doesn't need security to turn it off, you will find people who do need security turning it off. The only way to get people to practice good security habits is to force the issue; this has been shown time and time again with Microsoft.

[voodoo]

I can't imagine why you are opposed to the keychain. It is really handy not to type in your email password every time you open Mail.app in the morning! It isn't mandatory. If you are too paranoid to use the keychain you don't have to. I think that once you write your login/pass when you log on to your account is enough for users. That l/p should be enough to access all the rest. That l/p gives you sudo rights anyway (assuming you're an admin) so that is really all you have to remember.

[Big Mac]

I concur with voodoo, I cannot see a reason to be anti-keychain. The keychain is a necessary, functional component of modern computing. Without the keychain, users who care about security would be forced to try to remember a multitude of complex, unusual password strings. And those who don't care about security would only use a couple of easily guessed passwords. Unexperienced users often write the passwords down on notepads! Before I had Web Confidential (which I still use), I had a word processor password file. As long as people need to deal with passwords, they're going to need to store them somewhere. Humans are not machines.

Curmi isn't the first to suggest that users store each other's passwords in keychains. Siracusa asked for the feature in his Panther article, I believe. At first it really didn't make sense to me, but now it makes total sense. If a user stores another user's password in his or her keychain, it would allow password-less login to that user until the keychain entry would be invalidated by the other account. The other user's password gets changed, and then the keychain no longer works. Simple. When I get a faster Mac, I will setup multiple users just for additional workspaces. And I won't want to constantly type in passwords. And right now the situation doesn't work out for those who explicitly trust one another. For instance, my brother didn't feel like entering a password, so he got rid of his. What does that do for security? I think we definitely need this feature.

[thePurpleGiant]

Originally posted by Developer:
Then, faxing is nothing else than printing to a remote printer. So it's obvious that it's under the print menu.

Obvious? Obvious?? Man, I think you forget what the world is like through non-geek eyes!

I can guarantee you, I don't know anyone with a Mac that has found the Fax feature without asking me or turning to the Help Program. To them, faxing is as distinct from printing as emailing is. In fact - they think of faxing as being more like emailing than printing, since you are "sending" a file to someone.

Regardless, I can find the feature, but I seriously doubt many people would look there. I think two menu items is much clearer:

Print... Command-P
Fax... Command-Shift-P (since F is taken for find related tasks)

[curmi]

With the "save as PDF" issue, perhaps the confusion is that it isn't the same as saving an application file. Maybe it should be called "Create PDF". Or "Print to PDF".

A lot of people don't like my replaced "Print..." menu item, which is fair enough. I'm not really happy with it myself. If I could have come up with a simple expression to encompass all 3 actions I would have put that down. I tried believe me.

But I still maintain that having "Print..." does not convey to an inexperienced user that they can create PDFs or fax from that menu. Maybe 3 menu items than, "Print...", "Fax...", "Create PDF..."? Or another term that maybe one of you guys can come up with instead of just "Print..."?

[Big Mac]

You're right, curmi, it should be named "Create a PDF" rather than "Save as PDF" because PDF is output analogous to printed output. That is why it's placed in the print window. Now as far as faxing goes, I like the fact that Apple added the feature. Yet, I doubt many people use it anymore, especially since so many of us are on broadband and consequently don't use our modems. Faxing caters to an increasingly narrow audience. If the option key is held down, "Print. . ." should be changed to "Fax. . ." You state that people will have trouble finding the fax capability. But since it's featured prominently in System Preferences, I cannot imagine people would miss it. Btw, doesn't it seem unnecessary to have that Print pane in System Preferences? It only has four options, all of which appear to be painfully redundant.

[voodoo]

This is a good thread btw. Really interesting. I am glad that these are the things that are the most serious GUI problems in OS X. We are almost with a watertight OS.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I can't imagine why you are opposed to the keychain. It is really handy not to type in your email password every time you open Mail.app in the morning!

That's just it. This 'convenience-over-security' crap which permeates the non-technical world is directly responsible for almost every major computer security problem over the last few years, including all of the major e-mail worms, because these wouldn't be possible if this idiocy hadn't become a mantra at Microsoft.

It isn't mandatory. If you are too paranoid to use the keychain you don't have to. I think that once you write your login/pass when you log on to your account is enough for users. That l/p should be enough to access all the rest.

No, it shouldn't. That means that with only one password, not only can you access all of your data, but so can anybody else who happens to find it. And it's been well-known for a long time that passwords are themselves one of the weakest forms of security available today, because people are too lazy to memorize them.

That l/p gives you sudo rights anyway (assuming you're an admin) so that is really all you have to remember.

And that is the problem, not the solution.

[Big Mac]

Originally posted by Millennium:
No, it shouldn't. That means that with only one password, not only can you access all of your data, but so can anybody else who happens to find it. And it's been well-known for a long time that passwords are themselves one of the weakest forms of security available today, because people are too lazy to memorize them. And that is the problem, not the solution.

If the user stupid enough to place sensitive data in an insecure location, then the user deserves it. If the user is stupid enough to use a poor master password, then the user deserves it. If the user is stupid enough to have his credit card or bank login combo auto-filled by Keychain, then the user deserves it. Pure and simple. I still fail to see why the Keychain is evil.