[deltron]

In Leopard, is there any way to switch off the transparent background in programs?
It drives me NUTS when I accidentally click outside the bounds of a program element and it takes me back to the desktop.
My ideal scenario would be to have an opaque background when running full-screen programs, that masks all the other open programs and prevents me from clicking into the background and leaving the program. Basically, like how MS Windows operates. I've switched from XP to MacOS and this is the one thing that I can't get my head around.
I'm a web designer and I usually have dreamweaver, photoshop, illustrator, multiple browsers, email, ftp, etc open all at once. The window clutter also gets frustrating. For instance, if I have dreamweaver open, I can see all the photoshop windows behind it. I know there are keyboard shortcuts and spaces partly solve my problem, but I really don't like having to 'fix' the problem constantly with a shortcut, and having to memorise a million shortcut key combos.
I've tried 'Doodim' and 'Background' applications, and they only do half the job.. they make the other windows dissappear, but you can still click out of the program. It's also annoying to have to run seperate programs and fiddle with the settings all the time... it would be nice to have a program that runs at startup and does this for me.
Does anyone have any workarounds, programs etc that would solve my problem?
I'm sorry if this is one of those obvious questions, or it gets asked all the time!! I'm a bit frustrated, obviously... if I can just solve this one problem, I will be totally happy about my move to mac!!!

[Martian]

COMMAND OPTION H is the Hide Others keyboard command. It will hide all other applications including the Finder windows. However, if you then click the desktop, the Finder windows will reappear.

You could get a Microsoft multi-button mouse and program a side button to return you to “Next Application”. Then, whenever you misstep into another app you could just hit that side button and be returned back to the last app. Maybe other brands of mice are similarly programable???

(Actually, the Windows Maximize command and Window’s ability to arrange and tile windows is just about the only Windows feature I wish Mac would adopt).

[Tom_Diola]

Mac doesn't exactly want to emulate what Windoze does (nor do we want to do things like Windoze).

Between expose and Spaces you should be able to separate out what you want separated and

get to what you want in a snap e.g. My Dreamweaver is pinned to Space 3 and along in Space 3 I have Safari

in Space 1 I have all my IM's etc.

[ekaligreece]

I fully support the frustration and it certainly slows my work progress when you inadvertently find you are working in an application other than Photoshop. I like to keep "Mail" open so that messages can be received in real time so my messages automatically become the "background" to the Photoshop application - very distracting. I too was reared on Windows (from Photoshop version 4) and miss the neutral backgtround feature greatly - it is the one great disadvantage of the application running on Mac. I do enjoy the Mac experience otherwise.

I do hope a solution can be found.

[mdawson]

The Mac OS and Windows have completely different user interface paradigms. Apple has followed the basic principles underlying a graphical user interface in the design of the Mac OS; Microsoft has not. As a result, Windows users have become accustomed to using applications with the windows either maximized or in full screen mode defeating the purpose of having windows in the first place.

Peter Bright sums up the differences between how windows are handled in the Mac OS and Windows at ars technica. Although the article is about the Windows 7 Taskbar, the first two pages are about the underlying principles of each operating system?s user interface. As OS X?s windowing scheme follows proper UI design, Mr. Bright sums up the Mac paradigm in a little more than a paragraph. Windows paradigm leads to several problems and therefore more than a page is dedicated to describing the Windows UI paradigm and its pitfalls. (Further on in the article he points out how the Taskbar is subject to the same inherent flawed design, although OS X?s Dock also has its flaws.)

What Mr. Bright does not touch upon is how Windows UI paradigm also cripples multiple display setups. Macs have seamlessly used multiple displays since the late-1980s. Multiple display support came much later for Windows and its handling of multiple displays is clumsy at best. The heart of the problem is the windowing paradigm that Microsoft chose to implement.

[Remiss63]

My question is related to this discussion. Is there a way to "maximize" a window in Leopard? What I would really like is to have a colored round button at the top of the window that would enlarge the window to fill the screen. I'm not so concerned about working "full screen", but I do empathize with the difficulties of being distracted by background files, windows, etc., and the problem of clicking outside my current window.

[Martian]

Thanks for that link--I enjoyed the well-written comparison between Windows and Mac windows. With that said, I have two observations:

1) When Excel (or other MDI app) running in Windows has its sub-windows stacked up within the main Excel window, and each sub-window is set to "Maximize", it appears to the user quite like any of the tabbed browsers we have grown to love on both Macs and PC's.



2) When Excel (or other MDI app) running in Windows has its sub-windows scattered within the main Excel window — that is each sub-window is set to NOT "Maximize, but the single main application window IS maximized to full screen, it appears to the user quite like separate windows running on the Mac Desktop. Since the Windows user can then select to Maximize any sub-window, I don't see why Mac can't add a command to "Maximize" or go full screen with any window as well.

[Tom_Diola]

I could live without maximize for 1,000 years.
Learn to see more than 1 window at a time.

[mdawson]

Quote

Martian wrote:

>

Quote

When Excel (or other MDI app) running in Windows has its sub-windows stacked up within the main Excel window, and each sub-window is set to "Maximize", it appears to the user quite like any of the tabbed browsers we have grown to love on both Macs and PC's.

When document windows are maximized in an application window in Windows it is nothing like tabbed browsing. The closest parallel would be the tabbed worksheets that exist exclusively in Excel. No indication of other documents being open is apparent in an application windows when all of the encapsulated document windows are maximized; it is blatantly obvious when a browser window is linked to more than one Website.

Quote

Martian wrote:

>

Quote

When Excel (or other MDI app) running in Windows has its sub-windows scattered within the main Excel window ? that is each sub-window is set to NOT "Maximize, but the single main application window IS maximized to full screen, it appears to the user quite like separate windows running on the Mac Desktop.

Again, this is incorrect, because at no time in the history of the Mac OS has the user ever been confined to an application window because no such thing exists on a Mac.

Quote

Martian wrote:

>
Since the Windows user can then select to Maximize any sub-window, I don't see why Mac can't add a command to "Maximize" or go full screen with any window as well.

Macs did have a full screen mode in many applications early on, but as few people work on 9-inch displays there is little need for such a mode. Apple does not add a maximize button because doing so counters their UI paradigm that is based on the principles of proper user interface design. While Apple has had its share of UI foibles and consistency issues, they do not see a need to completely throw out the rulebook as Microsoft has done. As I stated previously, the author of the linked article took over a page to detail the pitfalls of Microsoft ignoring the rules and designing their user interface wrongly.

One of the reasons OS X does not have a full screen maximize option by default is because volumes are mounted on the right side of the desktop. Therefore, windows generally do not cover over that area intentionally, because the entire point of having mounted volumes present is to 1) allow the user to see the disks that are available on their computer and 2) provide easy access. That is defeated in Windows where 1) icons are placed on the left side of the desktop under windows, 2) mounted volumes have to be explicitly sought by the user by navigating Windows Explorer and 3) Windows continues to recognize drives instead of mounted volumes so the user is shown useless information such as the fact that they have two optical drives despite the fact that no discs are in those drives.

The Windows UI design also violates Fitt?s Law by design, reducing user productivity. Microsoft has opted to further reduce user productivity by eliminating menus, toolbars and palettes in Office for the poorly thought out Ribbon that force the user to engage in extra mouse clicks to get anything accomplished; the latter is a longstanding issue in Windows that Microsoft clearly intends to build upon and expand instead of correct. Like any kid cheating on an exam, Microsoft copied look and feel of the Mac OS without bothering to actually learn why Apple?s user interface is designed as it is, nor do they care.

Yes, most people are used to how the Windows user interface works, but it is still the wrong way to design a GUI. The fact that most people have become accustomed to doing something the wrong or hard way, does not make it the right or easy way.

[mdawson]

Quote

Remiss63 wrote:

>

Quote

My question is related to this discussion. Is there a way to "maximize" a window in Leopard?

No. And it is not a feature in OS X for good reason.

Quote

Remiss63 wrote:

>

Quote

I'm not so concerned about working "full screen", but I do empathize with the difficulties of being distracted by background files, windows, etc., and the problem of clicking outside my current window.

If you want to hide applications that you are not currently using then simply press ⌘ - option - H to hide background applications. A quick Google search will very likely turn shareware that does this automatically. As to clicking outside of your current window, is it really that hard for you to click back to where you were? If you clicked out of a window, then you can just as easily click back in. If it is obstructed, just press ⌘ - tab (application switcher) or ⌘ - ` (document switcher).

[Martian]

MAC PRECEDENTS FOR MAXIMIZED WINDOWS:
* Mac OS 9 (maybe earlier?)…Option click a window’s size box.
* Firefox currently on the Mac..size box maximizes the window




BENEFITS OF MAXIMIZE AND/OR FULL SCREEN COMMANDS:
* Complex spreadsheets can never have too much real estate.
* The odd graphic, photo, or whatever that the user chooses to be big — it’s his choice.
* Compliments 2nd monitor extended desktop that Mac handles so well
* Poor eyesight accessibility. Even the normal aging process without any other vision problem will eventually make everyone want to read in larger type. Larger type means choosing between larger windows and excessive scrolling.
* Addresses one more complaint that potential switchers from Windows may have.
* Great for netbook small screen — especially a true full-screen mode (if Apple ever gets its ass in gear on netbooks).
* Expose or even third party multi-button programmable mice make it so easy to access the desktop and other windows that are underneath the big window.
I realize that some people would never maximize or go full screen, but I don’t understand why anyone would actually object to the OPTION for others to CHOOSE to use it. Mac is loaded with features that some choose not to use, and Mac is loaded with alternate or redundant ways to choose to do something. Personally, I find Coverflow a glitzy waste of screen real estate, Dock Magnification annoying and counter-productive, spaces has no utility value for me, and it’s most convenient for my wife and me to share the same user account. But I am still glad these features are available for those who like/want/need them. Also they make great point-of-sale demonstrations for Mac.
I doubt that there is a technical or programming reason that maximize for full screen can’t be easily implemented in OS X, but if I am wrong I must accept that. But I don't see an ideological or a quantitative (re: 9-inch screen) argument as persuasive against providing this UNOBTRUSIVE PERSONAL CHOICE that certainly would be used by a substantial proportion of Mac users.

(BTW, for a couple of applications, I have programmed one of the buttons on my multi-button mouse to “Hide Others”).

[mdawson]

Quote

Mac OS 9 (maybe earlier?)?Option click a window?s size box.

The Classic Mac OS worked in a world where the average screen size was much smaller and that does make a difference.

Quote

Firefox currently on the Mac..size box maximizes the window.

That was Mozilla?s option to supercede the primary functionality of the (+) button on the titlebar, just as Apple apparently opted to do with iTunes.

Quote

Complex spreadsheets can never have too much real estate.

And clicking the (+) button in Excel essentially maximizes the document window.

Quote

The odd graphic, photo, or whatever that the user chooses to be big ? it?s his choice.
Compliments 2nd monitor extended desktop that Mac handles so well

And nothing stops anyone from making the window as large as they please in those instances.

Quote

Poor eyesight accessibility. Even the normal aging process without any other vision problem will eventually make everyone want to read in larger type. Larger type means choosing between larger windows and excessive scrolling.

OS X has functionality for people with poor eyesight and they do not need to alter te UI paradigm to that end.

Addresses one more complaint that potential switchers from Windows may have.

Sorry, but the ?because its what Windows does? excuse is just that: an excuse to not stop trying to work the Microsoft way. This argument has less than zero validity.

Great for netbook small screen ? especially a true full-screen mode (if Apple ever gets its ass in gear on netbooks).

Apple does not make netbooks nor does Apple need to make netbooks. So again, zero validity on this point.

I realize that some people would never maximize or go full screen, but I don?t understand why anyone would actually object to the OPTION for others to CHOOSE to use it.

The objection is not to people having options, the objection is to this mindset that OS X needs to adopt functionality that violates proper UI design as every article I have read on the matter clearly indicates. OS X does not need to implement Windows UI paradigm in any way shape or form. Those people that wish to engage in such violations can go out of their and the third-party utilities that will permit them to do so.

But I don't see an ideological or a quantitative (re: 9-inch screen) argument as persuasive against providing this UNOBTRUSIVE PERSONAL CHOICE that certainly would be used by a substantial proportion of Mac users.

No ideology is at play here. The principles underlying the proper way to design a user interface predate both the Mac OS and Windows and those principles are based on scientific and mathematical studies.

[mdawson]

Quote

KPO?M wrote:

>

Quote

The linked article you mentioned states pretty clearly that "there is no clear winner, and both camps have plenty to learn from each other."

That statement from Mr. Bright is strictly in reference to the Dock and Taskbar. I am in agreement with that assessment in reference to those aspects of each operating system. It is quite obvious from the first two pages that Mr. Bright is pointing out that in general the Windows user interface paradigm is flawed. A page was not dedicated to detailing pitfalls with the OS X?s user interface design.

Yes there are inconsistencies with the implementation of the () button in terms of how software developers (re-)program its use. In one particular instance, iTunes, Apple is also guilty of this, but Microsoft is the worst offender (e.g., Office:mac). That has caused confusion about what OS X?s () button is supposed to do.

Quote

KPO?M wrote:

>

Quote

Let's also not confuse Microsoft with Windows, and Apple with OS X. Office for Mac adheres to Apple Ui paradigms. Apple made a point of saying that Safari 4.0 for Windows adheres to Windows UI paradigms. Therefore, both companies are comfortable in playing within the other's sandlot.

A dramatic difference exists between using the APIs to develop software to run on a given platform and the paradigm upon which an operating system?s user interface is designed. When Apple designs software for Windows, and Microsoft does the contrary, their product is supposed to respect the look and feel of the target operating system. That is another core concept of GUI design: application consistency. That is also the primary reason for OS APIs; developers are not supposed to re-invent the wheel when it comes to windows and window objects for an application. Both Apple and Microsoft have been guilty of breeching this basic rule, but 3D software developers are consistently the worst offenders of UI consistency. Apple has even breeched this rule within OS X.

[Martian]

mdawson, it?s fine that you don?t want such a Windows-like command to resize a window to maximum or full screen because of a ?user interface paradigm? (ideological) reason. But come on, do you honestly disagree with each and every single PRACTICAL reason I mentioned?!?!

Regardless, if such a feature were added to OS X, it would have zero effect on those who choose not to use it. So you really need to come up with a real down side to accommodating a popular individual preference.

BTW, another Windows feature I love is easy keyboard access to menu commands. In Windows, you just hold down the Alt key and select the underlined letters to drill down to the desired menu command. It's nice to have a keyboard shortcut available for every single menu command without having had to set it up before hand.