[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2005/04/22]
> > > My distribution of choice is Debian. I like that with a simple command, > > > or a simple instruction in one of the GUI frontends, I can install > > > almost any kind of software. > > That was a great idea FreeBSD came up with, wasn't it? > Yes, certainly. It's even better when done right :P I'd like to see that. My experience with Debian is not good, but I understand they've fixed a lot of the stuff I hate about it. Maybe I'll gve it another try some time. I've just been biten by Linux too many times to want to rush back in... > > > You have to install third party > > > utilities for things like virtual desktops and a run program dialog. > > OK, I don't get this one. Linux is nothing but a bunch of third > > party utilities flying in cliose formation. > Yes, it is. Whenever I say Linux, most of the time I really mean "a good > GNU/Linux desktop distribution". That's STILL nothing but a bunch of third party utilities flying in close formation. Someone went out and picked the particular set of utilities for you, but it's still just an exercise in bundling... and that is a good thing. Besides, you still want to add more components, so what's the big deal? > > The idea that "third party utilities" is somehow a bad thing, > > especially when (in this case) said utilities are free and open source > > (just like the ones that go into Linux) just boggles my mind. > They are not a bad thing, but some features should be supported by the > platform itself. Heh. EVERYONE has a different list of what those features are. There's stuff you consider core that I don't even want, and I'm sure the opposite is true. There's still UNIX window managers that dont do virtual screens, even. And people who swear by them. > For example, I use QuickSilver, which I like much. But it'd be good if > OS X had something like it integrated so it's immediately useful after > installing the OS. Of course, there'd still be room for improvement and > thus third party utilities. And I don't like Quicksilver at all, I've tried a dozen similar apps, and I keep ending up typing "open" in Terminal.app. Because, you see, the default command line launcher in Mac OS X is the shell... the default command line launcher in every other UNIX version. > > > I hate how clicking a dock icon opens a new window only if there's none > > > open already, > > If there is, it pops that window to the top and focuses on it. > And because I already pressed the key for a new window, Why did you do that? You click on the dock icon, a window pops up. Whether it's a new window or an old window, it's still a window. > I end up with > two new windows instead of just one. Um, no you don't, you end up with one new window and one old window that was already there. > If I don't press that key myself, I have to click, wait 5 seconds, and > then if there is no new window, press the key anyway. It's too much work > to hit F9 for expose and then scan the surface for similar windows > before clicking a dock icon. So don't hit f9 for expose and scan for similar windows. Ask the app for a window. You have to wait for the window anyway, whether it's new or not. This is a tiny little hate. > > > I hate how Firefox under this platform won't let me use tab to select > > > hyperlinks and always opens tabs in the foreground. > > Have you checked your preferences? > Yes, and I even have the extension loaded that lets you finetune tab > settings. To no avail. Weird. That and your "can't drag images to the desktop" hate makes me wonder if you've broken Firefox somehow. > > > I hate how there is absolutely no telling how keys like home and end > > > will behave in a text input box. > > As opposed to Linux, where there's no way to tell how ANY keys will > > behave in a text input box, and in some pretty important apps (like > > XV) the key bindings either don't exist or were devised by a > > crack-addled lemur? > Yes. Uh... O-kay. > > > I hate how by default radio buttons and checkboxes cannot be focussed > > > with tab. > > Preferences. > "how by default". I think sane defaults are not too much to ask, and I > find this default setting pretty insane. I'm sorry, I can't connect your desire for sane defaults and your preference for Linux in any way that makes sense. > > > I hate that I can't find where the hell I can set program bindings, so > > > movies start with VLC instead of Quicktime. > > Click on a movie. > Movies I click are usually hyperlinked from web pages. Click on a movie in Finder. Your browser and Finder unfortunately use the same Launchservices database, so when you change it in Finder the browser should pick it up. (why unfortunately? <url: http://www.scarydevil.com/~peter/io/apple.html >) > > Cmd-I or select "Show Info" from the menu. > > See where it says "Open With"? > It's not the place where I expected that, as opening is not information. Yeh, "Get Info" should really be called "Properties". This is part of the dry hate of the legacy Finder. I wish Apple had just carbonised Finder and Aquafied the NeXT file manager and let us use either or both as we preferred. Hateful as it is, though, it's better than most. I do kind of like like the classic Windows Explorer (before it got all ActiveDesktopped), and even the old File Manager. Microsoft did a lot of things right in the original Windows GUI. Too bad they couldn't leave well enough alone. PS: I hate whatever software people use that makes it inconvenient to just reply to the Hates Software list instead of CCing everyone so I get multiple copies...There's stuff above here
Generated at 01:00 on 03 May 2005 by mariachi 0.52