digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Road to Mac OS X Leopard: Dock 1.6

appleinsider.com — A great look at the Dock coming soon in OSX Leopard, with a look at the Dock's origins as well.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • adamriggins, on 11/03/2007, -5/+34Man, they have come a LONG way with the dock. Although it does look a bit silly if on the sides of the screen, I think the Leopard dock looks great.
    • MicrosoftBob, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9And they *finally* added the apps folder to the dock by default.
    • Elranzer, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2They came a long way.... of catching up to Project Looking Glass.
    • ptFoe, on 10/17/2007, -2/+6AWN is better
    • ronaldpoi, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3The new dock looks like *****. I hate it... I love OSX but i want the classic dock =(
    • astrosmash, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Some more history:
      NEXTSTEP 4.0 Beta (unreleased), Dock with stacks: http://www.shawcomputing.net/resources/next/softwa ...

      WIndows 95 Beta: The task bar is basically just a simple dock that contains only Application shortcuts.
      http://toastytech.com/guis/chic58.html
    • hackmyballs, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2oh for godssake please call it DOCK 2.0 already!
    • willynilly, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Oh yeah, the dock is genius. For example, the inexplicable lack of a legitimate resizing control. How the ***** was anyone supposed to guess that a vertical separator line was actually a hidden resizing control? And the new one is no better, a ladder-like strip. That does NOT imply resizing.

      The vaunted Apple "ease of use" and "elegance" strike again.
  • jerols, on 10/11/2007, -2/+40I really like the idea of stacks. My desktop doesn't get too cluttered because all my downloads go to a specific folder but the majority of Mac users don't even know they can change where their downloads go and end up with extremely messy desktops. This will solve that problem for the most part. BTW, great article.
    • Jambi, on 10/11/2007, -17/+2Stacks are a horrible idea. Why, you ask? Because this exactly same functionality was built into 10.4 (Tiger), except you'd have a more compact menu pop up instead when you dragged a folder to the dock. Now, you have a space consuming "fan" or popup reminiscent of something you'd see in Overflow. Both take up much more space than the menu, and now you can't browse sub-folders from the Dock. Oh yeah, a real improvement, just like the new Finder. (compare it to Pathfinder and then tell me which one looks more like a full-featured file manager)
      • Protoss, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16You can't browse subfolders? Last time I tried Leopard I could click through my music folder all from the dock.
        • Jambi, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1Well, I just tried it and instead of popping up a submenu (or fan or whatever) it just opened it in the Finder...so no easy folder menu-browsing, as far as I can tell. I wouldn't mind if they'd introduced the new stuff as an option, but as it is, they've killed usability yet again. The current Mac OS UI is a mess...a hybrid of Classic/NeXT and Job's own screwy ideas (trust me, no designer with an ounce of sense would've designed that transparent menubar). It really needs an overhaul and a coherent HIG, like in the classic days. (not that I'm implying they should clone the Classic UI, but try for one that's as useful and consistent as they can make it)
        • skidooer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Either Cmd+Click the folder or hold down the mouse button for a while and what you seek will appear.
          • Jambi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Nope, just tried it. In both cases it ends up opening in the Finder. And seeing as this is the latest version of Leopard that I happen to be testing this on, I'm pretty sure it'll end up this way in the final release, unless some last minute changes are made.
          • MacBandit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Did you check finder prefs and system prefs?

      • Karmavs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3In this particular case, taking up space is okay - because stacks are only visible when you're using them. Making them larger means larger targets for the mouse, which is a win for useability. It means larger icons, which is a win for aesthetics…

        And about Pathfinder: Yes, PathFinder has more features (some would call this 'bloat'…) But which one is better for your average Mac user? The one with 4 different drawers, a double sidebar, a double bottom bar, a built in terminal, in-line permissions editing… or the one that is fast, is easy, and stays out of the way? A file manager should do as little as possible (in a sense) - it's there only as the path to other programs. It shouldn't try to be the other programs at the same time (text editor, terminal, activity monitor… different apps? nope, available inside every pathfinder window, cluttering up the interface)
        • Jambi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2And what would be wrong with adding these as advanced options in Finder, hidden by default, but available to power users?
    • birch25, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4i was privlaged enough to use leopard as my main os for a few weeks and while the dock enhancements seemed aesthetic-only at first, they really are useful. stacks in particular makes quickly accessing files easy. i put my three most used folders in the dock and i rarely needed to even open up a finder window. now that i'm back to tiger, i really miss the newer dock.
    • skidooer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5The desktop concept is such that only the files you are working with sit there. Like paper on your physical desk. When you are done with it you will file it away to a more appropriate location. As long as you stick to this workflow the desktop will never become messy.
    • ggko, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I have my downloads go the desktop, though I never could remember if that was the default or something that i set. I prefer it that way because then the presence of those document icons "nag" me for their attention. When I'm done whatever I'm doing, then I file them away to the appropriate folder.

      On the other hand, I do have a "downloads" folder. Whatever software I download goes to that folder (after their short stay on the desktop.) Problem was since they're "out of sight," they're also "out of mind." At one point I think I had two or three hundred items in there, all stuff I came across and grabbed, thinking, "this looks interesting, I'll download and check it out sometime later." Many were quickly forgotten once I dropped them into that folder.
  • cave, on 10/11/2007, -6/+18The Leopard dock looks pretty at a glance, but it has too much visual and spacial inconsistencies for me to be comfortable with it for daily use. Hopefully Apple has added a function to return to the tiger dock. If they didn't, Unsanity will come to the rescue, I'm sure. Also, the author talks about how minimizing windows clutters up the dock. Who minimizes windows on OSX anyways, aside from brand-new windows converts? I only hide them (apple+h) and then if I wanna bring them back, click on their icon. Nothing else gets added to the dock this way.
    • abrooks, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12Agree, hiding apps is the only way to go, as far as I'm concerned Apple could scrap the Minimise and 'Fit Window' buttons from windows, wouldn't make a difference to me.

      What do you find inconsistent in Leopard, examples?
      • cave, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Check this out for a good read > http://furbo.org/2007/07/03/the-hig-still-matters- ...
      • DMCer, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2OMG!!! WHO CARES THAT MUCH TO WRITE THAT ARTICLE!!
      • energizerrabbit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I think the Fit Window is a good feature, and I use it occasionally.
        It would be nice to have the option to remove the minimize, but I have used it occasionally. It is good when you see a website, with maybe a long article, but you don't want to forget it, and wont read it for several hours. Minimize it.
    • tizz66, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I quite often use the minimize feature for windows of the same app I want to get rid of for a while. For example, if I have a couple of projects open in textmate, I'll minimize the one I'm not using. Same thing with firefox windows too. It can be handy sometimes.
      • tracydanger, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I think I only minimize when I don't want to forget about something. Normally, hide does the trick.
    • pilot3033, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6The same people who put every application they have ever used into the dock.

      However, I tend to minimize windows if I only want to put them away for a second or two, and I do it pretty rarely now because of exposé. Now it's usually just for video files that I'm watching. When I need to do something else quickly, I minimize it, and keep an eye on it in the dock (as it keeps playing).
    • jaypeg, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I'm with ya, but I'm even more old school. I don't even hide, I stack. Even now, I'm running a dozen apps with a total of perhaps 15 or 16 open windows and I manage to just shuffle between them using Dock clicks and the window menu in each app. I often arrange windows slightly so I always have visible window edges that I can click on. These are old but fast, effective habits brought forth from the old Classic Mac OS. Who has time for Exposé :)
    • sammy22b06, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I dunno, it seems you have time for Digg...
  • tablelegs, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10Should be an option to have the black triangles and not the glowing dots.
    • Karmavs, on 10/11/2007, -9/+7there Shouldn't be an option to have black triangles instead of lights, - there should just BE black triangles instead of glowing lights. It's not a case of different things being better for different people - no-one is better served by the glowing dots.
    • ronnsprocket, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8agreed. the black triangles (white, in my case via cleardock) are only useful because they contrast the desktop image. I think that the dots under the icons should automatically contrast the desktop image. Would save me time in changing my triangle color everytime i change my desktop.
    • willynilly, on 10/22/2007, -2/+1This wouldn't be as big an issue if the apps would ***** QUIT when you close their sole window.
  • canthraxp, on 10/11/2007, -11/+13I'm no windows fan, nor an apple fan. But I admire how apple team creates nice things adding functionality, something like in the middle between "eye candy" and functionality; meanwhile microsoft goes either to functionality (like Xp) or Eye candy (Vista.. bury me windows fanboys!). But either way, I don't like having huge icons for apps (yes.. icons can be resized, but that would kill the eye candy), I stick to gnome/KDE panels to do that.
    • ggko, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I imagine large icons also have their use in that we're getting larger and larger displays and in some cases, finer and finer dpi settings. You need to be able to both find the icon you want and be able to hit it easily with the mouse pointer.
  • betterth, on 10/13/2007, -17/+53Eh, I really disliked the bit about Windows. Why do you need to bash Windows in an article about OSX 1.6's dock? Even in the history, they explicitly say that Windows took from Apple and not vice versa, making it superfluous and only there for the intention of bashing Windows.

    I have personally preferred the TaskBar to the dock, and it looks like Leopards dock might become the first useful dock I've ever seen on an Apple. It's not that the dock is a bad idea or ugly, I just have two major gripes with it. 1) Real-estate. The dock demands a huge amount of screen realestate and no program and can load within a certain padding of it. It also causes the desktop background to display even in a maximized app, which for some reason annoys me. 2) A double wide classic styled taskbar can comfortably fit 12 open programs, 6 quick launch buttons, and a system-task area of 12-16 icons at 1280x1024. With more programs, up to 20, I can still comfortably click and read each item. More comfortably than say, a dock of 20 wide apps. And it uses much less vertical screen estate, which especially crucial on a laptop.

    I dunno I've just never been a huge fan, especially on screens without a massive resolution. The Macbook literally feels like 1/5 of the screen is the dock, which to me is just downright retarded.
    • danfuturo, on 10/22/2007, -3/+17option + command + D

      problem solved.
      • willynilly, on 10/22/2007, -4/+2NO. That's a typical smug Mac response, and laughable to boot. There's no way for a user to know that.
        Any time a design omission comes up, some Mac apologist will step in and go, "Oh, you can do that; just press Command-Alt-Shift-Q."
        NO... NO WE WON'T.
    • KZeni, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16Real-estate. Turn on auto-hide, and the dock is only there when you want it. And as far as it showing the desktop background instead of the underlaying window... it's never done that for me on tiger, I'm not sure what you're talking about.
      The dock isn't used as a window management system. That's what expose is for. The dock is so you have your most commonly used applications and folders on there when you need them and to control the currently open applications. Even when you add more applications, the icons scale to fit on the screen, and then turn on the magnification to see the smaller icons with ease.
      • betterth, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Gotcha. I assumed that was the point because I'm used to having my open programs listed on screen. I like expose, but I hate having to push a button just to see whats open.
        • mmzplanet, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Theres a solution for that too... use expose as a hot corner. A quick flick of the pointer to upper right corner is very convenient to show all application windows.
        • err404, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1As a MBP user, expose isn't implemented as a convenient solution. The expose key, F9, requires that you press fn+F9 by default and the trackpad isn't good for hot-corners (your mileage may vary). I know that the function key mode can be toggled in preferences, but I prefer convenient access to screen brightness, volume etc. I'm just not a big fan of expose since it is cluttered with a lot of windows open.

          The Taskbar, while incredibly ugly, is very functional and powerful for dealing with a large numbers of running applications. However i prefer the Dock for casual use when I have fewer windows open.

          I'm hoping that the new Dock will offer something similar to stacks for displaying multiple instance of the same app running (like finder or textpad windows). I am very excited about the new Dock and Finder in Leopard and hope that they with close the gap in functionality for laptop machines by reducing instances of finder and the need for expose.
        • ckSubs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2As another Macbook Pro user, I use a mouse at all times. Try it. OSX should seriously not be used without Hot Corner'D Show Desktop and All Windows Expose, just as it would be stupid to run Windows without a Task Bar or without the 'Show Desktop' quicklaunch button.
        • HUKI365, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1ckSubs: I detest people who use the quick launch button - ever heard of "Windows + D"?
        • Rudiger81, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1It seems everyones gripe with the dock is because they don't know how to use it properly. In fact it seems that most people that have a gripe with apple are due to miss information. There is the occasional legit one but they are coming rarer and rarer. And for gods sack it has a right click and always has so stop saying it doesn't!
      • mym6, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Autohide is great, but is there anyway to define how quickly it responds? I find it's very slow to come up. Tooltips are the same in OS X, seems to take forever for a tooltip to popup.
      • devindotcom, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Autohide is too slow, and provides no information on what apps are open, hidden, etc.
    • koji29, on 10/11/2007, -8/+6Thanks for that. Agreed. A dock is not a core of the OS. Personally, I think it's kind of sad if the Dock is considered and focused on so much with regard to a new OS.

      Furthermore, its functionality can easily be handled by a third party application.
      • natenovs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4yeh, like with this
        http://www.stardock.com/products/objectdock/
      • Kelmon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yes it is. It's the equivalent of the Windows 95+ "Start" button. Sure, you can launch applications using the Finder but for anyone using a Mac for the first time the Dock is the most apparent way of launching and switching between applications. From an ease of use perspective it is a core function and therefore deserves the attention.
    • rawheadrex, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2No, the author is not focusing on the dock so much.. this is one part of a whole series of new features of Leopard. This must be like part 5 or something and I'm sure there will be many more to follow. I really like the in-depth manner the author gets into all the new features of Leopard and adding some history in his articles to boot. I agree that I feel he went over board in bashing Windows, though.

      RE: betterth, it really boils down to what you want to do with (or, what you expect you should be able to do with) the dock/taskbar. They're two separate beasts. As someone said, the taskbar is better for window management (although that may change with the Leopard dock) because that's really not the main function of the dock. The dock is an App launcher (like the quick launch tray) that also keeps track of the statuses of the Apps (running/not running/received message etc., UNLIKE the quick launch tray), as well as being able to control some of the apps (like with iTunes). So for people who are used to the dock being able to do all those things, the Windows taskbar is absolutely frustrating.
    • yourmightyruler, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Still, the bashing of window's "inefficiency" was just plain ridiculous. Goddamn fanboy. It does not matter if you can't tell if the application is running, because you can tell if the ***** window is open or not, of it pops up on the system tray icon.

      This whole "article" is completely biased. You're comparing apples (heh, pun intended) to oranges. The Dock is just a launching system, and the taskbar is a TASK bar. You're supposed to see which windows/apps you have open.
    • Phatt138, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Mouse movements are always going to be slower than rote keyboard strokes. That's why a launcher and a good command of keyboard shortcuts makes working on a Mac so easy. I see my dock so rarely that I forget it's there sometimes. As you noted, docks take up real-estate; so just make it tiny or hide it and do more things by hand. THAT's the solution for laptops, esp.
    • willynilly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yes, bashing Windows is especially embarrassing for a Mac proponent, when Apple so badly botched one of the few Windows conventions they sucked it up and adopted: Alt-Tab. Command-Tabbing to an application is essentially worthless, because it doesn't restore the app's window. It remains minimized in the Dock, useless, until you manually restore it. Duh, Apple, WTF is the point of the feature, then?
      • Kelmon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I will hear nothing bad said about Cmd+Tab. It was a bad feature in OS X 10.2 (presumably in earlier versions as well, if it existed) but came into its own in 10.3+. I will take Apple's implementation over Windows since I can interact with applications via the pop-up and mouse to later options in the list. Since I don't tend to minimise windows to the Dock I can't say that I've encountered the problem.
  • ThinkFr33ly, on 10/11/2007, -39/+25Wow, what utter crap. The Dock is absurd. It is a case study in HORRIBLE usability.

    The Windows Task Bar has it's problems, but it is a vastly superior way to track open applications. Why? Well, open applications appear as buttons on your task bar. It's that simple. Multiple windows for the same application appear as a single grouped button which can be expanded by clicking on it.

    The Dock? Well... the Dock shows both open applications and applications that aren't open. The difference? Um... well, they have a tiny little triangle under them that shows you they are open. Oh, and there is also the trash can. And sometimes control panel icons. And maybe some other stuff.

    It's really a dumping ground that was created to improve that absolutely abysmal application management that OS 9 had... but since they couldn't copy the Task Bar, they made a crappier version that was pretty.

    Furthermore, to credit Next or Apple with inspiring the Task Bar / Start Menu is so completely retarded I don't know where to start.
    • wedges, on 10/11/2007, -9/+18i used to be a windows user. i was a system builder and a gamer. while i miss the gaming aspects, i find windows to be cumbersome and almost completely unusable compared to my MacBook Pro and the Mac Pro tower I use at work.

      and the taskbar is infinitely less productive than OSX's dock combined with fast switching and expose.
      • willynilly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Typical regurgitated ***** with no support at all. There are so many examples of how the Mac UI is cumbersome and ignorant compared to Windows's. For example, you can't resize windows from their edges. You want to talk cumbersome? That's the definition.

        How about the lack of an "up one directory level" button in the Finder? How about the fact that when you try to create a subdirectory in the Finder, it instead creates the directory at the root level of the drive (sometimes off the screen) instead of under the directory you selected? That's just genius.

        How about being badgered, badgered, BADGERED every time you try to change a filename's extension? How about the fact that you say "show all filename extensions", and yet some are still inexplicably "hidden" for you?

        Then there's the fact that when you select something on your desktop and press the Delete key, NOTHING HAPPENS (thankfully that's finally fixed in Leopard). "Fast switching"? You must be kidding. If you minimize an app to use another one, and then Command-Tab back to it later, Mac OS doesn't restore its window. It stays minimized an unusable in the Dock. Not to mention that if the cursor is under the band of apps that's displayed when you Command-Tab and you nudge your mouse, you inexplicably changes your app selection. STUPID.

        Once again, Apple just doesn't "get" simple conventions that have worked flawlessly for many years.

        So don't reveal your ignorance by just parroting the same ***** that superficial hacks and bloggers trowel out year after stinking year. IT JUST DOESN'T HOLD WATER.
    • InCider, on 10/11/2007, -11/+18The article did not state or even suggest that the Windows TaskBar came from NeXT or Apple. It said Windows (95) copied from both, but did NOT use the Dock, using a very different TaskBar instead. Your opinion is fine, but don't lie about the article in an effort to discredit it.

      In reality, the Windows TaskBar was taken from IBM's OS/2, which delivered a superior TaskBar in ~1992 that's still better than Vista's.

      Lots of Windows users such as yourself are trained to use the Start button and the TaskBar, and overlook its problems. You'll find the Dock confusing and frustrating because there's nothing to read, few menus to click through, and fewer absurd contradictions. We have no hope left for you. We can only work on training the next generation to get rid of their Microsoft brainwashing and adopt a computing environment that makes sense. Windows Mobile has fallen in the face of the iPhone, Windows Media to the iPod, and Windows Vista is going to be relegated to gaming PCs and web browser users, both of which can just as well be served by Linux and some WINE glue. In ten years there will be no Windows PCs.
    • skidooer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5If you want to use a program you click on it's dock icon and the application will be brought to the foreground. With perhaps a few exceptions, who cares if it's already running? It's not a detail you need to know.
      • willynilly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Who cares if seven apps that you "closed" several hours ago are still running and consuming system resources?
        "Most people don't know what a rootkit is, so why should they care?" - Sony Music CEO
        • Kelmon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1But that's the beauty - good memory management means that they don't consume much system resources until they are activated. Honestly, it's amazing how many applications you can leave running (as long as they are inactive) without having much impact on performance. Mind you, this also may be due to the abundance of system resources to begin with. Loads of memory and a fast processor means that I no longer care.
    • ucg1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7The point of the dock is that you always click in the same place to get to your commonly used applications, whether you're starting them or switching to them. This saves time compared to the Windows taskbar, as you spend less time hunting for the app (to either start it or find its button in the task bar).
      • devindotcom, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3It's really not that hard to find an icon. My quick launch bar has like 4 apps in it that I use enough to warrant their placement there, and one expandable menu-folder that contains links to other stuff. It's unbelievably useful.
        • ucg1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You missed the point. Yes, I use Windows too and know about the quick launch. But the Dock way is simply faster and more efficient. When I use Windows, I typically have tons of apps open (I'm a developer), and yeah, it's not that hard to find the app that is running, but the fact is the apps appear in the order that I open them, which is different on any given day. With the Dock, I'd always be going to the same place for these apps, whether they are open or not. In Windows, I'd have to first make sure an app isn't open, use quicklaunch or the start menu item (which is top-level) which has all my frequently used apps and open it, or click on it in the taskbar if it isn't. Yes, it's not hard, I didn't say it was, but its not more efficient.

          You can check out Rocketdock (http://rocketdock.com/) for Windows which can be configured to work like OS X's dock, just to get a feel for how it makes you more efficient. Unfortunately, Rocketdock doesn't play nicely when you maximize a window.
    • tucsonwc, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5The Finder was released BEFORE WIndows. Deal with it.
      • willynilly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1One look at its abysmal design tells you that.
        Deal with it.
      • willynilly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1One look at its abysmal design tells you that.
        Deal with it.
    • geoffp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Actually, I think the article made really good points about the efficient use of space, and how the Dock really can (and often does) combine the functions of Windows' quick launch bar, task bar, and system tray.

      It's not without its share of problems. As you say, organizationally, it's sometimes questionable, although there are never "control panel icons" in there, just sometimes an icon for System Preferences, which is an application like all the rest on the large left side of the Dock. The Trash fits in nicely with other folder aliases on the right side, since the Trash is itself just a folder. I do object to minimized windows being stuck right next to those, though. Doesn't fit.

      By and large, I tend to prefer the Windows taskbar until I have more than 4 or 5 windows open, which is always...so I guess I prefer the Dock.
    • ckSubs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1The Dock isn't used to track open windows, like the Taskbar. Expose is used for that, and does a MUCH better job of it. The Dock is used to launch applications, as well as raise their windows and menubar (the key point here, windows doesn't do it like this) into focus. And you really shouldn't use grouped taskbar icons, now THAT is horrible usability.
      • jaypeg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1With the Dock you can also keep track of your open windows within each app by right clicking (control+click) or by clicking and holding on the app's dock icon. This brings up the contextual menu for that app which includes a listing of all open docs for that app along with common commands like hide, quit, show in finder and even Force Quit if the app is unresponsive.

        The is always confusing to Windows users because it doesn't spell out the names of everything. It presents a visual short hand that shows you what you've got going on. You can control what apps are on there and keep everything you are going to need handy. Also, you'll find many experienced Mac users never minimize anything, but just allow things to stack up. Knowing the Dock allows you to essentially 'shuffle' between apps and windows very quickly. Fantastic for multitasking!
  • constantC, on 10/11/2007, -12/+4I find the Dock annoying. I wonder why there's never any chatter about improvements to Mail.app or Address Book? Anyone? Steve-o? Throw me a bone, guy.
    • Kelmon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1AppleInsider seems to be running a sequence of articles tracking the various component application's evolution to the one in Leopard. I don't recall hearing that Address Book will get much of an update but given the updates to Mail I would be very surprised if there wasn't an article coming for that soon.
  • Goldspink, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22Dugg for the poetic description of icons in the Dock: "objects stuck in a translucent ribbon of icon flypaper"
  • joe90210, on 10/11/2007, -21/+10The dock is still one of the worst UI features ever
    • Kyderdog, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5your Keyboard to chair interface might be your real problem
    • Kelmon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Why? Surely it is one of the easiest way for a new user to identify which applications are installed on their computer and to launch one of them? The Windows Start button was an improvement over Windows 3.1 but you still have to open the menu and get into the Programs menu to find stuff. The Dock is definitely much more intuitive but I'll confess that it is strange if you are used to Windows' way of doing things.
  • wedges, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8i'm looking forward to stacks, but i really wish they gave me the option of the dock appearance from Tiger. oh well.
  • supermansuper, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6Apparently no one at Apple uses the Dock on the side:
    http://rogueamoeba.com/utm/posts/Thoughts/sidedock ...
  • kiantech, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15how about who cares and release the damn OS now
    • Elranzer, on 10/11/2007, -6/+6They're not done copying every Vista feature yet.
      • blocguy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Aye, apparently they can't get drivers to not work yet.
  • mpancha, on 10/11/2007, -4/+32aside from the pointless windows bashing, interesting read. Would have been a good informative piece had the Windows bashing bit been left out entirely.
    • heyitsgarrett, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19"As an aside, allow me to tell you why Windows sucks and hasn't improved where Apple has.."

      My personal computer is a Mac, at work I use a PC. I prefer Macs, but I don't see anything wrong with the Windows task bar. Apple fanboyism gets old fast.
      • MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I would agree with that. I use Windows at work and have no problems with the Taskbar. Having all open documents available at a click is great when you might have 3-6 open from the same program at the same time. With OS X, I find myself using Expose to do the same thing, but it's not as elegant.
        • darkcooger, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Same situation - Mac at home, Windows at work. I prefer getting at my open windows with Expose because I can identify them by looking at them rather than trying to read the title of the window in the taskbar. I don't have a problem with the taskbar, though (but I do use ObjectDock and hide the taskbar completely now).
      • jaypeg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2With the Dock, right-click or click and hold on the app icon and you'll get a pop up menu that has all open windows for that app. A check mark next to those that have been saved. Much faster than Expose.
  • DeeprBlue, on 10/13/2007, -9/+40The author wrote the article in such a way that every single sentence was packed full of potshots at the "competition" and self-gloating. I found it disgusting and I would really like to think that AppleInsider was better than that, but this has me questioning. Being the kind of fanboy that don't think their ***** stinks is really demeaning and insulting to those around them.
    • devindotcom, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4I agree completely. Instead of "here is an interesting and objective history of the dock/taskbar" it's "look how awesome apple always has been, look how bad everyone else is when we compare the best parts of apples to the worst parts of oranges."
    • wiihuck, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3they're not better than that.
    • nunofgs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Absolutely agreed. He also gave some bad information. He claimed you could grab any number of items, drop them in the Dock and they become a Stack.

      Not true as of build 9A559 this is no longer possible (even though Steve demonstrated it on the Keynote). You can only drop a single folder into the Dock which SUCKS. I was hoping to just select my entire desktop icons (where I keep stuff I'm working on), dropping them to a stack and start a new project.

      Also, he even gave bad info with a picture contradicting him. He says the Finder now has new right-click menu options in the Dock. In the picture you can only create a "Smart Folder", but not a regular Folder like he claimed.

      I felt insulted by this article for simply having different preferences that the writer. (such as the vertical dock)
  • danasghar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I guess to each his own, but I for one love the dock. I can readily put the applications that I use on a regular basis so they are at my fingertips and moments notice andunlike Windows I dont have to go back to the desktop or go routing through the start menu. I can be in the middle of using an application, move my mouse to the bottom of the screen...my dock appears and i go from there. Move my pointer away and the dock disappears. For me its fantastic. It can be moved and resized as well. Its beautiful and im really looking forward to stacks.
    • natenovs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4but quick launch is the same thing. only it takes up less space. to each his own, of course, and you can like what ever you like, but seriously, there's no difference between the dock and quick launch.
      • darkcooger, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Well, there is a difference, but it's not such a big one. If I open an application from the quick launch bar, the icon in the quick launch bar stays, plus I get a whole new icon on the task bar. If I open an application from the dock, the icon on the dock gets a little triangle and otherwise stays the same (well, it bounces a bit, but that's just aesthetics). The difference is that the dock both launches the application and gives me a way to get to the running application whereas the quick launch bar ONLY launches applications.

        I wouldn't say that either is better than the other. It's too subjective. I like the dock, but I also never had a complaint with the quick launch or task bars.
      • Kelmon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Quick Launch has the disadvantage that it needlessly takes up real-estate. It has no purpose beyond launching applications but yet continues to take up space even when you aren't launching programs. The Dock's functions, however, are many and therefore it is much more useful. At it's most basic level it is an application launcher but when the application is launched it also serves as the "Task Bar". Further, you can interact with applications via right-clicking on their Dock icon to access functions, be alerted to background activity, drag and drop files and folders onto applications (running or not), etc.
  • inspireology, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14As someone who uses both Macs and PCs, this is what I hate about Mac users (and some PC users occasionally). I cant stand the lack of an open mind or the constant implication that the Mac way is THE correct way and Windows (you may as well include linux users since they use task bars mostly) users are a bunch of uncultured morons living in some form of OS squalor. It is simply not true.

    This article was a frustrating read. Speaking about windows was unnecessary and the criticisms were in themselves inaccurate.
    • Jambi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8As a long time Mac user, I agree. And in addition, this whole "if it comes from Cupertino, it must be good" attitude bugs me. The majority of people I've discussed Leopard with seem to think it's good because it's new, and criticize anyone who disagrees as being "afraid of change". Nonsense. Look at a new feature, and ask yourself "does it add anything to the user experience"? Some of the Leopard changes, such as greater Finder speed and stability, Quicklook, taking parts of web pages to use as Dashboard widgets and improved UIs on several apps (such as the DVD player) all offer greater usability to the end-user. But what's the point of the Dock changes, or the new Stacks tool, or semi-transparent menu bar? What advantage do these offer? Get off the "Apple rocks, Microsoft sucks" bandwagon and judge features by their actual merits (or lack thereof) guys.
      • JackHarkness, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1I'm guesing that you haven't used stacks yet.(or you only use your mac as a media player). stacks is alot easier than diging around in finder to find often used work folders/files. And the blue dot is realy useful for new users who can get confused that apps are still on even though you've closed their window.
        • Jambi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I'm using Leopard right now, and use it for a variety of tasks. Menu browsing is much easier for me than using Stacks, which don't let you click down through sub-folders (popping them up in the Finder instead). Perhaps you weren't aware that it's already possible to drag those often used folders to the dock in Tiger, and then they pop up a menu if you click and hold the cursor over them for a minute. And what makes the blue dot better than the old triangles? I've certainly found it hard to spot through those damn reflections on the dock.
      • Jambi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Seeing as I forgot to add this to my prior comment, here's an example of the functionality that's been replaced by Stacks: http://www.itchyhands.com/images/8.jpg
  • mynameisjesse, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4If you use the dock as Apple wants you to in Tiger, I really dont like it one bit.

    I took out all the icons(except for the Finder) and put a folder next to my trash with my most used apps. This way, my dock only really shows my running apps. Throw a custom icon on that folder next to the trash, and you're all set. Why keep apps in your dock that aren't running when you have spotlight?

    I also make the dock as small as possible and throw it in the bottom right corner. Centering the dock is another gripe of mine...I like having the trash in the same spot every time. Centered dock = stupid.
    • inspireology, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Not a bad idea. I have to give that a try.
    • freudianslipper, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I also took out all of my icons. I use quicksilver to launch all of my apps really quickly (use comma to store an app then type in your next, hit comma again, rinse repeat until you've typed all the apps you want to open, hit enter and all apps open at once).
  • pwrstick, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7Leopard dock resembles Sun's dock:
    http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/12/leopard-dock-re ...
  • sethosayher, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Though I love my Mac the Dock has constantly annoyed the hell out of me. I really hope it becomes more wieldy in Leopard.
  • windmillninja, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Good thing I'm already used to keeping it on the bottom. That just doesn't seem like it would look right riding the left hand side.
  • neodorian, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2It looks like what I used to do with AWN but I ditched it because it was all eye candy and didn't really add any functionality.

    http://lifehacker.com/software/screenshot-tour/ava ...
  • davesawyer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Two things:
    1) Placing the dock on the right side makes more sense to me for my Macbook. This way, I scroll less. I already have plenty of horizontal screen space with the widescreen. With the dock at the bottom, I lose vertical screen space.
    2) Nevertheless, this dock business makes no difference to me. I use Quicksilver exclusively to launch programs. It's much more intuitive and efficient IMO. As I increase my reliance on Quicksilver, the dock becomes less relevant. Now I just let it auto-hide and stay out of the way completely.
    That said, I suppose I could appreciate the dock more if I had an iMac or a larger monitor.
    • fr34k5h0w, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My dock has Finder and Quicksilver in the rare event that QS randomly quits (~once a week?). Otherwise the dock is tucked away and only pops into view if I need to pull up something I minimized.
    • Eallan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Whats your hotkey for Quicksilver? I couldn't find one that wasn't a shortcut that I already used.
      • fr34k5h0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ctrl + Space here. Similar to Spotlight (Apple [or command] + Space)
  • pyrates, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Well I've never liked the dock in os x. I prefer the way windows does it. I see all the apps I have open and when an app is open, it has a window associated with it. If I need to copy something from one window to another, I drag the item down to the task bar, wait for it to open up the window I want it to copy to, and let go and it copies. Alt-tab works with it, I find it much easier to switch apps/windows anyways with the way it groups it together too. I also like how I can access the start menu using the mouse scroll wheel. It was so annoying when it would suddenly close on you because you moved the mouse off of it.
  • wiihuck, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7AWN 0.2 > Dock 1.6
    • neodorian, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Be prepared to be buried. I mentioned AWN and it didn't go over so well. Kinda silly in a thread discussing the merits and detriments of different docks and taskbars.
    • antitab, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Surely you jest. AWN will never be able to match the level of integration present in the Dock. This is kind of a given on Linux, where each part is independently developed, vs. OS X, where the entire OS is built together as one coherent whole. You lose choice, but you gain integration and consistency. And when the developers making the choices for you have a good sense of design and HCI, that's not such a bad thing.
      • neodorian, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I meant it strictly from a standpoint of how it looks and functions. I agree with you about the trade of consistency for customization and freedom though. Sometimes one is more important to a user than the other. That's why I like choices in the OS market.
  • ckSubs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Anyone have any idea what the new "shelf" dock looks like when it's put on the left or the right? I hope it's more like the current flat one. I kind of view those who have a bottom dock as a Mac amateur... it uses up way too much of your screen real estate that way, especially on small notebook screens.
  • ariez84, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Great read, certainly not biased at all, especially to windows.
  • nunofgs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5One complaint I have with the Stacks feature is that clicking a Folder while viewing a Stack opens the folder in the Finder. This is certainly not what I expect.

    Here's an example. You can drop your entire home folder onto the Dock and it becomes a Stack. When you click on it, you'll see folders like: "Desktop", "Documents", "Library", "Movies", etc.
    If you decide to click on one of them, in my opinion, it should readjust the size of the Stack "translucent window" and display the items inside the folder.

    Not so. It just opens the folder in the Finder, making Folders inside Stacks completely useless for me.
    • wiihuck, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1"If you decide to click on one of them, in my opinion, it should readjust the size of the Stack "translucent window" and display the items inside the folder."

      kinda like stacks do in AWN?
  • AZooYorkMystery, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Leopard is going to let me delete 4 separate applications that let me do what tiger can't. That's reason enough to buy leopard.
  • digid, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3the new dock looks retarded on the left side of the screen. I'm a fan of the dock on the left to maximize my workspace. Why squeeze all the apps into smaller vertical space when monitors have so much more horizontal resolution?
  • spacebetween, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I was coming into this with an open mind... and then I read the article.

    After seeing the way the author bashes other OSs, I can't help but reply with, "Well, I can do that with AWN on Linux."
  • MCCULLAH, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1i hate mac, but thats a sweet dock. I didnt read the words just looked at the pwetty pictuws!
  • altf13, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Well, I was genuinely interested until the Windows bashing. I really hope the Mac community (at least the vocal part) learns to grow up sometime soon.
  • antitab, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Fortunately, I don't have time to get upset about which way a shadow falls, so I can't complain about nausea and vertigo as some have."

    Best line in the article.
  • InCider, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Why do Windows users start crying when anyone articulately complains about anything in Windows or about Microsoft? They applaud people like Paul Thurrott and call them "fair and balanced and unbiased," despite Paul's constant denigrating of the Mac and Apple. Are some opinions just not tolerated? You can't be smart and have reasons for what you think, you can only "feel things in your gut" and be afraid? Sounds a lot like what's wrong with America. Sometimes I think that MS fans are a mirror image of the right wing fanatics.
  • yabos, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The stacks are horrible if you have many applications. It only holds 40 items in the grid and if there's more you can't use it without opening a Finder window for items not displayed.

    In Tiger you would get a scrolling menu with all the applications listed. This was much more desirable than the current stacks. Luckily, Spotlight is extremely fast so I use that as an application launcher now.
  • sudowrestler, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0The comments bring out once again the fact that everyone develops their own method of using a computer, and takes advantage of whatever features the OS presents that seem to suit their own inclinations and priorities, whether it be on Mac, Windows, or Linux. It always strikes me how individual our relationships with our computers are, and that what makes sense to one person seems totally whacked to someone else. I agree with the comments that there was no need for ragging on Windows in this context. It detracted from an otherwise informative article.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.