Recommended Posts

Let me introduce you to the OS X fullscreen option. Introduced a year and a half ago and heavily critized by Windows users claiming that desktop guis should not be like tablet guis.

post-4652-0-11830900-1355182142.png

Wait what!?

I don't remember seeing that button on my macbook, and I've always used the green button... Am I missing something :s?

Let me introduce you to the OS X fullscreen option. Introduced a year and a half ago and heavily critized by Windows users claiming that desktop guis should not be like tablet guis.

post-4652-0-11830900-1355182142.png

In the interest of fairness:

1) Yup. Mac OS has offered full screen mode for a little while now. Complaining that it doesn't exist is a little behind the times, but...

2) Mac OS's full screen mode has some shortcomings. In what seems like nothing more than a raging desire to be as unlike every other OS as possible, OS X full screen mode is roughly the same as running a game full screen (all elements of the desktop completely disappear). For people who just want to quickly and easily set an application to take up the maximum available space while allowing access to common OS visual elements, Mac OS didn't exactly deliver, and it really is on par with "tablet mode" as a result.

Also, I *believe* the Mac OS full screen mode must have support coded into each and every application. That is, no applications predating the feature would allow it. It's an application "mode", not simply a view. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Aside: I do realize that it's very difficult to make a maximize equivalent in Mac OS. A window can't really "maximize" in any meaningful way, leaving all common OS visual elements available, due to Mac OS using both a universal menu bar and the massive-by-default dock. Unifying the two to increase available desktop area would likely never happen for branding reasons, and possibly also because of the no-copy agreement between Apple and Microsoft (a unified menu/appbar is Windows turf, after all).

Mac OS's full screen mode has some shortcomings. In what seems like nothing more than a raging desire to be as unlike every other OS as possible, OS X full screen mode is roughly the same as running a game full screen (all elements of the desktop completely disappear). For people who just want to quickly and easily set an application to take up the maximum available space while allowing access to common OS visual elements, Mac OS didn't exactly deliver, and it really is on par with "tablet mode" as a result.

Not quite right. You can access OS X components in fullscreen just like you would on Windows 8: Either by mouse proximity to certain hotspots or by shortcuts.

Also, you are right that the feature must be coded into apps. Just like Metro.

Except they do and it's not like 27-inch is the boundary where full-screen becomes useless.

Excluding techies, no they don't. I myself, won't buy anything great than 22 inch screens. They're too expensive, and too large.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=17&qpct=2&qpcd=13&qptimeframe=Y

Excluding techies, no they don't. I myself, won't buy anything great than 22 inch screens. They're too expensive, and too large.

Most people with the means will buy screens in excess of 23-inch. It's really that simple and something I see happening all the time. If your situation is different either by choice and/or financial restrictions that's fine too of course.

Most people with the means will buy screens in excess of 23-inch. It's really that simple and something I see happening all the time. If your situation is different that's fine too.

Marketshare indicators don't support your claims, though. In fact, most places don't even display monitors any bigger than 22 inches, and in all my years of supporting people, I have never seen anything bigger from the people/places I've supported. So, who exactly are snatching up these behemoths like you claim?

Marketshare indicators don't support your claims, though. In fact, most places don't even display monitors any bigger than 22 inches, and in all my years of supporting people, I have never seen anything bigger from the people/places I've supported. So, who exactly are snatching up these behemoths like you claim?

Obviously worldwide statistics will give you lower-res screens. Not to mention many people use laptops. I've been working for small IT support company in Amsterdam for four years now and I see 22/23-inch screens and up all the time in people's homes and at companies. The 21,5-inch iMac being the exception to the rule. Most really don't even bother with anything smaller. The last place I ran my internship, a large television network, all computers (both PC and Mac) were equipped with 21,5/22 to 30-inch screens. At college all computers, again both PC and Mac, are either 21,5-inch, 23-inch, 24-inch, 27-inch or 30-inch.

You always seem to have enormous difficulties with accepting views/experiences different from your own.

Anyway, here's a link to a popular Dutch computer store called MyCom. Notice how they only sell only two screens smaller than 21,5-inch? Both aren't being displayed in the actual MyCom stores anymore. I can assure you the situation isn't much different at most other computer stores.

I seem to be able to multi-task and use Windows 8 just like I used 7. All I need to do once I boot my computer is click the Desktop tile.

All I need to do once I boot my computer is nothing, as I'm already at the Desktop. (and without any third-party app helping me along) :)

Marketshare indicators don't support your claims, though. In fact, most places don't even display monitors any bigger than 22 inches, and in all my years of supporting people, I have never seen anything bigger from the people/places I've supported. So, who exactly are snatching up these behemoths like you claim?

What? Staples, Office Max and Office Depot - ALL have 23" monitors and above out on display. Heck, you can pick one up for under $150 on sale, that's what I paid for my 23".

I don't know where you shop, but if the big 3 office stores keep them in stock and on display, then you can bet every electronic big box store has them.

What? Staples, Office Max and Office Depot - ALL have 23" monitors and above out on display. Heck, you can pick one up for under $150 on sale, that's what I paid for my 23".

I don't know where you shop, but if the big 3 office stores keep them in stock and on display, then you can bet every electronic big box store has them.

23 inch monitors aren't the question here. The We're talking 27+. Dvorak wants to claim fullscreen "sucks" on 27+ inch monitors, but no consumer I know of owns a 27+ inch monitor. The most I see on sale, in store is 21, 22, and 23. The common one is 21.5 inches, and Windows 8 on those is nothing.

What? Staples, Office Max and Office Depot - ALL have 23" monitors and above out on display. Heck, you can pick one up for under $150 on sale, that's what I paid for my 23".

I don't know where you shop, but if the big 3 office stores keep them in stock and on display, then you can bet every electronic big box store has them.

Heck, $499 can get you a 2560x1440 27" display getting a 4+ star rating over at Amazon. Price isn't exactly a limiting factor here.

I usually spend 99.999% of the time in desktop mode.

Recently, thanks to the excellent "StartisBack", I have been spending 99.999999% of the time in desktop mode.

On tablets, I have no problem with them, but forced full-screen apps on the desktop represents a huge, misguided, pointless step backwards.

Heck, $499 can get you a 2560x1440 27" display getting a 4+ star rating over at Amazon. Price isn't exactly a limiting factor here.

Right, I was just pointing out you can go to ANY office supply store and pick up a 23" to 25" HD monitor, and that they are on display and in stock. I mentioned mine because it was/is a cheap monitor that cost less @ 23" than several of 19" top of the line models. People always think bigger is better and if they are cheaper than their smaller counter parts you are going to move lots of big monitors.

I usually spend 99.999% of the time in desktop mode.

Recently, thanks to the excellent "StartisBack", I have been spending 99.999999% of the time in desktop mode.

On tablets, I have no problem with them, but forced full-screen apps on the desktop represents a huge, misguided, pointless step backwards.

Same here, I have both Start8 ans Startisback demos/trials going right now on different machines testing which I want to spring for. I guess the idea that desktop users wouldn't want a tablet UI flew right over the heads of Microsoft. Not even and option to keep the os in "desktop" mode. The biggest surprise for me was that they removed the ability to change your system fonts without hacking into the registry, it just stunned me.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • 1. Define "better". 2. It's still more expensive than equivalent PCs so... And there is not one Windows platform. This is the mistake ALL Apple oriented people make. Apple is one OEM. You could reasonably compare them to one PC OEM, say Dell or HP. But you can't compare them to ALL PC OEMs. Case in point, Apple has NO touch screen MacBooks. No tablet Macs. There are no rugged Macs. The variety of PC OEM design is insane. With Apple, you have... Apple. The problem is that you're starting with Apple as the definition of "good" then filtering out anything that isn't close to an existing Apple product, then trying to homogenise all of those left into a fictional product line and then ignore any innovations to create a minimal feature subset so you can say "See! Apple better!" PS: I was an Apple dev for 17 years and helped develop MacInTalk and disability solutions for Apple, and worked on Microsoft Office for MacOS - and I have several Macs and MacBooks - so tread very carefully.
    • Major Xbox layoffs may claim South of Midnight developer Compulsion entirely by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Microsoft has been making major changes in its gaming wing Xbox for a few months now, including the appointment of a new CEO, a large number of leadership changes, and strategy shifts. However, the company is seemingly also looking at initiating a major layoffs wave at Xbox and perhaps even a studio closure. The new report lands from Kotaku, Xbox first-party developer Compulsion Games is being shuttered soon by Microsoft. For those unfamiliar with the studio, it's the team behind Contrast (2013), We Happy Few (2018), and South of Midnight (2025). Its latest game was quite well received, even winning a Peabody Award for its writing. It even received a 9/10 in Neowin's own review, highlighting its engaging storyline, gorgeous world, and curious characters. The studio joined Xbox Game Studios in 2018, just as Microsoft announced it is acquiring Playground Games, Undead Labs, and Ninja Theory. Despite recent listings for new staff roles, according to the new report, Compulsion Games is being closed entirely, with over 90 staff being let go. Kotaku also added that the studio's leadership is in negotiations with Microsoft about this decision, but no official details have been revealed yet. The report lands just as two senior managers of Xbox leave their posts at Microsoft Gaming. Head of Xbox Game Studios Craig Duncan and chief of staff Louise O'Connor originally began their journey in Rare and have been a part of Xbox for over two decades. Dunkan has been responsible for games like Kinect Sports and Sea of Thieves, while O'Connor was primarily working on Rare's Everwild project before its cancelation. If this report about the studio shutdown is accurate, this may just be the start of a major new layoffs wave at Xbox Game Studios. There are also rumors of Arkane Studios being heavily affected. As always, take all these reports with a grain of salt until something official materializes from Microsoft or the studios.
    • The flaw with this analysis is that this laptop has a cellphone CPU in it. In the Intel world, that would be an N150 and those are everywhere, even in low end laptops. You can get an N150 based NUC with 16GB RAM and 256GB-512GB SSD... NOT soldered in... for < $500 Canadian (around US$360). The problem is two fold: tech bloggers/writers on most tech site (like this one, ironically) overvalue Apple and apparently aren't in the same earnings class as most regular people. As a result, we get breathless articles about how everyone needs a folding phone when most people just cannot afford one... or really need one. And we get Apple used as the baseline metric regardless of whether that comparison makes any sense. If Dell or HP released a retail laptop with a cellphone motherboard, you'd be all over them for doing that - but Apple does it and it's genius. I see articles suggesting what Samsung - a company that basically started the foldable phone market and has built them for eight years - needs to do to compete with Apple's unreleased, unspecced and unseen folding phone. Sorry, no - if the Neo (really creative name there BTW - still, better than the Go, the other "creative" product name everyone's using) encourages PC makers to make cellphone laptops using lower end ARM processors, we all lose. It's a step backwards and a capitulation to the fact that semiconductor makers and computer OEMs (and tech bloggers) have totally lost the plot.
    • Everyone should install this extension and ignore games that use AI. https://chromewebstore.google....nnigaaeelfkeomjcngmnh?pli=1 https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ai-warning-for-steam/
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      ThatGuyOnline earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Jeroen Wilms earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      505
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      127
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      82
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      74
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!