OS X.5: A review from a former Wintel User


Recommended Posts

First I don't WANT my OS to organize my stuff for me, to provide me with a "user" folder and an "application" folder and whatnot. I want to know where that folder is located and usually it is not where I want it to, or down a complicated path. I create my own Program Files, on the hard drive partition I reserved for applications. I create my own user folders, on the hard drive partition I reserved for files. My own way of organizing my files is better for me than the default OS way.

Ok Windows does the same thing, but that's precisly one the gripes I have with Windows too.

As you said, Windows does it aswell, pointless rant against OSX there

Next, I hate that bulky dock at the bottom of the screen. I don't want things that inflate when I mouse over them, I don't want them jumping around gaily when I click on them. Besides aesthetical reasons, the damn thing just takes too much space.

Well, you can stop it bounching, turn it off, hide it, shrink it, how is this different from the task bar?

Next, why is it so hard to maximize a window? Double-clicking doesn't work. None of the three standard buttons do it. So since I'm not aware of yet another mac-[insert key here] shortcut here, I have to manually expand the window.

As has being explained many times before, this works different, it expands to the maximum it needs to, why expand to full screen when its just a waste?

Then they minimize at the bottom-right of the screen, yes, with a graphical representation of the contents, but so tiny its useless and much less informative than the sensible, sobre title used in Windows. Well you can make them huge if you like your dock to be huge but I'd rather make it as small as possible and make my screen estate actually useful.

How is that exactly worse the taskbar minimizes?

Next, Safari font rendering looks horrible, and Apple keyboards, mice and lcd screens are simply among the cheapest I ever saw.

Oh yeah OS X is better for multimedia. Right. I had Digital Performer hang or crash at least once everyday on the G4 I used for a year.[/rant]

waste of time

I have a question. Considering apple says vista doesnt have the feature how is time machine different then the full system backup and previous file system in vista ultimate? Its hard to even think about getting a mac because apple is consistantly lying about what vista has.

I am really asking this I am not trying to start a flamer war.

Its hard to even think about getting a mac because apple is consistantly lying about what vista has.

I don't really understand how that stops you getting a consumer device?

I don't even listen to adverts press releases what not, why would I be that anal, the only time I actually go out of my way is when they have a mac world going on and thats to see what new products there is.

If over the top advertising stops you getting a Mac, why are you on Vista rather then Linux cause surly illegal business practices is surly worse the OTT advertising?

I have a question. Considering apple says vista doesnt have the feature how is time machine different then the full system backup and previous file system in vista ultimate?

The one-click "always on" setup and the UI (specifically the bit that allows restoration from within applications) is the part that matters so far as the time machine vs. volume shadow copy/etc debate goes.

Its hard to even think about getting a mac because apple is consistantly lying about what vista has.

If you're interested in product <x>, who cares what people say product <y> is lacking?

Don't worry, you won't want to use windows after using a unix like OS anyway.

I said about the apple advertising stuff because I wont just switch because everybody says its just better. I would switch because OSX has features that vista doesn't and Apple outright lies about that all the time and if you try to ask real non flaming questions to apple users or windows users you get flames and fanboys. MY example is evo spooks answer. I am not a fanboy of either OS but latyely on any website is downright impossible to get fair straight answers about either operating system.

The answers are simple, if simple straight forward questions are asked, rather then confused statements. How can you give a answer to a opinion I;m not get a device cause the company or users go OTT, as this stands for Windows, Apple and every other manufacturer.

eg: Play games - stick with Windows

eg: do .net programming - stick with windows

eg: don't like to fight your computer - OSX

To this you have to add personal preference, which is down to the individual

I said about the apple advertising stuff because I wont just switch because everybody says its just better. I would switch because OSX has features that vista doesn't and Apple outright lies about that all the time and if you try to ask real non flaming questions to apple users or windows users you get flames and fanboys. MY example is evo spooks answer. I am not a fanboy of either OS but latyely on any website is downright impossible to get fair straight answers about either operating system.

I don't use use either but I can tell you OSX is a better OS than Windows.

Whether it has the "features" you want is a different matter. I prefer to have my PC exactly the way I want it, and I would probably even choose Windows over OSX for that reason if I absolutely had to (it must be possible to hack OSX, though.. so maybe I wouldn't). OSX thinks it knows the best way to do everything and forces you to do it that way. A lot of people like that, though.

if I absolutely had to (it must be possible to hack OSX, though.. so maybe I wouldn't). OSX thinks it knows the best way to do everything and forces you to do it that way. A lot of people like that, though.

OSX is very hackable, just as with its Unix background though a lot of the hacks will have to be from the Terminal.

Could you explain on who OSX forces you to do something a particular way, but windows (without extensions) doesn't?

eg: don't like to fight your computer - OSX

For some reason, I end up fighting more with OS/X than I do with Vista. And I seem to be the only one that suffers from this...

might be length of usage, I've being using Macs a lot longer then I have Windows machines

so now you are saying that it's experience that counts and that os/x isn't inherently easier to use? Or did I misread that?

so now you are saying that it's experience that counts and that os/x isn't inherently easier to use? Or did I misread that?

In the post above I said: To this you have to add personal preference, which is down to the individual

Which will I think fit in with what you said above, personal preference and usage will always have a bearing on someones experience.

I find OSX a lot easier then Windows, is that because it is easier, because I just find it easier, or is it just due to experience, who knows I just do, cause if I say IT IS EASIER BECAUSE IT IS A EASIER SYSTEM, many Windows users will disagree, they find Windows easier, is that just due to usage?

Its a question with really no right or wrong, except for ME, OSX is easier, smoother logical on how it is set

What's giving you trouble? Make a thread in Mac Software so we can help you out.

It's not anything I can't get over - nothing is where I would expect it to be, and I am not looking in the 'illogical Windows places', but I still don't find my experience as fluid (having been an OS/X user since 10.1 on a PowerMac and a Windows user since 95 - I didn't like Windows until Win2K). Like evo_spook said, I guess more a personal preference thing.

In the post above I said: To this you have to add personal preference, which is down to the individual

Which will I think fit in with what you said above, personal preference and usage will always have a bearing on someones experience.

I find OSX a lot easier then Windows, is that because it is easier, because I just find it easier, or is it just due to experience, who knows I just do, cause if I say IT IS EASIER BECAUSE IT IS A EASIER SYSTEM, many Windows users will disagree, they find Windows easier, is that just due to usage?

Its a question with really no right or wrong, except for ME, OSX is easier, smoother logical on how it is set

Enough of the caps already (no need to get your knickers in a twist) - I did ask if I had misread your statement!

As you said, Windows does it aswell, pointless rant against OSX there
I mentioned it because the OP was talking about it being an advantage in OSX.
Well, you can stop it bounching, turn it off, hide it, shrink it, how is this different from the task bar?
You already have a task bar in OSX. It's at the top of the screen. But in OSX, not only do you get a taskbar, but also that stupid bulky dock.
As has being explained many times before, this works different, it expands to the maximum it needs to, why expand to full screen when its just a waste?
Because the maximum it needs (or think it needs) is not necessarly the maximum I want it to be. So I'd like the option to simply maximize it. I don't have it. It sucks.
How is that exactly worse the taskbar minimizes?
As I said, because the taskbar minimize uses about 70% of its area for this whereas the OSX dock is cramped in right corner; and because the Windows taskbar uses titles which are much more informative than tiny graphics.
waste of time
Why am I even arguing with you I wonder :rolleyes:
Because the maximum it needs (or think it needs) is not necessarly the maximum I want it to be. So I'd like the option to simply maximize it. I don't have it. It sucks.

There's no maximise button because Mac OS X is all about multi-tasking. When you maximise a window, you eliminate that; and it goes against core features of multi-window layering and drag-and-drop. The Zoom button (expect in iTunes) aims to "maximise" the window to show maximum content without hogging the entire screen (e.g. Safari would only expand vertically, as horizontally is just webpage background.)

And if you don't like that, go ahead and set your own size. You can then toggle between your size and (?) the default.

As I said, because the taskbar minimize uses about 70% of its area for this whereas the OSX dock is cramped in right corner; and because the Windows taskbar uses titles which are much more informative than tiny graphics.

You're comparing two different ideals. The taskbar manages windows; the dock (the majority of it) manages applications. Expose manages windows.

I've been using Macs since OS 7 and started using windows when NT4 was current. I can understand both points of view as I use XP and OSX Leopard. First, as far as mice go, I've tried Apple's Mighty Mouse, Microsoft, and Logitech and found from my experience that my logitech mice work best. My logitech seemed more reliable retaining it's settings than the MS mouse and easier to adapt/use-regularly than when I tried the mighty mouse. As far as the OS's are concern, I found that OSX is great for multimedia/entertainment stuff. Very easy to manage all my photos, movies, music, etc. Dashboard is great, especially since they added the ability to make your own widgets. However, I feel that some of the apps still lack in features. Safari is very fast, but I can't live without my Firefox extensions. Also ran into a lot of website compatibility issues with sites like blogger and ebay for example. Mail.app just flat out didn't work correctly with gmail using POP, while Thunderbird works flawlessly with it. MS Office on my mac is horribly slow and clunky. One issue I also found a hindrance was working with long file names. For work, I have a lot of files with very long file names and because you can't modify the OS's fonts [to use small fonts or pixel fonts], managing large archives of long filenames is a nightmare. This is where I still prefer XP for things. Office is much faster, Firefox is faster, and managing large archives with long file names is a breeze [even on lesser hardware]. And XP is very flexible to modify it's GUI [fonts, visual style, taskbar placement, etc]. and of course, some windows only apps that I can't live without, like Foobar2k ^_^. I guess it's just a matter of personal preference. Both have pros and cons, I guess it's just a matter of personal preference. I could go on-and-on comparing pros and cons of both. I still use both every day and enjoy both of them for various reasons.

...

You already have a task bar in OSX. It's at the top of the screen. But in OSX, not only do you get a taskbar, but also that stupid bulky dock.

...

I've been using a mac daily for about 3 years, and I've never noticed this, can you point it out?

You already have a task bar in OSX. It's at the top of the screen. But in OSX, not only do you get a taskbar, but also that stupid bulky dock.

What? The menu bar is nothing like the taskbar in Windows.

There's no maximise button because Mac OS X is all about multi-tasking. When you maximise a window, you eliminate that; and it goes against core features of multi-window layering and drag-and-drop. The Zoom button (expect in iTunes) aims to "maximise" the window to show maximum content without hogging the entire screen (e.g. Safari would only expand vertically, as horizontally is just webpage background.)

And if you don't like that, go ahead and set your own size. You can then toggle between your size and (?) the default.

Well I'm not necessarily multitasking. When I work in Visual Studio there are times when I need other applications in my view, and there are times when I need maximum space for the code. You can have multiple panes open in VS. Then you are multitasking inside the app. Then you don't want to OS to interfere with large taskbar jumping at you or not let you easily maximize or reduce the window.

Maximizing a window with a single or double click is a convenience I've used since I started using PCs. I can't help but feel clumsy with an OS that doesn't give me that basic tool. Even Linux does.

You're comparing two different ideals. The taskbar manages windows; the dock (the majority of it) manages applications. Expose manages windows.
The Windows taskbar not only manages windows, but also applications (with the quick laucnh - much more subtle), most of the computer's basic functionality (with the start menu), applications running in the background (with the system tray), and you can even drag and drop your own folders there for quick access to your most useful stuff. For instance, I can create a folder called "Games", put all my game desktop shortcuts in there, and drop it in the bar. Then with a single click I have access to all my games.

The OS X dock takes a lot more space and does more to capture your attention (with animations, large icons), but does a whole lot less. Again, I find the Windows solution more practical and elegant.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Segra 1.6.2 by Razvan Serea Segra is a free, open-source OBS-powered game recorder offering fast gameplay capture, instant clips, AI highlights, deep game integration, and seamless uploads—perfect for gamers, streamers, and content creators. Lightweight, fast, zero bloat. Segra key features: Automatic Game Recording: Begin capturing gameplay the moment your game launches, with zero manual setup. Instant Clipping: Save important moments instantly using a customizable hotkey—perfect for highlights, montages, or quick shares. Segra AI Highlights: Let Segra automatically detect kills, assists, deaths, and key events to generate polished highlight reels without manual editing. Gameplay Uploads: Upload recordings and clips directly to Segra.tv for fast sharing and cloud access. Deep Game Integration: Enjoy advanced game-data tracking across hundreds of supported titles, enabling smart highlight generation and stat-informed clipping. High-Performance Capture: Record up to 4K at 144 FPS using OBS-powered technology with minimal performance impact, supporting NVENC, AMD VCE, and custom quality controls. Segra Editor: Edit recordings easily with timeline controls, segment management, and event-based navigation to build the perfect clip. Customization Options: Adjust hotkeys, output formats, storage paths, codecs, capture quality, and performance settings for a tailored recording experience. Segra 1.6.2 changelog: UI: Improved the transition from the loading skeleton to the real content card. Security: Added Segra.dll code signing and automatic VirusTotal upload. Settings: Fixed the settings header to highlight Account when scrolled to the top. Recording: Updated OBSKit.NET to 1.4.1. Download: Segra 1.6.2 | 74.5 MB (Open Source) View: Segra Homepage | Github | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Hey Google, these are the Gemini features I want in 2026 by Aditya Tiwari Google Gemini has been around for over three years. The AI chatbot started its journey back in 2023 (as Bard) when ChatGPT was already a talk of the town. However, it quickly attracted criticism after misrepresenting facts about the James Webb Space Telescope. The search giant spent a year fine-tuning Bard before rebranding the chatbot and its underlying generative AI model to Gemini, drawing inspiration from NASA's first human spaceflight program. Note that Bard was initially powered by LaMDA and PaLM 2; Google has since added several new features and integrations to Gemini. That said, there is scope for improvement and a gap for new features. I have been using Gemini for a while now and have realized that the chatbot lacks several features, making it harder for me to research across topics. These are mostly function-over-form updates that can improve the overall experience. Delete individual messages from a conversation Image via DepositPhotos.com One good thing about Gemini is that it can maintain context throughout the conversation. But things might get chaotic when you want to ask a related question, but don't want it to be part of your conversation in the long run. You can't ask that related question in a fresh chat because Gemini will lose the active conversation context of what you're trying to research. If Google allowed you to delete individual question/answer pairs, you could simply ask about a sub-topic and remove it from the conversation to create a smooth flow of important stuff. Offline mode Image via DepositPhotos.com A big pain of using Gemini daily is that everything loads from the cloud. It takes time for your chats to appear, and you can't view your conversation history while offline. To get a better idea, you can open the Gemini app and see how it looks without an internet connection. While Gemini models run in the cloud, it wouldn't hurt if Google could store chats (at least the text part) on the device so we can refer to them when offline. Google can also offer a lightweight version of its AI model to help with basic drafting, summarization, and other tasks. It has the Gemini Nano model, which can perform on-device processing on Google Pixel, Samsung, and some other Android brands, but it's a system feature and not related to the cloud-based Gemini app. Make temporary chats permanent I can't thank Google enough for taking the time and effort to add incognito mode or temporary chat mode to the Gemini app. It lets you have conversations without worrying that the topics will end up in your chat history or used for model training (at least on paper). Google claims that it doesn't use your temporary chats to "personalize your Gemini experience or train Google’s AI models." However, the data is stored "up to 72 hours to respond to you and to process any feedback you choose to provide." That said, I often start researching something in a temporary chat, only to realize the chatbot's answer is good enough to refer to later. Sadly, Gemini doesn't have an option to make such temporary chats permanent. In other words, I won't be able to follow up on it if I close the temporary chat. I'm left with alternatives like copying the answers into notes or another app. My digital life will get a lot better if Gemini gets a button to make temporary chats permanent. Collapse answers for a cleaner view You're heavily invested in your research game and suddenly feel the need to go up in the chat to recall something. This is when the conversation thread starts to feel like an overwhelming, unending wall of questions and answers. What if Google added a way to collapse Q&A pairs in the Gemini chat thread? It would look quite clean and easy to navigate. You'll quickly get an overview of everything you have discussed with the chatbot. Add buttons to jump between messages Suggested mockup of the feature. This reminds me of a small but useful Gemini feature that Google could add to its chatbot: the ability to hop between prompts in a conversation. Just add simple up- and down-arrow buttons, similar to YouTube Shorts, so people can quickly scroll through the messages. A table of contents or Chat Overview It's hard to get a bird's-eye view of everything you have discussed with the chatbot during a lengthy conversation. This is where a table of contents, or Chat Overview, displayed at the top of the screen, possibly in a drop-down button, might come in handy. You'll be able to get an overview of the chat and jump between messages, serving as an alternative to the up/down arrow buttons. Temporary mode for Gemini Live Image: Google You can use Gemini Live to have real-time conversations with the chatbot, which feels like you're talking to someone in the same room. However, a downside is that Gemini Live doesn't work in Temporary Chat mode, so all your conversations end up in the chat history. Google should consider expanding the temporary chat mode to include Gemini Live. Default to a specific chat One thing that feels somewhat annoying to me is that Gemini always opens in a new chat, whether on web or mobile. Sometimes, you want to return to your last chat. Google can take cues from web browsers, which let you choose whether you want to go to a new tab or a specific web page(s). Gemini can also have options to default to a specific chat when reopened. That said, generative AI chatbots have endless possibilities given the vagueness of their work. You can mold them the way you want by attaching different connectors, adding custom instructions, and including source files. It remains to be seen what Google has in store for future updates and whether anything from this wishlist gets the green light. The search giant released a stream of new Gemini updates in recent months, including Gemini 3.5 Flash and Gemini Omni Spark, adding that it now has 13 products with more than a billion users each. What do you want to see in the Gemini app? Tell us in the comments.
    • Thank you for the post. Just a FYI that links to an outside site or promoting specific software is considered spamming here. Asking general questions is fine.
    • I have been thinking about AI detector tools as a software workflow rather than a single "AI score" widget. When someone pastes text or uploads a document, the UI can return a report with a probability-style score, sentence highlights, reliability notes, and limitations. The useful part is that it can point a reviewer toward passages worth reading again. The risky part is that a polished score can look more certain than it really is. For people who build or review web apps, what should happen before the user copies or exports that kind of report? The minimum I would expect is: A clear input boundary for pasted text versus document files. Limits shown near the workflow, including minimum text length and maximum file size. A report label that says the result is a signal, not proof of who wrote the text. Sentence highlights and evidence notes alongside the global score. Reliability notes when the sample is too short or lacks enough sentence variety. False-positive and false-negative caveats that remain visible in copied/exported summaries. I am trying to avoid the pattern where a clean report card becomes the whole product story. For AI detection, "review this evidence in context" seems more honest than "trust this score." Would you keep the warning text visible on every report, or make it collapsible so the main result stays easier to scan? Disclosure: I work on a small AI detector/reporting workflow, but I am intentionally not linking it here. I am asking about software and report design, not promoting a site.
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      507
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      181
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      86
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!