<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Faint Praise: Mac OS X is Better than Vista</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/</link>
	<description>Longer than a blog; shorter than a book</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:45:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Branstrom</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-54692</link>
		<dc:creator>Branstrom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-54692</guid>
		<description>I largely agree with http://www.xvsxp.com/system/fonts_view.php concerning the fonts. They are really more readable and more beautiful than on any currently available version of Windows, or Linux for that matter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I largely agree with <a href="http://www.xvsxp.com/system/fonts_view.php" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview('/outbound/comment/www.xvsxp.com');" rel="nofollow">http://www.xvsxp.com/system/fonts_view.php</a> concerning the fonts. They are really more readable and more beautiful than on any currently available version of Windows, or Linux for that matter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: scottcc</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-52234</link>
		<dc:creator>scottcc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2007 05:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-52234</guid>
		<description>"John K Says:
January 7th, 2007 at 9:19 pm

What do you think of the font smoothing in OS X? For me, thatâ€™s the major reason why I donâ€™t perform a full switch to my Mac machineâ€¦"

===============================================

Forced anti-aliasing bothers me as well. There's something to be said about pixel-perfect/crystal clear displaying of text, regardless of what experts say in regards to "font smoothing makes text easier to read"...that's total BS.

I think this ONE thing alone is what makes OS X **APPEAR** to be so radically different from Windows...everything looks pretty even ugly old bland text that's been around since day one of computer screens. Too bad smoothed text on screen does NOT equal better readability.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;John K Says:<br />
January 7th, 2007 at 9:19 pm</p>
<p>What do you think of the font smoothing in OS X? For me, thatâ€™s the major reason why I donâ€™t perform a full switch to my Mac machineâ€¦&#8221;</p>
<p>===============================================</p>
<p>Forced anti-aliasing bothers me as well. There&#8217;s something to be said about pixel-perfect/crystal clear displaying of text, regardless of what experts say in regards to &#8220;font smoothing makes text easier to read&#8221;&#8230;that&#8217;s total BS.</p>
<p>I think this ONE thing alone is what makes OS X **APPEAR** to be so radically different from Windows&#8230;everything looks pretty even ugly old bland text that&#8217;s been around since day one of computer screens. Too bad smoothed text on screen does NOT equal better readability.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronald</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-49619</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronald</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-49619</guid>
		<description>Man I never noticed that search feature.
Nifty</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Man I never noticed that search feature.<br />
Nifty</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: roberthahn</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46794</link>
		<dc:creator>roberthahn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:24:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46794</guid>
		<description>Regarding the system preferences, one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is the search feature - if  you're trying to find some  preference that  needs twiddling, typing in the search box will dim the  whole pane and highlight the  preference panes that might be relevant.  

As cool as that is, though, it still feels like lipstick on a pig.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the system preferences, one thing I haven&#8217;t seen mentioned yet is the search feature - if  you&#8217;re trying to find some  preference that  needs twiddling, typing in the search box will dim the  whole pane and highlight the  preference panes that might be relevant.  </p>
<p>As cool as that is, though, it still feels like lipstick on a pig.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elliotte Rusty Harold</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46670</link>
		<dc:creator>Elliotte Rusty Harold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 04:14:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46670</guid>
		<description>Good enough for me, but I'm not a big font junkie. I do notice apps where it's not turned on like Eudora. Otherwise I don't pay that much attention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good enough for me, but I&#8217;m not a big font junkie. I do notice apps where it&#8217;s not turned on like Eudora. Otherwise I don&#8217;t pay that much attention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John K</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46640</link>
		<dc:creator>John K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 02:19:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46640</guid>
		<description>What do you think of the font smoothing in OS X? For me, that's the major reason why I don't perform a full switch to my Mac machine...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What do you think of the font smoothing in OS X? For me, that&#8217;s the major reason why I don&#8217;t perform a full switch to my Mac machine&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amy!</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46624</link>
		<dc:creator>Amy!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 00:54:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46624</guid>
		<description>As to file sharing, while your proposed method is commendably simple, it's a truly *dreadful* idea.  Sorry.

If you're going to agitate for better file sharing, get Apple to make the default be WebDAV.  It's simple (it's an application where HTTP actually works, because it's simply scaling HTTP in a particular direction); it can be made secure (making it impossible to use BASIC authentication would help); and it does what most people want: get/put files.

FTP also does get/put of resources (files), but isn't simple and can't be made secure without years of network experience.  I keep hoping that the poor old beast will *finally* just *die*.

NFS, AFP, and SMB all suffer the same problem: they're RPC, squinching their eyes tight shut to pretend the network away.  All three also have security models that are ... egregious.  They fail on all three counts: complex, solve problems users don't care about, and poor security.

I understand that your point is simply that file sharing ought to be really simple from the UI perspective, but I really really hope that no one takes you up on "share all protocols," if only because it's the sort of behavior that reminds me of early Windows, and building complex, fragile, insecure stuff *will* be punished, once it's deployed to the net in general.

The best part of using WebDAV is that you can access it through a web browser.  Hard to imagine easier than that (of course, it's nearly impossible to PUT using a browser, but Apple could simultaneously address that in Safari, at least).

Amy!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As to file sharing, while your proposed method is commendably simple, it&#8217;s a truly *dreadful* idea.  Sorry.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re going to agitate for better file sharing, get Apple to make the default be WebDAV.  It&#8217;s simple (it&#8217;s an application where HTTP actually works, because it&#8217;s simply scaling HTTP in a particular direction); it can be made secure (making it impossible to use BASIC authentication would help); and it does what most people want: get/put files.</p>
<p>FTP also does get/put of resources (files), but isn&#8217;t simple and can&#8217;t be made secure without years of network experience.  I keep hoping that the poor old beast will *finally* just *die*.</p>
<p>NFS, AFP, and SMB all suffer the same problem: they&#8217;re RPC, squinching their eyes tight shut to pretend the network away.  All three also have security models that are &#8230; egregious.  They fail on all three counts: complex, solve problems users don&#8217;t care about, and poor security.</p>
<p>I understand that your point is simply that file sharing ought to be really simple from the UI perspective, but I really really hope that no one takes you up on &#8220;share all protocols,&#8221; if only because it&#8217;s the sort of behavior that reminds me of early Windows, and building complex, fragile, insecure stuff *will* be punished, once it&#8217;s deployed to the net in general.</p>
<p>The best part of using WebDAV is that you can access it through a web browser.  Hard to imagine easier than that (of course, it&#8217;s nearly impossible to PUT using a browser, but Apple could simultaneously address that in Safari, at least).</p>
<p>Amy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46581</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 21:20:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46581</guid>
		<description>The difficulty I have with System Preferences is its inscrutable grouping algorithm.

Under Mac OS 9, there was a single folder, which I could arrange alphabetically (or however I wanted).  Under Mac OS X, there are multiple groups, whose membership policy is unknown, so I have to scan two dimensions in order to find what I want: alphabetically within a group, then skip to next group when I don't see what I want.  I can't just scan the whole thing with one alphabetical probe.  It's the difference between sorting by one key or two keys, and I never know exactly what the primary (grouping) key is.

This is also why the System Preferences Dock-menu is better: single-key alphabetical sort.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The difficulty I have with System Preferences is its inscrutable grouping algorithm.</p>
<p>Under Mac OS 9, there was a single folder, which I could arrange alphabetically (or however I wanted).  Under Mac OS X, there are multiple groups, whose membership policy is unknown, so I have to scan two dimensions in order to find what I want: alphabetically within a group, then skip to next group when I don&#8217;t see what I want.  I can&#8217;t just scan the whole thing with one alphabetical probe.  It&#8217;s the difference between sorting by one key or two keys, and I never know exactly what the primary (grouping) key is.</p>
<p>This is also why the System Preferences Dock-menu is better: single-key alphabetical sort.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Blackstone</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46577</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Blackstone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 21:15:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46577</guid>
		<description>I was a little surprised at the tone of your comments on the System Preferences Control Panel. Though I can't say I love it, it's never bothered me that much. I thought I'd look at the difference between using the panel and using the dock menu that you mentioned. I think I prefer the category groups over the alphabetical list, but I noticed that the View menu offers an alphabetical list. Have you tried that?

I also just noticed the search field (I only recently upgraded to Tiger), and tried typing in it. I think I could really appreciate the cool highlight effect it gives for the various matches to the search string. Have you used that feature, or have an opinion on it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was a little surprised at the tone of your comments on the System Preferences Control Panel. Though I can&#8217;t say I love it, it&#8217;s never bothered me that much. I thought I&#8217;d look at the difference between using the panel and using the dock menu that you mentioned. I think I prefer the category groups over the alphabetical list, but I noticed that the View menu offers an alphabetical list. Have you tried that?</p>
<p>I also just noticed the search field (I only recently upgraded to Tiger), and tried typing in it. I think I could really appreciate the cool highlight effect it gives for the various matches to the search string. Have you used that feature, or have an opinion on it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elliotte Rusty Harold</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46545</link>
		<dc:creator>Elliotte Rusty Harold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 18:59:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/ui/faint-praise-mac-os-x-is-better-than-vista/#comment-46545</guid>
		<description>Mac OS X, of course. Sorry of that wasn't clear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mac OS X, of course. Sorry of that wasn&#8217;t clear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
