>install osx
>close button doesn't close
>immediately uninstall
>>54799218
people actually use keyboard shortcuts on os x. also
>install os x
fuck off hackintosh scum
>>54799218
Then what does it do?
>>54799343
close the window, like it's supposed to
>install Windows
>press start to shutdown
>immediately uninstall
>install windows 7
>get windows 10 update pop up
>close button triggers the update
>immediately throw disk out of my window
>install linux
>spend 6 hours working on my network drivers
>everything just works
>>54799385
i'm still surprised there hasn't been a lawsuit or something against microsofts scummy behavour in regards to windows 10 upgrades
>>54799336
spotted the mactoddler
>>54799343
It closes the window, but programs on OS X stay open and active even after all windows are closed. You need to hit Cmd+Q to actually close them. Every mac owner I've seen always has a dock that's bursting at the seams from all the open programs. Doesn't help that OS X now reopens all the programs that were running when you shut down.
Also the maximize button doesn't maximize anymore, and tbqh it never did. Now the maximize button just fullscreens the program, and before it would just like vertically expand it or something, but it wouldn't take up all available space. Depending on the app the maximize button sometimes did nothing at all. It was seriously retarded.
>install windows 10
>ad for candy crush saga pops up on start menu
>immediately uninstall
>install GNU/Linux
>buttons do what they're supposed to
>no ads on any menus
>no forced "up"grades
>>54799477
>install GNU/Linux
nice meem
>install xubuntu 16.04
>EVERYTHING just fucking works
It even reports the battery charge on a wireless mouse right off the bat, while Windows 10 has trouble recognizing a SteelSeries wired mouse as a mouse at all >.<
cucks when will you learn?
>>54799218
>install linux
>no close button
FUCK
where can i find an iso for os x so i can try it on virtualbox?
>>54799515
Look like this advertisement thread was successful OP!
>>54799524
Oh boy oh boy now I get my 3ยข commission.
This is the *one* thing OSX does that I like.
Everything else is horseshit, from their barely-unix unix, to their mistreatment of the user and liberal approach to software quality, but the fact that you can easily run a program without windows is FUCKING MAGNIFICENT.
Not worth using OSX, but I'd certainly use it if it was copied into other programs.
Winfags think this is logical and clean.
>>54799432
does the minimize button at least works as intended?
>install Linux
>Xorg won't start properly
>Can't even use my mouse to click the nonexistent x button that didn't render
>install some linux distro
>realise you chose gnome 3
>slowly push install disc back in
>>54799218
cmd + q asshole
>>54799704
>barely-unix unix
Ironic because OS X is the only commonly used OS X that is 'officially' considered Unix.
>>54799218
>install osx
>gpu fan doesn't work above 35% because "muh minimalism and noise"
>immediately uninstall
>>54799432
Anyone I know that uses OS X uses Cmd+W and Cmd+Q to close windows and programs. It's very consistent in OS X compared to Windows for example. But then again, the people I know who are using OS X are not idiots.
>Doesn't help that OS X now reopens all the programs that were running when you shut down.
You can turn that off and you probably should.
>>54800045
No it's not. It was never certified.
>>54799967
Everything works 'as intended'. The problem is just that you manchildren only ever used Windows and think the erratic behaviour of that piece of shit should be the blueprint for every other OS.
>>54800045
>because OS X is the only commonly used OS X that is 'officially' considered Unix
I'll assume you didn't mean to make that redundant statement.
Anyway, by default OS X isn't POSIX compliant (it needs to be installed as such), and when it is it typically does it poorly.
You could look up various online rants about the patchwork kernel and particularly the horrible filesystem.
If you want it as a terminal, you are fine, but anyone who seriously wants a Unix environment will be better off with a real BSD or GNU/Linux.
>>54800108
>Laying on the internet
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
>>54799415
Which law did they break?
>>54800136
Linux and Windows work the same when it comes to closing/maximizing windows. OSX is the retarded OS.
>>54800045
>that is 'officially' considered Unix.
The reason that GNU/Linux isn't officially Unix is because of the way it is released (each distro would need to be registered individually at great expense) and that it deviates from the Unix standard to improve upon it (note the current standard was finalised more than twelve years ago).
>>54800213
They probably haven't broken any (at least in the US), but in some countries tricking someone into signing a contract (for example by misleading the user into updating) could be considered a crime.
>>54799999
Checked
>>54800147
>lying on the the internet
OS X is POSIX compliant, and has been certified as such for every release since like snow leopard
>>54799999
Quints of truth
>>54800315
OSX *can* be POSIX compliant... when you install it as such.
The default installation configuration doesn't install a fully POSIX compliant system.
It's like me trying to claim my car (Ford Focus) is fully rally compliant.
The model *can* be rally compliant, but it needs to be configured as such.
>>54799432
Closing it via the red button does not save anything
It does close down and you will lose your tabs in safari for example
The yellow light is what you are talking about
>>54799415
It's in compliance with the terms you agreed to.
>>54800418
Nope, OSX IS POSIX compliant out of the box. It's actually fully UNIX compliant out of the box.
Please stop talking out of your ass...
>>54799956
That pisses me off but you can disable it or mark common icons to always show.
>>54800470
OSX uses the case insensitive filesystem by default.
This throws POSIX compliance out of the door (unless you select the case sensitive filesystem manually during install).
The main problem here though, is how quite a few programs in OSX (to be fair, mostly non-apple ones) depend on the filesystem being case insensitive. They work erratically in POSIX compliant mode.
Regardless of what you think of the quality of Apple's code, this specifically means that unless you install it to comply, OSX *does not comply with POSIX*.
Check it yourself (if you use a Mac). Unless you are using the Case Sensitive filesystem, your own machine doesn't comply with POSIX.
>>54800442
Re-read it. Shutting down saves windows and re opens them next boot. He didn't say anything about the red button saving windows.
>>54800147
That's fine. OS X is technically considered Unix see >>54800149
Why do you think I used single quotes around "official"?
>>54800660
I understand entirely.
I just think it's misleading to say that OSX is POSIX compliant without also mentioning how it is only a small (possibly even less than 10% of the installed base) that actually meet that compliance.
It's like saying America doesn't have nukes*.
*stored in the bathroom of their polish embassy
>>54800215
>implying Linux has a single way of how closing and maximizing windows works
>implying OS X's UI concept isn't older than both.
>>54800764
Stop talking out of your ass you stupid newfag.
>>54799218
>OSX
>not using keyboard shortcuts for everything
I only ever use the mouse for web browsing
>>54799359
>>54799385
>>54799402
>>54799336
>>54799450
>>54799477
>well done rajesh, you truely told him!
>>54799999
oh fuck i didn't realize i got quints i need to call my mom about this
linux still sucks dick btw
Right clicking in Windows is a minigame every time you do it. What kind of design did Microsoft think up of this time? Let's find out!!!!
>>54800456
You do realize that if it brokes law it's still illeagal. Read this: >>54800244
>>54801134
menus in Windows are special snowflakes
>>54801134
they kinda fixed it with the last Win 10 big patch.
FREE APPS
>>54801390
By turning every menu large and dark. Not a fix at all.
>>54801134
>the context menu shouldn't change depending on the context of the item I'm right-clicking!
>>54800764
>>implying OS X's UI concept isn't older than both.
It's not. X was developed before Nextstep.
>>54801412
>the context menu's appearance shouldn't change depending on the context of the item I'm right-clicking!
ftfy
>OSX can't even lock the desktop with a command, have to wait for the screensaver
>>54801444
Control + Shift + Power button to lock desktop
>>54800475
umm yes you can. i hate tray icons so i hide them all always
>>54801473
>Power
What
>>54799218
That's what I like with OS X, I can have an application loaded in memory and ready to serve but with no annoying windows.
>>54801134
Stop having autism stupid fucking Macafg
>>54801473
Oh that's handy, I've been using a hot corner for that all this time
>>54801580
Pic related, except it's eject on desktop keyboards. On Macbooks it's the power button
>>54801634
>small enter button
>>54801580
Idk why they didn't just make it the L button but whatever, it works.
>>54801634
>go to delete some text
>accidentally eject disc
thanks apple
>>54799218
>install either osx or gnu/linux
>there are several differences but everything just werkz
>don't get spied on by either
>no gaymer faggots polluting the community of either
>both a e s t h e t i c/can be made so easily
>consistent UI
>unix master race
>be happy with both, laugh at the windows users who will never know such happiness
>>54801634
>implying I'm using an apple keyboard
>Use Windows
>App crashes
>try to quit it
>Windows crashes
>>54801670
Neither of my Macs have optical drives but I'm pretty sure it's like the powerbutton on Macbooks; You need to hold it down for a few seconds to activate it.
>>54801693
Are you implying it isn't because you're a poor fag who can not buy decent hardware?
>>54801866
We're not talking about you and your chinese Windows PC.
>>54801431
os x's concept is of Mac OS 6 and original Mac OS and Lisa (early 80s)
>>54801897
Built my own pc you maccuck. I'd ask you what the hard ware specs is in your shitty iMac, but you would probably cry when you realize how much you over payed.
>>54801940
>5120x2880, 10-bit, wide gamut IPS screen with an ATW polarizer, also factory calibrated.
>SSD with 1.8 gigabyte per second read speeds. 1.1 gigabyte per second write speeds
>Core i5-5575R
>AMD M380
>Magic Trackpad 2
Of course I could have bought a Dell 5k monitor for $1600 and built a much shittier computer with the remaining $400, but why would I want to do that?
>>54802012
>amd
>needing a 5k monitor
>have to buy a new computer to upgrade you got cucked
Poor you senpai
>>54799999
Whoah, checked
Also >>54800000
>>54802097
Yes AMD. Do you think I care about video games if I'm using a Mac? Some of us are over 18 you know.
>needing a 5k monitor
You don't "need" much of anything. You don't "need" more than one 1080p monitor, yet you have three. Though even with your three, my single monitor still has far more pixels, all of which I can utilize if I really wanted.
>have to buy a new computer to upgrade you got cucked
Yes. I would have needed a new motherboard, CPU, and SSD. Though even with the $400 left over after buying a 5K Dell monitor, I'd still need a GPU that has two displayport 1.2 connections, so that leaves you with maybe $300-$250 for the rest of the computer. There's no way to make a computer comparable to the iMac 5k for $2000. You will have to compromise your CPU, resolution, or r/w speeds.
>>54802195
Why are you still talkinf to me faggot, this conversation ended when you told me your over priced shitty specs
>>54802241
Maybe some day you'll know what using such a high resolution is like.
>>54799432
and it still has better mem management than wangblows
>>54802271
I think we are done here
http://nofilmschool.com/2015/01/comparing-maxed-out-5k-imac-hackintosh-which-one-comes-out-top
>>54802298
Not Miles, but
>Another consideration to make between these two systems is the display and the value that you're getting with each one. Apple's new 5K Retina Display is already widely considered one of the premiere high resolution displays on the market, and many of the competing high-end displays still cost nearly as much as the base model 5K iMac, although that's changing as the technology becomes more widespread. There are currently less expensive 4K displays on the market, but many of them don't even come close to the 5K iMac in terms of overall display quality. Then when you factor in the speed of the computer that's included at that $2,500 price point (for the base-model iMac) and the thin integrated design, it's hard not to see the iMac as the better bargain, especially if display quality is an important factor in your decision-making process.
>>54802298
>A $2000 computer paired with a $1600 5k monitor is faster than a $2000 computer with a 5k monitor built in
Who'da'thunk
>>54802298
I'm not a Mac user, but reading this argument was like going back and forth between an adult and a toddler.
You got blown the fuck out, I think you should stop replying.
>>54802012
>a much shittier computer with the remaining $400
A $400 desktop would kick your iMac's ass. I'm dead serious.
>>54802327
A $400 computer with a $1600 5k monitor is faster than a $2000 computer with a 5k monitor built in.
And if you're spending $2000 already, you should buy a $600 computer which will OBLITERATE the iMac's laptop garbage.
>>54802340
>>54802337
>>54802327
>implying I actually read the article
>>54802377
It would not.
>>54802414
The article did the test using a Hackintosh with specs similar to that of the iMac 5K. Your claims are false unless you benchmark both yourself and somehow manage to prove otherwise.
>>54802377
The i5 alone would cost you $200, which is an underestimate.
An SSD which could do speeds over 1GB/s would cost another $150 maybe.
That leaves you with $50 for the RAM and motherboard. It's simply not going to happen.
>>54802414
>A $400 computer with a $1600 5k monitor is faster than a $2000 computer with a 5k monitor built in.
Got a citation?
>And if you're spending $2000 already, you should buy a $600 computer which will OBLITERATE the iMac's laptop garbage.
The only laptop components are the GPU and RAM. But what would I gain from having a slightly faster computer? What makes it worth spending the extra $200? I mean I'm spending $2000 already. Might as well Spend $3000 and build the best non-gaming desktop possible.
Not everyone needs or even cares about high performance. Look at all the people on /g/ using 5 year old ThinkPads.
>>54802340
>thinking that I'm actually trying to argue
I don't care what you fags think, keep buying your shit computers. This is just funny to me hence the fact you could pay just as much and build a computer way better than that shitty iMac
>>54802578
>hence the fact you could pay just as much and build a computer way better than that shitty iMac
Didn't you say you weren't arguing. But you just made an argument, one that's been disproven multiple times ITT.
>>54799477
random shit does not work and requires you to be obscenely ridiculed in front of your girlfriend that you tried to make her use loonix
>>54802603
Not really desu, but what ever makes you feel better about your shitty purchase
>mac for home
>chinkpad t series from work
feelsgoodman.jpg
no seriously youre all troglodytes
>>54801110
>mom! i got quints on a chinese website!
and thats how my mom let me have le two weiners
> install ubuntu
> flash doesn't work
you see you have to sudo apt-get * that ppa and than do some other shit
> it doesn't work
> try googling
> after 1 hours nothing
said fuck it
> unity sucks
> sudo apt-get gnome
> change DE and restart
> lol xorg is fucked up
something about resolution
gg linux , open source my ass
nothing works
beetter to stick with server and neckbeard bullshit
btw
OSX > windows > linux > gnu/linux fuckery
>>54804128
Good choice in distro.
>>54799432
>Also the maximize button doesn't maximize anymore, and tbqh it never did. Now the maximize button just fullscreens the program, and before it would just like vertically expand it or something, but it wouldn't take up all available space.
Then allow me to blow your mind: Hold the option key while clicking on the green button and it will maximize.
>>54804128
Being current year as it is, you can't bait like that anymore. Anyone who has tried ubuntu or any of its flavours instantly knows you're bait and poor one at that.
>>54799432
Only relatively new OS X users have the "dock bursting at the seams" thing going on.
The green button never maximized because on non-potato screen maximizing is a relatively useless function. Instead, it tries to resize the window to fit the window's content - for instance, in the case of Safari it'll ignore margins and resize the window to fit the width of the website's actual content.
>>54800136
This. OS X is a the culmination of years of development in UI conventions from both Classic Mac OS and NeXSTEP. The fact that these systems took different approaches than WIndows did doesn't make them bad, just different.
Why should Apple throw such a rich heritage out the window when it's proven to work well for them just because some lazy assholes can't be arsed to learn anything that's not Win9x style?
>>54799402
>6 hours
>Working on network drivers
Unless you were reworking them to support packet injection when you know the chipset is capable but no one's done it yet there is no reason you needed to do this.
>>54804128
>Company I work for buys 30 nvidia tx1's for future projects
>Ask boss if I can play with em
>3 weeks later I have a 30 tx1 Ubuntu cluster running an rnn I built with tensorflow (nvidias machine learning drivers kick ass) constantly watching our code review comments / merge changes in gitlab
>Gonna troll one of my co workers who's anal as fuck about standards by using it to rip his code apart
>Boss says I need to reimage them because we finally need them
>Mfw
Yea Linux is hard when it comes to proprietary bullshit sometimes. But with enough Ritalin and a wife that drives you nuts anything is possible!
>>54799432
>Also the maximize button doesn't maximize anymore, and tbqh it never did.
That's not a maximize button. It's a "fit to content" button, or something like that.
I don't recall the specifics, but it was supposed to do something a bit like what you see in a PDF reader, where you can fit a whole page into the window, or fit the width of a full line in the window, etc.
Theoretically, hitting the button over and over should cycle through a predictable set of window configurations. However, for a variety of reasons, it's not uncommon to see the window resize and move all over the screen as the programmer's weird resize-and-fit algorithm goes through it's bizarro paces.
This was one of the most confusing things for me when I switched to an OS X system for a few years.
>>54801087
>people make jokes about windows
>they are suddenly indians too
I just don't know anymore
What opinion about things do you have to have to be considered Indian on this board now?
Or are we all Indians now?
>>54799500
Why would the kernel have buttons?
>>54799218
command + q, dummy
>>54804814
>how long until someone makes a johnny depp/amber heard version of this
>>54799349
>>54799432
>close button minimizes
>minimize button also minimizes
>>54802276
actually has much worse
my work mac has 8 gigs and so does my home pc
the work mac always runs out of memory after a few programs are launched and starts using up fucking swap, while my home computer's 8gb is enough for everything
>>54801677
>>>>>>>OSX
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DON'T GET SPIED ON
DID HE REALLY WRITE THAT OUT?
>>54805003
Closing all your windows is not the same as minimizing all your windows. Stop thinking of programs as something that need a window to run.
The dock is essential a large tray where every application gets it's own icon. That's why OS X doesn't need a task bar or a tray, the dock care of both. This way you can simply close all your torrent windows while downloading or other things.
Hell, OS X also has Cmd+H which hides all your windows for a single application and does nothing else to them. As soon as you want to start using that application again you just click the dock icon and all of the windows for that application appear as you left them. OS X's window management is more involved than what you could ever do on Windows and most Linux DEs
>>54799218
>close window button closes the window
I fail to see the issue with this.
>>54805097
>minimize window on windows
>programs can run in background on windows if you want
>only way to close a program on osx is to forcefully end it's process
>>54805129
What he means is that it doesn't close the program, it just puts it to background and it still runs, basically windows 8.
>>54805156
It's not meant to close the program, it's the close window button. If you want the program closed you press Cmd+Q or click the program name in the menu bar and select Quit Program
>>54805175
Then what does minimize do?
>>54805211
What do you think minimize does? It minimizes the selected window.
>>54800244
The reason that GNU/Linux isn't officially Unix is because it simply isn't Unix, retard. It's a completly rewritten, different thing that just shares SOME of the Unix ideas.
>>54801444
Just close the laptop lid, Anon.
>>54805137
"Minimize" on Windows doesn't do the same thing as "Minimize" on OS X.
Minimizing on OS X minimizes the window to the dock. Minimizing on Windows 7 and up minimizes to the icon for that application on the taskbar. It's mingled in with a list of all the other windows, while on OS X you see pic related.
>>54805226
What's the difference between minimizing a window and closing a window?
They both keel the program open and they both allow you to open the window up by selecting it on the dock.
>>54805275
>What's the difference between minimizing a window and closing a window?
Exactly what it sounds like, minimize keeps the window open but minimizes it, closing the window closes the fucking window, both keep the propgram open.
>>54805076
This depends greatly on the type of software you're using. OS X performs best when you're using third-party apps that treat OS X as a first-class citizen and are written with Cocoa.
If you're running nothing but clunky web wrapper/electron "apps" and half-assed ports you're not going to have a good time. As of late Adobe and MS stuff has become pretty terrible too (especially Adobe).
>>54805267
OS X can be configured to minimize to the app icon as well
>>54805267
But on windows if you want to open all the windows open for a specific program just double click the icon, then all the windows for a specified program will open up.
>>54805296
But what's the difference to the end user?
>>54805306
>If you're running nothing but clunky web wrapper/electron "apps" and half-assed ports you're not going to have a good time
How's resource usage compare between Electron and native? Or pseudo-native, like .NET?
I'm genuinely curious. I only just heard about Electron and think it's a better investment of my mental resources that proprietary stuff like .NET+WPF.
>>54805296
BUT MECHANICALLY THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE
MINIMIZING: ALLOWS YOU TO OPEN THE WINDOW BACK UP BY CLICKING THE ICON IN THE DOCK
CLOSING: ALLOWS YOU TO OPEN THE WINDOW BACK UP BY CLICKING THE ICON ON THE DOCK
THEY LITERALLY DO THE SAME PROCESS, JUST IN A DIFFERENT METHOD
>>54805275
When you close a window in OS X, the memory consumed by whatever content the window was displaying is freed, but the program is still open.
If we use Chrome for an example, under Windows if you've got one window open and you're downloading something, the download stops when you close the window because Chrome is no longer running. Under OS X, when you close the window the memory consumed by the tabs is freed but the download continues until it's complete because Chrome is still running until you explicitly tell it to quit.
>>54805348
No? Apps have multiple windows, Anon. Closing the window destroys that window's state. If you were working on a text document, and you close that window, clicking on the dock icon won't magically reopen that file.
>>54805308
And on OS X if you click on an icon and do a finger gesture you get shown all the windows for your application on every desktop. You can bind it to a mouse button, screen corner or key as well.
>>54805334
One kills the window, the other doesn't, just minimizes it to the dock.
>>54805348
YES THERE IS YOU GODDAMNED RETARD
>>54801866
I could afford a new Mac
>>54805353
What's this showing?
>>54805348
>MINIMIZING: ALLOWS YOU TO OPEN THE WINDOW BACK UP BY CLICKING THE ICON IN THE DOCK
Yes, but on OS X the window itself gets it's own place on the dock. On Windows it goes into the application icon.
>CLOSING: ALLOWS YOU TO OPEN THE WINDOW BACK UP BY CLICKING THE ICON ON THE DOCK
If you close a window you lose it's state. Imagine if you closed your browser window. Now those tabs are gone. If you minimize a window you don't lose your tabs do you?
>THEY LITERALLY DO THE SAME PROCESS, JUST IN A DIFFERENT METHOD
No, they're similar, but fundamentally different things that happen to use the same name.
>>54805411
Forgot to circle Slack eating half a gig of RAM. Plenty of fun things to look at tho, like
>kernel_task
>softwareupdated
>OneDrive
>Skype
>Google Chrome Helper x700
>>54805422
>they get their own place on the dock
So you can fill up your dock with the same program, just in different windows?
>if you minimize you don't lose your tabs
So, just like windows? Except close on osx keeps the program open and running.
>>54805337
Electron is a hamplanet of the worst sort. As an example, a fresh launch of a native programming text editor (TextMate) takes 25MB-35MB of RAM. Atom and MS VS Code on the other hand cold start with 250MB-350MB of RAM consumed *before even doing anything*, and that consumption grows exponentially as you work. Where Textmate would break the 100MB mark (very large project), Atom creeps up into GB territory.
Pseudo-native stuff like Mono outperforms web wrapper crap by a large margin but will still be considerably heavier than a native C/C++/Objective-C/Swift app.
>>54805353
Yep, 90% of your problem is Chrome and Chrome wrappers (Slack). I wish so much that Slack in particular would port their 100% native iOS app to OS X.
If you can, use Safari. It's easier on both RAM and battery life, especially if you use its engine-level content blocker.
>>54799218
So OS X is basically faking "better performance" by simply leaving the programs open? lel, and I though Windows was retarded.
ITT: The tech illiterate retards that shit on OS X every day.
>>54805475
>So, just like windows?
Yes
>Except close on osx keeps the program open and running.
Clicking the close window button does not close the program, that would be like your engine shutting down because you pressed the stereo's power button in your car.
>>54805518
Only if you want to. If you want to kill a process entirely, just quit it. The status is entirely clear through the indicator dots in the Dock. Nothing is being hidden and its behavior is entirely under your control.
>>54805480
>and that consumption grows exponentially as you work
I'm very skeptical of that claim.
>Pseudo-native stuff like Mono outperforms web wrapper crap by a large margin but will still be considerably heavier than a native C/C++/Objective-C/Swift app.
I did native C++ on Windows for years. It's lightweight, but miserable. UI update comes down from management? You're looking at hours of fucking with the code.
Back in the early 2000's, it became possible to embed an Internet Explorer view in your window and intercept events from it. So, you could use HTML for your display. It was a HUGE improvement over GDI work, but the EU lawsuit against Microsoft, which made Internet Explorer optional, killed it.
Anyway, I've long put off getting into .NET+WinForms/WPF because Microsoft likes to change direction randomly and with relatively poor communication. I'd rather put my time and effort into skills that I can use on a variety of platforms.
>>54805518
>So OS X is basically faking "better performance" by simply leaving the programs open? lel, and I though Windows was retarded.
That's what Android does...
>>54805532
So then it's not like windows
Windows x:
closes program if x on main window is clicked
or
closes child windows
Windows minimize:
Keeps program open, minimizes windows
Osx x:
keeps program open, close window
Osx minimize:
Keeps program open, minimizes windows to separate objects on taskbar
>>54805475
>So you can fill up your dock with the same program, just in different windows?
If you want to, yes. But that's why you can also hide every window on an application using Cmd+H.
>So, just like windows?
No, like I said again minimizing on OS X minimizes the window itself to it's own icon on the dock. Minimizing on Windows hides the window into a list that you access by clicking on the application's icon. Except close on osx keeps the program open and running.
On OS X, if you click the icon for an application it will cycle between the windows unless it's minimized. Minimizing on OS X is used to keep a window safe from being messed with for a bit. Minimizing on Windows is used to get the window out of the way without closing it.
>>54805601
I never said the close functionality was like OS X, I said minimize was.
>>54805518
No, because the programs clearly have an icon with a dot under it on the dock. OS X just assumes you're not an idiot and you can handle the task of knowing when you actually want a program terminated.
>>54799496
>xfce
>>54805581
>I'm very skeptical of that claim.
Just try it yourself. Clone a large project like WebKit and try navigating through it and editing with Atom. Its memory usage will skyrocket very quickly.
>I did native C++ on Windows for years. It's lightweight, but miserable. UI update comes down from management? You're looking at hours of fucking with the code.
C++ is total shite when it comes to UI development. This is why native OS X apps use Objective-C and Swift for UI development and leave C++ to the invisible machinery portion of the program.
I feel you on the point of not having a good cross-platform setup for developing UIs with. I'm hope for libUI (https://github.com/andlabs/libui) though, which looks like it's a surprisingly sane way to do cross-platform native UIs and can easily bind to any language since it's C. Now that Swift has been open sourced, there's also a good chance that AppKit/Cocoa will follow suite and get ported to Linux and Windows.
>>54804128
That shit with Flash player is true though.
That sucks.
>>54805353
>chrome
>onedrive
>skype
go back to windows
>>54805348
try to close you torrent or skype on microsoft with the red cross, OMG, what happened?? they still running??!! you are not smart enough to use a mac so stop crying this will never be a problem for you
>>54804918
I see a world without loos, and it's glorious
>>54805961
>pajeet learns to use Google translate
>>54806069
in india english is native languange
>na education
>>54805961
>you torrent
>>54802665
Can't wait for summer to be over
>>54805267
Yeah well the Windows version is better.
ITT: The same people that claim OS X is an OS for retards can't figure out how to use it
>>54806213
>The method that gives you the least options and least control is better
Okay
>>54806069
>implying that india didnt get cucked for 2centuries by britfags
The only thing Windows does better than OSX is Window management like snapping to screen borders. El Capitan introduced it but in a retarded way.
However BetterTouchTools fixes this.
>>54799218
does it work the same way delete does in twm?
I still feel a tiny bit anxious clicking delete on file manager windows
>>54806287
Then how come they can never speak clearly, they always gotta point at you repeatedly when arguing
>>54806405
idk
>>54806221
This is the windows mentality senpai, they are literally so stupid they won't even try to learn a new OS.
>>54804979
Underrated post
>>54799402
>Fresh install Windows
>No fucking ethernet mobo driver by default
>Have to get driver on USB and install
>Install Linux
>Just werks, driver in Kernel and everything
>>54805175
>Being this autistic.
>>54805348
FUCKING RETARD
>>54806587
how to greentext?
>>54801431
"X" didn't inherently have these concepts, they're imposed by window managers. To the extent that modern Linux environments have one, it's based on ICCCM, which evolved from, ultimately, Motif, with the one significant change of using a taskbar for minimization rather than on-desktop icons (stolen from Windows 95).
>>54806186
(you)torrent
>>54806841
*ยตTorrent
>>54806865
mu torrent?
>>54806876
muTorrent or microTorrent, I'm not sure which they're after, but it's definitely neither uTorrent or youTorrent
>>54806865
microTorrent you pleb, i bet you spend like 5 mins to find the right char
>>54806186
your*
>>54806907
>i bet you spend like 5 mins to find the right char
Nah, it's a two key keybinding.
>>54801397
>โฌ49
>$55 American
>for video compression software
for what purpose
>>54807238
Apple doesn't take exchange rates into account, replace โฌ with $ and you've go the price for people in the US
>>54799218
Wait really? Holy shit I had no idea. That's so retarded, why wouldn't you just minimize it?
>>54804360
Unfortunately I already knew about that. Hopefully someone else's mind was suitably blown though.
>>54806548
>not using your phone as a Hotspot
How fucking retarded are you?
>>54806548
>installing Windows 7
>no ethernet driver
>no Wi-Fi driver
>put driver on a flash drive
>no driver for flash drive
>>54806548
god damn it this shit frustrates me so much
I have a realtek ethernet port on a pretty standard motherboard and a TP-link USB wireless adapter with arethos firmware. On linux the generic realtek driver covers it entirely, and in the worst of cases I may have to enable the ath 9k module for the adapter but on every distro but obviously gentoo it has worked ootb so far.
Even googling the device ID and downloading shady.exe gives me "device cannot start" errors, so I've had to keep drivers with manually edited ini files sitting on a usb drive just so I have functioning internet on a fresh windows install.
>>54799218
This is a stupid holdover from the days of System 1.x-6.x where the Mac could only open one program at a time. Having the close button not close the program made sense, because there was a chance you wanted to open a new document or whatever.
Nowadays, however, it's kinda stupid.
>>54799956
Actually the notification tray was supposed to be for exactly that: notifications. Developers though consider their programs special and always have then show a stupid icon. Also most Wincucs, if there weren't for the icons, will have a gazillions programs running without knowing it.
>>54807842
>Nowadays, however, it's kinda stupid.
Quite the contrary.
>>54799218
Literally a meme OS.
>>54808121
>waah it works as intended
>>54806328
I like Moom's approach to snapping best (see pic). Lets me position windows as I wish without accidental triggers and offers more options when option is held down.
>>54806515
Worse, to them anything that doesn't copy Windows is flat out wrong
>>54800244
>The reason that GNU/Linux isn't officially Unix blah blah blah
>GNU
>GNU's Not Unix
That's really all you needed to say.
>>54808249
it's got bad intentions
>>54808386
No it doesn't
>>54808394
yes it does
>>54808121
oh my god what the fuck is this?
Is it trying to fullscreen/maximize TWICE, and failing both times?
>>54808403
No it doesn't
>>54808416
proof?
>>54808415
It's not trying to maximize at all, it's resizing to what it deems fit for the content in the window
>>54808418
You're the one claiming it's got bad intentions, got any proof?
>>54808431
the maximize button does not maximize the window.
>>54808436
It's not a maximize button.
>>54799967
The close button closes the window and keeps the application open, the minimize button minimizes the window, you can restore it just like it is.
>>54808456
yes it is
>>54808475
No it's not.
>>54808494
proof?
>>54808496
Got any proof it is?
>>54800107
>the people I know who are using OS X are not idiots
>using OS X
>not idiots
>>54808541
>i-it's not a steering wheel! It's a hand wheel
>>54808561
that is an accurate description, as the steering wheel both steers, and is also a wheel, in your car, intended to be controlled by your hands
the maximize button on osx does not maximize the program.
>>54808578
Because it's not a maximize button.
>>54808595
yes it is
>>54805097
>OS X's window management is more involved than what you could ever do on Windows and most Linux DEs
>>still no snapping windows
hahahahahaha
>>54808599
No it's not
>>54808623
proof?
>>54808614
I don't know many people who like sidescrolling.
>>54799218
So you are fishing this weekend?
>>54808595
>button's design is to MAXIMIZE a window
>maxยทiยทmize
>/หmaksษหmฤซz/
>verb
>make as large or great as possible.
>"but it's not a maximize button!"
fricking epic dude! xD
>>54807238
Gotta pay those license fees anon.
Codecs aren't free.
>but I can use x264 for free without paying MPEG-LA a dime!!!XDXD
Not in a commercial setting you can't, you need a H.264 license.
>>54808633
You're the one claiming it's a maximize button, let's see some proof.
>>54808674
I know what maximize means, you'd have a point if it was the maximize button. It's not.
>>54808705
>It's not.
Then what is it, Pajeet?
>>54808705
>click maximize button
>doesn't maximize
>but it's not a maximize button!
Thread summary:
Close button doesn't close
Maximize button doesn't maximize
also TIL program windows can be closed without closing the program running them, and in Mac bizarro world users actually claim this behavior is desirable
>>54808715
A resize button.
>>54808723
What maximize button?
>>54808744
>A resize button.
I'm literally dying of laughter right now
>>54808734
>whining that the close window button doesn't close programs
>waah my stereo's power button doesn't shut off my car
>>54808766
Why anon?
>>54808734
What's not to get here? Close button closes the window and not the program? If you have 5 Word documents open, do you think that pressing the close button on one of them should close the other four?
The Maximize button is not even a maximize button, it's a full screen or scale to fit content (alt-press) button.
The entire complaint in regards to that is literally that it's not Windows.
https://support.apple.com/kb/PH18785
>>54808780
i seriously hope your pretending to be retarded
>>54808805
The button's primary function is to make the window bigger (maximizing) by clicking it twice, the secondary function is to make the window back to normal by clicking it a third time This is much similar to the maximize button on Windows and GNU/Linux distros
It's not that hard, Prajeet
>>54808826
>i seriously hope your pretending to be retarded
How am I being retarded? You're the one whining that it doesn't work like Windows. Apple's been doing it this way since before Windows was a thing, they've no need to change it just because something else is now more popular.
>>54802097
>Needing this much storage
Lay off the hentai anon. I've never used more than 100 GB in my life.
>>54808734
Maximise button does maximise, it just depends on your definition of maximise.
Keep in mind, Windows method of doing it was the outlier until GNOME and KDE copied it.
CDE, VUE, Indigo, OpenWindows NEXTSTEP/GnuSTEP all used a behaviour similar to OSX (and from where OSX inherited it's 'maximise' function)
In Windows the window is resized to occupy all available non-system toolbar.
In most everything else, it resized the window to occupy all available vertical space, but leave the horizontal window size alone.
Today, the Windows method is the most used so people think it's normal.
I'm not for either side here, just stating the facts.
>>54808852
Come back to me when I can drive my car stereo itself. Better yet, come up with a food analogy.
>>54808806
>If you have 5 Word documents open, do you think that pressing the close button on one of them should close the other four?
closing the last of five should end the process/program on my PC.
This should also hold true for other programs used with multiple windows like a web browser.
If there are zero windows open (or minimized), the program has no business to be running. Just like closing a terminal ends the processes running from it, even background processes.
I can pretty much guarantee anyone over the age of 45 won't understand the difference between "closing the window" and
"closing the program" and thus if using Mac OS will have 100% of their programs "open" in background all the time.
That is NOT good user interface design.
>>54808887
Did you even read what I wrote? Windows is not the standard of anything but how Windows works. Quit whining that it doesn't work like Windows.
>>54808898
>closing the last of five should end the process/program on my PC.
>This should also hold true for other programs used with multiple windows like a web browser.
No, telling the operating system to kill the program should kill the program, which is what Cmd+Q is for. It's nice if Windows takes closing the last window as telling the OS to kill the program, but that is not how it needs to be nor is it how it should be. It's how you want it to be. If you want Windows exact functionality so badly, stick to fucking Windows.
>>54808925
>makes shitty car analogy
>get called retarded
>did you read what I wrote? windows isn't the standard!
0/10
>>54808963
>but that is not how it needs to be nor is it how it should be
>It's how you want it to be
It all boils down to how you want it to be instead?
>>54808969
I wasn't talking about the car analogy you dumbass.
>Apple's been doing it this way since before Windows was a thing, they've no need to change it just because something else is now more popular.
>>54808861
I should mention for posterity, that I prefer the Windows method, however It must be accomplished by double-clicking the titlebar.
>Programs/Windows should close too if I double-click the icon in the top right corner.
I don't use the edge buttons.
>>54808987
It all boils down to how the OS designers intended it top work. I happen to like the way OS X does it, so that's just another plus of using OS X.
>>54808963
>No, telling the operating system to kill the program should kill the program, which is what Cmd+Q is for.
Asinine. might as well use ctrl-alt-delete to close every program in windows. Non-power-users should not be expected to learn chording keyboard shortcuts for basic OS functions.
What if you're using a touchscreen? Or a mouse only? Good luck closing your program without using system menus.
>>54808898
>That is NOT good user interface design.
So that scenario is an example of good interface design?
>Opening a document
>Editing a bit until finished
>Want to start a new document
>Close and save the old one
>Program is gone, have to start again
No, it's not and it's something that usually annoys me when it happens.
>>54808992
>because it's been like this for a long time, it shouldn't have to change
>>54809005
right click program in dock, click close.
alt. hold finger on program in dock, click close.
>>54809005
>Non-power-users should not be expected to learn chording keyboard shortcuts for basic OS functions
And they're not expected to, you can also close the program from the menu bar or the dock.
>>54809015
You're just whining that it doesn't work the way you're used to. Tough shit.
