Then I'm not sure what you meant by:

quote:

---

Originally posted by HighHopes:
I think you are wrong in this approach, John. The strength of the original Mac OS wasn't to be found in its individual features, but in the way they fit together into a whole. Which, of course, means the real strength was the design philosophy behind the OS. I don't think you are going to capture that with a listing of specific handy features.

---

My post wasn't an "approach" to anything and I wasn't trying to capture the design philosophy by listing specific handy features, I was merely making some comments since it was wrong that Mac OS X's Grab could print a full Finder window's contents.

So in as much as I misunderstood your post, I'm sorry.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HighHopes:
Also, I think OS 9 is particularly difficult to defend. By this time the Mac OS had become somewhat of a disconnected mess of efforts to keep up with Windows. It needed redesign or replacement. Except for the lingering strength that OS 9 inherited from the original Mac OS design it didn't have much to offer.

---

This seemed like you were suggesting I was defending Mac OS 9. Which, of course, I wasn't, hence my confusion.

Bad wording on your part perhaps? I dunno.

Well, I don't have time to check if it's still accurate but here's my old post anyway:

quote:

---

One thing I want to mention re: Services.

I'm almost tempted to think that you aren't first selecting some text?

When I select text, then go to Services, I have these choices:

1. FINDER: If the text selected is a valid Mac OS path, Finder will Open, Reveal or Get Info for it. Say, "/Users/johnq/Desktop/viagra_jokes.txt". Admittedly it's useless for anything but a file path, but that's unfair, since it's only designed to do that. Maybe it should be grayed out if it detects it's not a valid path.

2. GRAB: - Seems broken?

3. SEND TO: If the text selected is an email address, a draft email is started and the To: field is populated with the selected text. (Ideally it would gray out if it detects it is not an address that is selected.)

4. SEND SELECTION: Otherwise the text can be sent to Mail and a new document is created with the selected text.

5. MAKE NEW STICKY NOTE: (From the selected text) Does just that.

6. OPEN URL: Will open the selected URL/text and if valid, will open that in Safari.

7: SCRIPT EDITOR: Get result of (the selected) AppleScript (code). Make New AppleScript and Run As AppleScript do just that, assuming of course it is valid code.

8. SEARCH WITH GOOGLE: Will pump the selected text to Google via Safari/web browser.

9. SEND FILE TO BLUETOOTH DEVICE...: Sends the selected text as a file which gets placed on the yet-to-be-selected Bluetooth device. (Haven't tried this!)

10. SPEECH: Start Speaking Text speaks the selection and Stop Speaking (I love that command in other contexts!) stops Mr. Bubbles or Mr. Deranged. (My god those voices are tired)

11. SUMMARIZE: A real surprise to me actually, launches SummaryService in a window that lets you refine or expand the Summary Size of the selected text. kewl.

12. TEXT EDIT: New Window Containing Selection (poorly labeled, needs to be New Document With Selection) does that and if you selected a valid path string, Open Selected File does so.

Now thalo, I can only assume you never had a selection active, because everything works except Grab (in fact I can't get any screengrabs at the moment!).

Those are the default Panther Services, not 3rd party ones. I can't say if they worked in Jaguar. The fact remains that they are too hidden for me to routinely remember. Contextual menus would be better places for them. But not if it bloats my contextual menus or if I couldn't disable them.

---

Again, I'm not saying they are useful, well-made, perfect etc. But when I tried the the ones above, they worked as noted.

I will update that later, as I've had a few more Services added since then.

I think I've had enough. It was somewhat fun while it lasted. Thanks for the debate.

Leaving so soon? That's too bad. I wanted to hear more about that sense of decency you so long for.

Also, your views on why you think the members here have been banished from other forums may be interesting. Maybe, you could give us all long lectures on proper forum behavior so we too can become the fine example that you are.

Let me see if I have the words quite right: Jay, "I've met a lot of assholes online but you rank near the top of them. Do the world a favor and go fuck yourself."

Gee whiz, I feel that sense of decency already. Thanks, kid!

The reason I even brought up Printing windows was the fact the first thing my boss asked me was how do I print a window.

I had to say good question.

It was always something he had done from a finder menu. I placed Grab in his Dock to solve that problem.

Somewhere buried in Mac Help was a long explanation as an alternative to the Finder print window command was to jump thru rings of spinning fire to print a finder window. It probably took longer for some yahoo at Apple to make the help page explaining the new convoluted way of printing finder windows than it would be for the programmers to just add the functionality of a print window command in the first place.

On the flip side one of the biggest productivity gains using Panther was the ability to print and do work at the same time without locking up the system makes for much less down time. It was either sit and wait for a large job to print or risk locking up the system which resulted in a compound waste of time.

Hey smithz how was the prosting. Happy New year.

Don't forget smithz if your sister gets an XP laptop Microsoft is going to release Longhorn and she will have to relearn an OS completely over again. Longhorn will create more Apple users than anything in the past.

brother jay

I am glad we had this time together.

Wait, this "I don't wanna hafta select" argument is just dishonest.

OF COURSE, Services would be cooler if they pertained to entire documents. No one is arguing that expanding Services to also include windows as forms of data wouldn't be helpful. Over time, Apple and 3rd parties might do so.

Services DO work, they just are not matching your pre-conceived notions.

Services don't make coffee or give out blowjobs either, but it's not Apple's fault.

Apple's "promise" of what Services can do is an honest representation of the facts: That some applications do utilize Services, but other do not. And they only suggest that selections are usable, and then only if the Service has been designed to handle that data type (reasonable).

(I'm lumping "Services" together out of ignorance and laziness: I know services are dependent on Apple and in the case of non-Apple applications, 3rd parties)

From "Mac Help", the closest official user-level explanation (promise) of Services I could find:

quote:

---

Using an application's services

Some applications provide "services" that let you quickly use content in one application with another application. The content can include text, graphics, pictures, or movies.

For example, Mail provides a service that lets you send a file in an email message directly from the Finder. You don't have to open Mail to send the file.

To use an application's service in another application:

Select the content you want to work with (for example, select a file or some text).
Choose the service you want from the application menu. (For example, to email a document from a folder in the Finder, choose Finder > Services > Mail > Send File.)

If the service is dimmed, you may have selected content that doesn't work with the service.

---

That works. As do many other Services.

That you do not want to have to select something is tough. YES, expanding Services ( the target application's service) to any object you can see would be great. But that is not to say that the current implementation does not work as advertised.

Apple's biggest mistake re: SERVICES is that they are contextual but not in a contextual setting. Also they do not do a good enough job explaining that each service has it's own criteria for what it will and will not accept.

While I DO NOT suggest that ALL users need to be developer geeks just to be able to understand and use Services, it might nevertheless benefit you to at least see what Services are, as implemented (and not as you are daydreaming/expecting them to be):

Read:
Services Architecture (Cocoa)

I'll repeat that 5 times in case someone missed it:
I DO NOT suggest that ALL users need to be developer geeks just to be able to understand and use Services
I DO NOT suggest that ALL users need to be developer geeks just to be able to understand and use Services
I DO NOT suggest that ALL users need to be developer geeks just to be able to understand and use Services
I DO NOT suggest that ALL users need to be developer geeks just to be able to understand and use Services
I DO NOT suggest that ALL users need to be developer geeks just to be able to understand and use Services

quote:

---

Sometimes the only way to activate the functionality in the menu is to do counterintuitive things like selecting text. Even in cases where you don't really want to DEAL with a text selection.

---

It is INHERENTLY designed to handle data that is selected. YES it'd be great to ALSO send the entire document's content to another app, but that Service needs to be written to handle it! There's no inherent limit to what Services can and can't do, someone just needs to write it.

Bitching about how features don't work they way you think they ought to does not mean they are broken.

quote:

---

The active window should be enough of a "selection" to activate certain services. Suppose I've got a browser page opened. I could easily see wanting to invoke the BBEdit service and open THAT source in a new BBEdit doc.

---

That's a wish-list, not a fair criticism of how they DO work now. They do what they do. YES, they don't fail as gracefully as I'd like, they don't hide themselves sufficiently if they are out of context and they don't handle entire documents. But they DO handle selected data.

Services apply to selections.
Thalo did not know that.
Thalo does not like that.
Services apply to selections until someone makes .services also handle window contents.

Thalo not understanding/liking this != "Services don't work"

I'm all for Services being expanded to incorporate your ideas.

--

Additionally, if wondering about Carbon:

Introduction to Application Services (Carbon)

Items in the Services Menu (Carbon)

quote:

---

Do the world a favor and go fuck yourself.

---

I wonder if the world would really be sufficiently appreciative of that......

Interesting dynamic in the evolution of this thread. Everything was fine and substantive until some drunk showed up and posted something that made Jay demand that he be thrown out. We reminded him of what we'd ALREADY said about the freewheeling environment here. At that point everything changed, and he was snarly from then on. Not that one or two of the regulars here couldn't have been a bit more diplomatic in a few spots, but still.....

Markle

quote:

---

Thalo not understanding/liking this != "Services don't work"

---

NOW you're getting it, lol.

No, I know that you have to select text. But there are SO many instances where that's so damn counterintuitive (like, uh, when you really don't want to ACT on a piece of selected text), that for all intents and purposes it's broken. Like so much of OS X, it "works" but it's like a technicality that it does. You have to adjust your definition of what "works" means... like that whole Clinton "depends on what your definition of 'is' is." Tell a casual user or newbie that you have to select text first.

Grab doesn't work from the menu. It's an Apple service and it's prominent. And it sits there like a sore thumb.

I see the bigger picture. What is OS X good at? Text. Services are nothing more than text crap. Tiger is going to kick that up even further, with spotlight, and we're going to be doing a lot more typing and text-related things to find and make our way through the OS. I see a pattern. Text over graphics. Unix does text better.

"A request: Help me to understand the thalo goal"

1) To redefine "Pro" to mean only one person in the whole wide world: thalo
2) To provide a place to hurl f-bombs
3) To ease the mind of OS X users by showing them that anyone who doesn't like it must be a whack job
4) This may actually be a religious site since I hear so many mentions of "baby Jesus"
5) To work off a little steam so we don't go home and beat on the wife, girlfriend or dog

No Myrrh for you, brother Brad.

Actually it's not baby Jesus we have to worry about, but baby NEW YEAR. He's already shaping up to be a little prick.

Gee, I really wanted "really" to be bold in this sentence but the Mac doesn't "know" it because I didn't select the text first!. Macs suck. <b></b>

I want to crop a picture but Photoshop doesn't let me. Crop is grayed out until I make a selection. But sometimes I don't *want* to make a selection. I just want it to intuitively know based on a complex algorithm based on previous usage, image recognition and my facial expression. I should be able to speak coordinates and say CROP!

Come on, man.

Services work.

Hell, even Grab works if you are in TextEdit (or stickies), it's just that other applications (particularly 3rd party apps) haven't utilized it, (such as Photoshop). But that's clearly in the 3rd party's court at that point.

Photoshop clearly has not enabled itself to utilize Services, likely because they want to avoid any feature that isn't also on Windows. Blame Adobe. (And 3rd parties for other apps).

Yes, Apple should make all their own Services work with all their own apps, no argument.

Grab is a "Provider" Service and only works within the application that the user is calling it FROM.

Other Services are Processor Services, that take data FROM where you are and pipe to somewhere else (perhaps altering it along the way).

Did Apple err in lumping both Provider and Processor together? YES. It leads to the horrendous UI and confusion we have now.

I'm not arguing it can't be ripped apart and rewritten from the ground up, in some other form altogether.

I even said I rarely use them, just because they are too out-of-the-way and not contextual enough.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: the man in black,

Come on man, services don't. Look at your argument, bolding text, selecting something... those are basic Mac editing commands.

Services, at least the way they were hyped, are supposed to be much more than that. The fact that ALL they could do were a few simple, text-based things, is bogus and you know it. You've basically already said so. Yeah, you can argue that something POORLY conceived is nominally executed.

I say, half assed, when it comes to something as important equals broken. It means they couldn't do it right, so they did the fucking bare minimum to try and cover ass.

How much time do I save using a service, vs. regular Mac editing commands (in other words, cutting an email address and pasting it into my mail client instead of even bothering with the "service")? Right, none.

Meanwhile, the whole idea of THE ACTIVE WINDOW is supposedly a kind of selection, ain't it? If a file is open, come on, how hard would it be for Services to assume, contextually, that I was talking about THAT VERY OPEN DOCUMENT. Imagine that. Sit back and ask yourself, with an active window open, think of all the smart things the OS could do. You're in the middle of something, some project... but you want to quickly show it to somebody... even if it's just emailing a snapshot of that window.

Then there are things like Quickeys, which basically ARE pan-application services, but aren't using the Service architecture.

There's "grab" and then there's command-shift 3/4, which I don't know if that's grab or not.

Then, there's services that would totally make sense to invoke WITHOUT any selection... jeepers, how hard would it be to have the OS just pop a dialog "SELECT THE THING YOU WANT TO <service>" That's how it's meant to work.

Greying out the options is ridiculous when it comes to services. It's, welcome to Macintosh, here's all the crap you can't do. It's lazy. It's poorly conceived and unrealized. It's bullshit, and I say they don't work. They are so beta that nobody, not even you, ever uses them in any serious way.

quote:

---

Originally posted by thalo:
Services, at least the way they were hyped, are supposed to be much more than that. The fact that ALL they could do were a few simple, text-based things, is bogus and you know it. You've basically already said so.

---

What hype??

They are barely mentioned, first off.

Second, when they are mentioned, they "promise" only what, in fact, Services currently are capable of.

Each and every one of the Services work in the context in which they were designed to work.

That you have an entire other idea of how they should work, or additional features, does not mean that Services don't actually work.

My only complaints are over implementation, not that "they don't work".

I want:
1. Visual distinction between "processor" and "provider" Services.
2. Contextual menu - They should be in a contextual menu, with a System Preferences prefpane to disable whichever you don't want, including all.
3. Total hiding of inapplicable services. if the service isn't appropriate to the data or application, hide it. No reason to show it grayed out.

But those points do not amount to "Services don't work".

They do work. You seem to think that if there's room for improvement, then something doesn't work or is shoddy or half-assed.

But all things are improved given enough time. Even the fucking wheel and fire have been improved.

Thalo, like my ex-wife, you give good headache.

quote:

---

Interesting dynamic in the evolution of this thread. Everything was fine and substantive until some drunk showed up and posted something that made Jay demand that he be thrown out. We reminded him of what we'd ALREADY said about the freewheeling environment here. At that point everything changed, and he was snarly from then on. Not that one or two of the regulars here couldn't have been a bit more diplomatic in a few spots, but still.....

---

The sad thing is, after poking around his website, jay does have criticisms of Apple and OSX to offer. So why let some hit-and-run poster start a tizzy, then wilt in the face of people who a) call the behavior as they see it or b) offer up a challenging argument? Personally, I think there could be more of an extensive contribution if it were desired. Perhaps going cold turkey off of disciplinarian moderation is too much for some?

Dunno. Jeez, if it wasn't for personal offense and outrage, I wouldn't have developed such fast typing skills in bashing out replies!

Yeah, Grab sucks ass as a service. I'm not sure why Apple hasn't implemented its functionality yet. Maybe they feel people use the keyboard commands more. If so, why not just rid Grab from the services menu?

I'm not sure about Services being a contextual menu. I already have a load of contextual menu items installed and it often takes a long time for the menu to load (sometimes causing the beachball). Having Services as its own pan-application menu item is better, in my opinion.

There are actually a number of 3rd party services I use often, all that use text however. EndNote and MacJournal are the two most used. It would be great if Services could function beyond text. App developers and Apple could extend capabilities leaps and bounds. I wonder if some 3rd party app developers don't develop Services because they want their software to be consistent in feature sets between OSX and XP.

Perhaps going cold turkey off of disciplinarian moderation is too much for some?

I'm more than willing to bring out the whips, chains, rings, clamps, studded leather garments or whatever it takes to make someone feel the disciplinarian comforts of home. There are considerable waver forms to sign but that shouldn't be a problem.

Ask me to remove the bad language from your own posts and I will comply. If you wish to wear some kind of remotely controlled iShock device which I can activate when you make a transgression then I will gladly comply. If you want help, assistance or advice on how to deal with internet bullies, con men, belligerents, wascals, villains, vagabonds vipers, or even liberals then I'll be more than glad to share whatever knowledge I have.

I'm here at your service.

Everything was fine and substantive until some drunk showed up and posted something that made Jay demand that he be thrown out.

Re-read his first post. It's actually very provocative. Keep in mind that he thought he was walking into a forum inhabited by irrational graybeards desperately clinging to OS 9 out of ignorance and fear. People with a sort of unreasonable, insane love of the legacy OS. He says so right in his opening sentence. Then he goes on in the post to dump on what he thinks is the object of that insane love, the legacy Mac OS. Imagine yourself, say, addressing the members of a club dedicate to the preservation of the Bengal tiger and populated with people who are absolutely fanatic about their cause, and telling them upon your introduction that you think all the tigers should be made into rugs and how stupid their cause is. I don't think the insincere apology for trolling at the end actually changes much of that. He thought he was trolling and may be immediately be banned by our moderators.

It's a provocative post, but his impression of who we are is wrong. As far as OS X and OS 8-9 goes we each use whatever suits us for the task we are doing. For some that means OS X all the time. For others its the legacy all the time. For most it means sometimes OS X, and sometimes legacy. So, none of us were provoked by his post because it was aimed at imaginary wild men legacy lovers, and not us. We all told him "welcome" and not to be put off by stories of graybeard wild men, and that he could give his point of view freely.

I'm guessing, of course, but I think he found our responses disappointing. So, in his second post he decided to leave and thanked us for the fuller understanding he gained of our "crusade" (what crusade?) and wished us luck. That's when Rico jabbed him with the 'PC, crapsettling, Linux wannabe' remark and he seemed to return to engage Rico. Maybe he thought he had found one of those crazy niner graybeards.

I agree the "Rave" comment seemed to set him off. I took it as New Year's Eve highjinks and not to be taken seriously. However, I was genuinely shocked that after all our comments about the freedom of expression, that we do take seriously here, that Jay would immediately ignore and violate our one explicitly stated principle and call for Rave's expulsion. After that he seemed to contradict and be nasty to anyone who answered him no matter what they said. He didn't try to find out what their opinions were or even if they sided with him on the subject of OS X. He didn't seem to care. I don't think he ever intended to stay and get to know anyone's opinion. I believe that he primarily came here for that "Battle Royale" with the whackos that's advertised on the main page and that's pretty much all he was looking for. That's my guess.

I thought his exchanges with thalo were dismissive, nasty, and often explicitly and purposely insulting. Maybe he thought he had the main whack job on the hook and he was going to really provoke him. But, he doesn't know thalo. Thalo doesn't get provoked. He'll just keep on coming at you in waves. All with the same demeanor. He didn't get what he wanted from thalo either.

For all we know Jay may be a perfectly decent guy just having a couple of bad days and spoiling to give someone grief. As I said, he may have been a valuable addition with a wealth of information and a strong point of view. He'll probably be back. This is a good site for people with strong opinions. When he does I hope he doesn't stay with the obnoxious asshole act. It's hard to believe that's his actual personality.

This brings up another point that I made way back in the beginning of thalo.net. I think the front page is a sort of false negative advertising with its promise of a "Battle Royale" and fists pointing at you. I said at that time, it will put off most people because most people are not looking for a beef, and those few that are will be disappointed. Once inside the forum they'll find the members a rather levelheaded group of professionals; lawyers, researchers, business managers, graphic artists, and others; not crazy niner two-fisted wild men. They'll even find a wide range of well thought out opinion concerning OS X if they can get us to express it, yet again. They won't find what the advertisement says is here. Even thalo doesn't meet that description. He oftentimes has a flamboyant writing style, but his opinions are thoughtful and educated. He's more patient and respectful of others opinions than the two-fisted graphic would lead you believe. I know what our reputation is, and what our advertisement reenforces, but it just ain't so. It just leads people astray. We'll have to continue to do what we tried to do in our opening posts to Jay. Make long explanations trying to counter a false impression that we ourselves are helping to perpetuate.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: HH,

quote:

---

Imagine yourself, say, addressing the members of a club dedicate to the preservation of the Bengal tiger and populated with people who are absolutely fanatic about their cause, and telling them upon your introduction that you think all the tigers should be made into rugs and how stupid their cause is.

---

LOL. I think that's an apt analogy.

I believe that he primarily came here for that "Battle Royale" with the whackos that's advertised on the main page and that's pretty much all he was looking for.

One of the reasons people come here is because we can help bestow hero status on them. I don’t know if that’s true in this case but I’ve seen it before. The damsel in distress is OS X (and what a fat damsel she is…We’re gonna need a bigger horse!) The white knight swoops in and slays the greybeards who, of course, mean to drag everyone back to the dark ages. We are the Morlocks of the Apple universe. Having defended OS X’s honor they can then return to Camelot Forums (after several changes of horse) where their friends throw a festive celebration in their honor.