borton@sdcc3.UUCP (Chris Borton) (04/21/86)
One of the most fun things to share with other Mac people are option-key 'tricks' you've discovered or heard about. Supposedly these are all documented somewhere, but not obviously. Hence, a few more for those who haven't heard already: option-click on close box closes ALL windows. cmd-period soon after double-clicking in the finder will abort back. option-open folder in Finder 5.[12] will leave window closed upon return. cmd-drag icon in Finder 5.[12] leaves icon 'on grid.' This can be permanently enabled, along with many other goodies, in the LAYO resource of the Finder. Use ResEdit 1.0D? to modify. Most people know the option tricks for Font/DA Mover by now... Know some more? Tell the world. (or at least USENET :-)) -Chris -- Chris Borton, UC San Diego Undergraduate CS; Micro Consultant, UCSD borton@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU || ...!{ucbvax,decvax,noscvax,ihnp4,bang}!sdcsvax!borton
d@alice.UucP (Daniel Rosenberg) (04/26/86)
So many of these neat messages seem to come by, but I can't tack them all up (very neatly) near the Mac. So here's a request to all you hardcore MacFreaks out there (and I know you're out there!) - Why not have a periodically updated list of these option, command, and other combination Easter egg type-of-things? If you already have one, please, *please* post it to the net. If you only have a few, please mail them to me at the address below, and when it starts to get really huge, I post it back up again. Thanks and stuff, -- ############# Dan Rosenberg ### CE @# AT&T Bell Labs, Murray^Hill ########## # [ These opinions are necessarily mine, not my emp/o\yer's. ] # ## UUCP: {ihnp4 || research || allegra}!alice!d #AT&T: 201/582\9428 (work)##
greg%harvard@harvard.UUCP (05/01/86)
In article <3237@sdcc3.UUCP> borton@sdcc3.UUCP (Chris Borton) writes: >One of the most fun things to share with other Mac people are option-key >'tricks' you've discovered or heard about. ... >option-click on close box closes ALL windows. > >cmd-period soon after double-clicking in the finder will abort back. > >option-open folder in Finder 5.[12] will leave window closed upon return. > >cmd-drag icon in Finder 5.[12] leaves icon 'on grid.' This can be > permanently enabled, along with many other goodies, in the LAYO > resource of the Finder. Use ResEdit 1.0D? to modify. > >Most people know the option tricks for Font/DA Mover by now... You call these things fun? Well what about shift-command-click-option-double- click? Doesn't that do something too?? Oh yes, but you wouldn't know since it's *undocumented*. Apple and other software developers should stop these interface abuses before they get out of hand. -- gregregreg
neth@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU (05/15/86)
On finder "Shortcuts" greg%harvard@harvard.UUCP writes: >You call these things fun? Well what about shift-command-click-option-double- >click? Doesn't that do something too?? Oh yes, but you wouldn't know since >it's *undocumented*. >Apple and other software developers should stop these interface abuses >before they get out of hand. But they are *documented*. The MAC+ manual, at least, has a table that lists all of the mentioned shortcuts. I agree that this kind of cleverness can get out of hand quickly. Most of the shortcuts, at least, do things most people can live without. The only notable exception is cmd-opt-double click on finder, which ought to be in a menu. This *shortcut* is a necessity for running single drive systems. Craig Neth uiucdcs!neth
whp@cbnap.UUCP (W. H. Pollock x4575 3S235) (05/19/86)
Actually the option-command open works with any file, not just finder. This is useful not only for the finder, but for applications that aren't set right (for instance, some program you just downloaded). These are all clearly documented in a single place (in Apple's "power user's short-cut summary"). In addition, they have been documented elsewhere too, in MacUser magazine and USENET for instance. W. H. Pollock, UUCP: ...!cbnap!whp DELPHI: WHP "The opinions expressed above are ficticious. Any resemblance to the opinions of persons living or dead is purely coincidental."
chrism@reed.UUCP (05/25/86)
In article <132@cbnap.UUCP> whp@cbnap.UUCP (W. H. Pollock x4575 3S235) writes: >These are all clearly documented in a single place (in Apple's "power user's >short-cut summary"). In addition, they have been documented elsewhere too, >in MacUser magazine and USENET for instance. This is great that they at least are documented somewhere, but that really makes no difference. Much of the appeal of the Macintosh (it's biggest selling point, in my opinion) IS THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO READ A BIG MANUAL TO USE EACH PROGRAM. I don't want to have to dig through manuals to figure out how to do things. With shortcuts implemented in a non-intuitive way that requires reference to a manual to use them, the Mac loses one of the key characteristics that renders it superior to IBM style machines--it's intuitive, friendly nature. ...Chris... UUCP: tektronix!reed!chrism "Death is Nature's way of saying take it easy." _I Spy_
jimb@amdcad.UUCP (Jim Budler) (05/26/86)
In article <3530@reed.UUCP> chrism@reed.UUCP (Chris McKnight) writes: >This is great that they at least are documented somewhere, but that really >makes no difference. Much of the appeal of the Macintosh (it's biggest >selling point, in my opinion) IS THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO READ A BIG MANUAL >TO USE EACH PROGRAM. I don't want to have to dig through manuals to figure >out how to do things. With shortcuts implemented in a non-intuitive way >that requires reference to a manual to use them, the Mac loses one of the >key characteristics that renders it superior to IBM style machines--it's >intuitive, friendly nature. How silly. You still don't have to read a manual. You just can't use the shortcuts. Macintosh's friendly user interface is still there. I find both the options presented here to be silly (actually one option phrased two ways): 1. Don't allow any operation in any program or finder if it isn't a menu option. 2. Make all operations menu options. The first penalizes those who are willing to read the manual in search of possible shortcuts. The second could make menus large and unwieldy enough to discourage users. Remember that the 'user friendly system' only provides an environment where productive effort can be generated with a minimum of learning time spent. If it promised that additional learning time gained no additional productivity gains I wouldn't be using it now. THAT option reminds me of many menu operated tools of one sort or another which by making the performance of a job so easy that anyone could do it, made the possibility of using the tool for anything above the original design intent impossible. Ever try to use a dedicated word processor for anything else? -- Jim Budler Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (408) 749-5806 Usenet: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amdcad!jimb Compuserve: 72415,1200
jerryg@dartvax.UUCP (Jerry Godes) (05/26/86)
> ... Much of the appeal of the Macintosh (it's biggest > selling point, in my opinion) IS THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO READ A BIG MANUAL > TO USE EACH PROGRAM. I don't want to have to dig through manuals to figure > out how to do things. With shortcuts implemented in a non-intuitive way > that requires reference to a manual to use them, the Mac loses one of the > key characteristics that renders it superior to IBM style machines--it's > intuitive, friendly nature. > > ...Chris... Who said you have to use the short-cuts? The mac is still user friendly to those who need it. But, for someone who is going to use a program a lot, it saves an enormous amount of time if you don't have to move your hands from the keyboard. That's the advantage of the short-cuts: you can start to use the program without using the manual, but as you use progress, you can naturally learn the short-cuts and improve your productivity. - Jerry Godes
merchant@dartvax.UUCP (Peter Merchant) (05/27/86)
> Who said you have to use the short-cuts? The mac is still user friendly to > those who need it. But, for someone who is going to use a program a lot, it > saves an enormous amount of time if you don't have to move your hands from > the keyboard. That's the advantage of the short-cuts: you can start to use > the program without using the manual, but as you use progress, you can > naturally learn the short-cuts and improve your productivity. > > - Jerry Godes Maybe it's just me, but I find the mouse to be a real great shortcut. I've been using TML Pascal recently. I figure it's probably faster for me to point and click than it is to type out "Exam Maker.Pas". All these shortcuts are great for things like MacWrite and Word, but aren't all that necessary for stuff that uses the mouse alot. Here's what I did: I went out and spent $29.95 and bought MacTracks, by Assimilation. MacTracks installs as a Desk Accessory and allows you to store a mouse movement as a keystroke. Thus, if you hit Cmd-X, it will move the mouse up to the top of the screen and select the appropriate menu. Great. I can now define my own mouse movements. There. Now all your favourite commands can have their own keystrokes. It was $29.95 when I bought it, retail, about a year ago. Go buy it, define your favourite menu functions as keystrokes, and go away. Yeesh. -- "Synchronized like magic..." Peter Merchant
mazlack@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (Lawrence J. Mazlack) (05/27/86)
>>This is great that they at least are documented somewhere, but that really >>makes no difference. Much of the appeal of the Macintosh (it's biggest >>selling point, in my opinion) IS THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO READ A BIG MANUAL >>TO USE EACH PROGRAM. I don't want to have to dig through manuals to figure >>out how to do things. With shortcuts implemented in a non-intuitive way >>that requires reference to a manual to use them, the Mac loses one of the >>key characteristics that renders it superior to IBM style machines--it's >>intuitive, friendly nature. > >How silly. You still don't have to read a manual. You just can't use the >shortcuts. Macintosh's friendly user interface is still there. > I certainly agree, if you don't like em, don't use em. Casual users don't need em. You only need em when you are fairly sophisticated and are trying to save time. For example, when using Word and you keep changing fonts and styles. You CAN do it all through menu selections, but it takes a long, long, long time. Larry Mazlack New style mazlack@ernie.berkeley.edu ARPA | CSNET mazlack%ernie@berkeley.ARPA BITNET mazlack@ucbernie.BITNET telephone (415) 528-0496 snail CS Dept, 571 Evans, U. California, Berkeley, CA 94720
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (05/28/86)
[The referenced article complains that the "shortcut" or "power user" keystrokes contradict the Macintosh user interface's goal of ease of use without a manual.] I disagree with this complaint. While it is somewhat annoying that you can't find out the shortcuts without referencing a manual, the goal of the user interface should be that the user can use whatever application is being run, without having to reference the manual, to the extent that your *average* user would want to use it. Additional "esoteric" or "obscure" features, if they are shown to the new user, tend to be confusing. So it makes sense that some features should be essentially hidden until the program becomes familiar -- but they definitely should be available. This is not a new idea by any means, though; for example, I can recall that the same idea was expressed in the introductory description of the old Univac TSOS operating system (ca. 1973), which gave a simple set of commands that could do most things, but with a wide array of options to give flexibility. The trick there was a judicious choice of defaults: the commands documented in the introductory manuals didn't tell about all the available options, because the defaults were the ones most users would want. On the other hand, once you became familiar with the commands, you could change these defaults to gain greater flexibility. -- E. Roskos
rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) (06/05/86)
In article <2189@peora.UUCP> jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) writes: >[The referenced article complains that the "shortcut" or "power user" >keystrokes contradict the Macintosh user interface's goal of ease of >use without a manual.] > >I disagree with this complaint. While it is somewhat annoying that you >can't find out the shortcuts without referencing a manual, the goal of the >user interface should be that the user can use whatever application is >being run, without having to reference the manual, to the extent that your >*average* user would want to use it. Additional "esoteric" or "obscure" >features, if they are shown to the new user, tend to be confusing. So >it makes sense that some features should be essentially hidden until the >program becomes familiar -- but they definitely should be available. My main complaint is that many short-cuts aren't documented on-line. For example, trick like clover-p and such are only documented in the manual. I've even heard there's some way to switch the keyboard to DVORAK. Unfortunately, such things can't even be found in the online documentation. A real simple suggestion here would be to have various layers of "option menus" or "hint windows", which, even if mousing at them does nothing, at least lets you know that clover-P (or whatever) will send postscript out the printer port. I use shortcuts too, but there are a lot of them I just don't know about. Some of the shortcuts are different for different applications. How many additional bytes would be needed to have system level and application level "help windows" for each machine? How about a little "help" selection on the menu bar. Mouse to the menu bar, touch the "Option" key and a list of corresponding letters tells you what you can do with the "Option-letter" keys. Do the same for the various permutations of Shift, Option, and Clover. The beauty of the Mac (or most of the other mice and windows interfaces) is that the manual can be put on a "back shelf" while you learn the basics of a new application. Unfortunately, when you are ready to learn a few shortcuts, the manual is packed in some unlabled box! I suppose, if one is really couragous, they could just hit various combinations of keys and see what happens (are there shortcuts to format the disk :-).