Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The new MacBook

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 1001 posts

Re: The new MacBook

#741

Post by gcr »

davidw wrote: post #335
james-skemp wrote: post #271

A search against the comments returns no results: 2304×1440 resolution and 16:10 aspect ratio? Showing a few co-workers and a quick suggests what I thought: a bit of amazement at 16:10. Does anyone have any insight into why they didn't go with a 16:9 ratio?

I'm not a Mac person at all, but I greatly envy this, uh, aspect of their computers. The code I work with is vertical, not horizontal, so having more vertical space is good.

It might be fun to take a cardboard box or something and make a "vertical" stand for your macbook. You could keep it constantly rotated 90 degrees for code reading. :)

Re: The new MacBook

#742

Post by sigzero »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #662
nostrademons wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a big fan of the Finder of System 7. It seemed to hit the sweet spot where you could do just about everything you needed to easily (it had collapsible tree views, folders, computed folder sizes, drag & drop, copy & paste, labels, etc.), but it didn't try to hide things from you or restrict what you could do, it didn't get too fancy and guess at your common tasks, it actually showed your filesystem instead of Appl…

A thousand times this. I loved the "spatial Finder" of System 7. It was such a 1:1 mapping onto the filesystem that even my DOS-using friends realised that this wasn't a GUI abstraction over something cruder, this was the Mac and this was how it worked. 23 years later and I still can't consistently switch off "browser view" in the OS X Finder. Cmd-option-T works for windows on my local disks, but then I'll insert a U…

Does this help:

http://osxdaily.com/2012/07/04/change-finder-window-view-sty...

Re: The new MacBook

#743

Post by reustle »

BryantD wrote: post #38
jkot wrote: post #30

I am bit disappointed. Dell has similar sized laptop, with bigger display, smaller bezel and higher resolution. http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-13-9343-laptop/pd

Well. 25% heavier. Edit: which is not to say that the new MacBook is better; I'm just saying there are tradeoffs here. They both look pretty good to me.

Is 25% heavier on such a light laptop that big of a difference at the end of the day?

Re: The new MacBook

#745

Post by jjoonathan »

guelo wrote: post #617
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

Two features that Windows has that Finder doesn't, and annoy me all the time in my workflow are: 1)Finder search refuses to show the path for the files except in the status bar. So you can't sort by path. 2) Finder won't tell you the resolution of images. In general, Explorer has way more columns in the Details view than Finder.

Agreed, those things suck. But as someone moving in the other direction (Finder -> Explorer), let me share a few of my Explorer grievances. Hopefully I'm missing a hidden option, but more cynically I expect that I'm in basically the same situation you are: stuck putting up with the persistent mediocrity in big-name graphical file navigators.

0) Good trackpad gestures.

1) Explorer can't sort alphabetically by name. WTH? No matter what I do, the closest I can get is "sort by folder/file status, THEN sort alphabetically by name." This really sucks for the common use cases of navigating the file tree by keyboard or unzipping into a crowded directory.

2) The retarded file open dialogs. I don't mean to say that all file open dialogs in Windows suck (although none of them allow drag-to-jump-to-file which is a minor PITA), I am referring specifically to a subset of file open dialogs which seem to be developmentally impaired by a few decades. They display the entire file hierarchy in a tree view that you have to scroll downwards vs the usual click-to-change-directory + breadcrumbs view. Ctrl+L to jump to a path doesn't work, they don't remember your location between invocations, they don't display common locations (desktop, docs, etc), jump-to-first-letter is broken, and they don't allow easy use of the down arrow to scroll because the next item is invariably hidden beneath the fold. These things are straight from the pits of UX hell, yet for some unknown reason they seem to constitute about ~20% of file selection dialogs on Windows. Ugh.

3) There are no consistent "jump to file" semantics (you know the "Open Enclosing Folder" contextual menu? Like that, but more universal). On OSX, this is the command key. Command click a document's icon in the header to jump to open an enclosing folder. Command click a search result or dock icon to jump to its location in the filesystem. Very handy. Very frustrating to find missing.

4) Hot corners to turn off the screen. Some screen/laptop manufacturers have a physical button, but some don't. Finder provides a built-in workaround. Explorer doesn't. In order to solve this issue I have to navigate the fake-download-button gauntlet and crapware-installer gauntlet twice before writing a line of code to emulate this feature with a keystroke. Yuck!

EDIT: added 0

Re: The new MacBook

#746

Post by Joky »

geophile wrote: post #579
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

How about showing the actual filesystem? Instead of some restricted fictional view? For example, how the hell do you get to /tmp from the Finder? What's with the stupid column per directory level? This is an extremely bad use of display space. Haven't used Windows in a long time, and the equivalent in Linux is useless. (Or, more precisely, I don't use it.) But there are a number of irritations that have been there fo…

cmd+shift+G

Re: The new MacBook

#747

Post by ctdonath »

pbreit wrote: post #461
nickysielicki wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but when you ship a machine with ONE PORT for the purposes of charging and peripherals, this absolutely needs to be in the box. Nickel and $80'ering me on a $1400 computer is ridiculous. I'll stick with my thinkpad.

With Bluetooth, the cloud and AirPlay, who even needs those ports? People are up in arms every time Apple changes/deletes ports and are almost always wrong. Go ahead and stick with your thinkpad.

In defense of the parent: Apple sells more than just the 12" MacBook, and if its specs aren't to your liking then you're not the intended demographic. Some people DO want an extremely thin/light Mac and don't need more than a charging cable & audio jack, enough people that Apple decided it was worth going to this extreme. Want more ports/power/etc? get a MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, iMac, or Mac Pro - each with a variety of configurations.

Re: The new MacBook

#748

Post by Animats »

jkot wrote: post #108
Animats wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised it doesn't support wireless charging. Now that Starbucks does, I'd expect all new laptop designs to include Starbucks compatibility.

Starbucks and Ikea: the leading computer innovators :-)

Why not? Starbucks, Ikea, and Apple all target the same demographic.

Re: The new MacBook

#749

Post by Joky »

nickysielicki wrote: post #423
Finbarr wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like there are some new $79 adapters to split out the USB-C port into power, usb and av[1]/vga[2]. [1] http://store.apple.com/us/product/MJ1K2AM/A/usb-c-digital-av... [2] http://store.apple.com/us/product/MJ1L2AM/A/usb-c-vga-multip...

I'm sorry but when you ship a machine with ONE PORT for the purposes of charging and peripherals, this absolutely needs to be in the box. Nickel and $80'ering me on a $1400 computer is ridiculous. I'll stick with my thinkpad.

Then it would be sold $1480... At some point I had 5 Nokia phone and 4 Dell laptop ones, power adapter. Why having an adaptor for VGA/HDMI/DVI/Display Port/USB/Ethernet/... shipped with all machines when all users probably won't need all but just one. This is a waste...

Re: The new MacBook

#750

Post by jamiesonbecker »

mrbabbage wrote: post #668
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

Have you tried Dolphin on Linux? It's absolutely the best graphical file shell I've ever used: - integrated command line whose PWD matches the directory shown in the graphic view. This is killer. - automatic numbering if you rename a bunch of files. - a tab-completeable navigation bar. - integrated context menu items (e.g. send via email, compress, encrypt, convert file type). - pretty, Apple-style image previews. I…

Fixed link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_%28file_manager%29
Post reply on HN