May 13, 2008 at 07:16Leopard and switching layouts
More recently, having moved from Windows to Mac OS X Leopard, I, of course, came across many unusual things. The many differences of this system make you think a lot, because it becomes interesting: why did the developers do just that. Because from them - from developers - you expect a thorough approach to the details of the interface. I would like to reflect on one such detail out loud and listen to knowledgeable people. This is switching keyboard layouts.
One of the differences between Mac OS and Windows regarding keyboard layouts is that on Windows, when switching to another application, the current layout is remembered, and then restored upon return. (Somewhere I read that the same behavior was characteristic of Tiger). Why is Leopard wrong?
Perhaps the reason lies in the desire to avoid the modes (which I personally like). Here's what Jeff Ruskin writes about it:
That is, so that the user does not have to monitor what his application is active, so that the layouts do not switch as if spontaneously, perhaps it was done the way it was done.
But then the question arises, why is it not possible to configure keyboard shortcuts to switch to a specific layout? (Or just I did not find where). You can configure switching to the next and previous layouts, but this also gives rise to modes. Before typing, I have to check which layout is now turned on, because it is far from always “located at the locus of attention” or “in short-term memory”.
Somehow it doesn’t turn out very consistently: in one place we got rid of the modes, and in the other - no, because of which as a result we have to endure some inconvenience.
What do you think about this?
One of the differences between Mac OS and Windows regarding keyboard layouts is that on Windows, when switching to another application, the current layout is remembered, and then restored upon return. (Somewhere I read that the same behavior was characteristic of Tiger). Why is Leopard wrong?
Perhaps the reason lies in the desire to avoid the modes (which I personally like). Here's what Jeff Ruskin writes about it:
If you are developing a modal interface, keep in mind that users will always make modal errors, unless the value of the state controlled by this mode is in the user's locus of attention (and he can see it) or in his short-term memory. The task of the developers is to show that this mode is used correctly or that the advantages of this mode outweigh its inevitable disadvantages. However, it is safer to always avoid the use of modes in interface design.
“Interface: new directions in the design of computer systems”, 3.2.2
That is, so that the user does not have to monitor what his application is active, so that the layouts do not switch as if spontaneously, perhaps it was done the way it was done.
But then the question arises, why is it not possible to configure keyboard shortcuts to switch to a specific layout? (Or just I did not find where). You can configure switching to the next and previous layouts, but this also gives rise to modes. Before typing, I have to check which layout is now turned on, because it is far from always “located at the locus of attention” or “in short-term memory”.
Somehow it doesn’t turn out very consistently: in one place we got rid of the modes, and in the other - no, because of which as a result we have to endure some inconvenience.
What do you think about this?