Mac OS X - Disappearing Menu
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: TaliesinSoft on 14 Jan 2010 17:17 On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 13:34:57 -0600, Jolly Roger wrote (in article <jollyroger-C6CCA1.13345714012010(a)news.individual.net>): > I personally consider the general look of the Mac OS X user interface to > be satisfactory enough that I don't bother going out of my way to modify > it. Whether or not to modify the OS X user interface from the defaults is a matter of personal preference. As I've suggested elsewhere in this thread I prefer to have the menubar "hidden" when not needed so as to not detract from the desktop image. I also find that the perspective of the 3-D dock conflicts with that of desktop backgrounds that also have perspective. But, hey, that's just me and my weirdness! :-) -- James Leo Ryan --- Austin, Texas --- taliesinsoft(a)me.com
From: BreadWithSpam on 14 Jan 2010 18:15 TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft(a)me.com> writes: > the desktop image. I also find that the perspective of the 3-D dock > conflicts with that of desktop backgrounds that also have > perspective. I *hate* the 3-d dock. The way it indicates active apps is too subtle, and the 3-d-ness just doesn't add anything. When you move the dock to the side, it goes "flat". You can easily set it so that it's similarly 2-d when on the bottom (where I prefer it) using the following: defaults write com.apple.dock no-glass -boolean YES; killall Dock FWIW. That's in addition to the dock hiding that I didn't use at first, but now also prefer. -- Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed. Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow? http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting
From: Jamie Kahn Genet on 14 Jan 2010 19:42 Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > In article <0001HW.C77401CB0000F5E8B02A89BF(a)News.Individual.NET>, > TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft(a)me.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:02:26 -0600, Nick Naym wrote (in article > > <C773C942.4FBEE%nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>): > > > > [responding to my opening posting in this thread in which I described the > > application Menu Eclipse which allows on to have the menu bar at the top of > > the screen fade when the cursor is not over it, the fade ranging from a > > light gray all the way to a full black] > > > > > Since it doesn't gain you any real estate, I assume you want this > > > primarily for aesthetics? > > > > Yes my use of Menu Eclipse is purely for aesthetics. I happen to like a > > minimalist appearance of the desktop and that includes minimizing the > > appearance of the menu when it is not needed. > > I personally consider the general look of the Mac OS X user interface to > be satisfactory enough that I don't bother going out of my way to modify > it. I used to be somewhat anti-Dock (I was a big Apple and contextual menu user, using BeHierarchic and FinderPop to open almost everything in classic MacOS), but I've gone the same way. Big change from me customising the UI to the nth degree in classic, heh. Of course that cost me in stability... -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
From: Jolly Roger on 14 Jan 2010 21:15 In article <1jcd449.1qg35gi1jy40w1N%jamiekg(a)wizardling.geek.nz>, jamiekg(a)wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > > > In article <0001HW.C77401CB0000F5E8B02A89BF(a)News.Individual.NET>, > > TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft(a)me.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:02:26 -0600, Nick Naym wrote (in article > > > <C773C942.4FBEE%nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>): > > > > > > [responding to my opening posting in this thread in which I described the > > > application Menu Eclipse which allows on to have the menu bar at the top > > > of > > > the screen fade when the cursor is not over it, the fade ranging from a > > > light gray all the way to a full black] > > > > > > > Since it doesn't gain you any real estate, I assume you want this > > > > primarily for aesthetics? > > > > > > Yes my use of Menu Eclipse is purely for aesthetics. I happen to like a > > > minimalist appearance of the desktop and that includes minimizing the > > > appearance of the menu when it is not needed. > > > > I personally consider the general look of the Mac OS X user interface to > > be satisfactory enough that I don't bother going out of my way to modify > > it. > > I used to be somewhat anti-Dock (I was a big Apple and contextual menu > user, using BeHierarchic and FinderPop to open almost everything in > classic MacOS), but I've gone the same way. Me too. I hated the Dock in the beginning. I still think it's got severe limitations and is quite schizophrenic, but I'm able to live with it. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR
From: Jolly Roger on 14 Jan 2010 21:15
In article <yobvdf42s8l.fsf(a)panix2.panix.com>, BreadWithSpam(a)fractious.net wrote: > TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft(a)me.com> writes: > > > the desktop image. I also find that the perspective of the 3-D dock > > conflicts with that of desktop backgrounds that also have > > perspective. > > I *hate* the 3-d dock. The way it indicates active apps is too > subtle, and the 3-d-ness just doesn't add anything. Yes, I suppose I could have mentioned I use the Dock in 2D mode as well. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR |