On Windows, you run an installer. On Linux, you install a package.

On Mac, you just copy a folder somewhere. Anywhere.

Inside the .app folder (bundle), is an Info.plist. It describes all the file extensions that this application can use. It describes the URL schemas this application supports. It tells OS X what version it is, its localised pretty name.

The bundle contains all the libraries it needs to work. It is self contained. This is less efficient. You may end up running two copies of the same library in memory. But it improves reliability. As a product developer, I am assured by this system. I can be certain, in the event of a bug, that my app is only using the code I shipped. As a user, I know I can copy a .app bundle to anyone’s system, and it will run, because it has everything it needs already.

You don’t need administrative privileges to install a bundle. Trying out an application can’t break your Mac’s root system.

To delete an application, you just drag it to trash. You’re fairly assured that the app is gone. On Windows and Linux the uninstall may not be thorough. It may modify your system on the way out. There’s no assurances.

People complain that dragging for trash doesn’t allow the app to clean up. Which is true. “Your home directory is littered with files” is the general complaint. Usually however this is just a preference plist in ~/Library/Preferences and some app data in ~/Library/Application Support. Easy to clean up by hand. And also, I can’t think of any Windows or Linux applications that clean up the home directory when they uninstall.

Still people would be more assured an app is gone if it could do some kind of uninstall step when trashed. So it’s a con.

For developers, .app bundles can be a pain. Installers are possible, Apple even provide a native, standardised installation system that writes a receipt of the files it installs to /Library/Receipts. But you are encouraged to avoid them.

For our Last.fm app we needed to install an iTunes plugin. And we wanted to continue distributing our application as a bundle. With a little more work we had the app copying the plugin to the user’s iTunes plugin home directory on first use. And we made the plugin delete itself when it found that the Last.fm app no longer existed.

Overall I think the above system is better. On Windows we would have just expected the user to use the uninstaller. If they hadn’t, the iTunes plugin would never have been uninstalled.

I like bundles because it is one less thing that can go wrong. Installers are complicated. They require testing. They are hard to debug.

People often complain that it is “insane” that you can only resize from one corner on Mac. It’s especially crazy, they say, when you have to move the window first in order to make some space to resize at the bottom right!

The problem seems particularly exacerbated because Mac windows don’t really maximize (a topic for next time), so you end up resizing more often on Mac.

But really, this is just resistance to change.

Ask yourself: “How often do I actually resize windows?” Is it really so common a task that all four sides must be dedicated to this task? The answer is: no.

Personally, I resize windows rarely. The app I resize most is Safari, as some websites are optimally viewed narrower or wider than my usual window width, but I still estimate to doing that once a day at most. Most applications you resize once, the first time you use it, and that’s only if the app was badly designed and has a poor default size.

Still, why not make every side of the Window have a resize control?

MacPros

1. Utility. You have 10 pixels extra on three out of the four sides of every Window.
2. Usability. The content of Windows is emphasised when there is no border to distract you. Safari is a shining example of this. There is barely any controls, no statusbar, no window borders. The content of the website you are visiting is emphasised as much as it possible without losing navigation controls completely.
3. Usability. You actually have a larger target area for the resize control on Mac. It’s a square of about 10×10 pixels. Not 3 or 4 pixels on every side. Sure overall the other platforms have more area, but when you are aiming your mouse for the control, the bigger square wins. Statistically though
4. Aesthetics. Windows look better without thick borders.

MacCons

1. It obeys Fitts’ law less. You will over time move your mouse farther to resize a window on Mac versus Windows or Linux. But as I said above, it doesn’t make it worth it.

Debunked.

This is post one of a series.

Everyone likes an analogy, because a good analogy transforms a new and difficult concept into something familiar and easy to understand.

I don’t understand quantum physics, but I understand how my post is delivered! Thanks Professor McGarrigan!

And analogies are good. Sometimes. The problem is the person explaining the concept is rarely completely free of prejudice. Everyone has an ulterior motive. Even if they aren’t aware of it. And when choosing an appropriate simile the perpetrator will either consciously or unconsciously align you with their way of thinking. Practically, analogies are a kind of fallacy.

Politicians and marketing people use this to their advantage frequently. Associating groupthink from a topic people are passionate about to their mandate. And sadly it works. It works very well.

Really my only conclusion for you, my humble reader, is to do the same. But probably, you already do

I finish up with a bad simile that you probably already hate:

Pirating music is stealing

Today I got an anonymous message:

I think there was a filelight harddrive poster on the wall in “big bang theory” Season 1 Ep. 11

Can anyone confirm?

1. Download the Tube Map pdf from TFL
2. Save it somewhere you won’t delete it, eg ~/Documents/
3. Spotlight search for a tube map, eg Command-space, Tufnell Park

Spotlight will open the map with the Tufnell Park highlighted! So now you know where it is and what line to get.

OS X is awesome.