Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #712674

Re: Apple GUI Bug

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
> Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2026-05-10 22:42, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> On 11 May 2026 05:18:19 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On May 10, 2026 at 8:27:58 PM MST, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" wrote
>>>>> <10tribu$r55l$1@dont-email.me>:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, 10 May 2026 22:56:32 -0400, Nick Charles wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2026/5/10 4:05 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> You would expect B1 to be the active window now. And in all
>>>>>>>> normal multiwindow GUIs (including regular Unix and Linux ones),
>>>>>>>> this would be true. But on macOS, it’s not: instead, the next
>>>>>>>> window to become active is the next window from the same app,
>>>>>>>> namely A1!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Its not a bug, its a design choice.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What is the rationale behind that choice, can you enlighten us?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Unlike Windows and Linux, macOS is -- in terms of windows --
>>>>> application centric. It is not going to jump you to another
>>>>> application unless you specifically say you want to go to that
>>>>> application (or quit the app you are in). This is possible because
>>>>> macOS has the ability to have document focused apps be open with no
>>>>> application at all.
>>>> 
>>>> For a company which was such a stickler for intuitive UIs in its early
>>>> days, with clear cues to the user as to what is happening at any
>>>> moment, that seems very unintuitive -- obscure, even. Also, remember
>>>> they were champions of a more document-centric approach, consciously
>>>> moving away from an application-centric focus, at one point. Which
>>>> kind of compounds the mystery of why they would embrace such a
>>>> seemingly perverse idea.
>>> 
>>> 1. You mistake something you're not used to for "unintuitive".
>>> 
>>> 2. I don't remember any "document-centric approach". Perhaps you could 
>>> elucidate...
>>> 
>>> ...or just admit it's something you made up to make your whole argument 
>>> look better?
>>> 
>> 
>> I think it makes sense if you go from document / window A to B and then
>> close B to expect to go back to A. At least for my way of thinking. Others
>> might think more in terms of apps. 
>> 
>> With tabs I don’t expect to jump to another app when I close a doc — so
>> maybe that is tied to it. 
>> 
> 
> This is what AI says of the research. To me it makes sense and fits my
> experience.  
> 
> ——-
> 
> Cognitive research on task switching shows that adaptive behavior requires
> both the ability to focus on a task and protect it from distraction
> (cognitive stability) and to rapidly switch when circumstances change
> (cognitive flexibility) — and crucially, these are governed by a recency
> heuristic, where the system nudges control based on the recent history of
> task demands. 
> 
> In plain terms: your most recent context is the most cognitively “loaded”
> one. Returning to the last-used document after a close respects that — it
> puts you back where your working memory was focused.
> 
> The macOS behavior (stay in same app) has a principled defense, but it’s
> philosophical not empirical
> The macOS argument is: “If I’m working in an app and I finish using a
> document, I generally wish to stay in that app to create another document.”
> The OS treats the application as the primary actor, not the document or the
> prior context. 
> 
> That’s coherent within a document-centric model, but it assumes you closed
> that window within a workflow in that app — which isn’t the case in your
> scenario. You explicitly switched apps, then closed.
> The key variable: user intent at the moment of close
> 
> The research on mental models is most directly applicable here. When a
> user:
> 	1.	Is in App A
> 	2.	Switches to App B
> 	3.	Closes a window in App B
> …the most plausible intent is “I’m done with this thing in App B.”
> Returning to App A honors the navigation they initiated. Staying in App B
> requires the OS to assume the app-switch was incidental, which is a much
> bigger assumption.
> 
> Bottom line: The Windows behavior is better supported by the evidence on
> how people actually track task context. The macOS behavior is internally
> consistent but only correct if you never switch apps before closing — a
> narrow and increasingly uncommon use case. The research on recency
> heuristics and mental models both favor returning to the prior context
> rather than anchoring to the current app.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
> 

Asked another AI. To me this is interesting. 

——-
The behavior you’re describing is a fundamental divergence in
**Human-Computer Interaction (HCI)** philosophy. It touches on how
operating systems define the relationship between an "Application," a
"Window," and the "User’s Focus."
To determine which is "better," researchers typically look at **Mental
Models**, **Fitts's Law**, and **Task Switching Costs**.

## 1. The Windows Philosophy: Document-Centric

In Windows, the window *is* the app (or a primary instance of it). When you
close a window, the OS assumes you are done with that specific task and
returns you to the very last thing you were looking at, regardless of which
"program" it belonged to.

 * **The Research Strength:** This aligns with **Temporal Locality**.
Research shows that users often multitask between two specific documents
(e.g., a spreadsheet and a report). Returning to the "chronologically
previous" window minimizes the cognitive load of remembering where you just
were.
 * **The Weakness:** It can feel chaotic if you have many windows open, as
you might be "thrown" back to an app you forgot was running.

## 2. The macOS Philosophy: App-Centric
In macOS, the Application is a distinct entity that exists independently of
its windows. Closing a window doesn't "quit" the app; the focus stays
within the app's remaining windows or its menu bar.

 * **The Research Strength:** This supports **Spatial and Categorical
Grouping**. For power users or creative professionals, the "App" is a
workspace. Staying within the same app prevents "context switching," which
research identifies as a major drain on productivity. It maintains a stable
environment for the next action within that same tool.

 * **The Weakness:** It requires more manual "management" (e.g.,
Command+Tab) to get back to a previous app, adding an extra step to the
workflow.

## Comparison Table
| Feature | Windows (Last Document) | macOS (Same App) |
|---|---|---|
| **User Intent** | Focuses on *Time* (What did I do last?) | Focuses on
*Tool* (What am I using?) |
| **Cognitive Load** | Lower for quick back-and-forth tasks. | Lower for
deep-dive, single-app tasks. |
| **Predictability** | Can be "surprising" if the last app was buried. |
Highly predictable; you never leave the app. |
| **Efficiency** | Saves a click/keystroke when switching. | Requires an
intentional switch to change apps. |

## Which is "Better"?
There is no definitive "winner" in academic research, as the "better"
behavior depends entirely on the **User's Expertise** and **Task
Complexity**:

 * **For General/Casual Use:** The **Windows** approach is often cited as
more intuitive for beginners because it follows a "stack" logic (like
picking up the paper that was underneath the one you just threw away).

 * **For Professional/Complex Workflows:** The **macOS** approach is
favored by those who treat apps as "environments." Research into **Flow
State** suggests that accidentally being kicked out of an application (like
being moved from Photoshop back to a stray Chrome window) can break
concentration.

### A Third Path: Linux Environments
Interestingly, some Linux desktop environments (like GNOME) allow users to
toggle between these behaviors. User preference studies there suggest that
people who do **"heavy" multitasking** (10+ windows) prefer the macOS style
for stability, while **"light" multitaskers** (3-4 windows) prefer the
Windows style for speed.

Ultimately, it’s a trade-off between **speed of return** (Windows) and
**environmental stability** (macOS).
——-

Definite food for thought for me. 



-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-10 20:05 +0000
  Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 20:34 +0000
    Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-10 22:41 +0000
      Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 22:58 +0000
        Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-10 23:07 +0000
          Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 23:42 +0000
  Re: Apple GUI Bug CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-05-10 17:45 -0400
    Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 22:36 +0000
      Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-10 22:38 +0000
        Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-10 23:03 +0000
          Re: Apple GUI Bug Jim <slimjimmy1959@yahoomail.com> - 2026-05-10 23:47 +0000
            Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 00:08 +0000
  Re: Apple GUI Bug Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-05-10 22:56 -0400
    Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 03:26 +0000
    Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-11 03:27 +0000
      Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 05:18 +0000
        Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-11 05:42 +0000
          Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 05:50 +0000
            Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-11 06:19 +0000
              Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 06:44 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-12 02:46 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-12 03:04 +0000
          Re: Apple GUI Bug Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-05-11 11:34 -0700
            Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 18:47 +0000
              Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 18:59 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 19:25 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-11 22:40 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 22:53 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-12 02:50 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-12 03:07 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-12 07:09 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Chris <Christech@protonmail.com> - 2026-05-12 01:41 +0000
                Re: Apple GUI Bug Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-05-12 01:45 +0000
  Re: Apple GUI Bug Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2026-05-10 21:42 -0700

csiph-web