Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #61121 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-06-19 11:18 -0400 |
| Last post | 2014-06-27 18:26 +1000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 160 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-19 11:18 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-06-19 11:25 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-19 11:31 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-06-19 11:44 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 11:51 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-19 12:24 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 12:49 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-19 17:10 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 13:22 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-19 17:39 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 17:50 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-19 22:24 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 19:32 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 00:08 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 21:56 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-06-19 21:59 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2014-06-20 12:05 +1000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 16:27 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-06-20 00:15 +0100
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 00:00 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-20 00:16 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-06-20 22:03 +0100
Re: Unwanted Focus switches John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-06-20 00:23 +0100
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 00:07 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 21:56 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-19 23:18 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-20 07:49 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 16:26 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-20 15:10 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 20:01 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-20 16:14 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 20:20 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-06-20 16:53 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 22:16 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-20 22:54 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-21 04:41 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-21 04:46 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-06-20 16:51 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 22:05 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-21 08:33 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-21 16:48 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-21 17:02 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 08:27 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-21 17:02 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 19:39 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-19 12:44 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-06-20 09:28 +1200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 17:50 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-06-20 09:27 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-20 13:17 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 08:30 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-21 15:12 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-19 23:47 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-19 20:00 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-20 17:09 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-20 13:17 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 08:39 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 08:32 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-19 18:20 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu <nospam@stanford.edu.invalid> - 2014-06-19 18:29 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-06-19 21:54 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu <nospam@stanford.edu.invalid> - 2014-06-20 02:29 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 16:28 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-20 13:17 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 19:34 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-20 15:59 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-20 20:06 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-21 08:26 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-20 07:52 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-20 15:05 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-06-20 16:48 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 08:57 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-21 08:45 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu <nospam@stanford.edu.invalid> - 2014-06-20 18:08 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 09:12 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-06-20 09:27 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-22 10:36 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-22 16:20 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-22 17:22 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-22 20:24 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-22 17:24 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-22 23:15 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-23 08:39 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-06-23 08:00 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-06-23 08:09 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-23 08:43 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-24 15:35 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-23 08:42 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-23 14:41 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-24 07:46 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-24 12:06 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-24 18:40 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-25 03:16 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-25 07:19 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-25 21:16 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-26 06:52 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-26 15:59 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-26 17:25 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-26 22:45 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-26 20:47 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-27 01:50 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-27 06:43 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-06-20 17:50 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 09:15 +0200
Re: Unwanted Focus switches Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-21 09:03 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-25 07:21 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-06-25 07:41 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-25 17:25 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-06-25 18:34 +0100
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-25 14:51 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-25 15:04 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-25 19:55 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-25 15:04 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-25 15:32 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-26 12:22 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-25 20:02 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-26 12:22 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-26 17:27 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-26 19:08 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-26 22:03 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-27 04:41 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-27 04:48 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-27 08:20 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-27 22:04 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-27 06:36 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-28 16:10 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-29 10:34 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-29 15:11 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-27 01:59 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-27 08:27 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-28 16:10 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-06-27 07:59 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-27 22:08 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-28 16:11 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-06-28 22:22 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-29 14:46 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-06-29 13:01 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-29 20:36 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-06-29 13:46 -0700
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-29 23:13 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-29 21:54 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-29 21:40 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-30 02:12 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-30 02:27 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-30 13:52 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-30 19:51 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-30 16:07 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-01 02:52 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-07-01 15:08 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-01 13:16 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-07-01 08:19 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped billy@MIX.COM - 2014-07-01 15:12 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-28 16:10 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-26 22:03 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-27 04:19 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-28 16:10 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-06-28 20:35 +0000
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-26 14:42 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-06-26 22:03 -0400
Re: Unwanted Focus switches -- culprit trapped dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2014-06-27 18:26 +1000
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | billy@MIX.COM |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 00:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lnvugq$mic$1@reader2.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #61154 |
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes, quoting
John <Man@the.keyboard>:
> > Truthfully, if you know where to look [I do not nor do I care to find
> > out] he has given sufficient information to track his claim down. Just
> > go to the archives of bug reports for OS X and look for his name or
> > some vague description of the issue.
Bug reports submitted to Apple are not available to any third party.
> A bug report is not evidence that (a) it's a bug, nor (b) that the bug
> is in OS X, nor (c) that Apple considers it working as designed.
Correct. Responses from Apple are also under NDAs.
Billy Y..
--
sub #'9+1 ,r0 ; convert ascii byte
add #9.+1 ,r0 ; to an integer
bcc 20$ ; not a number
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John <Man@the.keyboard> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 22:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <o089q9devimqrl97on0vek5gb34ig2avu0@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #61160 |
On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 00:16:27 +0000 (UTC), billy@MIX.COM wrote:
>Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes, quoting
>John <Man@the.keyboard>:
>
>> > Truthfully, if you know where to look [I do not nor do I care to find
>> > out] he has given sufficient information to track his claim down. Just
>> > go to the archives of bug reports for OS X and look for his name or
>> > some vague description of the issue.
>
>Bug reports submitted to Apple are not available to any third party.
Oh. Sorry, didn't know that as I've never had an issue serious enough
to report to them as a bug. Anything that looked odd to me in Apple's
hardware or software has always been solved by you guys, for which I
express many thanks.
I would have thought there was some sort of TechNet or developer
forum type of thingy but if not, not.
>
>> A bug report is not evidence that (a) it's a bug, nor (b) that the bug
>> is in OS X, nor (c) that Apple considers it working as designed.
True but I thought you could follow the thread of responses from
Apple and further questions from the younger nospam and work out what
was actually happening. That's what "helpdesk" software is supposed to
be for; so errors and bugs and their fixes are transparent and easier
to fix next time.
>
>Correct. Responses from Apple are also under NDAs.
Oh. Well, that rather fucks the idea of transparency, then, doesn't
it? I can't say it surprises me much but it's disappointing.
J.
>
>Billy Y..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John <Man@the.keyboard> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 00:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <oor6q9l7h566j2r62bm7qknonhbvdhb84e@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #61128 |
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:51:40 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
>In article <L8ednfYEBIHKYj_OnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
><alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Occasionally I'm typing away (say here or in Excel or Word or the Chrome
>> address/searchbar or whatever) and the focus switches suddenly out of
>> the window that I'm in. The app I'm in remains the front app (on the
>> menu bar) but the RYG 'lights' go off and then there are error bings as
>> I continue typing. Have to mouse back into where I was to continue.
>>
>> Irritating.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure I'm not causing it by hitting a modifier key.
>>
>> Does this happen to anyone else? Any causes known?
>
>it's a longstanding bug in os x.
>
>i see it the most with itunes and safari.
Which explains why it never seems to happen to me. I don't use them
two. Ever.
I've seen focus-stealing in Windows and Unix [and, despite the
previous sentence, in Mac OSX] when a background process, like a very
large copy or move, encounters a problem or ends. That sort of
attention grabbing behaviour, though, would be expected. I don't think
I've seen it happen without a reasonable and obvious cause.
>
>sometimes the app that forces itself frontmost steals focus and other
>times the hidden app retains it and you are flying blind.
That would be irksome.
>
>i've even seen windows pop up during drag events, such as moving files
>in finder and then something else blasts itself in front, and if you
>let go of the icons you were dragging, you have no idea where they'll
>end up.
Edit/"Undo Move". That will get the files back where they came from
then you can try the move again.
Most of you probably know this, yes?
J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 00:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0hc9iFlupeU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61151 |
On 2014-06-19, John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:51:40 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> > wrote: > >>In article <L8ednfYEBIHKYj_OnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne >><alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote: >> >>> Occasionally I'm typing away (say here or in Excel or Word or the Chrome >>> address/searchbar or whatever) and the focus switches suddenly out of >>> the window that I'm in. The app I'm in remains the front app (on the >>> menu bar) but the RYG 'lights' go off and then there are error bings as >>> I continue typing. Have to mouse back into where I was to continue. >>> >>> Irritating. >>> >>> I'm pretty sure I'm not causing it by hitting a modifier key. >>> >>> Does this happen to anyone else? Any causes known? >> >>it's a longstanding bug in os x. >> >>i see it the most with itunes and safari. > > Which explains why it never seems to happen to me. I don't use them > two. Ever. Likewise, it also doesn't explain why some of us who use both iTunes and Safari all day, every day don't see the problem. > I've seen focus-stealing in Windows and Unix [and, despite the > previous sentence, in Mac OSX] when a background process, like a very > large copy or move, encounters a problem or ends. That sort of > attention grabbing behaviour, though, would be expected. I don't think > I've seen it happen without a reasonable and obvious cause. It is proper and completely natural for applications to activate themselves at certain times. For instance, when the user double-clicks an application, it is expected that the application will launch and come to the front. If I am viewing a web form in Safari and launch another application, I expect the application to make itself active and front-most, potentially interrupting my typing into the web form. And it doesn't take an extraordinary imagination to think of potential race conditions that might result in such an interruption. Regardless, whether this constitutes an actual bug is up for serious debate. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-19 21:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <190620142156081433%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #61158 |
In article <c0hc9iFlupeU2@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > It is proper and completely natural for applications to activate > themselves at certain times. For instance, when the user double-clicks > an application, it is expected that the application will launch and come > to the front. the problem is not launching an app. it's when you switch to a different app, when it is *not* expected that the now backgrounded application will pull itself forward again, interrupting what you were trying to do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-19 23:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <53a3a820$0$17064$c3e8da3$40d4fd75@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #61158 |
There is a difference between focus and the topmost window. If app1 is current in focus and you are typing away, it is possible for app2 to come to foreground without focus changing. In OS-X it appears that developpers have a choice on how to handle this. For instance, when, after a reboot, I relauhch a bunch of apps, the "screen sharing" app lets me cotinue to type my server's IP address even though other apps come to foreground. Yet, iPhoto stops allowing me to type in a text box when the mouse moves out of the text box (but stays inside the window). The flaw is that the operatimg system/GUI does not force a uniform applicatio of focus rules and lets apps differ from each other. And this is strange for Apple who has has GUI "bibles" since the Macintosh.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 07:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0uqdnYfZoaFagjnOnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #61158 |
On 2014.06.19, 20:07 , Jolly Roger wrote: > On 2014-06-19, John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote: >> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:51:40 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> In article <L8ednfYEBIHKYj_OnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne >>> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote: >>> >>>> Occasionally I'm typing away (say here or in Excel or Word or the Chrome >>>> address/searchbar or whatever) and the focus switches suddenly out of >>>> the window that I'm in. The app I'm in remains the front app (on the >>>> menu bar) but the RYG 'lights' go off and then there are error bings as >>>> I continue typing. Have to mouse back into where I was to continue. >>>> >>>> Irritating. >>>> >>>> I'm pretty sure I'm not causing it by hitting a modifier key. >>>> >>>> Does this happen to anyone else? Any causes known? >>> >>> it's a longstanding bug in os x. >>> >>> i see it the most with itunes and safari. >> >> Which explains why it never seems to happen to me. I don't use them >> two. Ever. > > Likewise, it also doesn't explain why some of us who use both iTunes and > Safari all day, every day don't see the problem. > >> I've seen focus-stealing in Windows and Unix [and, despite the >> previous sentence, in Mac OSX] when a background process, like a very >> large copy or move, encounters a problem or ends. That sort of >> attention grabbing behaviour, though, would be expected. I don't think >> I've seen it happen without a reasonable and obvious cause. > > It is proper and completely natural for applications to activate > themselves at certain times. For instance, when the user double-clicks > an application, it is expected that the application will launch and come > to the front. If I am viewing a web form in Safari and launch another > application, I expect the application to make itself active and > front-most, potentially interrupting my typing into the web form. And it > doesn't take an extraordinary imagination to think of potential race > conditions that might result in such an interruption. Regardless, > whether this constitutes an actual bug is up for serious debate. If the user is entering data in a spreadsheet or word document, etc. then nothing should interrupt that - even a pop up to warn of some issue should not steal focus unless it's very serious (loss of data imminent, for example). -- I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 16:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0j5m5F2sr8U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61187 |
On 2014-06-20, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote: > On 2014.06.19, 20:07 , Jolly Roger wrote: >> >> It is proper and completely natural for applications to activate >> themselves at certain times. For instance, when the user double-clicks >> an application, it is expected that the application will launch and come >> to the front. If I am viewing a web form in Safari and launch another >> application, I expect the application to make itself active and >> front-most, potentially interrupting my typing into the web form. And it >> doesn't take an extraordinary imagination to think of potential race >> conditions that might result in such an interruption. Regardless, >> whether this constitutes an actual bug is up for serious debate. > > If the user is entering data in a spreadsheet or word document, etc. > then nothing should interrupt that - even a pop up to warn of some issue > should not steal focus unless it's very serious (loss of data imminent, > for example). If I am in Safari looking at a web form, and I launch another application, I expect the application I launched to come to the front. You would have that application launch in the background instead? Or not launch at all? Like I said, it doesn't take an extraordinary imagination to imagine race conditions that might result int he behavior described. And it doesn't necessarily indicate an actual bug, or even necessarily a design flaw - though that is certainly possible. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 15:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <53a4872a$0$58760$c3e8da3$12bcf670@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #61201 |
On 14-06-20 12:26, Jolly Roger wrote: > If I am in Safari looking at a web form, and I launch another > application, I expect the application I launched to come to the front. The act of launching another application, unless you programmed some hot keys, would require focus be switched from Safari to the Dock, Finder or some other UI widget that causes the other app to be launched. If, after using the dock (for instance) to launch another app, you return focus to Safari and start typing, a proper UI would keep Safari in focus. (the proper logic would be that the recently launched app would steal focus only from the app that launched it). This is an area where Apple should have been a bit more forceful with implementation. Suspect it was unfinished work when Next went to OS-X and once established that way, Apple decided to keep the "indeterminate behaviour" instead of fixing it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 20:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0ji98F4re6U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61219 |
On 2014-06-20, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-06-20 12:26, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> If I am in Safari looking at a web form, and I launch another >> application, I expect the application I launched to come to the front. > > The act of launching another application, unless you programmed some hot > keys, would require focus be switched from Safari to the Dock, Finder or > some other UI widget that causes the other app to be launched. I do use LaunchBar, which certainly does not need to be front-most to use. > If, after using the dock (for instance) to launch another app, you > return focus to Safari and start typing, a proper UI would keep Safari > in focus. (the proper logic would be that the recently launched app > would steal focus only from the app that launched it). If the application being launched takes longer to launch, and you switch away during that time, chances are once it is finished launching, it will be given focus and become the front-most application. Mac OS X has always been this way, AFAIK. And while this is not the issue the OP described, we can logically theorize that the same activation mechanism could be in play there too. > This is an area where Apple should have been a bit more forceful with > implementation. Suspect it was unfinished work when Next went to OS-X > and once established that way, Apple decided to keep the "indeterminate > behaviour" instead of fixing it. Interactions between applications and system processes can be complex and hard to replicate, especially when race conditions are involved. Fixing such issues often requires very meticulous definition of all of the various factors that contribute to the end effect. It can take time. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 16:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <53a4963a$0$61220$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #61227 |
On 14-06-20 16:01, Jolly Roger wrote: > > I do use LaunchBar, which certainly does not need to be front-most to > use. The act of clicking on your lauchbar (or dock or whathever else) bringgs focus to that application (aka launchbar). Focus not necessarily equal to being the top most window. (but in many cases, moving the dock to the top does not cause visual changes to the display so you are unaware it has been brought to the foreground). Focus : GUI events are fed to that application. Foreground: window is not obscured by others. While the two are generally associated with each other, they are not necessarily equal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 20:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0jjc9F5op2U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61230 |
On 2014-06-20, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-06-20 16:01, Jolly Roger wrote: >> >> I do use LaunchBar, which certainly does not need to be front-most to >> use. > > The act of clicking on your lauchbar (or dock or whathever else) bringgs > focus to that application (aka launchbar). I don't click anything. You haven't ever used LaunchBar, have you? [irrelevant info about the difference between focus and activation deleted] -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 16:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <barmar-CAF023.16534620062014@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #61232 |
In article <c0jjc9F5op2U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > On 2014-06-20, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > On 14-06-20 16:01, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> > >> I do use LaunchBar, which certainly does not need to be front-most to > >> use. > > > > The act of clicking on your lauchbar (or dock or whathever else) bringgs > > focus to that application (aka launchbar). > > I don't click anything. You haven't ever used LaunchBar, have you? > > [irrelevant info about the difference between focus and activation > deleted] I think almost any method of launching an application is considered an explicit request to make it the front-most application and give it focus when it finishes launching, if you don't make any other switches of the focused application while waiting for it. -- Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 22:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0jq6lF7777U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61236 |
On 2014-06-20, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > In article <c0jjc9F5op2U3@mid.individual.net>, > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > >> On 2014-06-20, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> > On 14-06-20 16:01, Jolly Roger wrote: >> >> >> >> I do use LaunchBar, which certainly does not need to be front-most to >> >> use. >> > >> > The act of clicking on your lauchbar (or dock or whathever else) bringgs >> > focus to that application (aka launchbar). >> >> I don't click anything. You haven't ever used LaunchBar, have you? >> >> [irrelevant info about the difference between focus and activation >> deleted] > > I think almost any method of launching an application is considered an > explicit request to make it the front-most application and give it focus > when it finishes launching, if you don't make any other switches of the > focused application while waiting for it. The point I was making is that LaunchBar does not require one to launch or otherwise activate LaunchBar in such a way that it comes to the front just to make *use* of it. To launch an application, I typically type Control-Space followed by one to three letters of the name of said application. If I happen to be in the Finder when I type those commands, I don't magically get switched to LaunchBar in the interim before finally being switched to the application I want to launch. There are many ways one can control how users interact with applications depending on context. Nothing I have seen here yet is evidence that the behavior being described is due to an actual bug, nor that it is a bug in Mac OS X, nor that Apple has deemed this "bug" to be functioning as designed, as stated by nospam. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 22:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <53a4f3cb$0$47870$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #61252 |
On 14-06-20 18:16, Jolly Roger wrote: > The point I was making is that LaunchBar does not require one to launch > or otherwise activate LaunchBar in such a way that it comes to the front > just to make *use* of it. To launch an application, I typically type > Control-Space followed by one to three letters of the name of said > application. This means that somewhere in the GUI system, Launchbar has registered a keystroke that gets intercepted by the window manager instead of being delivered to the app currently in focus. (same mechanism that intecpts command-tab for instance) Unless Launchbar is integrated into the Window manager, the later will then switch focus to Launchbar which will get all subsequent events (keystrokes, mouse movement/clicks inside its window etc). At one point, Launchbar has to tell the window manager it is done with intercepting keystrokes and loses focus.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-21 04:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0kgo1FbbkdU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61280 |
On 2014-06-21, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 14-06-20 18:16, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> The point I was making is that LaunchBar does not require one to launch >> or otherwise activate LaunchBar in such a way that it comes to the front >> just to make *use* of it. To launch an application, I typically type >> Control-Space followed by one to three letters of the name of said >> application. > > This means that somewhere in the GUI system, Launchbar has registered a > keystroke that gets intercepted by the window manager instead of being > delivered to the app currently in focus. (same mechanism that intecpts > command-tab for instance) > > Unless Launchbar is integrated into the Window manager, the later will > then switch focus to Launchbar which will get all subsequent events > (keystrokes, mouse movement/clicks inside its window etc). > > At one point, Launchbar has to tell the window manager it is done with > intercepting keystrokes and loses focus. Nope. That is not how it works. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-21 04:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0kh22FbbkdU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61282 |
On 2014-06-21, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > On 2014-06-21, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> On 14-06-20 18:16, Jolly Roger wrote: >> >>> The point I was making is that LaunchBar does not require one to launch >>> or otherwise activate LaunchBar in such a way that it comes to the front >>> just to make *use* of it. To launch an application, I typically type >>> Control-Space followed by one to three letters of the name of said >>> application. >> >> This means that somewhere in the GUI system, Launchbar has registered a >> keystroke that gets intercepted by the window manager instead of being >> delivered to the app currently in focus. (same mechanism that intecpts >> command-tab for instance) >> >> Unless Launchbar is integrated into the Window manager, the later will >> then switch focus to Launchbar which will get all subsequent events >> (keystrokes, mouse movement/clicks inside its window etc). >> >> At one point, Launchbar has to tell the window manager it is done with >> intercepting keystrokes and loses focus. > > Nope. That is not how it works. Sorry; I was going too fast. Now that I re-read your reply I see you aren't debating that LaunchBar does not activate. It does get focus long enough for you to complete the command you started with the hot key, but the previously active application remains front-most throughout that process. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 16:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <barmar-C51CE3.16511420062014@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #61227 |
In article <c0ji98F4re6U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > On 2014-06-20, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > On 14-06-20 12:26, Jolly Roger wrote: > > > >> If I am in Safari looking at a web form, and I launch another > >> application, I expect the application I launched to come to the front. > > > > The act of launching another application, unless you programmed some hot > > keys, would require focus be switched from Safari to the Dock, Finder or > > some other UI widget that causes the other app to be launched. > > I do use LaunchBar, which certainly does not need to be front-most to > use. > > > If, after using the dock (for instance) to launch another app, you > > return focus to Safari and start typing, a proper UI would keep Safari > > in focus. (the proper logic would be that the recently launched app > > would steal focus only from the app that launched it). > > If the application being launched takes longer to launch, and you switch > away during that time, chances are once it is finished launching, it > will be given focus and become the front-most application. Mac OS X has > always been this way, AFAIK. And while this is not the issue the OP > described, we can logically theorize that the same activation mechanism > could be in play there too. Maybe it depends on the specific application, but I haven't run into that behavior. If I launch an application and switch my front-most application while waiting for it to launch, the new application usually opens behind the application I switched to. -- Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-20 22:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c0jphkF7777U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61235 |
On 2014-06-20, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > In article <c0ji98F4re6U3@mid.individual.net>, > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > >> On 2014-06-20, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> > On 14-06-20 12:26, Jolly Roger wrote: >> > >> >> If I am in Safari looking at a web form, and I launch another >> >> application, I expect the application I launched to come to the front. >> > >> > The act of launching another application, unless you programmed some hot >> > keys, would require focus be switched from Safari to the Dock, Finder or >> > some other UI widget that causes the other app to be launched. >> >> I do use LaunchBar, which certainly does not need to be front-most to >> use. >> >> > If, after using the dock (for instance) to launch another app, you >> > return focus to Safari and start typing, a proper UI would keep Safari >> > in focus. (the proper logic would be that the recently launched app >> > would steal focus only from the app that launched it). >> >> If the application being launched takes longer to launch, and you switch >> away during that time, chances are once it is finished launching, it >> will be given focus and become the front-most application. Mac OS X has >> always been this way, AFAIK. And while this is not the issue the OP >> described, we can logically theorize that the same activation mechanism >> could be in play there too. > > Maybe it depends on the specific application, but I haven't run into > that behavior. If I launch an application and switch my front-most > application while waiting for it to launch, the new application usually > opens behind the application I switched to. It's all in the timing. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-21 08:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <auWdnW-kmpAl5jjOnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #61201 |
On 2014.06.20, 12:26 , Jolly Roger wrote: > On 2014-06-20, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote: >> On 2014.06.19, 20:07 , Jolly Roger wrote: >>> >>> It is proper and completely natural for applications to activate >>> themselves at certain times. For instance, when the user double-clicks >>> an application, it is expected that the application will launch and come >>> to the front. If I am viewing a web form in Safari and launch another >>> application, I expect the application to make itself active and >>> front-most, potentially interrupting my typing into the web form. And it >>> doesn't take an extraordinary imagination to think of potential race >>> conditions that might result in such an interruption. Regardless, >>> whether this constitutes an actual bug is up for serious debate. >> >> If the user is entering data in a spreadsheet or word document, etc. >> then nothing should interrupt that - even a pop up to warn of some issue >> should not steal focus unless it's very serious (loss of data imminent, >> for example). > > If I am in Safari looking at a web form, and I launch another > application, I expect the application I launched to come to the front. > You would have that application launch in the background instead? Or not > launch at all? Like I said, it doesn't take an extraordinary imagination > to imagine race conditions that might result int he behavior described. > And it doesn't necessarily indicate an actual bug, or even necessarily a > design flaw - though that is certainly possible. All I'm doing is merrily writing The Great Canadian Novel in Word, or typing a reply in thunderbird or data in Numbers or Excel. Suddenly, unbidden ... 1. The window RYG lights go grey. 2. The 'bonging' sounds reply to each key (dude: that data goin' nowhere) 3. The app I'm in remains the foreground (menu bar) app. I did not launch anything. I was just typing away ... It's very plausible that something else has launched - but why does my app remain the FG app (named in menu bar)? But on the launch subject, it would indeed by my preference that, esp. large programs like Photoshop, do their launch quietly until ready and remain in the background while I do other things. For example I may be working in Bridge organizing a photo import - so I launch PS so that it is ready when I'm ready - but in the meantime I'd like to continue in Bridge. This is an issue with Windows as well as OS X and Linux. -- I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web