I'm not seeing it
Years ago I watched an old rerun of a television show, where the teenage son runs into the Dad's home office saying, "OMG Dad! If I turn off the TV, and turn it back on, the show has kept going!", to which the father responded "Gilligan's Island is being broadcast to millions, whether you're watching or not. Are you just not realizing the world doesn't revolve around you..?" Ayep, this is going to be rudimentary, but I need something to link to help keep the inbox below 100...
A computer system is complex and intertwined, built up upon layers and layers of different procedures all interacting with different dependencies-- and the interacting part is the key. The more an introduced program interacts with aspects of the system, the more you have to account for it when things go weird. For example, if I introduce an email client to the System, unless it is doing some very strange things the likelihood of it causing a problem a graphical glitch in another app is very low. If I introduce a different video driver, the likelihood is much higher.
The more you understand how a program works and what it interacts with, the easier it is to guesstimate likely culprits, which saves you time while trying to root it out -- at the very least whether its something innate versus something you introduced. This is rudimentary, and its why when something was working, and then goes wrong, the first thing you're going to turn your eye on is how you recently changed the system.
Unfortunately, many people have a very simplistic view of the System, which -- in the context of the ham story -- makes perfect sense. I.E., you're sitting there using a Mac that looks much the same as others, and while you may be using a Powerbook, all the Powerbooks look the same. Since Apple sells the whole widget, even if its a different type of system, say a PowerMac or eMac, you know Apple knows all of it. The upgrade market for Macs is slim indeed now, and its not like you had much of a choice in components when you picked yours up.
The problem is that there are differences, and just as installing different software changes your System's dynamic, different hardware changes the dynamic of the System, often because it changes the code interacting with the hardware, and that code then can have different behavior as it interacts with the rest of the System. A basic example of this is having an NVIDIA graphics card instead of an ATI card -- both have different sets of drivers, and often support different levels of functionality.
All that being said, sometimes the wonkiness is lurking there for everyone, but depending upon your usage patterns, you might never see it or have problems reproducing it.
As an example, we'll turn to our old arch-nemesis, the Mac OS X Finder. As you may or may not have noticed, OS X doesn't allow you to drag windows above the menu bar. You could in OS9, but in OS X this was removed -- I'm assuming because you could now only move windows around by their title bar, and if that went off the screen, the only way you could get your window back down would be to close it.
In recent versions they introduced Metal (gag) windows, which allow you to move the whole window around by clicking on regions of free space, but they still don't let you move them above the menu bar. Still, I ended up with the below screenshot earlier this evening...
This occurred while I was dragging a file to a folder via the trackpad and drilling down by hitting the space bar, which when pressed while you're dragging a file over a folder will open it. It's probably not a coincidence that they went crazy with wasting pixels in the Finder when they brought OS9's drill-down functionality to a later version of OS X, but that's a tangent I'll resist... The point is that its not supposed to happen.
While the Finder is metal, which means you could drag it down, many users wouldn't even know that, and wouldn't know how to get out of it short of going to the menu and selecting "Close Window". Many wouldn't even know that was there -- their lil red blob is gone, and they're screwed.
What's supposed to happen is that the System/app is aware of where the menu bar is (as well as the Dock, as long as its on the bottom, otherwise its a free for all for most apps, including the Finder), as well as the edge of the screen, and play ball within it, like so...
So we know it's not supposed to happen, yet it did happen, which means it's either an undisclosed feature I inadvertently discovered, or it's a bug.
Assuming its a bug, which is probably safe to assume, the question then becomes where the bug lies -- within code Apple has shipped, or something I've added in thats causing bugs. You may notice my Finder windows don't look like normal Finder windows, because I use Unsanity's Shapeshifter, because I simply won't look at those metal windows all day.
Now, if your System doesn't have a Finder window popping above the menu bar every so often, and its obvious I'm using something on my System that you aren't -- especially a haxie -- you might assume we'd found the root cause of the wonkiness. Unfortunately for that theory, I...
- Have a decent understanding of how the APE system works (what ShapeShifter uses to swap out graphics), and -- if a problem occurs -- what form its likely to take. This ain't one of them.
- Have a decent understanding of what ShapeShifter is using APE to do, and if there was a problem, the ways in which it might show up. This ain't one of them.
- Saw this happen once before I'd installed ShapeShifter, so I automatically know its not a factor.
This is one of those where you know the wonkiness is there, lurking, but reproducing it is a nightmare, because you don't really know what factors went into it. Maybe my window was in a specific part of the screen, and the Finder just got confused while drawing. Maybe it picked up something weird from the .DS_Store file it saw within the folder I was hovering over. Who knows, and here is why this really sucks:
- If someone saw the wonkiness occur, and had access to the Finder code, they could go through the routines responsible trying to figure out what might be going on. Unfortunately, only Apple has it, and they've shipped it with a bug.
- Saying to Apple, "So uh, the Finder windows went wonky" will do little good, and even a normal user sending off a screenshot won't do much good. They're going to want a reproducible test case so they can confirm it themselves... and then decide whether the fix makes it into 10.4.x, waits till 10.5, or just hangs around if its complex enough.
Basically, it's a bug that's there, but that you might never see, and even if you did, will probably only get fixed inadvertently. I.E., a developer at Apple happens to see a problem in the code while looking for something else, or the code is changed for other reasons, or -- if its due to some strange interaction between seemingly unrelated bits of code -- one of them gets changed and the bug magically goes away.
That I can see, the only way for the above situation to improve is for Apple to take more care with the code it puts out, or to allow others access to it, but either way the wonkiness is there.
Posted by drunkenbatmanOctober 18, 2005, at 07:17 AM
Comments (25)
Posted by: Diggory Laycock at October 18, 2005 08:01 AM
" their lil red blog is gone, and they're screwed."
Blob?
Posted by: Pat Allan at October 18, 2005 08:19 AM
Had to chuckle at the advertisement between a post about bugs in Tiger and its comments is for Tiger at a discount rate.
Obviously Google isn't quite that good at picking context
Posted by: matt at October 18, 2005 08:20 AM
This will sound sarcastic, but it is not.
"I could listen to you talk about bugs 'till the cows came home."
Plus, I wish I could afford Shape Shifter, I spent all my cash _getting_ the metal windows :)
Posted by: uv at October 18, 2005 08:21 AM
Makes you wonder if, with all this increasing complexity, Apple is going the right way (control over software+hardware, little tolerance for 3rd-party haxies, etc.) as opposed to the Microsoft Windows zoo.
Posted by: Jesper at October 18, 2005 08:36 AM
You are never going to stop use that photo. I just know that.
For what it's worth, at least when windows fuck up like that it's far easier to set them straight than in, er, Windows. Windows menu - Zoom is a bit better than alt+space (or right clicking the task bar button) - Move - arrow keys.
Posted by: Matthew (Was 2.STL-DX.B11) at October 18, 2005 09:09 AM
M$ Office does a similar thing. On odd occasions for me it will place a new document window (when Command-N is invoked) with the title bar underneath (i.e. being covered by) the Office toolbar or under the menubar. Very odd and very annoying at the same time. The fix is simple but irritating, nonetheless.
I agree with Jesper - I think that photo is here to stay, which is a shame since it is truly horrific to see the fairer sex all twisted up in such a way. Can we have new bug photo please?
Posted by: drunkenbatman at October 18, 2005 09:11 AM
I agree with Jesper - I think that photo is here to stay, which is a shame since it is truly horrific to see the fairer sex all twisted up in such a way. Can we have new bug photo please?
Not for ones involving the Finder, sorries. :)
Posted by: dan at October 18, 2005 09:20 AM
I just wanted to say that I think the girl on the right is pretty. The girl on the left is too, but the one on right is holding a better pose.
That is all.
Posted by: Pascale Soleil at October 18, 2005 09:41 AM
I'm feeling kind of slow here, since everyone else is piling on with the 'yes yes yes,' but I don't blatantly see the problem in the top picture...
I see two finder windows, both with their entire 'frames' invisible. Am I missing a part of the screenshot that shows the top of the finder window overlapping the main screen menubar?
Posted by: Pascale Soleil at October 18, 2005 09:42 AM
D'oh, that should be entire frames VISIBLE. That's what I get for staying up 'til 4. Again.
Posted by: JP at October 18, 2005 09:47 AM
I see two finder windows, both with their entire 'frames' invisible. Am I missing a part of the screenshot that shows the top of the finder window overlapping the main screen menubar?
Hi Pascale... if you click the first Finder picture it takes you to a larger... the top of the Finder window is underneath the menu bar in the left top... if you try to to put a window under the menu bar like that on your own you cannot...
Posted by: aaron at October 18, 2005 09:52 AM
Every time you link to the ham story I read it. And everytime I read it, I laugh. I can "hear" you telling it.
Everyone who is attending the Alder DrunkenFest should go back and re-read one of the more "conversational" posts after the show. Once youv'e heard DB hold forth verbally, and can project his "voice" onto his writing . . . it's a whole new world.
Posted by: lars at October 18, 2005 10:08 AM
If you don't want to run ShapeShifer but still want a unified theme without any metal try the UNO package at http://gui.interacto.net/
For the lazy, here is a screenshot:
http://gui.interacto.net/images/stories/screenshots/uno_ss_f.jpg
Posted by: rentzsch at October 18, 2005 11:48 AM
Sitcom reference: that was Michael "Mike" Aaron Seaver (Kirk Cameron) in "Growing Pains".
You see, I was raised in a Gracen and Gracen shipping box that was pointed at the TV.
Posted by: A Real Developer at October 18, 2005 12:29 PM
Unfortunately for that theory, I...
1. Have a decent understanding of how the APE system works (what ShapeShifter uses to swap out graphics), and -- if a problem occurs -- what form its likely to take. This ain't one of them.
2. Have a decent understanding of what ShapeShifter is using APE to do, and if there was a problem, the ways in which it might show up. This ain't one of them
Hmmmm... well that's probably what the original Finder developers are saying. That's why it's a bug: it's unexpected behavior. They guy or gal that wrote the code that's broken obviously doesn't think it's broken, and more than likely can give 100 reasons why it's not in his or her code.
But it's always that unexpected boundary condition or interaction with another system that is the source of bugs.
In other words:
No, I'm sorry, you cannot absolutely rule out your haxie as the cause of the bug, based on the first 2 conditions you listed.
Obviously, though, your 3rd condition (not quoted) is somewhat more reliable.
Posted by: Matthew (Was 2.STL-DX.B11) at October 18, 2005 12:35 PM
Posted by: drunkenbatman at October 18, 2005 09:11 AM
"Not for ones involving the Finder, sorries. :) "
Well, got to hand it to you mate - You're certainly illustrating your Finder gripes in a way which shows how unhappy you are with it all.... ;-)
I'd still like to see what those 2 poor girls looked like before the wind changed though. Do they know they represent your Finder unhappiness? Did they sign a model release form? :)
Posted by: Steve Streza at October 18, 2005 12:52 PM
As a programmer, I will mention that when a programmer writes an application, he can write some code that makes the window move anywhere on screen - including above the menu bar. Thus, it's probably something involving a window being opened in the above-the-menu-bar region, and no error checking being done.
Posted by: Jer at October 18, 2005 02:29 PM
I have a dual monitor setup, and I see weird stuff like this all the time. Our dear friend the Finder has a very special set of behaviors when it comes to its windows and the top of the screen/menu bar.
My two screens are setup such that one's top is higher than the other. If I move a window to the higher display, and then drag it to the other monitor, this boundary condition comes into play. Some applications handle it better than others.
The "proper behavior" would be to "pop" the window down below the menu bar, the "gyar approach" is just to leave the window marooned up there.
My theory: Cocoa apps do it right, Carbon Apps don't.
It should be possible for Carbon app developers to make sure it works, however, which is when one starts pulling one's hair and screaming: FTFF!!!!
Posted by: Rob at October 18, 2005 05:26 PM
Long time reader, first time commenter...
aaron (at October 18, 2005 09:52 AM)
Once youv'e heard DB hold forth verbally, and can project his "voice" onto his writing . . . it's a whole new world.
DB, I would like to suggest you have a quick look (if you haven't already) at Videocue from Vara Software... It would be great to see you deliver some of your posts directly into the camera. With that software, at least you could put your post (or bullet points) into your prompter?
Posted by: SamR at October 18, 2005 07:28 PM
That I can see, the only way for the above situation to improve is for Apple to take more care with the code it puts out, or to allow others access to it, but either way the wonkiness is there.All software has bugs in it. While it's easy for users to admonish Apple for not 'taking more care with the code it puts out', it glosses over the reality of software quality assurance, which is a 'law of diminishing returns' situation. Would everyone be willing to pay an extra $100 for an OS with fewer bugs in it?
As users, it's our right to bitch and moan about our favourite bugs, and we can (and should) certainly call into question perceived failings in the process, such as reported bugs which are not addressed, or what we feel is an unreasonably high defect rate for commercial software. However, I feel that stating this bug exists because Apple doesn't take enough care is naive or disingenuous.
Posted by: Anthony at October 18, 2005 09:50 PM
As users, it's our right to bitch and moan about our favourite bugs, and we can (and should) certainly call into question perceived failings in the process, such as reported bugs which are not addressed, or what we feel is an unreasonably high defect rate for commercial software. However, I feel that stating this bug exists because Apple doesn't take enough care is naive or disingenuous.Some recent bugs would have been impossible if Apple took enough care. The obvious example is the 64-bit breakage with 2005-007, but there are others.
Results don't increase linearly with amount of testing. At the low end, you catch a lot of no-brainers with very little additional effort. From observed problems, it is possible to infer that Apple is below this threshold.
Posted by: cabbey at October 18, 2005 10:51 PM
I'll concur with Jer's post, I too have a mismatched multi-monitor setup, 1024x768 lcd on the powerbook and 1280x1024 crt external next to it, with the two bottom aligned. As near as I can tell, finder won't let you drag it's titlebar through the menubar, but you can happily slide the finder window in from the side to acheive a position like you show above.
What's worse is when some silly app starts up and is displaying off screen somewhere because the last time you ran it you were in the office with the external crt connected and now you're in the field with just the lcd.
Posted by: Jeremy Wood at October 18, 2005 11:59 PM
Further exploration: I was wrong. It looks like most apps will let you "sneak through belgium" to get them wrong-side up through the menu bar. I guess I'd only noticed it in the finder. One app that stands tough: iTunes. It simply won't let itself be pushed above the top of the screen. If you try and sneak it across the border, it pops down below the menu bar. In fact, so far it's the only metal App I've found that won't let me trap it up there. Of course, iTunes isn't heavy anymore.
Posted by: Rufus at December 8, 2005 05:16 AM
Re: Pat Allan
If you thought that you had a good chuckle over the ad Google presented to you, then spare a thought for what it gave me:
Windows on Macintosh
How to install Windows inside OS X
I feel your pain, windows going partially/completely off the screen happens all the time in certain apps when I switch between one and two monitors... usually window->zoom is your friend. Before I realized that, the only recourse when things went really wonky was replugging the second monitor and dragging the window back from its hiding place... =/