Mouse - right click simulation

[don montalvo]

i agree totally...the default should be the expected standard.

 

[wesley]

I use my MacBook Pro all the time and I am quite used to using the Ctrl-Click as a right mouse click. When I launch PW and Windows, I expect the same behavior. Ctrl-click = right mouse click. If I happen to need to use ctrl-click for something in Windows, I'd be perfectly happy using another key combo for that. But with PW, I am still using the Mac and moving between the 2 environments. It is counter intuitive to change the way the "right-click" works just because my mouse cursor happens to be over PW in Windows versus a Mac window or program.

Obviously there are 2 trains of thoughts here, both with the obvious points of view. For those people who want ctrl-click to pass directly to Windows, how did you use this feature with Virtual PC on the Mac? Ctrl-Click there worked as the right-click using Virtual PC/Mac.

I hated how some key combos were 'blocked' by VirtualPC, but I guess I can see where you're coming from. It was trying to make the VM act like a Mac, like how CMD-C still worked like 'copy' function, albeit in the manner of direct 'rapid key send' straight from OS X's clipboard buffer. When Parallels gives the user two major choices to choose from (obviously there can be a third option for full customization) the 'act like OS X' option could be named 'Like VirtualPC'.

 

[Tyrven]

Why not use the Open Apple / Command Key? I get the purpose of using it to replace the Windows key but since Microsoft only uses the Windows key for a few things which all have other shortcut keys this seems like the most obvious solution to me.

 

[pecos]

in numerous applications under windows OS, like my favorite Poser4, ctrl-click is used as a special feature and right click doesn't exist at all.
so, i think emulate right click with a ctrl-shift-click is a very good choice !

 

[netdog]

Most consumers users will have 1-button mice as well.

 

[Jerry]

Most consumers users will have 1-button mice as well.

Not really - only MacBook/Pro users will have one button, but can plug in another multi button mouse. The iMacs (and any new macs) are all shipped with the MightyMouse (4 buttons), and MacMini guys will most probably buy a windows mouse.

 

[MicroDev]

How about map another key for the control key? I've rather gotten used to using the Command key myself. It makes it much more transparent when switching between different OS's on the fly.

 

[andgarden]

Not really - only MacBook/Pro users will have one button, but can plug in another multi button mouse.

Yeah, who cares? Notebooks are only Apple's best selling models. . .

 

[wesley]

Yeah, who cares? Notebooks are only Apple's best selling models. . .

A whole bunch of people. Apple sells about equal amount of desktops and notebooks. All things considered (i.e. MacBook was out only recently, 'Mac Pro' has yet to come out, iMac / Mac mini sells for cheaper than MacBook Pro) I think at least half the Intel Macs have 2+ buttons from the get go. This has been reflected from the polls that have been conducted at this forum. While I understand that you feel strongly about your sentiments on the issue, you have to realize there are lots of people who care about this, and quite differently from your way. Saying that only notebook matters is quite... a disappointing, and in a way, insulting, remark.

 

[joem]

Most consumers users will have 1-button mice as well.

ALL of the consumer Mac users I know (in fact all of the Mac users I know) have multi button mice. ONE (count 'em) laptop user often uses his trackpad, but has a mouse available for times when a surface is available. The very first thing I did when I got my first Mac is get a trackball (so I don't need enough flat surface area for a mouse. And now Apple is simulating a two button mouse on laptops.

We seem to be looking at different data sets and coming to different conclusions.

From what I can see, I think the one-button mouse concept is reaching the end of its run, regardless of the views of the partisans. I haven't seen anyone try a two button wheel mouse and dislike it enough to go back -- Mac or PC. In fact, those I know with access to more than one computer who try a wheel mouse at home or work quickly get one for the other location.

YMMV

 

[andgarden]

What I feel strongly about is that Virtual PC, which went through years of usability testing, had the defaults that I propose. Connectix was a very Mac focused company, and they got many things right. The VPC user interface has, in my opinion, yet to be improved upon.

 

[mcg]

I think the comparison to Virtual PC is less relevant than it might first appear. The fact that we're all working on Intel-based macs now that can potentially run both OS's at native speed (whether under virtualization or dual booting) changes the landscape completely. It's no secret that there are tons of Windows and Linux users who are now buying Intel macs so that can have it all. They are not necessarily looking for the Virtual PC experience when they use Parallels!

In fact, I think it would be quite interesting to see what fraction of Parallels users have ever actually used Virtual PC. I'll bet it's small. Whether or not I am right about that, it is the majority preference that ought to be the default, with the ability to switch over without difficulty.

 

[andgarden]

I think the comparison to Virtual PC is less relevant than it might first appear. The fact that we're all working on Intel-based macs now that can potentially run both OS's at native speed (whether under virtualization or dual booting) changes the landscape completely. It's no secret that there are tons of Windows and Linux users who are now buying Intel macs so that can have it all. They are not necessarily looking for the Virtual PC experience when they use Parallels!

In fact, I think it would be quite interesting to see what fraction of Parallels users have ever actually used Virtual PC. I'll bet it's small. Whether or not I am right about that, it is the majority preference that ought to be the default, with the ability to switch over without difficulty.

But the essence of what you're saying is that the Mac is no longer a Mac, and that Parallels needn't behave like a Mac application. Also, a majority should rule on defaults, but a majority of what? Members on this forum are unlikely to represent a majority of the people who will use Parallels in the future.

 

[mcg]

But the essence of what you're saying is that the Mac is no longer a Mac, and that Parallels needn't behave like a Mac application.

If that's the way you want to interpret it, then so be it. But Parallels is simply not a standard Mac application, in the spirit of iTunes, Mail, Microsoft Word, etc. As such I think it's entirely defensible to argue that it need not behave as one.

Also, a majority should rule on defaults, but a majority of what?

A majority of paying customers. Have you bought your license yet?

Members on this forum are unlikely to represent a majority of the people who will use Parallels in the future.

Perhaps, but the vast majority of current and paying customers are on this forum, which means we're getting to a bird-in-the-hand issue. If Parallels had reason to believe that there was a vast pool of potential users out there who would only buy the software if its defaults were set to what you say they ought to be---then fine, that's what they should do. Given that the software's behavior is going to be configurable, I highly doubt that pool is large. So, barring that, the defaults ought to reflect the majority of their immediate customer base.

 

[ciaran]

my mouse has, depending on how you look at it, eight buttons. and i'm a macbook pro user. the one-button mouse was never a good idea, ever.

 

[Scott Willsey]

But Parallels is simply not a standard Mac application, in the spirit of iTunes, Mail, Microsoft Word, etc. As such I think it's entirely defensible to argue that it need not behave as one.

In fact it's entirely defensible to go further and state that the guest OS should act like the guest OS and that OS X should not impose any new methodology on top of it.

Otherwise forget vm solutions and use only boot camp. Because it's going to be the only way to get windows to act like windows if everyone who wants to modify the behavior of windows has their way.

Cheers.

 

[wesley]

What I feel strongly about is that Virtual PC, which went through years of usability testing, had the defaults that I propose. Connectix was a very Mac focused company, and they got many things right. The VPC user interface has, in my opinion, yet to be improved upon.

While I do not doubt that the VPC user interface has molded well with traditional Mac users, it's apparent from the polls the majority of the forum participants is thinking otherwise.

Now, here's what I think happened. Parallels does not run on a PPC Mac. Many buyers of the Intel Mac system comes expecting that Windows can run natively, whether by Boot Camp or by Parallels. What's also implied is that these people have higher expectancy of Windows acting exactly like Windows in the guest VM. In this case the user has likely already tried getting a 2+ button solution for his/her Mac if it didn't sport one. Windows doesn't 'feel' right without a physical second button on the mouse, if you ask me. Even if you have a key combo + mouse click for that context menu, using WIndows with one-button mouse feels like you have one of those dumb mittens on your hand.

Of course, there will also be many PPC Mac owners getting the Intel Mac and seeing Parallels as Intel Mac's Virtual PC counterpart, may seek Virtual PC's 'way of things' (like you, andgarden).

Polls here have showed that the former outweighs latter, so the influx of users with different mindset must be tipping the results. Still, the 'old way' is not a distant minority. That's why I still think the wizard interface that lets you choose 'the way of things' from the start is the only valid way out of this argument. The 'pure' way should the first choice if you ask me, of course!

 

[andgarden]

Now, here's what I think happened. Parallels does not run on a PPC Mac. Many buyers of the Intel Mac system comes expecting that Windows can run natively, whether by Boot Camp or by Parallels.

This may well be.

Of course, there will also be many PPC Mac owners getting the Intel Mac and seeing Parallels as Intel Mac's Virtual PC counterpart, may seek Virtual PC's 'way of things' (like you, andgarden).

This is also true. And at the risk of being melodramatic, I predict, based on the many accommodations that were made for Classic Mac users in the OS X transition, that we won't go quietly into the night.

Polls here have showed that the former outweighs latter, so the influx of users with different mindset must be tipping the results. Still, the 'old way' is not a distant minority. That's why I still think the wizard interface that lets you choose 'the way of things' from the start is the only valid way out of this argument.

Indeed, I agree with this as well, with one exception: Talking about a "wizard" to Mac users is like talking about a "lorry" with speakers of American English--It's completely alien!

In any case, I have confidence that the fine programmers at Parallels will work this out reasonably well.

 

[mcg]

Agree 100% on the last point!

 

[Edd]

for the intel laptops it is possible to have the right click (ctrl click) be a two fingered tap so, I'd vote allowing whatever the mac OS uses as being the default so this feature is not eliminated.

Edd.