Jump to content


Photo

App Menu Bar Name


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 David Glasgow

David Glasgow

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Location:Boiling Springs, PA, USA
  • Interests:Music, Diversity

Posted 14 July 2006 - 08:20 AM

Hi all--

Not really an urgent question here, but I'm curious as to the reason behind Oaktree's decision to change the name of the application with each update? (In other words, why is the version number part of the application name?)

Of the 100+ applications in my Apps folder, only Accordance and Finale include the version number in the Application menu. None of Apple's "first-party" applications do, which suggests (though I haven't checked) that the Mac guidelines don't recommend the practice. And on a slightly whiney note, whenever an application changes its name, QuicKeys users have to rescope all of the macros they've assigned to the application. (Easy enough to do, but it's great not to have to every time 7.0.x changes to 7.0.x+1, for instance....)

Anyway. Again, I'm just curious. I really will survive if the practice continues....

:)
David
"I would rather have a mind opened by wonder
than one closed by belief." --Gerry Spence

#2 Helen Brown

Helen Brown

    Mithril

  • Admin
  • 8,490 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:heart in Israel
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 15 July 2006 - 09:27 AM

Version 7.0.2 actually just shows as Accordance in the menu bar, though the version number appears in the finder and in the dock.
Helen Brown
OakTree Software

#3 Joel Brown

Joel Brown

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • 3,047 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • Accordance Version:11.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows

Posted 15 July 2006 - 06:29 PM

Just to clarify a bit the thought going behind this, there are advantages to both practices, as far as the filename is concerned.

The primary advantages of having no version number in the filename are clear: associations such as aliases (aliasi?) scripts and other hard links remain the same, cleanliness, more "OS X"-like. However...

The advantages of keeping the version number in the file name come mostly from the backend. From a tech support standpoint, often there are some users not as familiar with the Mac OS interface. It is much simpler to ask them to tell the full filename. Also, from an installer point of view, its easier to process files with specific filenames. Given as complicated as the installer needs to be, this seems to be a huge plus. Consider also in case you wish to have multiple versions of the program in the folder, for either development or simply personal backup.

I'm sure there are some other reasons on both sides of the boat, but hopefully that might clarify the issue just a bit.
Joel Brown

By day: Consultant for Oaktree
By night: Freelance Trombonist and Private Instructor

#4 Guest_frgpeter_*

Guest_frgpeter_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 July 2006 - 09:10 PM

I appreciate what you are saying about having in the name. But I'm currently exploring tools such as Quickeys, Applescript, even voice commands. Having to locate and change these could possibly work against these "time savers".

The version/release is an attribute of application objects. I would think that one could create a function that could be easily inserted into the installer that would provide the information. Of course I'm not really knowledgable about the particular installer utility.

What if I were to change the name of the app after installing. How would that affect future updates, etc.


hmm,
G. Peter David

#5 David Glasgow

David Glasgow

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Location:Boiling Springs, PA, USA
  • Interests:Music, Diversity

Posted 15 July 2006 - 10:13 PM

Version 7.0.2 actually just shows as Accordance in the menu bar, though the version number appears in the finder and in the dock.


Well, golly! Hadn't noticed that!

Of course, QuicKeys must be referencing the Finder, 'cause I still had to rescope the macros to 7.0.2, rather than just "Accordance."

Not a big deal--as I said, it's quick and easy to make the switch in QuicKeys; it's just that moment of panic before I figure out why none of my shortcuts are working..... :)

Thanks for your responses, Helen and Joel!

:)
David
"I would rather have a mind opened by wonder
than one closed by belief." --Gerry Spence

#6 Joe Weaks

Joe Weaks

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Odessa, TX
  • Interests:I like things that are Orange, and possibly Blue.
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 16 July 2006 - 01:53 PM

Well, I confess that this decision infuriates me to no end, and has for years. It does indeed discourage the use and development of partnering OS X technologies with Accordance. I have fiddled with many scripting things over the years that I simply can't release publicly because it would take so much more effort to make it run seamlessly on everyone's computer and the ever-changing-name is the primary reason for this.

The previously mentioned reasons for keeping 7.0.4 in the UI seem narrow, to me.
1. A tech support person can talk a monkey through selecting the "About Accordance" menu item to read aloud the version number.
2. An installer can easily contain a routine that gets a version number of an app.
3. The five of us who keep old versions of the app lying around for development purposes don't need to have our habits affect the masses. Find another way of differentiating, such as manually renaming the app ourselves to include version numbers or using labels.

There's a reason that less than 10% of apps keep version numbers in the name... it's an archaic approach, IMHO. These days, we respect the UI experience greater than keeping three decimal pointed numbers in a name on the dock!
Joe Weaks
The Macintosh Biblioblog

Sometimes I'm so helpful even I can't stand it.

#7 Guest_frgpeter_*

Guest_frgpeter_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 July 2006 - 06:30 PM

The previously mentioned reasons for keeping 7.0.4 in the UI seem narrow, to me.
1. A tech support person can talk a monkey through selecting the "About Accordance" menu item to read aloud the version number.
2. An installer can easily contain a routine that gets a version number of an app.
3. The five of us who keep old versions of the app lying around for development purposes don't need to have our habits affect the masses. Find another way of differentiating, such as manually renaming the app ourselves to include version numbers or using labels.

There's a reason that less than 10% of apps keep version numbers in the name... it's an archaic approach, IMHO. These days, we respect the UI experience greater than keeping three decimal pointed numbers in a name on the dock!


I'm with you on this Joe. I too find it strange that an application that is only for the Macintosh platform would work against the "ease of use". These systems aid in productivity, but this is so counter.

I've also found it strange that I have to manually remove the icon from the dock. Then go through the trouble of manually adding it back. I put up with it, but don't like it.

Hopefully this approach will change soon. I work in IT and know that when we put forth the best effort to simplify -- everyone is happier and more productive.

Peace,
G. Peter David

#8 Mick Matousek

Mick Matousek

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 173 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 16 July 2006 - 11:20 PM

I'm with Joe on this one. Ditch the constant name change.

This issue is long standing and consistently disliked by the user community.
http://www.accordanc...=version number
http://www.accordanc...=version number
http://www.accordanc...=version number
http://www.accordanc...=version number
http://www.accordanc...=version number

Having left software development years ago, I may be a bit dated.
-However, even then, the Stuffit and MindVision installers could query for complex system and file attributes, version number, being one of many. I fail to see the problem.
-The proper place for any user to look for current running version is the "About Accordance" menu, just like all other applications.
-Cannot "numbered name" aliases support multiple application version development needs?

#9 Helen Brown

Helen Brown

    Mithril

  • Admin
  • 8,490 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:heart in Israel
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 17 July 2006 - 03:43 AM

You all do understand that the issue does not just affect future installers? We have about 30 current CDs mastered, and another 50 or more older CDs that people are still using to install Accordance and modules. All those installers need to be able to find the Accordance folder and not replace a newer app. We will look at the issue, but I am not at all sure that we would not be replacing one headache with another bigger one.
Helen Brown
OakTree Software

#10 David Glasgow

David Glasgow

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Location:Boiling Springs, PA, USA
  • Interests:Music, Diversity

Posted 17 July 2006 - 06:52 AM

I am not at all sure that we would not be replacing one headache with another bigger one.


That's certainly a valid consideration! I didn't mean to initiate a firestorm of debate on this one; it just surprises me that an app that's so proudly Mac-only seems so un-Mac-like on this point.

I obviously don't understand the mechanics of the bazillions of installers y'all deal with, but don't current installers require the user to "quit all currently running Accordance applications" or something? So the job of finding the currently installed version seems to fall to the user anyway. Interim updaters, I suppose, would be a big exception to that point, but when we hit version 8 and the installer is no longer modifying a currently installed app, it seems to me that we ought to be able to install a (for lack of a better term) "compliant" Accordance sans version number just as easily as installing a copy of a completely different application, and then delete version 7.

The individual modules, after all, don't need to look for the application, do they? (And if they did, I would naïvely assume that it's easier for software to look for "Accordance" than "Accordance 1 or Accordance 1.1 or Accordance 1.2 or....")

Anyway. For someone who didn't want to initiate a firestorm, I've rambled for too long, haven't I? I'm sure the version-number thing isn't a problem at all for most users, is only a very minor inconvenience for the majority of those who even notice, and a major frustration only for über-users like Joe who do tons of custom scripting. Keep focusing on the "big stuff," Helen and team. We appreciate all you do!

:)
David

Edited by David Glasgow, 17 July 2006 - 06:53 AM.

"I would rather have a mind opened by wonder
than one closed by belief." --Gerry Spence

#11 Mick Matousek

Mick Matousek

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 173 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 August 2006 - 06:23 PM

Thank you for removing the version number in the lastest 7.0.3 update. It will make AppleScripts, Quickey, and iKey macros much easier to maintain. :D

Edited by Mick Matousek, 01 August 2006 - 06:24 PM.


#12 Joe Weaks

Joe Weaks

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Odessa, TX
  • Interests:I like things that are Orange, and possibly Blue.
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 02 August 2006 - 12:33 AM

Helen,
The number of different installers out there and different OSes that you're still supporting always stuns me. And you should rightly so never forget that we early adopters are a small base of your users.
I'm tickled that you've found a way to remove the 7.x.x from the new updates.

I toast you all.
Joe Weaks
The Macintosh Biblioblog

Sometimes I'm so helpful even I can't stand it.

#13 Alistair

Alistair

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 02 August 2006 - 09:17 AM

Finally!

Well done to all concerned. :)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users