Thoughtful, detailed coverage of the Mac, iPhone, and iPad, plus the best-selling Take Control ebooks.

 

 

Pick an apple! 
 
Mac OS X Services in Snow Leopard

Mac OS X Services let one application supply its powers to another; for example, a Grab service helps TextEdit paste a screenshot into a document. Most users either don't know that Services exist, because they're in an obscure hierarchical menu (ApplicationName > Services), or they mostly don't use them because there are so many of them.

Snow Leopard makes it easier for the uninitiated to utilize this feature; only services appropriate to the current context appear. And in addition to the hierarchical menu, services are discoverable as custom contextual menu items - Control-click in a TextEdit document to access the Grab service, for instance.

In addition, the revamped Keyboard preference pane lets you manage services for the first time ever. You can enable and disable them, and even change their keyboard shortcuts.

Submitted by
Doug McLean

 

 

Related Articles

 

 

Jakob Nielsen Tests iPad and Kindle Reading Speeds

Send Article to a Friend

Do you read faster or slower on a device like an iPad or Kindle, in comparison with a physical book? The overall answer, according to usability expert Jakob Nielsen, is about 5 to 10 percent slower (with the same comprehension of what was read). That's statistically significant, though not all that much slower. (We suspect it may have to do with years of familiarity with the form factor of the book.) More interesting was that on a 1 to 7 scale, users rated their satisfaction at 5.8 for the iPad, 5.7 for the Kindle, and 5.6 for the physical book, with the traditional PC trailing behind at only 3.6.favicon follow link

 

Comments about Jakob Nielsen Tests iPad and Kindle Reading Speeds

You write

"More interesting was that on a 1 to 7 scale, users rated their satisfaction at 5.8 for the iPad, 5.7 for the Kindle, and 5.6 for the physical book, with the traditional PC trailing behind at only 3.6."

However, this is somewhat misleading. Those who read the original article will see that the sample size is quite small (27) and so 5.8, 5.7, and 5.6 for the ebooks and the real book is certainly a statistical tie. The writeup doesn't make clear whether the difference between those books and the PC was statistically significant or not.
Adam Engst  An apple icon for a TidBITS Staffer 2010-07-03 06:23
I'm just trying to get people to read the original - there's a limit to how detailed I can get. You're certainly right that the satisfaction ratings for the iPad, Kindle, and book are a tie, but I found it interesting that they were so much higher than the PC (I'm assuming they surveyed the same people because it wouldn't make sense not to).