Comment by cptskippy | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cptskippy | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I just checked and nothing really lines up with what the author states.

MacOS Sierra and El Capitan default to the "Last Printer Used". The UI is the same in both and there is no indication in the UI that this a per network preference.

Windows 10 defaults to "Let Windows manage my default printer" and has clarifying text under the option that states "Windows will set your default printer to be the one you used most recently at your current location". Which appears to be the feature the author loves about OSX.

Windows 7 sets the first installed printer as the default printer and when you install a printer it asks if you would like to default to it in the future.

Personally I prefer the Windows 7 approach over macOS and Windows 10. Having a network/location default would be ideal in my mind and that doesn't appear to be an option for macOS or Windows.

> Having a network/location default would be ideal in my mind and that doesn't appear to be an option for macOS or Windows.

That's too bad.

The crux of the author's point appears to be that reducing the choices the user has to make is generally good, but I feel that modern designers are often over zealous in that pursuit.

Intelligent defaults is something that feels like a good blend. You're working with the computer, it recommends something it thinks is smart (I set this local printer as the default) and if you disagree you can modify it. One must be careful to not overly increase the mental overhead of the user this way, but smart defaults can prevent the complexity of the user trying to reverse engineer and fight unspoken rules.

I believe I have seen this work in Leopard through Lion, particularly Snow Leopard. I remember re-making the addressing of my home network once I changed jobs and the internal subnets were no longer different. More recently, I no longer print with the same machine at both sites, I will check it out.

This is not an explicit option, such as a default setting for printer for a named network. What I noticed back then was that printers located on the unreacheable networks were never the default offering, provided the routing could be used to distinguish where I was. So, if both home and work networks were using 10.0.0/24, it would not work.

It may be possible that binding to the name of access points is a more clever way to do it today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com