5 ms·

Words cannot describe how right he is. Apple is becoming an 8000 pound gorilla because nobody else can design a user interface! Windows is crap committee-ware,

by api 17y ago

Words cannot describe how right he is. Apple is becoming an 8000 pound gorilla because nobody else can design a user interface! Windows is crap committee-ware, and open source UIs insist on imitating Windows (look at Gnome, KDE) which means they're imitation crap. There are other aspects to Apple that matter too. Their code performs well and doesn't tend to break. There's a polish that Apple's code has that nobody else puts on their product. Their hardware is decent (not excellent, but decent) on the quality factor too, but it's also well-designed just like their UIs are. The biggest feature of Apple's hardware is what it doesn't have: loads of useless buttons (stupid blue ThinkVantage button, I'm looking at you!), connectors you never use, etc. Note that Linux rules the server space for the same reason. Open source UIs are crap, but under the hood the open source ecosystem obviously cares. So in markets where under the hood matters most, Linux and other OSS operating systems are the dominant players. The moral of the story? Stop listening to the idiots that tell you that the way to design software is to slap it together and focus exclusively on marketing. This only works if your market is not crowded. This worked for Microsoft in the 80s and 90s because there weren't many affordable alternatives. People actually do care about quality.

mojuba 17y ago
People care about aesthetics, and quality is, I think, one form of it. Can't agree more, and I think there could have been many more Apples if more companies were run by technical people with a good sense of aesthetics (in a broader sense), rather than by business people.
- doron 17y ago
  I disagree, Apple's offering in terms of servers (both hardware and software) is downright ridiculous, no ability to virtual the servers. and the software doesn't scale well (they are very far from Microsoft in that regard). Disclaimer: All the desktop hardware we use are Apple, but we switched the OS's to windows 7, its more suitable for an organization.
jon_dahl 17y ago
Apple's aesthetics are important, no doubt. But equally important was its decision to standardize its computers on BSD and Intel. Before OS X, Apple was a niche product, and its niche didn't include most developers. After OS X, the dev community started to trickle in, but it really took off after the Intel switch. Partly because the Core Duo was much faster than the PowerPC, but also because the PowerPC was a form of lock-in. It kept good software out, and made it hard to develop for other platforms. Apple owes a lot to standardization and opening up. It's not all App Store lockdown. The question is, is this App Store crap a general trend? Are they going to bring that to the desktop?
- baguasquirrel 17y ago
  Others could have done the same. BeOS didn't succeed. You don't see Linux everywhere and it was (and still is) based on openness.
  - DrSprout 17y ago
    But you do see Linux everywhere. Servers, embedded devices (including Android) tons run Linux. The Desktop is just a sliver.
- glhaynes 17y ago
  I'm not sure there are that many Mac apps that have been built since the Intel switch that are used by most of the types of folks that are new to the Mac. Lots of Mac users don't run much at all on their Macs besides Apple software other than perhaps Firefox and/or a 3rd party IM client. As I see it, the Intel switch was mostly important to get Macs being used (and thus recommended) by geeks for the same reasons it's been popular among non-geeks: the ability to run Windows (and, of course, to a lesser extent, other Intel operating systems). This, along with the increasing importance of the web (and thus lessened importance of the specific OS platform), the spread of Apple retail stores, and the iPod/iPhone halo effect I think are the main reasons Mac sales have done so well. Because of that mix, it's hard to tell how much the platform's openness has been important to it. It certainly hasn't hurt any, though, and it's a very likable trait in a "desktop" OS!
phil 17y ago
Their hardware is decent (not excellent, but decent) on the quality factor Who builds better quality hardware than Apple?
- mahmud 17y ago
  Have you ever owned an IBM Thinkpad?
  - codyrobbins 17y ago
    Yes, and it didn’t pass the creak test.
    - jrockway 17y ago
      Yeah, but it does pass the "accidentally spilled coffee on my keyboard test".
      - mattmaroon 17y ago
        Mine passed the "getting dropped from 3-5 feet on about 700 different occasions" test.
        jfarmer 17y ago
        Mine passed the got-run-over-by-an-SUV test, modulo a new external keyboard and monitor.
        nick-dap 17y ago
        Mine had a cracked motherboard because I was apparently picking it up off the table wrong, by the corner vs gently holding it on both sides, as designed. IBM initially claimed that it was water damage (6 months prior), searching online revealed a small army with the same problem as I. I still use that ThinkPad (well minus the new motherboard) on my electronics bench, but to say that its on par with the iPhone or Mac Pro in terms of quality is laughable. The whole thing looks and feels like its made out of recycled plastic. Its so ugly it looks rugged. And I still love the damn thing... go figure.
yesimahuman 17y ago
I completely disagree that windows 7 is crap design. I'm more efficient with Windows 7's window management, for example, so I find their design much better than OS X's
- api 17y ago
  Windows 7 is an improvement, but I still don't like it. I suppose some of it is personal taste. I also still consider it ugly from an aesthetic point of view. It's not clean. It's cluttered and counterintuitive. There's something else too... even with 7, Windows doesn't perform well. NTFS uses a "pessimum" allocation algorithm that seems to achieve maximum conceivable file fragmentation after even moderate use, and I'm still not sure why Windows disk thrashes more than any other OS. With equivalent workloads on Linux and OSX, the disk occasionally blinks. On Windows it thrashes wildly. "Performance doesn't matter" is a relative of UIs as an afterthought. Performance is a UI issue, and it does matter. It's even more apparently on mobile devices... the iPlatform performs so much better than Windows Mobile. (Android isn't bad either.) http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/v7i24_fallacy.html http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/v7i24_fallacy.html
  - yesimahuman 17y ago
    Perhaps I'm less sensitive, but I've noticed no more slow downs than any other OS I've used before. Not that I'm loyal to any particular platform but I feel a need to voice that I like many of the things MS has done with 7, and that arguments that OS X (at least the UI, I still prefer the *nix environment for development) is far better are just not true anymore. I also enjoy the other desktops like Gnome or IceWM, but 7 is my favorite so far in terms of UI experience.

by api 17y ago

mojuba 17y ago

People care about aesthetics, and quality is, I think, one form of it. Can't agree more, and I think there could have been many more Apples if more companies were run by technical people with a good sense of aesthetics (in a broader sense), rather than by business people.

doron 17y ago
I disagree, Apple's offering in terms of servers (both hardware and software) is downright ridiculous, no ability to virtual the servers. and the software doesn't scale well (they are very far from Microsoft in that regard). Disclaimer: All the desktop hardware we use are Apple, but we switched the OS's to windows 7, its more suitable for an organization.

jon_dahl 17y ago

Apple's aesthetics are important, no doubt. But equally important was its decision to standardize its computers on BSD and Intel. Before OS X, Apple was a niche product, and its niche didn't include most developers. After OS X, the dev community started to trickle in, but it really took off after the Intel switch. Partly because the Core Duo was much faster than the PowerPC, but also because the PowerPC was a form of lock-in. It kept good software out, and made it hard to develop for other platforms. Apple owes a lot to standardization and opening up. It's not all App Store lockdown. The question is, is this App Store crap a general trend? Are they going to bring that to the desktop?

baguasquirrel 17y ago
Others could have done the same. BeOS didn't succeed. You don't see Linux everywhere and it was (and still is) based on openness.
- DrSprout 17y ago
  But you do see Linux everywhere. Servers, embedded devices (including Android) tons run Linux. The Desktop is just a sliver.
glhaynes 17y ago
I'm not sure there are that many Mac apps that have been built since the Intel switch that are used by most of the types of folks that are new to the Mac. Lots of Mac users don't run much at all on their Macs besides Apple software other than perhaps Firefox and/or a 3rd party IM client. As I see it, the Intel switch was mostly important to get Macs being used (and thus recommended) by geeks for the same reasons it's been popular among non-geeks: the ability to run Windows (and, of course, to a lesser extent, other Intel operating systems). This, along with the increasing importance of the web (and thus lessened importance of the specific OS platform), the spread of Apple retail stores, and the iPod/iPhone halo effect I think are the main reasons Mac sales have done so well. Because of that mix, it's hard to tell how much the platform's openness has been important to it. It certainly hasn't hurt any, though, and it's a very likable trait in a "desktop" OS!

phil 17y ago

Their hardware is decent (not excellent, but decent) on the quality factor Who builds better quality hardware than Apple?

mahmud 17y ago
Have you ever owned an IBM Thinkpad?
- codyrobbins 17y ago
  Yes, and it didn’t pass the creak test.
  - jrockway 17y ago
    Yeah, but it does pass the "accidentally spilled coffee on my keyboard test".
    - mattmaroon 17y ago
      Mine passed the "getting dropped from 3-5 feet on about 700 different occasions" test.
      - jfarmer 17y ago
        Mine passed the got-run-over-by-an-SUV test, modulo a new external keyboard and monitor.
        nick-dap 17y ago
        Mine had a cracked motherboard because I was apparently picking it up off the table wrong, by the corner vs gently holding it on both sides, as designed. IBM initially claimed that it was water damage (6 months prior), searching online revealed a small army with the same problem as I. I still use that ThinkPad (well minus the new motherboard) on my electronics bench, but to say that its on par with the iPhone or Mac Pro in terms of quality is laughable. The whole thing looks and feels like its made out of recycled plastic. Its so ugly it looks rugged. And I still love the damn thing... go figure.

yesimahuman 17y ago

I completely disagree that windows 7 is crap design. I'm more efficient with Windows 7's window management, for example, so I find their design much better than OS X's

api 17y ago
Windows 7 is an improvement, but I still don't like it. I suppose some of it is personal taste. I also still consider it ugly from an aesthetic point of view. It's not clean. It's cluttered and counterintuitive. There's something else too... even with 7, Windows doesn't perform well. NTFS uses a "pessimum" allocation algorithm that seems to achieve maximum conceivable file fragmentation after even moderate use, and I'm still not sure why Windows disk thrashes more than any other OS. With equivalent workloads on Linux and OSX, the disk occasionally blinks. On Windows it thrashes wildly. "Performance doesn't matter" is a relative of UIs as an afterthought. Performance is a UI issue, and it does matter. It's even more apparently on mobile devices... the iPlatform performs so much better than Windows Mobile. (Android isn't bad either.) http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/v7i24_fallacy.html http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/v7i24_fallacy.html
- yesimahuman 17y ago
  Perhaps I'm less sensitive, but I've noticed no more slow downs than any other OS I've used before. Not that I'm loyal to any particular platform but I feel a need to voice that I like many of the things MS has done with 7, and that arguments that OS X (at least the UI, I still prefer the *nix environment for development) is far better are just not true anymore. I also enjoy the other desktops like Gnome or IceWM, but 7 is my favorite so far in terms of UI experience.