3 ms·

It's the look and feel – and more than this. E.g., when Apple decided that customizable icons in the sidebar were bad for their corporate identity, this didn't

It's the look and feel – and more than this. E.g., when Apple decided that customizable icons in the sidebar were bad for their corporate identity, this didn't cost me just a few moments of lifetime whenever I use a file dialog, it also puts some extra stress on me. Now, since visual orientation doesn't work anymore, I've to actually read the list to identify a project folder. Moreover, this also means unloading some of the working memory (just 7 chunks, but there are more than this in the sidebar!) and having to get back into the workflow after having finished what should have been a task as modeless as possible. Big Sur iterates on this, just think centered text and vertically stacked buttons for prompts (as opposed to everywhere else). It's a zoo of micro modes. Another example, the now-you-don't-see-me – now-you-see-me game of the proxy icon, varying window geometry (Mail), etc.

spiderfarmer 6y ago
These are all examples you can get used to. Like you've gotten used the current version of MacOS. Big Sur has a lot of improvements. Sometimes you just have to take the good with the bad.
- masswerk 6y ago
  > These are all examples you can get used to. Actually, no. All these examples are about orientation and how the UI paradigms integrate with the human neural physis. This isn't simply changeable by accustomization. E.g., if the primary structure of the visual field breaks (like the one given by the primary horizontal contours), our brain blocks for a full situational update (which takes about 0.2 secs). Similarly, visual orientation is considerably faster than reading lists. Identifying a colored dot on the screen chips just a single bit from your stack of working memory. Aiming at an invisible point target is difficult and requires extra attention. This isn't subject to negotiation, it's just how we are wired. Edit, another perspective on this: Toys tend to be robust and to grab as much attention as possible. Professional tools, on the other hand, are sometimes delicate, you should know what you're doing, and they are also highly optimized to facilitate a trade and not to get in its way. From this perspective, Big Sur progresses on the toy scale. This is good news for a media house that uses this contraption as the primary outlet, but it may be bad news for those who use it as professional tool.

spiderfarmer 6y ago

These are all examples you can get used to. Like you've gotten used the current version of MacOS. Big Sur has a lot of improvements. Sometimes you just have to take the good with the bad.

masswerk 6y ago
> These are all examples you can get used to. Actually, no. All these examples are about orientation and how the UI paradigms integrate with the human neural physis. This isn't simply changeable by accustomization. E.g., if the primary structure of the visual field breaks (like the one given by the primary horizontal contours), our brain blocks for a full situational update (which takes about 0.2 secs). Similarly, visual orientation is considerably faster than reading lists. Identifying a colored dot on the screen chips just a single bit from your stack of working memory. Aiming at an invisible point target is difficult and requires extra attention. This isn't subject to negotiation, it's just how we are wired. Edit, another perspective on this: Toys tend to be robust and to grab as much attention as possible. Professional tools, on the other hand, are sometimes delicate, you should know what you're doing, and they are also highly optimized to facilitate a trade and not to get in its way. From this perspective, Big Sur progresses on the toy scale. This is good news for a media house that uses this contraption as the primary outlet, but it may be bad news for those who use it as professional tool.