6 ms·

Mac OS UI is a great example for why one shouldn't "improve" software just for the sake for changing something. UI design peaked at Windows XP style. the design

Mac OS UI is a great example for why one shouldn't "improve" software just for the sake for changing something. UI design peaked at Windows XP style. the design portraied here falls for my opinion in that category. As a user of xfce (on Linux Mint) which is basically Windows XP with different icons I am super happy. Apple actually came up with only a single valuable UI element and that is the three finger swipe to switch workspaces or display running applications. The rest is crap and I am flabbergasted at how Mac fanboys are willing to jump through hoops to justify and praise whatever Apple dumps on them. Working in IT they gave me an MBP (the edition w/o an Esc key) and now my second IPhone (13PM). I say with confidence that the only reason why Mac / IPhone is more popular than a TP (be it with Windows or Linux) / Android is simply b/c it is more expensive and a status symbol. That's it. A status symbol. Congratulations to Apple for conning even IT experts who are at the end of the day also just human beings with psychological weaknesses to be capitalized on.

Duckton 5y ago
Can you give some examples on why you think Windows XP is better than macOS and also how macOS is crap?
- icelancer 5y ago
  Command vs. ALT/CTRL bindings are vastly superior in Windows. The MacOS method of using the Command button is different for the sake of being different, not for any actual productive reason. I had the first Macbook Retina and used it for years at a company where it made sense to do so; when I handed it in and left for my own startup life, I was open to either OS (couldn't use Linux as the daily driver since I my industry uses a lot of Windows-only programs), and Windows was just far more productive to use on a regular basis. The only thing I miss is Final Cut Pro, and Sublime Text to some degree (VS Code has been an adequate replacement).
  - bitigchi 5y ago
    LOL. Not at all. Mac keyboard shortcuts are explicitly more reachable than its Windows counterparts. Try reaching alt+f4 versus command+w/q. Also macOS incorporates more keyboard shortcuts than any other OS. You will need to elaborate more on this one.
  - Duckton 5y ago
    It’s funny how different it can be for different people. I switch regularly between macOS and Fedora, and have windows on a ssd for gaming. I agree on the Command vs. CTRL bindings thing. It’s annoying when switching between the two systems. I recently wanted to pick up unity, and decided to try it on windows. I have to say, as strongly as you find macOS annoying I find windows annoying. Fx system settings, for some reason when I have to change something it takes me ages to navigate through the UI to find what I’m looking for. But maybe it’s all just personal preference and what one is used to.
  - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
    > The MacOS method of using the Command button is different for the sake of being different, not for any actual productive reason. I’m actually pretty sure the Mac’s Command key predates ctrl being used for this purpose.
  - kergonath 5y ago
    > Command vs. ALT/CTRL bindings are vastly superior in Windows. The MacOS method of using the Command button is different for the sake of being different, not for any actual productive reason. Command is much more accessible as part of a shortcut than control. Also, alt is much more useful as a composition key than as a pseudo-control key. And seriously, who in their right mind believes that things like alt-F4 are a good idea? The way Windows shortcuts work is particularly idiosyncratic and makes sense only as an historical oddity from way back when DOS had to coexist with Windows.
- 2-718-281-828 5y ago
  - Finder - Applications not actually being terminated when clicking on the close icon - lagging / unreliable context menu opening with middle-index-finger on apps in dock bar - the concept of installing something by moving it from an icon on the left to an icon on the right - or when you can't start apps due to connectivity issues - app removal is totally opaque and sometimes requires to download a custom uninstallation tool (adobe creative cloud f.x.)
  - Duckton 5y ago
    I find finder more productive than explorer. I love the fact that clicking the close icon of a window doesn’t terminate the application Haven’t experienced this, not sure what you are referring to. Also something I like. The fact that an installation is just moving an executable, is to me, superior to an entire process with regedit and what not. As I said somewhere below, it might just come down to what one is used to and not objective facts.
    - 2-718-281-828 5y ago
      > I love the fact that clicking the close icon of a window doesn’t terminate the application what is the difference then between closing and minimizing?
      - Duckton 5y ago
        I minimise when I want to get the content, fx a VS code workspace, out of the way to retrieve it later. Close is when I am done with that particular window/workspace. Command+Q is when I’m done working in VS code entirely.
      - kergonath 5y ago
        > what is the difference then between closing and minimizing? Closing is putting away, as in “I don’t think I’ll need it in the near future”, and minimising is putting aside as in “I’ll probably come back to this in 5 minutes”. The minimised window is not cluttering the screen but still accessible from the dock and list of open windows in its application. This is not related to the problem you claimed to have with an application being still open without having a single window.
- jayd16 5y ago
  MacOS and its applications relegate far too much functionality to hidden "power tools." Often its impossible to know what is clickable in macOS. Windows XP features were easy to discover. Scroll bars were not hidden. Buttons looked like buttons.
icelancer 5y ago
I loved Windows XP (I think most of us did) but I find the Windows NT/2000 -> Windows 7 design to be the most intuitive. I still install Start10 on every server and workstation I use and revert to the Windows 7 style. I suspect I'll do it for as long as Start10 supports their software (fortunately they already patched Windows 11, too).
Hakashiro 5y ago
I strongly disagree. Windows XP plasticky design was pretty unappealing. Windows 2000 and Windows Vista on the other hand... Much better in my opinion. Also Mac OS Aqua design was great when it was skeuomorphic.
__void 5y ago
Well, windows XP was the peak of gui... only when set to classic mode (like windows millennium)! the plastic edges and colors of XP offered nothing extra to 9x-class interfaces; the absolute peak of interfaces was mac system 9
- jayd16 5y ago
  I don't know. I kind of prefer Windows XP as the many-windowed-application style died out by then. Now the only major example I can think of is Gimp.
skocznymroczny 5y ago
I disagree. Currently I have a company provided Macbook Pro (butterfly keyboard) and a Thinkpad. I very much prefer to work on the Macbook. Software issues aside - Macbook is less preloaded with company snake oil crapware, also gives easy access to Unixy commandline tools. Hardware - I much prefer the Macbook. It's completely quiet 99% of the time, whereas the Thinkpad has it's fans blazing as soon as I open Chrome. The build quality feels much better on the Macbook and I love how sleek and thin it is. Meanwhile Thinkpad feels like a brick.
- edgyquant 5y ago
  MacOS is beautiful and while it may be possible I do not believe anyone, except maybe a tiny percentage of tech users who used windows 9x or old school Mac as their first interface, objectively looks at it and thinks it’s ugly while the old beige UI was the last truly beautiful interface. That is some bizarro world stuff. Even Windows 10 is actually fairly pretty in its interface even if it is super bloated.
edgyquant 5y ago
I have never seen anyone argue Mac OS was anything but beautiful but I guess there’s a first for everything. These threads pop up constantly and I always jump in to ask people claiming they find the blocky beige of late 90s OSS more aesthetically pleasing to explain how it is they believe this to be true. There are lots of complaints about modern OSs one can make but none of the major three are anything close to ugly and are all easy on the eyes. So I ask you to explain why you believe UI design peaked in the 90s, when just using these OSs was unintuitive to anyone but a tech enthusiast, other than you are looking through rose colored glasses. I started on Win95 and remember how I couldn’t wait to switch to XP and where there were actual colors and it didn’t feel so empty. I then wanted to switch to vista so bad that when my PC wouldn’t handle it I download SUSE Community Edition (a Linux) because Vista copied a lot of its fancy new UI (like previews and 3D icons) from Gnome (at least it seemed that way to me, may not be true or it could be they just happened to be tested on Gnome first.) I get rose colored glasses for sure but romanticizing about a UI that only looked as plain as it did due to technical limitations just seems weird to me. Then again I suppose their were people who thought black and white cartoons were objectively prettier than technicolor. People have a way of convincing themselves what they initially got used to is the best way and any change is a regression.
- jcelerier 5y ago
  > when just using these OSs was unintuitive to anyone but a tech enthusiast That's very far from my experience. I know a fair amount of people who had no trouble going from DOS -> win 3.1 -> 95, 98, XP, but starting from Vista using their computer became much harder and much more external assistance started to be required. I know no one who is learning how to use computers as easily with, say, Win 10 or the latest Macs, than people 15 years ago ; when I give classes most non-CS college students are more computer illiterate than people around me when I was in junior high.
  - edgyquant 5y ago
    I’m not sure how old you are, so I’m inferring, but isn’t the reason because most peoples computers are phones or tablets so what you’re calling them being computer illiterate is really them just being desktop os illiterate? Also 15 years ago (that’s 2004) the UIs weren’t that different and were no longer the beige UIs of the 90s we’re discussing here. As for using super early windows being easier than modern day I disagree if they were only doing the exact same things I don’t see how it’s harder today. The thing is people use their PCs for a ton more stuff today than they did during say windows 3.1
grishka 5y ago
I am a Mac user for 10 years and just can't fathom using anything else at this point so I might as well be called a "Mac fanboy". Yet, Monterey's (12.0) UI is a clear regression in comparison to Mojave (10.14). The utter lack of attention to the pixel grid, the unnecessary horizontal paddings where horizontal space is valuable like sidebars, these top bars that are way too huge and combine the title bar with the toolbar so neither fits comfortably, too much spacing between menu bar icons, the "control center" that's clearly made for touchscreens despite macOS devices having none, and this list goes on and on. This redesign was clearly done by someone who 1) prioritizes looks over function and 2) wants change for its own sake. edit: you know you're making terribly misguided UI decisions when people build software to revert them: https://github.com/MacEnhance/MEMiniMe https://github.com/MacEnhance/MEMiniMe
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Toutouxc 5y ago
> congratulations to Apple for conning even IT experts Which one is more plausible? a) Apple actually "conning" tens of thousands of highly skilled, [mostly] intelligent, [mostly] educated people into spending money on hardware they don't actually need. b) You not understanding some important aspect of the situation and/or having different personal preferences.
- 2-718-281-828 5y ago
  (a) ... when it comes to status and self-presentation people tend to ignore their intelligence and education.

Duckton 5y ago

Can you give some examples on why you think Windows XP is better than macOS and also how macOS is crap?

icelancer 5y ago
Command vs. ALT/CTRL bindings are vastly superior in Windows. The MacOS method of using the Command button is different for the sake of being different, not for any actual productive reason. I had the first Macbook Retina and used it for years at a company where it made sense to do so; when I handed it in and left for my own startup life, I was open to either OS (couldn't use Linux as the daily driver since I my industry uses a lot of Windows-only programs), and Windows was just far more productive to use on a regular basis. The only thing I miss is Final Cut Pro, and Sublime Text to some degree (VS Code has been an adequate replacement).
- bitigchi 5y ago
  LOL. Not at all. Mac keyboard shortcuts are explicitly more reachable than its Windows counterparts. Try reaching alt+f4 versus command+w/q. Also macOS incorporates more keyboard shortcuts than any other OS. You will need to elaborate more on this one.
- Duckton 5y ago
  It’s funny how different it can be for different people. I switch regularly between macOS and Fedora, and have windows on a ssd for gaming. I agree on the Command vs. CTRL bindings thing. It’s annoying when switching between the two systems. I recently wanted to pick up unity, and decided to try it on windows. I have to say, as strongly as you find macOS annoying I find windows annoying. Fx system settings, for some reason when I have to change something it takes me ages to navigate through the UI to find what I’m looking for. But maybe it’s all just personal preference and what one is used to.
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago
  > The MacOS method of using the Command button is different for the sake of being different, not for any actual productive reason. I’m actually pretty sure the Mac’s Command key predates ctrl being used for this purpose.
- kergonath 5y ago
  > Command vs. ALT/CTRL bindings are vastly superior in Windows. The MacOS method of using the Command button is different for the sake of being different, not for any actual productive reason. Command is much more accessible as part of a shortcut than control. Also, alt is much more useful as a composition key than as a pseudo-control key. And seriously, who in their right mind believes that things like alt-F4 are a good idea? The way Windows shortcuts work is particularly idiosyncratic and makes sense only as an historical oddity from way back when DOS had to coexist with Windows.
2-718-281-828 5y ago
- Finder - Applications not actually being terminated when clicking on the close icon - lagging / unreliable context menu opening with middle-index-finger on apps in dock bar - the concept of installing something by moving it from an icon on the left to an icon on the right - or when you can't start apps due to connectivity issues - app removal is totally opaque and sometimes requires to download a custom uninstallation tool (adobe creative cloud f.x.)
- Duckton 5y ago
  I find finder more productive than explorer. I love the fact that clicking the close icon of a window doesn’t terminate the application Haven’t experienced this, not sure what you are referring to. Also something I like. The fact that an installation is just moving an executable, is to me, superior to an entire process with regedit and what not. As I said somewhere below, it might just come down to what one is used to and not objective facts.
  - 2-718-281-828 5y ago
    > I love the fact that clicking the close icon of a window doesn’t terminate the application what is the difference then between closing and minimizing?
    - Duckton 5y ago
      I minimise when I want to get the content, fx a VS code workspace, out of the way to retrieve it later. Close is when I am done with that particular window/workspace. Command+Q is when I’m done working in VS code entirely.
    - kergonath 5y ago
      > what is the difference then between closing and minimizing? Closing is putting away, as in “I don’t think I’ll need it in the near future”, and minimising is putting aside as in “I’ll probably come back to this in 5 minutes”. The minimised window is not cluttering the screen but still accessible from the dock and list of open windows in its application. This is not related to the problem you claimed to have with an application being still open without having a single window.
jayd16 5y ago
MacOS and its applications relegate far too much functionality to hidden "power tools." Often its impossible to know what is clickable in macOS. Windows XP features were easy to discover. Scroll bars were not hidden. Buttons looked like buttons.

icelancer 5y ago

I loved Windows XP (I think most of us did) but I find the Windows NT/2000 -> Windows 7 design to be the most intuitive. I still install Start10 on every server and workstation I use and revert to the Windows 7 style. I suspect I'll do it for as long as Start10 supports their software (fortunately they already patched Windows 11, too).

Hakashiro 5y ago

I strongly disagree. Windows XP plasticky design was pretty unappealing. Windows 2000 and Windows Vista on the other hand... Much better in my opinion. Also Mac OS Aqua design was great when it was skeuomorphic.

__void 5y ago

Well, windows XP was the peak of gui... only when set to classic mode (like windows millennium)! the plastic edges and colors of XP offered nothing extra to 9x-class interfaces; the absolute peak of interfaces was mac system 9

jayd16 5y ago
I don't know. I kind of prefer Windows XP as the many-windowed-application style died out by then. Now the only major example I can think of is Gimp.

skocznymroczny 5y ago

I disagree. Currently I have a company provided Macbook Pro (butterfly keyboard) and a Thinkpad. I very much prefer to work on the Macbook. Software issues aside - Macbook is less preloaded with company snake oil crapware, also gives easy access to Unixy commandline tools. Hardware - I much prefer the Macbook. It's completely quiet 99% of the time, whereas the Thinkpad has it's fans blazing as soon as I open Chrome. The build quality feels much better on the Macbook and I love how sleek and thin it is. Meanwhile Thinkpad feels like a brick.

edgyquant 5y ago
MacOS is beautiful and while it may be possible I do not believe anyone, except maybe a tiny percentage of tech users who used windows 9x or old school Mac as their first interface, objectively looks at it and thinks it’s ugly while the old beige UI was the last truly beautiful interface. That is some bizarro world stuff. Even Windows 10 is actually fairly pretty in its interface even if it is super bloated.

edgyquant 5y ago

I have never seen anyone argue Mac OS was anything but beautiful but I guess there’s a first for everything. These threads pop up constantly and I always jump in to ask people claiming they find the blocky beige of late 90s OSS more aesthetically pleasing to explain how it is they believe this to be true. There are lots of complaints about modern OSs one can make but none of the major three are anything close to ugly and are all easy on the eyes. So I ask you to explain why you believe UI design peaked in the 90s, when just using these OSs was unintuitive to anyone but a tech enthusiast, other than you are looking through rose colored glasses. I started on Win95 and remember how I couldn’t wait to switch to XP and where there were actual colors and it didn’t feel so empty. I then wanted to switch to vista so bad that when my PC wouldn’t handle it I download SUSE Community Edition (a Linux) because Vista copied a lot of its fancy new UI (like previews and 3D icons) from Gnome (at least it seemed that way to me, may not be true or it could be they just happened to be tested on Gnome first.) I get rose colored glasses for sure but romanticizing about a UI that only looked as plain as it did due to technical limitations just seems weird to me. Then again I suppose their were people who thought black and white cartoons were objectively prettier than technicolor. People have a way of convincing themselves what they initially got used to is the best way and any change is a regression.

jcelerier 5y ago
> when just using these OSs was unintuitive to anyone but a tech enthusiast That's very far from my experience. I know a fair amount of people who had no trouble going from DOS -> win 3.1 -> 95, 98, XP, but starting from Vista using their computer became much harder and much more external assistance started to be required. I know no one who is learning how to use computers as easily with, say, Win 10 or the latest Macs, than people 15 years ago ; when I give classes most non-CS college students are more computer illiterate than people around me when I was in junior high.
- edgyquant 5y ago
  I’m not sure how old you are, so I’m inferring, but isn’t the reason because most peoples computers are phones or tablets so what you’re calling them being computer illiterate is really them just being desktop os illiterate? Also 15 years ago (that’s 2004) the UIs weren’t that different and were no longer the beige UIs of the 90s we’re discussing here. As for using super early windows being easier than modern day I disagree if they were only doing the exact same things I don’t see how it’s harder today. The thing is people use their PCs for a ton more stuff today than they did during say windows 3.1

grishka 5y ago

I am a Mac user for 10 years and just can't fathom using anything else at this point so I might as well be called a "Mac fanboy". Yet, Monterey's (12.0) UI is a clear regression in comparison to Mojave (10.14). The utter lack of attention to the pixel grid, the unnecessary horizontal paddings where horizontal space is valuable like sidebars, these top bars that are way too huge and combine the title bar with the toolbar so neither fits comfortably, too much spacing between menu bar icons, the "control center" that's clearly made for touchscreens despite macOS devices having none, and this list goes on and on. This redesign was clearly done by someone who 1) prioritizes looks over function and 2) wants change for its own sake. edit: you know you're making terribly misguided UI decisions when people build software to revert them: https://github.com/MacEnhance/MEMiniMe https://github.com/MacEnhance/MEMiniMe

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Toutouxc 5y ago

> congratulations to Apple for conning even IT experts Which one is more plausible? a) Apple actually "conning" tens of thousands of highly skilled, [mostly] intelligent, [mostly] educated people into spending money on hardware they don't actually need. b) You not understanding some important aspect of the situation and/or having different personal preferences.

2-718-281-828 5y ago
(a) ... when it comes to status and self-presentation people tend to ignore their intelligence and education.