4 ms·
> This is nostalgic bias. > Early OS X was a mess. The OS was steadily and visibly improving. However, once it reached maturity, Apple decided to throw all ca
by dmitriid 4y ago
> This is nostalgic bias.
> Early OS X was a mess.
The OS was steadily and visibly improving. However, once it reached maturity, Apple decided to throw all care (and its own HIGs) out of the window. And now the OS has moved from stagnation to steady degradation.
- dangus 4y agoThis discussion reminds me of the technology adoption curve: https://ondigitalmarketing.com/learn/odm/foundations/5-customer-segments-technology-adoption/ https://ondigitalmarketing.com/learn/odm/foundations/5-custo... The truth is, HIG is a guideline. That’s the G. It’s a living document that changes, like language. A lot of changes that happened to macOS and Apple software looked bad at first release, like Final Cut Pro X. Many of those decisions were the right move in the long term. Don't mistake early iteration deficiencies of rewritten component with an overall trend of degradation (again, see Final Cut Pro). If you’re a late majority adopter or laggard, you might just not be comfortable with change at first or ever, and that’s perfectly okay. And sure, not all change is good, but bad software doesn’t make Apple money, either.
- dmitriid 4y agoApple's HIGs were carefully researched and validated. The original HIGs from the 80s even had an extensive bibliography linking to and citing extensive user research. What are the current changes except "we don't understand how desktop OSes work, and we've only worked with iOS, so there"?