3 ms·

The ideal state for Apple and their target audience is to make your computer an appliance. They really don't want a wide set of configuration options, that make

The ideal state for Apple and their target audience is to make your computer an appliance. They really don't want a wide set of configuration options, that makes it harder to service and harder to test. People are kind of anchored to how Mac is / used to be etc, thinking of it as basically another unix. That's a historical blip in retrospect. Long term, their market really isn't developers & technical users, there are not enough of those to make concessions to. In order to really help Aunt Sally keep her computer running and functional, they need to make sure that her nephew Billy can't make any complicated or potentially dangerous changes to the lower levels of the OS based on some internet forum post. If you need that kind of configurability, you really want a different OS. (Alternately, consider whether you really do need that configurability. Maybe you just think you do, and you'd much rather have a stable operating system that just works)

Brian_K_White 2y ago
My definition of a tool that just works is not a hammer that will only hit some kinds of nails and refuses to break rocks. Even an appliance is a tool. A bicycle, as in "bicycle for the mind" does not become more useful and valid when it gains the ability to decide if it agrees with how and where it's being operated. There are people who think that's a good thing, who think the ultimate form of life would be the wonderful order if all the bicycles kept anyone from going too fast, removing their hands from the handle bars, riding on sidewalks, ignoring traffic lights, etc... But those bicycles are no longer human amplifiers. They are no longer tools, or they are tools but the user is not the person on the bike. The order argument ignores the ultimate purpose of any tool, and ultimately the point of human existence itself. It's flatly invalid to forget that the person wields the tool, not the other way around. Sanity checks and guard rails and sane defaults etc are one thing, those are themselves tools that ultimately empower the wielder, as long as the user is the one who ultimately controls them.

Brian_K_White 2y ago

My definition of a tool that just works is not a hammer that will only hit some kinds of nails and refuses to break rocks. Even an appliance is a tool. A bicycle, as in "bicycle for the mind" does not become more useful and valid when it gains the ability to decide if it agrees with how and where it's being operated. There are people who think that's a good thing, who think the ultimate form of life would be the wonderful order if all the bicycles kept anyone from going too fast, removing their hands from the handle bars, riding on sidewalks, ignoring traffic lights, etc... But those bicycles are no longer human amplifiers. They are no longer tools, or they are tools but the user is not the person on the bike. The order argument ignores the ultimate purpose of any tool, and ultimately the point of human existence itself. It's flatly invalid to forget that the person wields the tool, not the other way around. Sanity checks and guard rails and sane defaults etc are one thing, those are themselves tools that ultimately empower the wielder, as long as the user is the one who ultimately controls them.