3 ms·

> It's constant change for the sake of change. This is far from isolated to Apple, too. It's a cancer that's infested virtually every single software company i

> It's constant change for the sake of change. This is far from isolated to Apple, too. It's a cancer that's infested virtually every single software company in the entire world at this point, and it's endlessly frustrating. If they don't have some New Shiny Version to show off to the tech media and blogosphere everyone starts acting like the software itself is a dead man walking. I also think it's partially down to all these same companies trying to justify subscription billing with a constant trickle of "new stuff" that the application in question does that you're meant to feel like you'd be missing out on. I don't ascribe to this notion whatsoever. I in fact far prefer my software that barely changes at all over time. My most reliable and useful computer is my huge Ubuntu box that lives in my laundry room which handles... I mean frankly it would be easier to say what it doesn't handle, which is anything Apple adjacent because that's all proprietary, and it doesn't handle my security cameras because I couldn't find a linux-based solution for that. Literally every other automated function outside those two categories is handled by that machine, with a mix of software I've downloaded and configured and a fair bit that I've written myself. I say all this to say that machine barely changes at fucking all. I do security updates of course and occasionally have to tweak something but the apps on it are the same, it serves the same internal websites, it runs the same scripts, like clockwork. I LOVE that thing and my life would be in an utter shambles if some overpaid tech executive had the power to randomly change how it works to justify his salary.

keyringlight 2y ago
The way I see it is like fashion or fashion-adjacent, at least on the consumer side. One of the big accomplishments of Jobs direction is that they made computing cool, something you'd want to display instead of a functional beige box you hide away. It's not in the background, you have these colors, elegance or attention to detail on computing you want to be seen, and new major models need to be different to keep customers engaged along with being the status symbol. With further progression on integration/miniaturization and lower power consumption/heat output for general computing, the devices have shrunk to their bare minimum as slabs, there's very little physical to display so the fashion needed to move to software (and what online services it can be a client for). Stasis is death when you rely on selling, and maintenance is a constant cost which no one really wants to pay for. As a side note, it's interesting to compare attitudes to the physical side to PC, where for years there was almost a pride that PC was a minimalist functional box (besides the occasional fun/weird exception), but that contrasts against now where it's hard not to get components with windows or embellished with LEDs and logos on display (and there's another weird contrast, where on one hand you have internals on display, on the other trying to minimize or hiding away the cables as though the inner workings were ugly)
- PaulHoule 2y ago
  2 years ago I built an AI workstation (aka gaming PC) with all the RGB bling because it would have been harder to find parts that didn’t have the bling.
PaulHoule 2y ago
I think of Microsoft’s bad habit of introducing meaningless superficial changes to the interface but they also keep legacy software working for a long long time. (Office ‘97 works fine on Win 11) The strangest thing about this is in the system configuration dialogs where they have a set of really gee whizzy modern configuration screens but you still have to go into 15 year old screens to do many common tasks —- they updated some but kept the old ones that they did not have time to update which is a little ugly but fine because they old ones work 100%. I used to have “who moved my cheese?” moments all the time with Windows circa 2005 when I was admining Windows and having to deal with configuration screens in ‘98, 2000, XP and various versions of Windows Server, they couldn’t resist making superficial changes that annoyed me to no end.
- ToucanLoucan 2y ago
  Oh my god, as a UI designer by trade, the sheer STATE of the Windows OS will send me into a rant far too long (and that I'm far too sober for right now) for a hacker news comment. It's a TRAVESTY. If you try and modify certain system settings you will see, in no particular order, the slightly cleaned up Metro ala Windows 11 (I honestly don't know if this got a name), remnants of the original Metro from 8/10, the modified refreshed control panel from windows 7/vista, and as you point out, dialogs that are seemingly ported directly from as old as Windows 98. I don't know who if anyone really is heading the UX department at Microsoft, but they should either be empowered to their job properly or fucking fired, and I couldn't tell you which.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- artimaeis 2y ago
  Lots of people in this thread (correctly!) pointing out Apple's struggles with releasing high quality user software on MacOS. But at least when they changed the System Settings UI in MacOS Ventura (10.13) they managed to stick the landing. Not that I necessarily _like_ the new Settings UI, but there's no jumping into old UIs to configure things. Microsoft released Windows 8 in 2012, and here we are 13 years later using interaction panels that have only gotten minor chrome updates since their original release in Windows 95 (looking at you, Advanced System Settings and Device Manager).

keyringlight 2y ago

The way I see it is like fashion or fashion-adjacent, at least on the consumer side. One of the big accomplishments of Jobs direction is that they made computing cool, something you'd want to display instead of a functional beige box you hide away. It's not in the background, you have these colors, elegance or attention to detail on computing you want to be seen, and new major models need to be different to keep customers engaged along with being the status symbol. With further progression on integration/miniaturization and lower power consumption/heat output for general computing, the devices have shrunk to their bare minimum as slabs, there's very little physical to display so the fashion needed to move to software (and what online services it can be a client for). Stasis is death when you rely on selling, and maintenance is a constant cost which no one really wants to pay for. As a side note, it's interesting to compare attitudes to the physical side to PC, where for years there was almost a pride that PC was a minimalist functional box (besides the occasional fun/weird exception), but that contrasts against now where it's hard not to get components with windows or embellished with LEDs and logos on display (and there's another weird contrast, where on one hand you have internals on display, on the other trying to minimize or hiding away the cables as though the inner workings were ugly)

PaulHoule 2y ago
2 years ago I built an AI workstation (aka gaming PC) with all the RGB bling because it would have been harder to find parts that didn’t have the bling.

PaulHoule 2y ago

I think of Microsoft’s bad habit of introducing meaningless superficial changes to the interface but they also keep legacy software working for a long long time. (Office ‘97 works fine on Win 11) The strangest thing about this is in the system configuration dialogs where they have a set of really gee whizzy modern configuration screens but you still have to go into 15 year old screens to do many common tasks —- they updated some but kept the old ones that they did not have time to update which is a little ugly but fine because they old ones work 100%. I used to have “who moved my cheese?” moments all the time with Windows circa 2005 when I was admining Windows and having to deal with configuration screens in ‘98, 2000, XP and various versions of Windows Server, they couldn’t resist making superficial changes that annoyed me to no end.

ToucanLoucan 2y ago
Oh my god, as a UI designer by trade, the sheer STATE of the Windows OS will send me into a rant far too long (and that I'm far too sober for right now) for a hacker news comment. It's a TRAVESTY. If you try and modify certain system settings you will see, in no particular order, the slightly cleaned up Metro ala Windows 11 (I honestly don't know if this got a name), remnants of the original Metro from 8/10, the modified refreshed control panel from windows 7/vista, and as you point out, dialogs that are seemingly ported directly from as old as Windows 98. I don't know who if anyone really is heading the UX department at Microsoft, but they should either be empowered to their job properly or fucking fired, and I couldn't tell you which.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
artimaeis 2y ago
Lots of people in this thread (correctly!) pointing out Apple's struggles with releasing high quality user software on MacOS. But at least when they changed the System Settings UI in MacOS Ventura (10.13) they managed to stick the landing. Not that I necessarily _like_ the new Settings UI, but there's no jumping into old UIs to configure things. Microsoft released Windows 8 in 2012, and here we are 13 years later using interaction panels that have only gotten minor chrome updates since their original release in Windows 95 (looking at you, Advanced System Settings and Device Manager).