4 ms·

My comment: Nobody will claim that Apple creates ugly, hard to use hardware and software. Design, art and beauty of hardware and software is a primary focus a

My comment: Nobody will claim that Apple creates ugly, hard to use hardware and software. Design, art and beauty of hardware and software is a primary focus at Apple. They are meticulous about the look and feel of their products. I have been through 5 or 6 different Ubuntu's. Several versions of RedHat. Both Gnome and KDE. I used Gentoo and Mandrake Linux back in the day. And just recently used Linux Mint. I actually like the look and feel of Ubuntu12. And that is the only one that I actually like the user interface, the speed and usability of the desktop. Pretty much every other version of the Linux OSes that I used. The fonts were too big or the file manager was unresponsive. The software looked bad or was incomplete. Eventually, I just gave in and went back to Windows or Mac. They will never admit it, but open source is not concerned with design or usability.

aw3c2 14y ago
I will do the deed. I find the iphone ugly compared to a more rounded, plastic smartphone. I find the ipad's metal back uncomfortable to hold. I also find the size of the ipad too big for reading. The Apple power cables are very edgey(?) and I dislike that but that might be my common sense seeing the "planned breaking points". Ok, software next: I find the detachment of the menu bar from windows irritating. And on mobile devices I find the placement of the back button awkward to use (most distance from my hand as possible). Apple is considered great because of highly successful marketing.
- sixbrx 14y ago
  All fine until the last sentence which doesn't follow because all of the previous points were very minor (though I agree with some).
derleth 14y ago
> Nobody will claim that Apple creates ugly, hard to use hardware and software. I will. The current iMac keyboard is a bad joke and the mouse is just plain strange. Why would I need a touchpad on a mouse? The Mac GUI is atrocious. Forcing the focused window to be on top is asinine. Making it impossible to change this is idiotic, and symptomatic of a deeper evil: There is only One Steve Jobs Way. Unless you do it their way, well, "You're holding it wrong." Don't argue, just adapt your workflow to their technology and never expect the designers to be humble enough to admit that they might, in your case, be wrong about something. So, no, the Macintosh is not my favorite computer system.
- berlinbrown 14y ago
  Compared to the Linux (open) world? There was no real interface before 2000. Even with the core Linux developers like Linus, he absolutely did not care about the user space. Linux was sort of this competitor to MS Windows and the main creator of Linux didn't actually care to building user interfaces. Sure Linus was a kernel hacker and was trying to building the compliant OS system. I bet Steve Jobs didn't just look on the Apple OS kernel. He focused on the design of the hardware and the design of all the software. It is myopic to completely ignore the desktop arena. And a lot of open source developers were like that.
  - derleth 14y ago
    > There was no real interface before 2000. Yes there was. This invalidates your whole post.
sethrin 14y ago
How many apps ship with OS X? 50, 500, or 5000? Let's just say they're dealing with a more restricted problem space, where they have a great deal more latitude to enforce technology use. That's kinda the point of their vertical monopoly, don'cha think? So you see, not only is open source kinda the opposite of a vertical monopoly, most open source budgets orders of magnitude smaller than those of Apple or Microsoft. But aside from those little problems, you also have to optimize in several opposing directions at once! Considering only the desktop, you gotta balance the needs of those who find more configuration options more useful with those who think such things are ugly and confusing. Both are right! In the wider range of open source (which both you and the author ignore), there are lots of people who don't want any GUI integration. There are many millions more headless linux installations than desktops. Clearly, there are some problems to overcome. It's possible that they're really unresolvable, that you can't simultaneously optimize for all of those goals. However, it is possible that you can help bring about a better world, even if you're not an artist or programmer. The next time you say to yourself, "Man, I wish XXX desktop looked better," * Obtain an envelope and postage. * Write out your complaint on a note, preferably a high-denomination bank note. * Mail it to the makers of the aforementioned desktop environment. Your comments will receive the most prompt attention. This could also be viewed as buying a right to complain -- if it's not your time or money involved in making it, maybe you shouldn't complain that your use-case isn't being optimized for? (What is wrong with deciding to optimize for non-GUI uses, for that matter?) On a more personal level, I'm happy that you like Mac and/or Windows! It's nice to like things, isn't it? Thanks for sharing.
derleth 14y ago
> open source is not concerned with design or usability. Not if you define those words the way Apple has. But that's a perfectly obvious statement: Apple's way is antithetical to the whole idea of Open Source, at least to the extent of Apple being obsessed with forcing a specific workflow on everyone who uses their products.

aw3c2 14y ago

I will do the deed. I find the iphone ugly compared to a more rounded, plastic smartphone. I find the ipad's metal back uncomfortable to hold. I also find the size of the ipad too big for reading. The Apple power cables are very edgey(?) and I dislike that but that might be my common sense seeing the "planned breaking points". Ok, software next: I find the detachment of the menu bar from windows irritating. And on mobile devices I find the placement of the back button awkward to use (most distance from my hand as possible). Apple is considered great because of highly successful marketing.

sixbrx 14y ago
All fine until the last sentence which doesn't follow because all of the previous points were very minor (though I agree with some).

derleth 14y ago

> Nobody will claim that Apple creates ugly, hard to use hardware and software. I will. The current iMac keyboard is a bad joke and the mouse is just plain strange. Why would I need a touchpad on a mouse? The Mac GUI is atrocious. Forcing the focused window to be on top is asinine. Making it impossible to change this is idiotic, and symptomatic of a deeper evil: There is only One Steve Jobs Way. Unless you do it their way, well, "You're holding it wrong." Don't argue, just adapt your workflow to their technology and never expect the designers to be humble enough to admit that they might, in your case, be wrong about something. So, no, the Macintosh is not my favorite computer system.

berlinbrown 14y ago
Compared to the Linux (open) world? There was no real interface before 2000. Even with the core Linux developers like Linus, he absolutely did not care about the user space. Linux was sort of this competitor to MS Windows and the main creator of Linux didn't actually care to building user interfaces. Sure Linus was a kernel hacker and was trying to building the compliant OS system. I bet Steve Jobs didn't just look on the Apple OS kernel. He focused on the design of the hardware and the design of all the software. It is myopic to completely ignore the desktop arena. And a lot of open source developers were like that.
- derleth 14y ago
  > There was no real interface before 2000. Yes there was. This invalidates your whole post.

sethrin 14y ago

How many apps ship with OS X? 50, 500, or 5000? Let's just say they're dealing with a more restricted problem space, where they have a great deal more latitude to enforce technology use. That's kinda the point of their vertical monopoly, don'cha think? So you see, not only is open source kinda the opposite of a vertical monopoly, most open source budgets orders of magnitude smaller than those of Apple or Microsoft. But aside from those little problems, you also have to optimize in several opposing directions at once! Considering only the desktop, you gotta balance the needs of those who find more configuration options more useful with those who think such things are ugly and confusing. Both are right! In the wider range of open source (which both you and the author ignore), there are lots of people who don't want any GUI integration. There are many millions more headless linux installations than desktops. Clearly, there are some problems to overcome. It's possible that they're really unresolvable, that you can't simultaneously optimize for all of those goals. However, it is possible that you can help bring about a better world, even if you're not an artist or programmer. The next time you say to yourself, "Man, I wish XXX desktop looked better," * Obtain an envelope and postage. * Write out your complaint on a note, preferably a high-denomination bank note. * Mail it to the makers of the aforementioned desktop environment. Your comments will receive the most prompt attention. This could also be viewed as buying a right to complain -- if it's not your time or money involved in making it, maybe you shouldn't complain that your use-case isn't being optimized for? (What is wrong with deciding to optimize for non-GUI uses, for that matter?) On a more personal level, I'm happy that you like Mac and/or Windows! It's nice to like things, isn't it? Thanks for sharing.

derleth 14y ago

> open source is not concerned with design or usability. Not if you define those words the way Apple has. But that's a perfectly obvious statement: Apple's way is antithetical to the whole idea of Open Source, at least to the extent of Apple being obsessed with forcing a specific workflow on everyone who uses their products.