Sircusa's article is extraordinarily pedantic, which is not all bad -- he raises valid points, and we need to keep Apple on their toes. However, the big point sort of gets lost in the details: OS X is the magic combination of Usability and UNIX we've been wishing for all these years.
Linux developers, take notes. Most of what OS X is doing is not magic -- it's just a lot of steady, careful attention to usability. Honestly, how hard would it be to implement OS X's lovely Network Settings panel under Linux, for example? Yes, the OS X Finder is still a bit glitchy, but it's still way ahead of the various Linux file system browsers I've used. Yes, the Dock has its glitches, but it's a darn shot easier to use and configure than either Gnome or KDE's taskbars. Apple is hardly perfect, but they are extraordinarily good at the usability stuff, where Linux software generally is not.
That's a shame -- Linux can and should be just as gorgeous and usable as OS X, or any other OS on the planet.
Linux developers: get off the high horse, and lay off the one-button cracks. You have a lot to learn, and if you are earnest students of this new OS now, in five years you'll be teaching things to Apple.
1) linux is built by people with absolutely NO taste. And every shitty Window Manager shows that. And every shitty skin by every non-artist shows that also. This is why linux is not pretty and doesn't have a sense of style. (not to mention every idiot out there trying to make linux look like windows)
2) linux users ENJOY that linux is difficult to use. Oh sure, they brag that linux is an easy install NOW and that Caldera/Red Hat is easy to use/install. Well, guess what. IT ISN'T! With patches and kernel mods coming out all the time linux WILL stay an OS that is made for engineers by engineers. This keeps linux ugly.
Linux users should rally behind OS X. And who really gives a damn if OS X won't run on a P166 rig that costs $200.
I agree that the aesthetic quality of OSX is superior to that of the GNOME/KDE environments. However, graphical environments are like love: "lookers" can be nice for a couple of weeks but if you have to live with them for any extended period of time, you'd rather have them treat you well than look pretty. Good design and usability engineering based on cognitive psychology is far more important for a graphical environment than aesthetics. Not that I'm criticizing OSX specifically, rather I'm criticizing aesthetics as main criteria for judging the usability of a graphical environment.
I agree with your comments about the installers. In fact, many of the installers are still very hard to use, but now confusing text-only parameters are replaced by confusing widget layouts. Virtually all the people who say that these installers are ready for prime time are the geeks and engineers who can use their prior linux expertise to get around the most confusing points of the linux graphical installers. I actually talked to one of the people who worked on the Red Hat installer and I mentioned some of the usability problems that made the installer difficult to use and difficult to navigate. He couldn't understand why these designs were problematic and thought that what I didn't like about the installer was that it "wasn't pretty enough". Which sort of goes back to issue 1.
Heads up, Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux developers, take notes. Most of what OS X is doing is not magic -- it's just a lot of steady, careful attention to usability. Honestly, how hard would it be to implement OS X's lovely Network Settings panel under Linux, for example? Yes, the OS X Finder is still a bit glitchy, but it's still way ahead of the various Linux file system browsers I've used. Yes, the Dock has its glitches, but it's a darn shot easier to use and configure than either Gnome or KDE's taskbars. Apple is hardly perfect, but they are extraordinarily good at the usability stuff, where Linux software generally is not.
That's a shame -- Linux can and should be just as gorgeous and usable as OS X, or any other OS on the planet.
Linux developers: get off the high horse, and lay off the one-button cracks. You have a lot to learn, and if you are earnest students of this new OS now, in five years you'll be teaching things to Apple.
linux will never be gorgeous (Score:0)
1) linux is built by people with absolutely NO taste. And every shitty Window Manager shows that. And every shitty skin by every non-artist shows that also. This is why linux is not pretty and doesn't have a sense of style. (not to mention every idiot out there trying to make linux look like windows)
2) linux users ENJOY that linux is difficult to use. Oh sure, they brag that linux is an easy install NOW and that Caldera/Red Hat is easy to use/install. Well, guess what. IT ISN'T! With patches and kernel mods coming out all the time linux WILL stay an OS that is made for engineers by engineers. This keeps linux ugly.
Linux users should rally behind OS X. And who really gives a damn if OS X won't run on a P166 rig that costs $200.
You get what you pay for.
Linux Installers and Perty Widgets (Score:3, Insightful)