Ars Technica OS X 10.1 Review
Joystickit writes: "John Siracusa over at Arstechnica has posted his review of OS X 10.1. He comes to the conclusion that 10.1 is much improved but still leaves much to be desired. It is an excellent read. He always seems to have the most in-depth reviews. Check it out." John's earlier OS X reviews are excellent as well; seeing what Apple does right and wrong is informative reading no matter what OS you prefer.
I see this as an Installer issue. On Windows, most installers will ASK you the name of the Program item to be placed in the Start menu. The Mac has never had this...in fact, the installers on the Mac, although sometimes nicer than Windows, have never seemed to get a GOOD handle on interactive installs. Apple's own System installer does a decent job, allowing a "custom" install, but many times still puts crap all over the place (and usually overwrites things you didn't want overwritten).
Really what needs to occur is for Apple to make a best-of-breed installer for OSX. Especially since we're playing with UNIX now (think of all the problems when multiple installers start monkeying with your /etc files or NetInfo database!), installation procedures are going to become VERY important. No developer should outwardly say they don't want a user looking over their "install" shoulder...I know in many cases, as an admin, I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS BEING INSTALLED AND TO BE ABLE TO SAY NO! So back to this best-of-breed installer--Apple has plenty of lead to follow (VISE, Stuffit, their own), and it wouldn't be too hard. Essentially they need to provide ALL the flexiblity a developer would want while providing the user the ability to configure the level of interaction they are comfortable with (none, let me know when things are being put in menu/dock/Apple menu, complete control).
This is something they should do...but they won't.
Scott
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."