MacWorld Expo Report, Part II

As promised chrisd back with his report from the expo floor at MacWorld and a brief note about what Linux can learn from the Macintosh. Walking the show floor at MacWorld, I'm beginning to feel a little sorry for people who are Windows boosters. Where do they go for their community? The Mac folks have MacWorld and WWDC, we have LinuxWorld, O'Reilly and Usenix, but they have what? Comdex? There is no MicrosoftWorld. Whether this is a result of their size or what, I couldn't tell you. But there is a similar feel that the "Linux Faithful" and "Apple Faithful" share and that is that we are clearly part of a user and developer community.

Yesterday, I reported on the Jobs keynote and his ability to expand his reality field to encompass and entire ballroom. Today, do people still feel energized by his talk? Some were still pumped just to a part of the show, gasping and oo'ing and enjoying the melodrama of it all, but the next day there was a collective vibe of "well, was that it?". This is not to say that they were disappointed by it, but they perhaps wanted something more. The rumors had been flying for months about a flat screen iMac, and since that was what Apple brought forward, it was going to been seen as an evolutional, and thus anti-climactic, step, even if it was daringly packaged.

Many noted that they were expecting a speed bump for the G4 towers, but with Seybold coming up in February, many expect Apple to announce their tower update then to a more professional audience.

At the Tuesday keynote "The Power of X", Phil Shiller and Avie Tevanian talked about OS X and what it means to apple and to the future of the Macintosh platform. Apple is stressing how stable and crash proof OS X is and what this can means to the "Apple Faithful". They discussed the kernel, the media layers, security and the user interface and how it all works together. What they've done with their BSD derived core is really impressive. As part of the keynote, Tweak Films showed off an OS X based deep ocean wave visualization app that they assert they ported from Unix in weeks, with significant functionality gains.

The show floor itself was bouncy fun. For me it was a nice change from the austerity of a Linux exposition and it's focus on sheer functionality, capability and commerce. Large exhibitors included Alias|WaveFront, Adobe (not having anyone at this conference arrested, I noted), FileMaker pro, Microsoft and a number of other software development houses. As I walked the floor, I made a mental note of applications that were available for both Windows and the Macintosh. The reality is that there isn't much that is specifically for the Mac intosh, with the obvious exception of the hardware from apple, with all the vendors one ends up asking, what is unique here?

What Apple has that is unique, and sadly Windows and Linux both lack, is cohesion. Everyone with devices and software for the Mac seem to work so well with each other and the OS. We should strive to emulate that cohesion whenever practical for open source software. Before, the apple story was cohesion without stability or power. Now, with BSD at it's core, you can bet that Apple will be able to attack Windows, SUN and Linux on the power front. A year from now it will be interesting to see how many people are running apache to serve pages from their Apple machines, and I will be unsurprised if someone is giving an apache serving presentation at the next Apple WWDC.

Please note that I have posted some pictures of my trip to MacWorld, with some pictures of the new iMac and of the keynote.

Comments

Best of both worlds

[mirko]

A colleague of mine just traded his win2k/linux laptop for a 12" white iBook with MacOSX.
Though reluctant at first I have to say I was impressed.
In short, this is quite faster than what I expected after reading many comments, it is also cheap, has 5 hour battery life, an included DVD/CDRW drive, MSIE (like it or not, it is quite more functional as most other browsers and its only cons are : -1- it's Microsoft -2- it may still have backdoors)...
Now with Virtual PC or OfficeX it becomes an obvious choice for the hardcore multi-environment worker.
Mass-Porting Geek know they may quickly get some of their predilection Free Software up and running on this machine.
My personal favourite is Interface Builder which I have known for years...
So, this is both sexy looking and a seriously tempting alternative to other worl.
But no, it has nothing to do with a community but rather with a unique feeling/identity. The community is the consequence.

Warm Fuzzy

[mmarlett]

I have to say, as the owner of a Duel 800 MHz G4 Tower, that I'm happy that I've stayed on top of the Mac heap since my July purchase. Of course, it's a little disapointing to see the chips not bumping up -- I'd like to see my machine left in the dust just for the sake of the company. But how many people on other hardware platforms would say that? Not many, I don't think.

Being Mac faithful has been a hard thing. It's so hard to justify a company locking down it's software to just use its hardware. It's so difficult to watch Apple make silly little choices like the dock and know that it will latch on to that choice until the next complete revision of the OS.

But, hey, it does cool stuff. I mean, just putting my machine to sleep is cool -- the power button pulsates in a white glow to let me know that it's on but down. It looks alive ... like it is breathing.

And since I've been running 10.1, I haven't crashed. I've had to restart about four times in four months -- three times for system upgrades and once because I shut the computer down because I was going to be out of the house for a week -- and every time I realize that I've left my startup preferences all wrong, that I haven't been keeping up with my changes in my work flow. I'm still learning how I use it.

OS X is so rediculously stable (compared to all of my previous Mac/Win9X experiences). And it is so easy to use (compaired to my previous Linux/BeOS/BSD eperiences). Sure, there are imperfections -- the dock sucks when compaired to the ease-of-use of the Apple menu, etc, but it's not as confusing as any random X Windows client nor as difficult as and version of Microsoft's ... thing.

I'm a satisfied customer, and everything that I've seen so far has just made me want to be more of a customer. And that can't be all bad, can it?

--Mike

I'm waiting for Macworld in March...

[Chasing Amy]

Why? Because if all goes well At MacWorld Tokyo the product I've been waiting for for a year is supposed to be demoed and released. It's Microcode Solutions' hardware-assisted PowerPC emulation for x86 PCs. http://www.microcode-solutions.com/home.htm

Some people are very happy with the new iMac announcement. Some are waiting for the G4 Tower speed bump that should be announced at the next expo. But all of us MacOS lovers who defected to the Dark Side over the years for one reason or another might be made happy by the little PCI card and software package that should be released soon.

Currently we x86 users are limited to running OS 8.x on 68k Mac emulators, the best of which is the GPL'ed Basilisk II. This works great for playing older Mac games (there are a lot of great ones never ported to Windows or Linux) and using any 68k-compatible Mac apps for a great level of interoperability, or just the cool factor of running so many OSes off one machine. It runs blazing fast with 68k code--but the obvious problem is that anything remotely recent is PPC-only, and OS 9 and OS X are far out of reach.

But the PPC emulator to be introduced at Macworld Tokyo will change all that. To MacOS, it will be indistinguishable from a real iMac. A cheap software-only version will be made available, but it won't run all the newest stuff; the jewel in the crown will be the hardware-assisted version, which will have a real, fast G3 processor and RAM on a PCI card. It should run anything an iMac will run and at native speeds or better (depending on processor).

Any OS 9.x operating system will run full-speed on it and it's very likely that OS X will be made to run on it too, although by all reports OS X on an older model iMac is no speed demon.

Since the Mac's VirtualPC has run all the latest Windows OSes for some time, it's only fair that PC users should finally be able to run the latest Mac OSes, OS X in particular. And with this G3 and RAM card, running the MacOS on an equipped x86 box will be a lot smoother than the Mac's current all-software VPC emulation of x86.

Before dismissing it as vaporous, the Microcode Solutions website may be Spartan, but the man behind it coded the first fully functional 68k Mac emulator for x86, Fusion, and has already released a rudimentary PPC Mac emulator for old Amigas equipped with PPC cards, through Blittersoft.

To some this won't mean much. But personally, I've always loved the MacOS, ever since I used System 7 many a year ago. But I didn't want to be locked into expensive proprietary hardware, or not be able to run Windows games. But if all goes well at Macworld Tokyo, a properly equipped PC may now be able to run Linux, Windows, and even OS X if the G3/RAM card and emulator are purchased. If there's demand, maybe the emulator software part of the package could be ported to x86 Linux.

It will be interesting indeed to see if Microcode Solutions comes through at Macworld Tokyo, and it'll be even more interesting to gauge the reaction of Macworld attendees if they see OS X running well on a PC. And that is very likely, since Jim Drew has been talking about his new product and answering questions about it on all the Mac-related emulation sites and forums, and even gave out pricing information--$349.95 for the fully-functional package with the PPC card, or $49.95 for the cheapo software-only emulator that will be far more limited in its abilities. $349.95 (plus OS purchase price, because you're not a pirate) to run OS X at native iMac speeds on a commodity "Wintel" box, with all its advantages, sounds pretty damn good.

And before any zealots start modding this down, it's valid news about an upcoming Mac expo, which definitely seems to be related to this thread. I may have defected to the Dark Side, but I still want all that creamy Mac goodnes. Having your cake and eating it too might be possible in a month and a half. ;-)

Re:Isn't that just sheer shortsightedness?

[setmajer]

Yeah, top left is quicker to access with the mouse. The OS 9 apple menu is also easier to hit, since it's in the corner and effectively infinitely large in two directions because there is no margin to the left or top; you can't 'overshoot' the icon (I'm sitting on OS X now and can't double-check that there's no margin to the left [there is one on OS X--shame on Apple], but I believe there are none).

There's all sorts of margin around the Start menu, and it's easy to overshoot it unless you move your mouse more slowly. Fitt's Law, dontcha know. Quoth Bruce Tognazzini:

The time to acquire a target is a function of the distance to and size of the target.

While at first glance, this law might seem patently obvious, it is one of the most ignored principles in design. Fitts's law dictates the Macintosh pull-down menu acquisition should be approximately five times faster than Windows menu acquisition, and this is proven out. Fitt's law dictates that the windows task bar will constantly and unnecessarily get in people's way, and this is proven out. Fitt's law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen, because of their pinning action, and yet they seem to be avoided at all costs by designers.

Use large objects for important functions (Big buttons are faster).

Use the pinning actions of the sides, bottom, top, and corners of your display: A single-row toolbar with tool icons that "bleed" into the edges of the display will be many times faster than a double row of icons with a carefully-applied one-pixel non-clickable edge along the side of the display.

It's the same principle, though: a user-editable menu holding a variety of system-wide functions (launching apps, settings, etc.).

Re:Isn't that just sheer shortsightedness?

[macjerry]

This history of the Mac OS is both incomplete and incorrect. Isn't there a (-1,Wrong) mod? I know some of the people involved during this time so this corrects the errors in the above

Apple *bought* the UCSD Pascal system
IIRC, SoftTech owned the commerical rights to UCSD Pascal (from U.C. San Diego, where it was developed) and licensed it to Apple for the ][ and ///. Apple probably licensed the source code as well. For those of you too young to remember, UCSD Pascal was the Java of it's day. I first used it iin '76 on a DEC LSI 11-based desktop machine whose name I now forget.

Apple took UCSD Pascal and ported it to the Lisa then Mac
Apple actually bought a compiler from a 3rd party that generated 68000 code from UCSD Pascal source. This included the wonderful segment manager from UCSD Pascal that all Mac programmers love to hate. UCSD Pascal was never ported to either system AFAIK.

and further developed the UI using ideas copied from Xerox PARC and SUN Windows
Jef Raskin was the original proponent of the Lisa and Mac at Apple and it was he who convinced Jobs to start development on these projects. His PHD thesis was called "A Quick Draw Engine" and laid out the basis for the UI that was later developed at Xerox Parc. So in reality, Xerox Parc took the ideas from his thesis and he later took them back. See this search at google for more details.

Re:Silly and shallow thinking by chrisd

[Bud]

See, there's no need to seek out fellow Windows users when practically anybody can give 10 friends a call and 9 of them will have some Windows experience. C'mon chrisd, do try harder next time.

Oh, come on Zico! You are assuming that Mac users cluster together for TECHNICAL support, like Windows users do.

It's just amazing to see how much freezes and crashes and almost-working peripherals Windows people are willing to endure. Eventually, you learn how to avoid specific problems. You don't burn CD's after you've used the printer, for example. This is the kind of experience of Windows people typically will have. They also know how to reinstall drivers, and sometimes even WHAT to reinstall.

Windows can fsck itself up in an incredible number of ways, and "some" Windows experience will not get you anywhere. Any of your friends is just likely to spend several hours sweating over the computer and then announce the problem impossible to solve and requiring a reinstall of Windows. As if that would solve anything permanently.

Mac users meet for MORAL support. When 95% of the world looks wryly at you because you've got the wrong brand of shoes... errr, a friendly and working computer, you need someone to say: hey, you made a smart choice.

--Bud

haven't i seen this before?

[jon_c]

same post, about a month ago

-Jon

Re:See modern-day religion at work...

[medcalf]

The Task Switcher - requires 2 clicks to switch application, compared to 1 click with a Windows-style taskbar. This is one of the disadvantages of having a single top-level menubar, as there isn't enough screen real estate to have a taskbar as well. Of course OS X has both a panel and a top-level menubar, which is great. Except that now about a third of your screen is unavailable for application windows.

Of course, you can tear off the application menu and have one-click switching. And in OS X, you can configure your panel to autohide, and/or configure it with small icons that magnify fully as the cursor passes over them.

The Finder - yes, Finder has usability problems. People crow about the Finder being 'spatial', meaning that directory windows and the icons contained within retain the same size and position as when they were previously opened. This is good, as the human brain is very good at remembering sizes and positions. What isn't mentioned is the side effect this causes - when every directory is opened in a new window, the screen rapidly fills up with windows, overwhelming the user. It is possible to tell the Finder to close the previous directory window when opening a new one, but only with a non-obvious keyboard modifier when double-clicking.

All interfaces are learned. MacOS 7.x-9.x is easier to learn, and more consistent, than most other OS interfaces.

Also, if the previous directory window has been closed, it is now impossible to navigate backwards. Other systems (Windows included) have found solutions to this problem - why hasn't the Mac?

Command click the title of the window, and you will get a pop-down of the full path to the current folder. I certainly prefer that to having a button bar with a web-like interface.

Context Menus - The lack of a second button on the standard Mac mouse is for some a boon in terms of simplicity. However, for anyone past beginner level it is a serious usability handicap.

Then get a two-button mouse and plug it in. My father knows not of context menus. I use them extensively. He has the original mouse, while I use a Logitech optical mouse. I have no interest in teaching him the difference between right and left clicking, and he has no interest in learning, since he can do everything he needs to do with one button.

Context menus have been shown to be a major enhancement to mousing efficiency, but by and large, Mac apps ignore them as they require use of a keyboard modifier or a non-standard mouse. It is amusing to note that the Mac, the most mouse-centric of all desktops, requires the keyboard for something as simple as a context menu.

I don't see this as a major weakness. Context menus are important to Windows and Linux users (and I use both) because the UI is so poorly designed that they actually help. On Mac, the context menus are a minor assistance at best - in fact I mainly use them to quickly eject disks.

Keyboard navigation - or the lack of it. You're stuffed on a Mac if you can't use the mouse. The menubar is totally off limits to you, which makes the computer all but useless. The Finder allows a certain amount of keyboard navigation, but again, without access to the menubar you have a problem. Remember, not everyone has the faculties to use a mouse, and if this is the case for you, forget every other question about usability - a Mac just isn't usable.

Or you could buy a tablet, or one of the many input devices designed for the disabled, and supported by the Mac, or just install one of several shareware or freeware programs which add full keyboard navigation to the Mac.

Note also that both Windows and the Linux GUIs have avoided all these problems,

While adding their own far more crippling problems and inefficiencies.

Don't even get me started on OS X, right now it's an ill thought-out usability nightmare. I'm sure it will get better, but right now it's the last place to be looking for usability ideas. It's pretty, yes, but pretty does not equal easy to use.

I find it quite easy to use, though not as easy or seamless as the classic interface. The multicolumn directory browser is growing on me. At first, it annoyed me, but it is actually turning out to provide a faster move through directories in depth. Plus, being a long-time UNIX type, I like having the underlying BSD layer with a standard UNIX command line - it means that I will be able to consolidate my mix of Linux and Mac boxes into all OS X boxes, which will save me time administering my home net. If you like, you can always just run FFree86 and Gnome on OS X and work that way.

Blindly following anyone is a seriously poor idea.

No truer thing was ever said.