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

Ideas Anyone?

[ianaverage]

I was thinking about how the open-source community could start to bring a little more cohesion to the many projects that are out there, and I personally was unable to come up with much. I do think that sourceforge is a decent start, but by no means is it going to really bring the applications together.

Do any of you have an ideas that can be implimented to bring the cohesion that will obviously strengthen opensource? Can some functionality be added to SourceForge to help this?

How well will Apple respond to that community?

[Zergwyn]

I have been using Macs for awhile now, since using my first SE/30 almost a decade ago(heck, I even have an old Apple IIe kicking around). Apple has made a big change in its move to OS X, but what has made it a lot better for me is how at each major update (beta>10.0>10.1) there has been an obvious willingness to respond to feedback they have been given. The system has come a long way since the PB, restoring many old features and functionality that users asked for. Yes it has flaws, especially evident in Job's insistance on doing things His Way(TM) in many cases. But that is definitely changing. In the beta, the menu bar didn't even really exist, the NeXTish dock tried to cover even more stuff. Metadata and networking seem to be improving somewhate, and springloaded folders look to make a comeback in the next version.

I view all the moans from other Mac users in much the same way I remember the horror people expressed at the transition from OS 6 to OS 7. I am thrilled to be able to have a command line and all the power it offers at my finger tips, and the stability is very welcome. It is just fun to play with again, especially since it is so much more customizable. The system is still fresh, and has great potential. People should try to think of it as it will be in a year or two, with a bit more polish, and a lot more software. I hope that the linux community will be able to gain valuable stuff from OS X, just as we can gain from *nix. As long as Apple continues to show a willingness to respond to what users want, I have a lot of optimism for the system.

No WindowsWorld since Windows users don't like Win

[ciryon]

There is no WindowsWorld because most Windowsusers don't really like Windows, or their computer generally. It's just something they have to use, wether they like it or not. When something doesn't work they don't think it's the Operating System's fault. They believe it's their own fault or perhaps they blame it on "the computer". It's actually a very popular excuse: "I couldn't do it/was late because the damn computer didn't work". And never ever realize that it could be Microsoft's fault.

Mac users love their computer environment and are very very faithful to Apple. Linux users love their OS and realize if something doesn't work it's usually their own fault, but it can be resolved with a little work.

Ciryon

Re:Silly and shallow thinking by chrisd

[SerpentMage]

Folks hate to break this bubble. But the Windows community does have a community. It is called PDC or TechEd. These are the big events. And Windows has its heros, Charles Petzold, Kraig Brockshmidt, Don Box, Chris Sells, Jeff Prosie, etc, etc, etc.

The problem is that if you are NOT in that community you will never know that there is a community.

For example to me there is no MAC community (I use LINUX and Windows). But my personal perception does not fit reality. Hence the assertion that there is no Windows community is absolutely false.

Re:Silly and shallow thinking by chrisd

[the_2nd_coming]

the problem with that logic is that most windows users do not know of the community. If you use Mac or Linux, you know there is a community since it is right there to help you from the start. you get into the platform, and right away, you are presented with resources and information on where to get help. people on UseNet talk about it and point you in the direction that you need to go where you can read about the community.

in windows, you do not have this advertisment. UseNet is about the only place you can go for help (save the web logs). do those people talk about the famouse Windows community members? do those people point you to resources that inform you? no.

even if Windows does have a community, it is so pitifuly weak and diluted, that it has no impact on 95% of the windows user base.

See modern-day religion at work...

[marm]

Why not *pick* to copy Apple's HCI and adopt it for the Linux desktop?

Did it ever occur to you that the Mac UI is not the be-all and end-all of user interface design? No, because the Mac UI is 'holy' and many proponents of it adopt a 'holier-than-thou' attitude, yourself included. I can't deny that MacOS 9.x is pretty good from an HCI point of view, but is it as good as some Mac disciples make it out to be? Hardly.

There are actually quite a number of areas where MacOS 9.x is deficient compared to other systems, from a usability point of view. Let's list a few of the major ones, shall we?

• 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.
• 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. 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?
• 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. 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. Which brings me on to...
• 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.

There are more usability problems than this - these are just the first that came off the top of my head. Note also that both Windows and the Linux GUIs have avoided all these problems, and also come up with some good ideas that Apple hasn't even touched on - like the universal viewer application (Explorer, Konqueror, Nautilus), or thumbnailing of all pictures, not just the ones that the creator app decided to attach a thumbnail to.

Perhaps it isn't such a good idea to be blindly copying the Mac after all?

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.

Of course, the problem is that most people don't have access to a Mac and don't know what it's like to use a Mac and don't understand the Mac gestalt, otherwise they'd be using Macs already...

Suuuuure. When you finally wake up and pull your head out of the sand, be sure to let us know, ok?

In the meantime, the rest of us can get on with using and improving our GUI experience, pulling the best ideas from existing GUIs as well as inventing new ideas. Blindly following anyone is a seriously poor idea.