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

New Mac

[byolinux]

I gotta say, that running Virtual PC on one of those, would certainly solve a lot of my problems.

...Isn't there?

[nurightshu]

There is no MicrosoftWorld.

Look out the window.

/me holds his head in his hands and weeps quietly.

MS Community

[Iamthefallen]

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.

I believe this to be not because MS are big, but because they have not been original nor innovative enough to make their customers and users anxiously await the next release. Typically the Linux user knows a lot more about his system, compiling software, configuration etc than the windows users where it's already done for them. The Linux user stays more up to date about what's happening in the community. As does Mac users, new designs, innovative interfaces, ease of use and a powerful platform creates a stronger sense of community spirit than "GODAMN /%&#/%& Word crashed again" ever will.

I am a Linux newbie and have used Macs VERY little, but, those OSes / platforms are a whole lot more interesting to follow than Windows. Oh? What's that? New Windows release? So soon? Oh, so they've basically pathed it and applied makeup, wow...

Re:MS Community

[bay43270]

There is no MicrosoftWorld I know Microsoft isn't the most popular company here, but lets at least try to be honest here. Microsoft does have plenty of user-directed-propaganda-fests. They just choose to distribute the information across the contry, rather than making users fly to California. Take a look. Personaly, I haven't been to any of these presentations, (my wife does from time to time). I wish other companies would bring the show to the user like this. I would love to get information about Java directly from Sun without incurring the overhead of plane tickets and hotel rooms.

Silly and shallow thinking by chrisd

[Zico]

I'm beginning to feel a little sorry for people who are Windows boosters. Where do they go for their community?

Umm, that's about as useful as having meetings for non-alcoholics, non-Mensa qualifier get-togethers, or picnics for people who don't run marathons. Try looking into the majority/minority dynamic sometime. 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.

Re:Silly and shallow thinking by chrisd

[banky]

I think the point is that community is, or at least should be, important.

By extension: where does a Linux user go for help? Well, there's always the local LUG, and Apple has had user groups for some time. If you're a Windows user, and you need help, you can try a local teenager, anonymous online help forums, your vendor, or MS itself; the latter 2 most likely require your credit card. Community is important because it provides a source of free, hopefully helpful support.

Second: OK, admittedly, a group of people getting together and talking about Word macros seems a little silly. But since Microsoft is so (cough) innovative, shouldn't there be groups of people who get together to push forward this innovation, sharing and promoting the general use and utility of the platform? It is kinda hard when you can't share your source code, and not everyone can easily afford the compiler suite. Although that's just my opinion. But the real point is, don't Windows users do things *besides* play video games and type Word documents? Don't people want to share things like security techniques, usability improvements, "howtos", and other stuff? Aren't there Windows users out there doing really innovative things with their hardware and software, and want to share and enjoy?

I suppose not; community in the Windows world comes at a price. Involvement in the platform is non-existant. It is, after all, just an operating system, not a lifestyle, and there's plenty of community to be had (and opinion to be decided for me) from ZDnet and the rest.

Still; I've met lots of really cool people at LUGs, and I'm sure there's people with similar feelings about Apple user groups. Too bad for Windows; you're just another product activation key in the pool.

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.

Re:Silly and shallow thinking by chrisd

[nehril]

C'mon chrisd, do try harder next time

indeed chrisd. otherwise people will pick on every turn of phrase or minor comment in your post, trash it and you, and generate karma for themselves.

Chrisd, everything you said is wrong and sucks, and you are a slashdot editor, so everything you said is doubly wrong and sucky. And I can't believe you used the word "the" in your article. Clearly you do not understand even the basics of computing, and you should submit yourself to the Soylent Green recycling center immediately.

and I now their is a spelling mis take in they're somewhere, I just don't halve thyme to find it and generate karma form it. Ewe should use a spell czech pogrom.

C'mon chrisd, do try harder next time.

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

Isn't that just sheer shortsightedness?

[2nd Post!]

For nearly 24 years now Apple has been in business. Maybe 25. For 19 years Apple has been making UIs. For something like 17 or 16 of those years, Microsoft has been copying Apple; if not copying per feature, copying per functionality. More or less, Apple unleashed UIs and mice, with the Lisa, in 1983.

Why the heck do Linux developers copy Windows? A copy of a copy? Why not *pick* to copy Apple's HCI and adopt it for the Linux desktop? It's been finalized for *years*. It's not new. It's older than Linux itself, I think. Especially now that Apple has more or less relegated OS 9 to standby status, many people are mourning the loss of their great OS.

At this rate, Windows will copy OS X, and then Linux will copy Windows...

At least *learn* everything Apple has so daringly decided to throw away with OS 9, and then start adopting OS Xisms, and shortcircuit Windows *altogether*.

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...

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?

[Masem]

Why the heck do Linux developers copy Windows? A copy of a copy? Why not *pick* to copy Apple's HCI and adopt it for the Linux desktop?

Why do we need to *copy* anything anyway? Or at least, why isn't there a project to bring a new type of UI that is not WIMP, not Mac, not Win-like in any regards, that would be unique and well suited for maximum efficiency for power users? Yes, we still need the mac/win/WIMP clones in order to get Linux on the desktop and projects like KDE and GNOME cannot be overlooked in getting to that point. However, as we have the ability to define the UI at the system level instead of trying to add to an existing, there's no better place to try something other than WIMP than on Linux. And what if that becomes much more usable than WIMP for the casual user (doubtful, but not out of the realm of possibilites?)...it would be interesting to watch both Apple and MS run around like chickens as their user base switches to Linux for that great interface. Pipe dreams, sure, but that's half the problem with Linux development: we're always playing catch up in getting tools that are 'just like' what are already out there, and not a lot of time in developing systems that are new and completely different.

That said, it's not just a matter of writing code, but instead trying to figure out what this 'new interface' is. And that would require a large amount of brainstorming and idea generation to get to that. In addition, such a project might have to break from the X metaphore because of the high dependance of the libraries to support WIMP, and that would require a higher level of programming to provide a different graphically system for Linux. So there's a lot of undertaking that would have to be done for a tool that might only be used by a few. But I'm still curious to learn of any other UI metaphores that have been explored.

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:Isn't that just sheer shortsightedness?

[Rand Race]

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).

I'm sitting on an 8200/132 running OS 9.1 and alas, there is a margin to the left. Some third party menus can place themselves to the left of the Apple menu although most are on the right. But even without there is a 10 pixel or so dead space on the far left of the menu bar.

Saw this in TechTV: Free Maya

[dimator]

http://www.aliaswavefront.com/freemaya. This looks too, too cool. A free, non-crippled version of Maya for home use. You can't use it in any commercial setting, and there will be a maya watermark in the videos it produces, but even so, to have such an amazing app available for free is something truly awesome.

(I'm not sure at all of the platforms supported, though... I'm keeping my fingers crossed.)

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?

Steve on Lou Dobbs Moneyline

[//violentmac]

DOBBS: Apple Computer today launching its flagship desktop computer, the iMac, Apple hoping the new product line will lead it out of a slump in the computer industry. The original iMac produced three years ago helped to revitalize the company. CEO Steve Jobs unveiled this new lines of computers at the annual Mac World gathering in San Francisco, and he joins us from there now. Steve, good to have you with us.

STEVE JOBS, CEO, APPLE COMPUTER: Good to be here.

DOBBS: The reception, there's been a lot of talk about the new product line. The fact of the matter is, you've got another winner on your hands?

JOBS: Well, we'll find out soon enough. We just launched it today, so we'll see the orders start to stream in over the next month and we're hopeful.

DOBBS: Now, there were also a number of people looking for the G5 introduction, some other products as well and some disappointed about that. When do we see that?

JOBS: Well, you know, we introduced an all new iMac which is a huge seller for us.

DOBBS: Right.

JOBS: We introduced the new I-book today and anew digital hub application called I-photo, which is sort of the missing link in digital photography. You can't do everything in one day, so we'll just have to wait for that one.

DOBBS: Give us a sense of when.

JOBS: You know, we can't talk about unannounced products, but.

DOBBS: All right. I know a number of people watching you and following you very carefully were, hopefully were looking for that product introduction. One of the things that you have to struggle with at Apple, and despite the fact you've done a terrific job since you came back, driving the company ahead, restoring its stock price. Your stock is up almost what, 60 percent over the past year.

The fact is, you're still locked at five percent of the market. Are you going to be able to break Apple out of that? Because you get ringing endorsements for the innovation in products, for the new marketing and everything else, but still you're at five percent. When do we see the breakout?

JOBS: Well, I'd say a few things. Number one, our share of the personal computer market is larger than either Mercedes or BMW's share of the automotive market. So just to put that in perspective.

DOBBS: Sure.

JOBS: But one of the things we're doing to increase our market share is we've actually opened 27 retail stores in the U.S. And what's interesting, is those stores, those 27 stores in the month of December alone had 800,000 visitors and 40 percent of the customers that bought a computer at our stores didn't own Mac when they bought it.

So, I think we're starting to see a little bit of optimism about that, and I think we're going to really focus on that in the next year or two to try to get our market share up a little bit.

DOBBS: Well, as you try to drive that share of market, at the same time you're in an industry caught in a recession and a tough recession. Do you see the computer industry, the PC industry itself recovering anytime soon?

JOBS: Well, you know right now the winners are going to be the survivors.

DOBBS: Right.

JOBS: Because it's a pretty tough industry right now.

DOBBS: Yes. JOBS: But yes, I think what we're focused on right now is that we see the next great age of personal computing coming, and that is where the personal computer becomes the digital hub for all these other cool little digital devices we have, like digital camcorders or digital cameras.

DOBBS: Right.

JOBS: DVD players, et cetera, and we're doing a lot of work in that area, and we're getting a lot of good feedback.

DOBBS: OK, well Steve Jobs, as always, it is good to have you here and much continued success.

JOBS: I have to show you one thing before I leave, Lou.

DOBBS: Do we have time?

JOBS: Check this out.

DOBBS: If you can show it to us in two seconds in two seconds.

Oh, that's cool. I will admit that's cool, Steve.

JOBS: Thanks.

DOBBS: Designed, I understand, inspired by the sunflower?

JOBS: We want to keep the flat screen flat.

DOBBS: You got it. Well again, all the very best Steve.

JOBS: Thanks.

DOBBS: Keep promoting -- Steve Jobs.

JOBS: Wait, I'm not finished you fat fuck. The new imac is also inspired by large breasted women.

DOBBS: Shut up you turtle-neck-wearing hippie. I thought you just liked little boys anyway.

JOBS: Fuck off pig. Isn't it time for your six martini lunch?

DOBBS: Ironically I ate an entire roasted pig for lunch today. You smoke a lot of marijuana don't you, Steve?

JOBS: Hell yeah, dude. It inspires me to open up my mind and let the karma flow. I do alot of TM too. It roxors.

DOBBS: TM? Ah yes, transcendental meditation. I can imagine you running around with your fairy friends. You must drop acid, too. I used to do that back in my younger days. Oh, the stories I could tell.

JOBS: Lou, I love acid. I didn't get to where I am today by ignoring the health benefits of regular acid trips.

DOBBS: So Steve how did you really come up the with iMac.

JOBS: Alright Lou, just don't eat me. Ha-ha-ha, mind if I smoke...

DOBBS: Go ahead.

JOBS: I dreamed of the new imac while I was having a wonderful acid trip. Jonathan Ive and I went out the the desert and we ate peyote and this awesome acid. While I was smoking some weed to take the edge off I had this wonderful vision. I had a pair of dragon wings and I was flying through a canyon when a distant mesa began to transform into a giant breast. I could smell the colors. It was just like when I had discovered Aqua. Then the giant breast erupted in a explosion of milk that glomed into a giant LCD. Then I realized my purpose for being here on Earth. I must make a new imac. Then Jon and I had sex.

DOBBS: Well, that's a great story Steve. Thanks for being with us today.

JOBS: Anytime, want a hit?

DOBBS: Yeah, thanks. And now, let's turn to Wolf Blitzer for the very latest. His show begins in just a few minutes. Wolf, tell us what's up.

***

"Feel free to make any improvements on this transcript." vm

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.

Re:How well will Apple respond to that community?

[Bartmoss]

I think what Apple is doing is great. They took a "crappy" OS (no flames please, I am talking about technical standpoint - cooperative multitasking and lack of memory protection are necessities) and thre it away, to be replaced by something Entirely New.

Of course UNIX has been around. NeXT has been around. But UNIX is not exactly known for its grand UIs. So what Apple seems to be doing is to learn the whole UI part again. They have some starting pointers from their experience, but I think it's actually great that they didn't do a 1:1 port of their interface to BSD. They could've done that, you know, just add AquaCandy to OS9 and there you go.

OSX shipped with a relatively basic UI. It ahd bugs. It was slow. Then came the updates, and sicne 10.1 it runs okay, 10.1.1 and 10.1.2 did further improvements to a point where I would call it "ready for the masses" (as Apple does, now, too, as Steve announced on the keynote). And now that their system runs well enough, they're going to add in all the features that really make sense (spring loaded folders seem to be a good addition, and so on).

This is how I think it has to be done: Get the system stable, usable, and efficent, THEN add features. Other vendors (I shan't name names, you know who they are) add features upon features while their platforms have been unstable for the past 10 years and they never got the bugs worked out.

I really hope that Apple will not make ANY compromises with OSX. If the longtime Apple users bitch and moan, let them. Listen to them, too. But don't add (or remove) a feature just because some people scream loudly (the whole file extension debate being a good example).

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

My experience with macs...

[Adrian Voinea]

My office is now 100% Window-less as of about 6 months ago, but we're instead 100% Mac OS X (currently 10.1).
It's great. I don't miss Windows at all, and the myth that you "can't get applications for the Mac" is such a load of cr@p.
In fact, the new Office for Mac OS X is, in my opinion, much BETTER than the Windows version. Networking has been faster, too, and that's important to us.
You'd never believe it, but it's cheaper too. No more calling for technical support or having someone on duty to fix problems with our systems.
You just don't need it with a Mac because the hardware and software is so well integrated.
The machines themselves have been CHEAPER for us. $1199 iMacs as clients and G4s to handle some of the heavier loads. It's worked great.
And by the way... that 22" Apple flat screen is not only beautiful for working with, but it impresses customers too.
I know it seems like a detail, but people have gotten the impression we're an upscale successful business because they see those screens and comment on them.
I know I seem like a troll ranting about this or that, but I just want to get the word out, because I'm a very pleased Apple customer...
and I'm laughing at myself for ever having used Windows for so long.

OS X

[RobPiano]

Apple is moving in the right direction In the 80-90s apple grabbed many artists and musicans with its beautiful multimedia software. Still to this day, many musicians I know will not touch anything that is not an Apple. Put recently, I've seen musicians switching over to windows because of the huge popularity. Still there are enough musicians and artists interested, and a few other niche folk to keep Apple afloat. In this game however, marketshare is important and they need more customers. Where to get them?

Windows has business pretty well covered. Even though it might not be the best option for the business, people know the software. Suits like what's comfortable. Sure apple might get a few of the suits, but not very many, they really just don't care.

What market is left? Well geeks naturally! I've had a chance to use OS X a bit, and I think its a very nice OS. You can definitly see the UNIX incooperated and it still supports tons of old Mac software. Well Linux is really just UNIX anyhow but for an x86. Who cares what the processor is so long as it plays l33t games. Plus as geeks we like sticking it to Intel as well, and frankly I'm ok with that.

I like where Apple is going and if they would let me build my own system, drill a few holes in the side and overclock the processor into toast... I'd already have one.

Rob

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

Too true

[Matthew Weigel]

Well nuts, there went my rant. Stole it from me whole cloth.

Well, I have more rants than just that... like how I wish more of the OS/2 technology saw emulation in other systems, since I've long felt that it was the best PC operating system. The object technology simply made for a more pleasant experience, whether you were doing basic things like surfing the web, or scripting your environment like a good little *nix weenie, or doing office work.

MacOS provides a different set of pleasant user experiences, a generally more consistent set, but nonetheless it lacks a number of things OS/2 had.

And all the people working on KDE and Gnome blithely ignore them all, and try to copy - feature for feature, and with less original thought than Microsoft used in following Apple - Microsoft's interface.

Re:The main reason all the Mac stuff work cohesive

[Graymalkin]

Just because someone would develop it doesn't mean anybody would use it. For every one person who wants some cohesion between all the different apps they use in Linux there's five who say they want it their way or no way. If you pool Linux users, some are using KDE, some use GNOME, others just use WindowMaker, some may just to twm or no GUI whatsoever. If you poll Windows users they're all using Explorer and Mac users are all using Finder. Some say the lack of choice is a detriment (these are the people who use one of the above mentioned graphical kits and will continue to use it no matter what).

Why would KDE and GNOME developers need to break X compatibility in the first place? Both toolkits are abstracted from X enough so that both toolkits are pretty portable and only use X on Linux because that is what everbody else uses and some apps talk directly to Motif or Xlib which some people feel they can't live without.

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. ;-)

Apache

[gjh]

Regarding Apache for MacOS X - it is installed by default, and individual users can share "~/Sites" (equivalent to ~/public_html) using the GUI control panel.

The best part about this is that Apple configured httpd.conf so that it includes the appropriate user configs as extra files; you can edit httpd.conf yourself without fear of the changes being lost. Furthermore, you can replace the apache binaries if you need to upgrade. Apple provides ( understand ) an apache module to better work with the non-case sensitive file system which should also work with newer versions, but worst case is that this is lost.

I added Tomcat yesterady, apache.org have a binary download.

Greg

Don't forget adversity!

[The Mutant]

From the iMac to the iPod to OSX to money in the bank (about $4 BILLION, according to this source
, Apple's really firing on all cylinders these days, but don't forget that a little over four years ago things weren't quite so rosey, and it was pretty common to speculate just when Apple would expire.

As a long standing Mac user, I remember those days clearly.

Threats cause folks - the so-called Macfaithful in this case - to join together against the preceived danger. Call it a herd instinct, a crowd mentality, whatever; external threats focus your attention.

The Windows crowd is dominant now, and hence have no reason to exhibit such unity.

Answer

[4of12]

Where do they go for their community?

The Windows world, creators and consumers alike, has long been ruled by bean counters and eschews any need of "community".

After all, they have "money".

Re:Not at all.

[Chasing Amy]

> Ok, first off. Darwin !=OS X

Dude, I'm not a moron. It's a lower layer of a multi-layered system, between the Mach microkernel and the upper layers of the OS and its APIs and its Quartz engine.

This is why I said "let's say Apple decides to add things into the upper layers in the near future that only work on G4's..."--because I recognize that they could, though I find it unlikely.

> Secondly, its sounds like hella vapor.

I explained in my first post the several reasons why it *most likely* isn't. First, the man behind it is a respected programmer who wrote the first complete and functional 68k Mac emulator for the PC, Fusion. Second, the company already released its software to run Mac OS on Amigas with PPC cards over a year ago, and licensed it to Blittersoft, and has been working on this ever since with the Amiga code as starting point. Third, the man behind it is going around to all the Mac emulation and convergence forums dropping droll hints about the product and drumming up expectations in the community for a Macworld Tokyo release. So either a respected individual has morphed into the Bitboys or he's going to release a big product he's excited about at Macworld Tokyo.

> (also what the hell does iMac-based emulation mean?)

It means that his emulator will be based around emulating an iMac.

> The problem with iMacs (at least the older CRT ones) is that the Boot ROM is on the Processor card.

Yes, which makes little difference since the boot ROM no longer actually does much. Unlike in the old 68k days, it's pretty much "Hi OS, I am a boot ROM. Bye." And that's that. And OS X doesn't even need a boot ROM--remember, Darwin.

> Therefore to act like an iMac, they're going to have to have some form of the Boot ROM on this card.

Not at all. They could devise their own original code that tells the OS it's a boot ROM, when it isn't. At least one existing Mac emulator already does this, mimicking the ROM's functions while not actually using any of Apple's proprietary code. But as I said, thanks to Darwin a boot ROM wouldn't be necessary to run OS X.

Also, there are some commercial 68k Mac emulators that have been sold for a long while which come with simple utilities for dumping a ROM image from a real live Mac. The pretense is that if you have an old Mac you no longer use, you have the right to use an image of the ROM for other purposes. Fair Use. Of course, few people actually use those included ROM extraction utilities on Macs they don't intend to use--instead they just download ROM images off USENET or the Web. But the company making the software can't be held responsible, because they provided a perfectly legal way for you to use your own Mac ROM.

Since this product doesn't target Mac users--it targets a certain enthusiast segment of the PC crowd--anyone likely to buy it already knows where to download an iMac ROM. They're out there as we speak, and have been ever since a few months after iMacs were released.

In addition, Apple has released updates on its website that actually have Open Firmware updates embedded in them.

> I find it hard to believe that Apple would let this company just put anything like that near a Wintel PC

Again, they have zero legal recourse as long as the company either bypasses the ROM by using their own original code, or includes an original utility for dumping your own legal copy of your own legal ROM from your own iMac. The company that makes a product can't be held responsible if some users pirate iMac ROMs, since they will have provided a legitimate means for users to obtain legal ROMs from their own hardware. As I said, existing products have successfully taken both approaches, althout I must say that no existing product is as good as the GPL'd Basilisk II.

And either way, OS X could be made to boot on it without a ROM at all thanks to the Darwin layer.

But since I know the product will support the older MacOS's, and can't be sure yet whether it'll support OS X right off the bat, I rather suspect the programmer has just bypassed the necessity for the ROM through creative coding, since at leat one emulator already does so.

> (not to mention the fact that they're a product 2 months from a pretty major hardware release and nobody's seen it in action yet).

That's usually how giddy master programmers are about their major products they've spent years developing. Mr. Drew probably isnt giving deatails because he's having fun building up expectation. He probably wants to play Steve Jobs for a Day and surprise everyone with his new baby. At least, this is what I would gather from what I've been reading him say in the emulation forums. He's always coy and cryptic in a playful sort of way, rather than the "oh no my product sucks" sort of way.

We'll know at Macworld Tokyo whether his product lives up to the expectations he's helped fuel. If it runs OS X at any decent speed--not even full speed of a real iMac--those who'd think about buying such a card/emulator combo would be impressed enough. If it runs OS X at about the full speed of an iMac, we'll be very, very impressed and happy with it. If it only runs OS 9, we'll be disappointed but hopeful that OS X can still be made to work with it with a little Darwin-hacking.

We'll know soon enough ;-)

Re:DisplayPDF (slightly OT)

[Knobby]

Much of the interface is still bitmapped images to speed up rendering. Jpegs and non-vector images are handled just like the bitmapped interface images..

Re:DisplayPDF (slightly OT)

[MouseR]

Isn't OSX's dispay engine vector based? Very cool but isn't that a fairly big disadvantage when it comes to display photographic images like jpg's etc? Do they have a way around it or am I wrong in general?

You're generally wrong. ;-)

Quartz being vector-based doesn't mean it can't do bitmaps. Compare Display PostScript, or PostScript printers.

OSX -- LINUX -- WIN

[ellem]

The folks at Apple are geniuses. Here's why.

1 -- The make you run their OS on their hardware. IT HAS TO WORK. They know what you have.

2 -- They practically force 3rd party developers and manufacturers to "Do the Apple Thing" Subsequently things look a like, work alike and keep the "Apple Vibe"

3 -- They make users fanatics. They create a niche whrere "creative people" _need_ an Apple. You're not going to be creative on a PC; _Are you?_

------

Now Linux has fanatic users, sure. And Linux will run on a million different different machines. Sound? Who needs sound? :) But Linux has a real *nix thing going on. It is percieved as being unfriendly. Anytime someone makes a "Friendly" distro the community complains. The Linux community is more interested in Flame - Wars.

Vi vs Emacs
KDE vs Gnome
Enlightenment vs Sawfish
RPM (et al) vs make
Red Hat vs Everyone else

No sense of community like Mac has. More of a taunting older brother (UNIX) with a smart alecky sibling.
----------

Windows is a horrible mess.

DOS, 3.11, 95, 98, 98SE, XP, NT, W2K

More bad publicity than anything I have ever seen. If I was MS I would pull Outlook off the shelf and send everyone on the planet a copy of Eudora or something. Even things that are not Outlook/Explorer related tend to get lumped into an MS problem (see also AIM.)

Users _don't_ want to get together and talk about their computers. (Some wold argue that is becuase they are busy using them, others would say it is because they are busy rebooting!) But in any event I see little pride in owning XP SP1.

----------

Apple has created a "Vibe" about their product. Created a myth that their products are the only thing that can do certain things.

Truth be told -- Apple makes excellent products and _NOW_ has an excellent OS to go with their _cool_ hardware. And let's face it Anything you can do on a Mac you can do on any PC (Lin/WIN). You could even be... creative. But the perception persists because Apple has made their marketing work so well that _YOU_ believe it.

Re:OSX -- LINUX -- WIN

[overunderunderdone]

Created a myth that their products are the only thing that can do certain things.... Anything you can do on a Mac you can do on any PC (Lin/WIN). You could even be... creative.

Part of the prevelance of this myth is that it used to be quite true. Several years ago if a freelancer claiming to be a professional designer came to me looking for a job but told me he used a PC he would not get the job. Why? because he was not and could not be a professional. Professional art and design software simply wasn't available on the PC. Since those days Adobe, Quark etc. have all ported their apps to the PC and now it is not only possible to be a professional designer using a PC there are actually some that do.

Today the advantages are subtler and found in smaller details. First off there is simply the inertia of the industry and compatiblity with that industries standard. nearly all of your professional peers and all the vendors you need are primarily mac based. Designers, photographers, service bureaus, printers etc. are all using macs - You are on the wrong side of whatever (ususually minor - but still there) compatiblity issues remain between PC's and Macs.

Secondly: ColorSync. Systemwide and well supported color management is HUGE for a visual artist. Particularly the art-director or designer who is responsible for making sure that the photo looks the same to the photographer, to the designer, to the client, to the proofsheet, to the final printed piece. You have no idea what a big, important, potentially costly issue this is. You would be amazed at how much color can change each step along the way without good color management and how screwed you are if it comes out wrong.

Finally, and this advantage is not limited to artists though they are perhaps more impacted by it than most, ease-of-use, "intuitive" UI and that cohession the article spoke of. Artists, designers, musicians etc. are "right-brained" they tend to be more intuitive than deductive. The computer is only a tool to them, they often have a love/hate relationship with it. They love it for the creative power it gives them. They hate it's fussiness and the technical crap they need to learn to get it to work. The less technical crap the better - the more that technical crap is hidden away or the better they are able pursue their real goals (the creative stuff they love and get paid for.) Linux and Unix in general are complete failures at "intuitive" UI. Everything is learned jargon and technical details - great and natural for the "left-brained" engineer or Programmer but an unnecessary nightmare for the creative professional. Windows is not so bad and is always getting better. But it still isn't quite as natural to an intuitive thinker than the Mac - it still carries some of the baggage of it's more technically minded past. One of my favorite quotes from "Triumph of the Nerds" was when Jobs said that Gates' problem was that "he had no taste - and I mean that in a large way" Jobs also made the point that Apple had (because Jobs hired them) programmers that were also artists and musicians - people that in his mind were not only technically astute but who had "taste" or a sense of aesthetics. Gates hired people like himself - technical astute but without any aesthetic sensibilities whatsoever. The initial products from each company reflected that. It has changed over time, Apple after Jobs became less of a creative place, Microsoft as it grew learned to appreciate the value of good design (and hired away many UI people from Apple). But the products still reflect the philosophies that went into their creation.

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.

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

[Alan Partridge]

"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?" You raise a lot of valid points, but this one is plain WRONG - to instantly access your folder tree in MacOS, you need only CMD-Click on your window's title and you'll get a pop-out tree hierarchy. You can combine the CMD modifier with the OPTION modifier and gracefully surf back as many levels as you like without spawning any new windows. The ability to COMBINE click modifier keys is another strength of the MacOS approach over Windows' multi-button mouse system. MacOSX also includes a "BACK" command accessible as a kbd shortcut or in the windows' title bar.

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.

MicrosoftWorld

[Manpage]

There is no MicrosoftWorld.

Sure there is. Ever heard of Defcon?

haven't i seen this before?

[jon_c]

same post, about a month ago

-Jon

Are there Windows boosters?

[lostboy2]

I'm beginning to feel a little sorry for people who are Windows boosters. Where do they go for their community?

Hmmm... In the 15+ years that I've been working with computers, I don't think I've ever met anyone who was a Windows booster (who don't also work for Microsoft), and certainly none of the people I've met who have had to manage or support a Windows network have been real fans (myself included). At best I'd say people were neutral. [That's not MS-bashing, that's a true observation!]

In my experience, most people who do praise Microsoft do so for their business success (which is another issue, which I won't go into here) rather than the merits of Windows.

But, that aside, it seems to me that non-technically-savvy Windows-users would not be interested enough to want to attend a UG or convention, and technically-savvy Windows-users know enough about the problems with Windows that are hard to deny.

Linux fans can rally around the Open Source warcry; Mac users can bond over the cohesion of their systems. What can Windows users use as our mantra? "BSOD"? "Buffer Overflow"? The best we can use seems to be "market-share".

But the people with enough passion for the technology (who would be likely to organize/attend a convention) don't really care about Market-share, in my experience. We're motivated more by Cool-share.

With Microsoft's current totalitarian licensing scheme (e.g., forcing people to create a Passport account), the message that they send is that Microsoft isn't interested in cultivating user loyalty; they're more interested in developing subordination as a means to get to our money. [Okay, that _is_ a little MS-bashing, and a slight rant. :-)]

But that's just my opinion.

-- D.

Mac Faithful

[EccentricAnomaly]

I always thought it was:

Mac Faithful
Linux Geek
Microsoft Certified

Also, Microsoft is the Company, Linux is the Movement, and Apple is the Mothership :)

Pre OS X it was different

[sulli]

Pre OS X, particularly in the awful OS 8.x days, Mac crashed ALL THE TIME. And these were HARD crashes, not just programs quitting on you; routinely work was lost.

From what I've read about X (I still use 9.2 because I have an older machine, but may upgrade shortly) it solves this problem quite nicely. But most "members of the Mac community" remember the crashes, not fondly, but well.

Raskin

[Animats]

Raskin had a completely different model for a user interface. He didn't want a mouse or a GUI. His concept was the ultimate keyboard-driven word processor. The result was not the Mac, but the Canon Cat, which lasted six months on the market before being discontinued.

Windows copied X as well as Mac

[spitzak]

One reason that Linux looks like Windows is that Windows actually copied a lot of ideas from existing X implementations, as well as from the Mac.

The menubar style of Windows apps is from X. The Mac menubar cannot be done in a point-to-type environment, also it was more of an X design to not have a particular app be "active" but to have them all be equal. Turning open windows into an icon with 1:1 mapping between each icon and each window is from X (this is how Windows worked before '95). Keyboard navigation was exactly copied from the CDE/Motif environment, including the Alt+Tab (MicroSoft improved this by making Alt+Tab go to iconized windows, CDE required the mouse to open an iconized window), and the meaning of ctrl and shift on navigating lists of items.

In fact I see a lot more of X in MicroSoft's interface than Macintosh. The main thing taken from Mac is desktop icons (ie icons that do not correspond to windows). Also the keyboard bindings could claim to be copied from Mac, though at the time almost all X applications were copying the Mac bindings as well (one big difference is that the X applications, and most MSDOS ones, used the "Alt" key, MicroSoft's insistance on using "Ctrl" resulted in a huge mess and is mostly responsible for the claims that X appliations are inconsistent).

It's called PC Expo

[GlenRaphael]

In the beginning was the West Coast Computer Faire, then for, oh, the last 20 years or so there's been some sort of "MacWorld Expo" and a perfectly parallel - but usually bigger - "PC Expo". The sort of people who go to these kind of things know about them.

Last year's PC Expo is summarized here.

The next one will be held June 25-27 2002 at the Javits Convention Center in New York.