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

...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...

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

[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...

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

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

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...

[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.

haven't i seen this before?

[jon_c]

same post, about a month ago

-Jon

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 :)