re: ::scr tell me why you're using OSX, you big geek

[matt jones <jonah@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Celia:
> I've noticed that there is an increasing use of Mac hardware and OSX
> amongst the scary geeks around me.

This is a timely post - I managed to persuade work that I needed a Mac to
do my new job, as opposed to another Lunix(sic)/NT workstation. It's
really pleasant going back to th Classic GUI - I'm remembering all the
things that I had to stop wanting to do when I stopped using a Mac for
work. I'm also having my first hands-on taste of OS X.

> It occurred to me that it could be because of a combination of:
> o the fact that Apple make shiny hardware

Well, there is that - Macs are almost unheard of here and my office seems
to be getting a load of people coming in and stroking it or gawping at it
because it's not beige. But I don't reckon that's an issue for the truly
Scary Geeks out there.

> o *nix window managers' interfaces suck

That's the second reason I don't have X installed on the box I have at
home - I've not had enough exposure to it to really grok using it, and I
really can't see the point when there're two GUI-using machines sat right
next to it. 

Besides, of all the GUIs in all the world, I love the Classic Mac
interface the most, and it's not jsut a familiarity thing. But more on
that later. 

> One of the traditional reasons people dissed Macs was because they
> didn't like being able to get 'under the hood'.

Try telling blech that - I've seen him do things with macs that I didn't
think were possible, and some of them were even non-sexual[0]. The other
week, I asked him why he seemed to be down on OS X, since maccishness and
*nix functionality seemed to me to be his perfect combination. "It would
be if they'd done it right" he replied. I think he may even have explained
what he thought they'd done wrong, but later that evening a big scary man
frightened it out of my head. Bueller, Bueller, Mison?

Simon Batistoni:
> I have several big niggles with the G4 tower sitting to the left of me:
>
> 1) There's no easy hardware eject for the CD - it's controlled
> entirely by the keyboard. This is A Bad Thing

Yes, there is that, but at least you can now eject CDs without dragging
the fucker to the trash[1][2]. Heh, it was quite amusing when I came back
from lunch on tuesday to find a confused support fella sitting at the Mac,
desperately hunting around for an eject button (having just installed
Outlook[3]).

> 2) Ditto, a full power-down requires the OS to instruct the hardware
> - pressing the "power" switch simply places the machine in standby
> mode.

Is that really such a problem, though? Don't most modern OSes  prefer to
shut down the machine themselves rather than just having the power
disconnected?

> I actually think it looks more grown-up, too. The earlier macoses
> have always seemed twee to me, like computing in fairyland (I

You *must* be joking, Simon! *More* twee than aqua? I wayyyyyy prefer
Classic interface - it seems so much more functional and simpler to
use. Aqua, on the other hand ... well, let me tell you what I think about
aqua vs OS 9- interface-wise:

[ window widgets ]
The coloured window widgets - it's not obvious which does what (well,
not to me, I had to try them). And FFS, their functions are signified by
colour! Isn't that a big accessibility no-no, if not a usability one? And
yes, I know that they put up little symbols in the buttons when you put
the mouse over, but again, isn't displaying information only on mouseover
also Bad and Wrong?

With OS 9-, the minimise, resize and shut buttons can easily be
identified by sight, the grphic depicting a rough analogue of what it does
to the window. The resize/minimise buttons are on the opposite side of the
window from the close window button, which reduces those pesky spazmouse
irritations (I am an inveterate spazmouser).

[ general look and feel ] 
Well, for a start, whenever I'm using Aqua I
feel like some bastard hybrid of the stay-puft marshmallow man and a
roe-obsessed sushi-chef has put a crystal candy glaze across my eyeballs.
The windows use up way more screen real estate than they need, and the
whole thing is executed with this awful cutessiness. Way more "computing
in fairlyand" than OS 9-, IMHO.

The windows in OS 9-, by contrast, are quite minimal, only using a tiny
bar at the top to keep the widgets. I don't want the windows on my OS to
be all prettified and glamourous and attention-grabbing. OK, so compared
to OS X, the windows are small, grey and (dare I say it?) boring-looking.
But isn't the interesting stuff is supposed to be *inside* the window?

[ bells and whistles ]
As Simon noted, OS X HAS A *shedload* of these, and it's *very*
irritating, I feel. The gratuitous animation (especially of the dock when
items bounce) just smacks of fricking clippy, to me, and the semiotics of
that make it a complete turn off to me. I suppose you could argue that it
gives inexperienced users a chance to understand what's happening, but I
don't feel that sufficient reward to have all that crap on.

[ the dock ] 
The dock leaves me cold. I don't see what the dock does that
I can't do with a tear-off apps menu and some windows at the bottom of the
screen, and all for a lot less screen space. But then, better people than
me have made critiques of the dock:

http://www.asktog.com/columns/044top10docksucks.html

In case there's anyone who hasn't read it.

Simon Wistow:
> these were days of yore when people still laughed when you
> said Wizzywig and Gooey. And probably when you said Ram and Floppy as
> well.

I'm afraid I still laugh when people say RAM and floppy. [**shame**]

Celia:
> And above all: where does this leave the 'number of mouse buttons'
> debate'?

At the door. 8'} I don't care how many buttons my mouse has, so long as
the interface I'm using is well-enough designed to let me Do What I Want
with it.

Simon Wistow:
> Anyway, my real point is that people argue that this could confuse users
> so they haven't done it. Which is fair enough. I mean if they argued for
> ages over symlinks being confusing then ...
> 
> And then they go give users, who they expect to be confused by right
> mouse clicking and symlinks a Bash prompt.

Nah, they've given those users OS X. They've given *you*[4] the bash
prompt. :)

-- 
mjx
and god saw the people going crazy

[0] I still remember blech and the chimp coming and sniffing at the fan
grill when we fired up the first Blue G3 we got our hands on.

[1] For such a carefully-designed interface, that has always struck me as
a pretty poor way of ejecting/dismounting disks.

[2] Yes, yes, cmd-e. But how do you highlight the disk without the mouse,
eh?

[3] Outlook for the mac does not appear to have an option to send the mail
as plain text! Jesus. Well, maybe it does, but it's somewhere elese, and
I'm fscked if I'm spending any more time in that program than I have to.

[4] Yes, you *personally*, Simon.