Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Nessie and OS X | Login/Join |
Master Baiter |
Well, it's official. There ain't no Loch Ness monster. An exhaustive scientific study trawled the loch with high tech equipment, used sattelites, sonar, spent all kinds of time and money and came up with... right. Squat. No large animal of any kind living in the loch. Now let me ask you: who will believe this? The scientific community. Who absolutely will not, and will assume that the scientific methods were a crock of shit? Nessie freaks, people who desperately want to believe. People who have deluded themselves and who prefer to live in a fantasy world of mysterious monsters. People who make money off of Nessiana. In short, Ness-men. "Oh, Nessie was too smart for all them gizmos, laddie. Ol' Nessie can see those sonar beams comin' a mile away... and Nessie, she'll swim real deep and bury herself in the sand." "Well, even if she did that, the sonar would pick up the air in her lungs." "You think Nessie do'nna ken that? Nessi is crafty... she'll let that air right out of her lungs, and she'll survive with a wee oxygen storing gland in her grand tail." "That sounds pretty unbelievable." "Laddie, I don't care what you say, I saw the aul girl with me own eyes oncet." We have our own bloated Nessie in the Mac community. Its name is X-ie. It's a magical operating system that creates a bright future for all. It has magic powers too. It will be blazingly fast and stable and usable for some people (the people who believe. There are many eye witness reports of this unbelievable performance)... unfortunately, it's slow and crap-ridden, has a terrible interface, and is easy to break for anyone who dares point out that quite a bit of its myth and hype doesn't appear to add up. X-ie fans are called X-Men, and they mean well. It's our nature to want to believe in things. To escape the dreary drudgery of day-to-day life, and dream of better. Just as Nessie was an inspiration for everything from T-shirts to children's books, X-ie is becoming an inspiration for people. They are spending lots of time and money pursuing the IDEA of X-ie, and there are people who make money off of that pursuit. They know it's about entertainment, about fantasy. It's like a shared technological hallucination. One that has bright colors and plays music, and does a little bit of a lot of useless distracting things. In short, it's a monument to human distractions. A violin strung to play the strains of procrastination, short attention-spans, and the need to recreationally twiddle and configure and waste time. It's a brain teaser, a rubics cube, an IQ test for test subjects in a big grand marketing survey. I wonder if the BBC team could have saved millions if they had listened to the guys who said: "there is no Nessie. Never was." If they could have left the people who wanted to believe alone, and let the skeptics and cynics continue to be skeptical and cynical. The truth was always there, for those who wanted to see it. And true, incontrovertable scientific proof (something like a dead Nessie washing ashore) would have always been forthcoming. Ness-men wouldn't have had to face the lack of it, because it could have always come tomorrow. Nah. I think it's better to face the truth. In the case of OS X, we can sit around and wait for this magical performance and stability... pretending it's there now, yearning and looking for it... emphasizing the good while ignoring the bad... pretending it will resolve itself into something even better x time into the future... or we can face NOW that it's really all a myth. A con-job. Something that was never designed to be more than a digital hubster marketing gimmick. That the software relies in large measure, on users to BELIEVE in it, make it an act of faith. We don't hold this operating system to high enough standards. Meanwhile, the standards are being set ever lower to accomodate the believers. So they have just enough to hang onto to maintain the fantasy. Magazines that used to do comparative benchmarks, real scientific studies of speed and performance, are testing other things now. The OS won't hold up to real-world tests, or stand up to criticism of functionality and design and intuitiveness, so the tests change. The expectations are lowered. So software that doesn't work, gets great reviews, A's for effort, because to do any less would tear down the illusion. And the illusion makes money. | ||
|
THALO.net divinity |
Or ones own self delusion besides Nessie always stays with me when they hunt the loch. Them scientific types don't have a prayer or a blanket of a chance of ever finding her. Believe in the force Will Robinson. | |||
|
Mockerator |
Hey, I'm tired of playing Martin to your Lewis. Oh well. Best get this thread started. To restate a working hypothesis of mine: We're living in the age of technology where the life cycle of so much stuff has been shortened. When I grew up it wasn't uncommon to own the same phone for twenty or more years. Now stuff that was cutting edge just twelve months ago is often considered (and actual is) outdated. We throw it aside, not necessarily wastefully, but because so much of this stuff – TVs, VCRs, toaster ovens, cell phones – are so relatively cheap and it doesn't pay to fix them when they break. In the case of computers and software this is even more so. Last year's hardware and software is often disposed of because faster hardware makes economic sense in terms of productivity and newer software often means bug fixes and new features (which spawns still more bug fixes, etc.) This idea of "old equals outdated" becomes ingrained in us. It becomes habit. It becomes a mindset and it's a mindset gladly promoted by the computer industry. So what you have by default is the idea that new equals better. That's why it's so difficult for people to look back and judge the past objectively. This may even be the root cause of Postmodernism, but I digress. quote: Yes, people do want to believe in the Mac. They want it to work. After all, there's a lot of sentimental baggage that comes with being a Mac user; big bad Microsoft, soft squishy Apple – that sort of stuff. It's also my firm belief that people know that the Mac is in a precarious position and they don't want to be a part of seemingly tipping it over the edge. Well, you know how I feel about that. We need tough love. We need to be cruel to be kind. But I think a good part of this is that people just don't trust the evidence of their own eyes. It's new, it's gotta be good. It's Mac and so it must be good. I can't tell you how many times I've suspended my own good judgment when working with a new bit of Mac software. I've seen so many neat tricks by Mac developers (Adobe in particular) that I reserve judgment until I've given it a good trial – and even then I have some trust in the pros who I figure must have had a good reasons for making things the way they did – especially Mac software pros. Hell, how long did it take for some people to realize that Clinton was a liar? They still make excuses for him. (Okay, you libs can substitute Nixon if it makes you feel better.) Looking objectively at the Mac OS of the past has not been an easy thing for people to do but it's what needs to be done. I think people have been WAY to anxious to evangelize something that has yet to have even been baptized with the AHIGs. I understand the Geek Aristocracy component. That can, for the most part, be ignored (except for the stuff coming from Apple). Most Mac users want the Mac to be good but they're more trusting of Apple and Jobs then of Uncle Thalo or even Uncle Raskin or Uncle Togg. So while I do believe that Apple (NeXT) thinks we are all chimps, I don't believe Mac users, in general, are chimps. They've simply willingly swallowed a lot of stuff, as you've said, in the hope of something better. But I don't believe them to be suckers for this. I just think this is a symptom of a bigger problem (or condition). I think it requires a wake-up call and bashing OS X seems to have the opposite reaction. They simply defend it harder. It's harder to imagine that our ideas might be wrong than to imagine that something is dreadfully wrong with OS X. That's human nature. I do hope OS X is vastly improved but I'm about ready to say to hell with it. Mac users are going to get what they deserve and that will be no Mac at all in a year or two. They'll keep bleeding money as a company or keep just breaking even while the erosion to Windows continues. This can't keep up forever. Panther appears to be more of the same. More un-Mac-like stuff. More crap. I don't see any bandages on the horizon. I look at what they mean to pass off as Labels and it's truly amazing that anything like this could appear in a Mac OS. If they pinged Apple's headquarters with that Nessie gear they'd find no giant sea monsters but plenty of sharks. The Mac ethos of old is gone from there. Dead. It's up to the customers now to restock the pond. | |||
|
| DigiGeek |
quote:Actually, I think you're playing Martin to his Rowan. So I'll pipe up with the Henry Gibson line: "Verrrrrry interesting...but shtupid!" Seems to me this Nessie metaphor is a bit strained; I could just as easily make the case that Nessie represents the myth of the Golden Age of Perfection of the Mac OS. An exhaustive scientific study trawl[ing] the loch with high tech equipment sounds like nothing so much as a team of Geeks, searching without avail for this mysterious Goddess of the Faithful. Turns out Loch 9 was just another loch, albeit with a certain romantic appeal lending itself to epic poetry by the Bards of the Bygone. | |||
|
| Master Baiter |
quote: I hear that, my brother. Listen, as much as I shake my fists at the blueness of the sky, there was a deep dark part of me that wished all the hype was true. That's why I loaded OS X the very DAY the public beta came on debut date by Saturday Fedex; why I've been trying to use it and think about it and devote a part of my life to it. As one of the Mac Faithful, I would like nothing better than to see Apple succeed big. Unfortunately, I have a rational mind, and have a long history of intensive Mac use (since 1984) to compare my current experiences to... and I see what they're up to. And I've got to say, this time something is really, really, really wrong. I love new. I used to go through life absolutely loving the way personal computer technology was heading. I always felt things were moving forward, getting more and more exciting. I was inspired, I dreamed of the future. To this day, I see myself sitting in front of a Cinema Display the size of a sheet of plywood, with resolution equal to that of the printed page. I imagine myself working with a Macintosh computer that feels like an extension of my soul... a canvas for whatever creative enterprise I choose. Something that exists to help me realize my artistic potential. Something that allows me to do my work. Something that makes the BORING, mundane parts of my work easier, and lets me concentrate on creating visually. I need a personal computer I can rely on. This product, OS X and its interface Aqua, is way too awful to be an Apple product. It's profoundly and scarily unreliable. They myth of its reliability is born of the deep need for it to BE reliable. The song and dance and hype about stability are lies which work because we all desperately hope are true. So badly do we want stuff that works, we're willing to slack-cut and crap-settle and wish and hope that someday it will COME true. We seem to be willing to forgive the here and now, for the rosy picture of the Star Trek future. Well, it needs to be true now. Not tomorrow, now. Getting the operating system to work was simply WAY more important than getting the bullshit stuff to work. The OS was and is more important than the iTunes music store. Sorry to break the news. The fact that Apple has emphasized the useless things to the detriment of the important things, shows where their heads are at. And their heads are sticking up inside some gigantic crap-filled marketing colon, where the standards of Mac usability and intuitiveness, and emphasis on the power of the individual ain't nothing more than a polyp. The problem with this whole mess is that Apple built the foundations of this new system on sand--no wait, WATER-- instead of bedrock. And now it's lost all sense of cohesion. One of the BEST things about the legacy, and I mean this from the bottom of my heart, was that feeling of cohesive, predictable, logical and pervasive Macness. Every app looked like a Mac app. They behaved like Mac apps. You knew where things were likely to be. There was consistency. There was a rationale behind everything that made really, really good sense. The thing they had SO SO RIGHT, was the interface. It was so perfectly and carefully thought out, and was so usable and clear and consistent... that it MADE UP FOR for certain lacks in software. All because it put usability and intuitiveness first. Now that's gone. Sorry, but it is. And it's the greatest fuckup and loss in personal computer history. The abandonment of the true Mac-style interface is a friggin' TRAGEDY. That's what we need back. Better interface, and better philosophy BEHIND the interface. Better ideas. A GUI ain't something that can be slapped together. If its not conceived with these things in mind, it falls apart. It has to be lovingly and carefully and intelligently brought to life. Thought about by people who know its importance. Selling the platform to retards and chimps became more important than making the interface good. Making it cohesive. That's the tragic fatal flaw in this drama. The biggest mistake Apple ever made. They put Eye Candy over functionality and commonsense. Apple turned their own coolness factor into a liability instead of a strength. And the weakness of Aqua is that it's simply too much interface. It's unbelievably overdone. It's the fast-food supersize of interfaces. And so, like many of us Americans who feed in to that particular cultural brain fart of overabundancy, it's bloated and overweight. Look at the things Apple does well: forward thinking design. The powerbooks are beautiful. I mean it doesn't get any better than that for industrial design. The only thing that would make them any better hardwarewise is if they could work just as well after a fall from a three story building onto concrete and shrug the impact off like it never happened. Take a licking and keep on ticking. If they were the kind of things people didn't have to be so damn CAREFUL with, because they were so delicate and expensive. If they were tough, rugged, indestructable, practical, as well as beautiful. I mean I see people on planes or trains with powerbooks, and they treat them like newborns. I wouldn't be surprised to see them handle them with white gloves. I've watched people wipe fingerprints off the case before, during, and after use. So I think our relationships with laptops will be healthier when they are not so precious. When they are a bit tougher. I think those days will come. But not by wishing alone. The biggest, most immediate problem is the operating system and in particular, the interface. That's where the loss of ethos shows most egregiously. And unfortunately, it's also where the NEW aims of the Mac reveal themselves to us. It's where the rubber meets the road for Apple's new downtalking. I've said it before, but cure the interface... conceive it well, and make sure it works, and that's more than half the battle. It's so important, that I can't believe Apple didn't know that, and we ended up with this nonsense. It's painfully obvious to me that they just went in the wrong direction: they think more is better. Like TV, with crawls, box scores, logos, a stock ticker, five logos, animation and lighting effects all going on while you're trying to watch the friggin' news. It's so unbelievably stupid to overload the experience, but that's what somebody thought would sell. Well, it's gotta change. Apple has to take a stand against whatever THAT crap is all about. And go minimal. "Less is More" could rescue them. A conscious effort to strip out all the nonsense, and concentrate on what's really important. Save the visual superabundancy for commercials. They've got to trim the bloat. They've got to simplify and coalesce functionality, and make the interface more cohesive, consistent and intuitive. Icon more iconic. Pro users need less interface, rather than more. Apple needs to take some of the hardware power and return it to system and interface performance. Font rendering needs to be better. All these things seem OBVIOUS to me, and yet we're three years in, and bloat is showing no signs of abating. Then you look at the way OpenSource developers work, and it comes clear. It's always seat-of-the-pants. Start one way, and then go off on a bazillion tangents and add bits and pieces and reconceive on the fly. Never be sure of what you want to be. I look at a big, groaning app like GIMP and say that's probably not a heritage we want to follow. These guys start with a couple of small ideas, and then cobble the living shit out of everything. I don't see big, sweeping, grand conceptions, great ideas very often. Well, the Mac interface was a great idea. And I think we're seeing proof now that cobbling it and theming it and overdoing it into oblivion, is not in the best interests of the platform. | |||
|
| Mockerator |
I’m bored at the moment. quote: I believe that. You believe that. But if we’re both crazy… quote: One that can be folded into a notebook-sized screen or further folded into a PDA. I’m with you so far, brother. quote: That’s really the definition of ANY tool that purports to be better. Less mind-work is required to actually run the tool so more can be spent using the tool to create something. quote: Just how the fuck (can I say “fuck”) did the same company that simplified their own logo from a multi-colored rainbow to a classy monochrome understatement come up with Aqua? quote: I…umm…agree.  quote: "Better philosophy behind the interface." It’s as simple as that, brothers and sisters. quote: They reached the wrong conclusion from the ascendancy of Windows. Proprietary hardware is the losing strategy for market dominance. If they want to make PCs then I suggest they just get to it. I actually think they might sell a fair number of them if Ive was designing them. But that’s not what they did. They don’t understand their own market (unless we all really are chimps). The Mac market is, as Jobs himself has alluded to, the Mercedes or BMW of the computer world. The DigiKid strategy is a loser. Imagine what would happen if, say, Volvo’s cars suddenly sported enormous tailfins. quote: Great analysis. quote: I’ve got my whole suite of programs open and 9.1 is taking up 26.7 MB of memory. It’s faster than OS X and it has a better interface. It just doesn’t have the preemptive multitasking. There’s superabundance enough to go around. It ain’t all to do with Aqua. quote: Yes. And I will admit that OS 9 needs improvement. It can be made far simpler for people to use – pros or newbies. It may have simply been an unintended consequence of all the eye candy, but this is one area where OS X has taken some baby steps. I think it’s also a consequence of intentionally just trying to do things differently from OS 9. A blind chicken will find a grain now and then. quote: Well, that can work if you have some underlying principles to guide you and, more importantly, a user base that demands a certain thing. The Aqua HIGs is simply too much revisionist history to justify the travesty of Aqua. The biggest hit I’ve ever taken from what I’ve heard anybody ever say is when I hear some design professional say something to the effect of “OS X has its problems but Aqua is rather striking to me.” Yes. They should be struck. | |||
|
| Master Baiter |
Brother 95, The difference between the Golden Age of the Mac, and now, is that there was a pervasive, rational program of ideas governing the operating system, that was not about conning the end user, but making their lives easier. Increasing THEIR productivity and working experience was job one, not increasing Apple's market share. Self delusion wasn't essential to the legacy's existence. For the simple reason that it worked better. And the intent was computer functionality, not salesmanship. The whole OS X thing reeks of con-job and doubletalk. What's being lost isn't worth what's being gained. And what's being gained is mostly lies and fantasy. It's Nessie, because none of it is true. And it requires an act of faith to believe that somehow this is a working operating system, ready for primetime... when in fact it's very very far from that. Did the legacy have problems? Hell yes. But one of them wasn't the interface; and another of them wasn't abandonment of the core market of pros for casual use. The Mac Faithful, until now, were never manhandled and forced to settle for less. They weren't talked down to, and seen as chimps. In the Golden Age, the Mac had a soul, and its aim was quality. Now, mass-appeal is going hand in hand with lack of quality. Lowest common denominator product equals a product that does less, and does it less well. And so the problems to pros with OS 9 are DWARFED by the gargantuan problems of OS X. Not only do we have to settle for slow software that doesn't work and can't handle a workload, we have to buy new hardware to drive all the AWFUL bloated newbie digikid interface bullshit that we don't want anyway. And because the OS is way less resolved or complete or realized than any Mac OS in HISTORY, we're getting caught in an upgrade con. A racket where we'll spend a friggin' fortune on upgrades until something, finally works right. The golden age of the Mac was far less an "age of the work in progress" as is now. In the Golden Age, the buck stopped with the OS. If it gave up, people complained to Apple and they fixed it. Now apps and developers take all the heat. The OS doesn't have to do anything but keep a dumb kernel alive, and shrug its shoulders when an app bails. That's supposed to make us believe it's stable. | |||
|
THALO.net journeyman |
thalo I'm curious - professionally, what percentage of time do you spend in OS X vs. OS 9? Do you dual boot from the same box, work within Classic, or both? Do you find your productivity hampered by having to switch between them? Do you find your ability to work in OS 9 being reduced as modern hardware/software is leaving it behind, or do you percieve you can still get x number of years out of 9? | |||
|
| Master Baiter |
Brother Arlo, I spend as much time as I can in OS X, but that only works out to about 25% total. But of that, almost no time spent designing anything big. If it's a small web graphic, or a postcard in Quark, I may suffer through depending on my mood. If it's a bus wrap, a big multilayered photoshop piece, a retail print catalog, a flash site or a big web site, I'll generally boot into 9. If I need to print postscript: 9. If I need to work with a lot of fonts: 9. If I need to scan: 9 (works in OS X with VueScan, but MUCH slower, so if it's only one scan I may tough it out in X. Many scans: 9) Business stuff (QuickBooks Pro), in OS 9. 3-D stuff (Strata), in OS 9. Virtual PC work, definitely OS 9 (or else I'll use a beater PC laptop I hauled out of the garbage and fixed.) Telnetting and geek stuff I generally do in OS X. Anything that's working with code or resource/config text files on remote servers. Sucking in digital photos from my camera, OS X (iPhoto). Recreational stuff: Listening to music, beta testing, troubleshooting, ranting, some surfing (usually beta testing safari), some e-mailing... OS X. I'll generally boot into 9 instead of working in Classic, because of performance and bugs. And because of font issues, slow updating of cut-and-paste, and internet freeze-ups with Classic browsers. I'll try to stay in OS X, but again it's a matter of workload. Little stuff, I can manage with Classic. When the going gets rough, or if there's a screaming deadline, I've found it's easier to bail on X and just work without all the bullshit. The plan as of now, is to get as much out of OS 9 as I can. Adopt only when OS X is adequate for a pro workload, or when Classic runs OS 9 apps adequately enough that it's a wash. I find that OS X gets worse with use, I need only to look at a disk map to see how quickly it degrades. How inefficiently it uses disk space. It's more like a big scratch disk, than it is a sleek optimized OS. Meanwhile, my work in OS 9 continues to go on as before, in other words BETTER than the work in X. I don't feel left behind. On the contrary, I think OS X is a step backwards, and a pro would be nuts to use it as it is now. The pro Mac platform is still OS 9, there's no doubt in my mind about that. If it didn't work, I'd be the first to abandon it. But on balance, for what I do, it still beats OS X soundly. No contest. Jaguar may be fine for casual users, twiddlers, digital hubsters... but it can't handle a fraction of what I need to throw at it, as well as 9 can. My work experience in 9 is simply, unequivocally better. Even with 9's shortcomings, it's better designed and more capable for creative work. As for hardware, same deal, I'll get a G5 the second OS X is ready for primetime. But there's a lot that'll have to happen first. Panther is a big unknown. Looks like more of the same, but I'll give it a chance, I'm so desperate for OS X to start working and living up to its hype. I think one huge issue at the fore, is fixing the interface so it's appropriate for pro use, meaning conservation of screen real estate, readability, clarity, monochromatic, and no goofy shit. Fixing the font rendering and font management, and fixing the Finder so it can cope with big directories. Proper labels and sorting by date in column view (or else column view has absolutely no use for me). I'm sick of broken Finder graphic previews (the mini-icon bug). I am growing sick of the Dock, which is unfortunately the most realized part of this operating system. I have it on hide, and it still gets in the damn way. The whole moving target thing is ridiculous. Having the trash in it is ridiculous. Not sure I'd be able to live with Aqua without shooting myself in the head. It needs a major "Less is More" overhaul. So there will probably have to be some kind of retro platinum/eye-candy-set-to-a-dull-roar option. But it really all boils down to the ability to get through a day's work without problems, obstacles, slowdowns, and irritating bullshit. So far it's a no-go. I've given OS X every opportunity to shine, and time and again it's let me down. Not just aesthetically, which of course it totally does, but I find it lacking in care, quality, conception and execution. It's all too beta and half-assed for me. Doesn't have the craftsmanship and attention to detail of a commercial release three years in, like it ought. There is little consistency between apps, and it's just too flaky and easy to break to trust with my life. Much less spend the money on all the upgrades. Nah-ah, no way. I tried. I got almost all my major apps native, and feel I've gotten burned every time. I paid good money for inferior software. Not a one has me convinced that they perform any better under the new operating system. When they do, I'll be happy to upgrade. And there is no way I'm so stupid that I'll get Quark now, on the threshhold of 10.3. When I know Quark will somehow, some way blow up running in Panther. But remember, I'm ready to give up 9. Always was. I was as sick of 9 crashing as anyone. I was ready for stability and protected memory and multitasking. What I TOTALLY didn't need was them to dick with the interface, which was superb the way it was. What we got was nothing more than a teaser. A three year public pay-for-beta. A mock up, a carrot and stick about what this thing MIGHT be someday in the far-off future. Not good enough. There has to be a few good reasons to adopt, and casual use, passive entertainment, and visual superabundance are not good enough reasons for me. I won't adopt as long as the new is inferior to the old. As long as the legacy continues to surpass OS X for the simple reason that it is mature, and wasn't created with the digikid marketshare increase agenda foremost on its mind. I'm happy that the Mac is broadening its scope, as long as it doesn't do it at the expense of their core pro user base. The industries APPLE spawned, are suffering the most right now. The new hardware looks GREAT. I want it. But not to run bullshit. A pro-capable operating system is more important than ever. One big CUT THE CRAP minimal "Less is More" release, one that resurrects or IMPROVES the original AHIGs; and I'll be all over it, goodbye 9, viking funeral. | |||
|
| THALO.net journeyman |
I love funeral pyres. [This message was edited by Arlo on Fri August 01 2003 at 04:51 PM.] | |||
|
| Master Baiter |
funeral pyres are even more stirring when you loved and respected the burnee. I just won't retire OS 9 for hot air. Which is what 99% of OS X is. Believe it or not I ain't that hard to please. Make it work, make it easy to use, don't try to con me or throw obstacles in the way of my work, and I'm generally happy. OS X blows it, badly, on all counts. I still can't get over how readily people are settling for operating system software that truly does not work. How easily they've been duped by a few bells and whistles, blurry fonts and over-rendered icons. How really little it took to get some computer users to throw in behind OS X and believe the bullshit. When the OS clearly doesn't do anything well. I've never seen it do ANY heavy lifting, except of course the lifting of the Quartz crap that is useless to me. I literally watch this software struggle and crap out constantly. I force quit more apps than I ever had to in the legacy. I restart more than I ever had to. I lose more work than I ever did. I experience more glitches and slowdowns and odd behavior than I ever did. And some guys call this the next coming. I think that's just sad. The Mac Faithful, I think, are (or have to be) much tougher on this product. There's stuff we can't tolerate. Just basic, core functionality that has to be right, which isn't. There is no way I can adopt software with this much wrong. I just can't. And I can't blow my wad on a G5 to prove the thesis that faster crap is still crap. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© 2005 THALO.net