[CharlesS]

Okay, I just have to begin with: WTF?!

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
All these kids under 20 who claim to know OS 9 and talk trash about it at the same time just piss me off.

I'm 23. While that's not as old as the other posters who were 27 and 30, it's still old enough for me to have been using Macs since 1986. Judging by your behavior in here and your tendency to respond to anyone who disagrees with you simply by calling him/her an idiot, my guess would be that you are somewhere between 12-15 years old. That would mean I've probably been using Macs since before you were born.

If anyone claims OS 9 had a bad UI compared Windows (through XP and likely through Longhorn) that person is deranged and comlpetely nuts. That's putting it nicely. When all was accounted for the OS 9 GUI was the single most powerful feature of the Mac. It was the ONLY THING that kept people on the FU-KING PLATFORM! Sure wasn't the FEATURES of OS 9!! Sure wasn't the HUGE AMOUNT OF SOFTWARE available for OS 9!! Idiots.

OS 9's interface was better than Windows 98's, but that's not saying a whole lot! OS X's interface is better than OS 9's ever was, hands down.

OS X was in beta until 10.3.

Oh God, not this "beta" crap. 10.0 I can understand. But 10.2 and higher have been great.

Those of you who keep whining and trolling against improved GUI in OS X make me sick.

All I can say is, WTF? Since when is saying that what we have now is better than what we had before whining?

I'd say that the reactionaries who insist that everything must be as it was in OS 9 fit the definition much better of "whining and trolling against improved GUI in OS X." Change is necessary if you're going to improve everything. If you just stay exactly where you are forever, you stagnate.

Whiner 1: "Whaaaa I always lose my files when someone messes up the alpabetical order or whatever but I don't realize I can make the OS keep files always in alphabet order because I'm an idiot"

Nice way to use personal attacks constantly in every single freaking sentence of your post. You know, that really makes you so much more convincing, and it really makes up for your lack of arguments when you (and voodoo, earlier on in this thread) when you constantly insist that if anyone disagrees with you they must not understand what you mean, and they must be an idiot.

It's particularly ironic here, since my entire point seems to have gone completely over your head. Yeah, you can auto-sort the files by alphabetical order. But then the result is that everything shifts around and thus the spatial arrangement of the files gets completely messed up every time any file is added to the folder! And thus there is very little advantage of a sorted icon view over a list view or column view for any folder that has more than 4 or 5 files in it!

But since it seems like you can't be bothered to actually read people's arguments, then I guess I shouldn't be surprised. In any case, I don't feel like starting this "debate" up again, so don't be surprised if any further "argument" consisting of a quick retort and a personal attack doesn't get a reply.

Oh, and it's spelled 'alphabetical', not 'alpabetical'.

Whiner 2: "Whhaaa! Games don't autostart when I put them in the drive like on the Windows but I don't realize that the option is there in OS 9 so developers are to blame if anyone!"

Again: AutoStart-9805.

Whiner 3: "Whaaaa! Spaciality is dead geet over it even if that is just my opinion and projecting it like that upon others is completely meaningless"

I think the irony here speaks for itself, and needs no reply from me.

Whiner 4: "Whaaaa OS 9 sucked when you wanted to go to the internet because there wasn't a dock but I don't realize that people had to learn it on Windows and they had to learn it on the Mac that things were not always done exactly the F-CKING same"

Inside 9, it will be able to use the Internet which inside the bender of it application which spreads out it discovers in browser. The like window anchored and, that negative number the what kind of thing, it requested and the wharf intelligence it was not. Also, me there is not an idea to what you are talking.

Whiner 7: Whaaaaa I always ended up with a lot of windows everywhere when using OS 9 but I didn't realize that using search, pop-up folders, spring loaded folders, aliases and the Apple menu would save me a lot of headache but I am too dumb to learn"

If you'd actually read my posts, you'd realize that I used all those things in OS 9. And I loved those features, because they let me work around the way OS 9 would throw windows everywhere. But OS X with the Column View is better.

Whiner 8: "Whaaaa People used to save files everywhere but in OS 9 that doesn't really matter and I'm going to pretend it does"

That's it! If you just assert that it doesn't matter, that will magically make it true!

Whiner 9: "Whhaaa I don't understand why these people like OS 9 and I don't have the mental maturity to accept that so I'll just whine and troll a lot every time I encounter these people on teh Intarweb I'm so 1337 I use column view!"

Given that those who like OS 9 over OS X are a very small minority at this point, especially on this board, I hardly think that asserting the majority opinion that OS X is leagues better than OS 9 constitutes "trolling." And if constantly screaming for an OS that is DEAD and not coming back because it was inferior to what we have now is not whining, then I don't know what is.

[Twilly Spree]

Yep obtuse. Us southerners know the attitude well. In farm animals and democrats.

"OS 9's interface was better than Windows 98's, but that's not saying a whole lot! OS X's interface is better than OS 9's ever was, hands down."

[PSST]

Holy cow... Man...

Just to clarify things again from my perspective I never said OS 9 was better than X... That's just stupid....I hate when people put words in my mouth.

To quote Jef Raskin in a recent article in 2002, before his death, " I wish that that human interfaces would move beyond the ideas from the 1970's"

My original reason for posting this topic was because I couldn't understand why I couldn't manage and navigate things in OS X, like I could in OS 9.

If that makes me a defect behind the keyboard then so be it. But, truth be told I now have to be responsible for 4 seperate individuals who all converted from Windows to Mac, and 2 of them tried OS X and hated it. Absolutely hated it.

But again, I have a responsibility to help and be an administrator of sorts to these 4 with their individual MACINTOSHES, and that my friends is a very big responsibility. I also told them that using and running OS 9 is a gamble right now, because Apple has made it obsolete or dead. I've tried to play devil's advocate and let them know that OS X is the future, but regardless these people have on their own chosen to use and run OS9 on a daily basis, and are very comfortable with it. I left my own opinions and feelings out of the matter, and did not want to influence them in their decisions.

Two individuals both of whom, I'm personally very proud of, have a very limited knowledge of computing in general, love OS 9 and are so comfortable with it that it overcomes their fears of computing in general.

That has to speak volumes for OS 9....

But again ponder on this fact quote from this article here: "Among the 19 million Mac OS desktop and laptop installations IDC surveyed, just about half were running releases predating OS X"

from Yahoo News - Creaky Operating Systems Show Their Age


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...5207_2005feb26

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by PSST:
But again, I have a responsibility to help and be an administrator of sorts to these 4 with their individual MACINTOSHES, and that my friends is a very big responsibility. I also told them that using and running OS 9 is a gamble right now, because Apple has made it obsolete or dead. I've tried to play devil's advocate and let them know that OS X is the future, but regardless these people have on their own chosen to use and run OS9 on a daily basis, and are very comfortable with it. I left my own opinions and feelings out of the matter, and did not want to influence them in their decisions.

Two individuals both of whom, I'm personally very proud of, have a very limited knowledge of computing in general, love OS 9 and are so comfortable with it that it overcomes their fears of computing in general.

That has to speak volumes for OS 9....

Sure. OS 9 was a great system. OS X is even better, but as you said, you friends know nothing about and are generally fearful toward computers, so they made a poor choice. That's what often happens when people make uninformed decisions about topics that make them skittish.

I'm sure your friends would be even more comfortable with no computer at all, but that doesn't make no computer all a decent OS.

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Sure. OS 9 was a great system. OS X is even better, but as you said, you friends know nothing about and are generally fearful toward computers, so they made a poor choice.

Fact of the matter is that OS 9 has a better UI than any other system available today and it hasn't been developed for 4 years or something. If it did escape some of the zealots here, I think OS X is way better than OS 9 in TERMS OF FEATURES and TECHNOLOGY. OS 9 has the better INTERFACE. Yes, it means OS X has an inferior UI to the single most celebrated and arguably the best UI IN THE ENTIRE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT.

No way, as in NO WAY can anyone claim with a straight face that the UI of OS X is the best in the world. This can (and is) frequently be done with OS 9's UI. Simple as that.

Now the quote I chose from your post crystalized the fundemental lack of understanding you show. People aren't all nerds like you. The people that chose OS 9 as their Mac system didn't choose poorly. PSST says they were simply people that were not familiar with using a computer and felt comfortable in a UI that shows the consistancy, simplicity and elegance of OS 9. FOUR years after Apple stopped developing it. These people chose wisely, because they chose interface, not features because they are not nerds. They don't care about features. Can the thing run Office? Great!

That is what you nerdboys have to get through your thick skulls. Not all people care about the geeky features of OS X. They don't care, nor should they. People use Windows 95 and 98 today. Some instances of 3.11. A lot of people simply don't care about features. They just want a comfortable environment to work on that damn computer. They not nerds. They are just people. OS X should also be for those people, despite what you army of nerds think is appropriate for a OS that is in most other respects a wet dream for you guys. Your elitism pisses me off.

[leperkuhn]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Fact of the matter is that OS 9 has a better UI than any other system available today and it hasn't been developed for 4 years or something. If it did escape some of the zealots here, I think OS X is way better than OS 9 in TERMS OF FEATURES and TECHNOLOGY. OS 9 has the better INTERFACE. Yes, it means OS X has an inferior UI to the single most celebrated and arguably the best UI IN THE ENTIRE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT.

No way, as in NO WAY can anyone claim with a straight face that the UI of OS X is the best in the world. This can (and is) frequently be done with OS 9's UI. Simple as that.

Now the quote I chose from your post crystalized the fundemental lack of understanding you show. People aren't all nerds like you. The people that chose OS 9 as their Mac system didn't choose poorly. PSST says they were simply people that were not familiar with using a computer and felt comfortable in a UI that shows the consistancy, simplicity and elegance of OS 9. FOUR years after Apple stopped developing it. These people chose wisely, because they chose interface, not features because they are not nerds. They don't care about features. Can the thing run Office? Great!

That is what you nerdboys have to get through your thick skulls. Not all people care about the geeky features of OS X. They don't care, nor should they. People use Windows 95 and 98 today. Some instances of 3.11. A lot of people simply don't care about features. They just want a comfortable environment to work on that damn computer. They not nerds. They are just people. OS X should also be for those people, despite what you army of nerds think is appropriate for a OS that is in most other respects a wet dream for you guys. Your elitism pisses me off.

I've posted this before. I'll post it again. I still don't know what features of OS 9 are so noteworthy. I claim, with a straight face, that OS X is the best OS I've ever used. There is nothing about OS 9 that I miss, and no one has posted anything except "spacial folders". (I didn't care for them i always held down option and used list view).

I frequently talk with people that have recently switched from OS 9. Know how many of them miss it? Zero. Even people that are completely helpless at a computer like OS X more.

Furthermore, OS X is for the people AND for the geeks. A friend of mine just inherited an ibook. Had os 9 on it. Never used a mac. He called me, and asked why it sucked. I suggested he install os x. He did last night, and sees a night and day difference. I've x'ed his name so you don't bug him.

10:41:34 mattedgoatfur: question
10:41:41 mattedgoatfur: did you use os 9 at all on the ibook?
10:42:05 xxx: a little
10:42:15 mattedgoatfur: what did you think, compared to os x?
10:42:36 xxx: oh its def a win 95 to xp comparison
10:42:41 xxx: major difference

For the record, it looks more like elitism on your end, or more accurately fanaticism.

[wataru]

Holy crap, I didn't realize Twilly Spree was a dick in every thread. Welcome to my ignore list. Anyone else who'd like to ignore his personal attacks and nonsensical ramblings can click here.

[mAxximo]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Fact of the matter is that OS 9 has a better UI than any other system available today and it hasn't been developed for 4 years or something. If it did escape some of the zealots here, I think OS X is way better than OS 9 in TERMS OF FEATURES and TECHNOLOGY. OS 9 has the better INTERFACE. Yes, it means OS X has an inferior UI to the single most celebrated and arguably the best UI IN THE ENTIRE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT.

No way, as in NO WAY can anyone claim with a straight face that the UI of OS X is the best in the world. This can (and is) frequently be done with OS 9's UI. Simple as that.

Now the quote I chose from your post crystalized the fundemental lack of understanding you show. People aren't all nerds like you. The people that chose OS 9 as their Mac system didn't choose poorly. PSST says they were simply people that were not familiar with using a computer and felt comfortable in a UI that shows the consistancy, simplicity and elegance of OS 9. FOUR years after Apple stopped developing it. These people chose wisely, because they chose interface, not features because they are not nerds. They don't care about features. Can the thing run Office? Great!

That is what you nerdboys have to get through your thick skulls. Not all people care about the geeky features of OS X. They don't care, nor should they. People use Windows 95 and 98 today. Some instances of 3.11. A lot of people simply don't care about features. They just want a comfortable environment to work on that damn computer. They not nerds. They are just people. OS X should also be for those people, despite what you army of nerds think is appropriate for a OS that is in most other respects a wet dream for you guys. Your elitism pisses me off.

Great post.

[cpac]

again:

(1) the original poster's question did not relate solely to UI, but to OS 9 more generally.

(2) to suggest that UI and underlying technology are completely independent is just false

(3) to suggest that UI design is an archetypal, static goal is false (what we do on our computers is fundamentally different now than it was 10, and especially 15 years ago - it's just arrogant to assume that the ideal interface 10 years ago is ideal for today's purposes).

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Fact of the matter is that OS 9 has a better UI than any other system available today and it hasn't been developed for 4 years or something. If it did escape some of the zealots here, I think OS X is way better than OS 9 in TERMS OF FEATURES and TECHNOLOGY. OS 9 has the better INTERFACE. Yes, it means OS X has an inferior UI to the single most celebrated and arguably the best UI IN THE ENTIRE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT.

No way, as in NO WAY can anyone claim with a straight face that the UI of OS X is the best in the world. This can (and is) frequently be done with OS 9's UI. Simple as that.

How about backing that up with some facts? I'll give you a few, right now. This is right off the top of the head, and as such is only scratching the surface.

1. Menu bar organization. OS X organizes the menus into System (the Apple menu), Application (the app menu) and Document (File, Edit, etc.). The organization is much more logical - why should Quit be in the File menu, anyway? What does quitting an app have to do with the currently open file? And what do Preferences have to do with Editing a file? Why should Shut Down only be in the Special menu in the Finder, and not accessible anywhere else? Why in hell should Log Out be in the File menu in the Finder?

2. The Dock vs. the Application menu. Yes, OS 9 had the Application menu. But no one except the "nerds" knew what it was or that it was there. The Dock makes it easy to see what apps are running, at any time and is much easier for new users to understand. With the Application menu, any app that happened to be running with no windows open would be completely invisible, with no indication it was running unless you clicked on the Application Menu which no one realized was a menu. As a result, newbies tended to have lots of programs running in the background without realizing it.

3. In OS X, when you click on an app's Dock icon or double-click its icon in the Finder and it has no windows open, the app pops up a new window if it follows the Aqua HIG. In OS 9, it would bring the app to the front, but no new windows would appear, so to a new user it appeared as if nothing had happened. Combine this with the ease of accidentally leaving invisible apps open as mentioned in #2, and you have a lot of WTF?! moments for users.

4. Memory management. What, this is strictly an underlying OS feature and not part of the UI? Think again. In OS 9, there was no memory management, so users had to do their own. Since it required user interaction to go into the Get Info window and adjust the memory requirements of an app that was complaining about being out of memory, that makes it part of the UI in my book. I dare you to show this to a new user and explain to them why they need to muck with the memory allocation just to get their Web browser to display a page they wanted to load. But that's not all. Because of the crappy VM scheme and the ease of leaving open invisible apps in #2, you often have all the system memory taken up by those invisible apps and you can't launch anything. The system asks the user to quit some apps, but since the user doesn't see any apps open, this creates WTF moments for the user.

5. The Dock in general. It's a very handy and attractive app launcher. There's nothing to compare it against in OS 9 at all. I can drag a document onto any open app. When I'm in OS 9, I often try to do this, only to remember that I can't and I'll have to use the Open dialog in that app. And if it doesn't support Navigation Services, I won't be able to drag the file into the Open dialog either. Hey, this reminds me of:

6. Drag and drop onto apps. In both OS 9 and OS X, the system lets you know whether an app supports opening a document when you drag it over the app, by highlighting it only if it's supported. But in OS X, you can hold down Command and Option to override this and open the file whether the app thinks it can or not.

7. Exposé. Need I say more? It drives me nuts whenever I have to use a system that doesn't have this.

8. Column View. See #7. The OS 9 Finder makes you open tons of windows unless you hold down the Option key or use spring-loaded folders, which are fragile and which dump you back to where you were if you make one false move with the mouse.

9. OS X supports multi-button mice and scroll wheels right out of the box. In OS 9, you have to install third-party drivers, and then they're never quite as good (most that I've used try to simulate the scroll wheel by clicking on the scroll arrows when you move it, which never feels natural).

10. The printing system. Let's face it, OS 9's printing system sucks. The Chooser sucks. Put yourself in a newbie's shoes. You need to set up a printer. Is there anything that actually looks like it would be used to set up a printer? No, there's this thing unintuitively named "Chooser" which, for some reason, also is used to browse network drives (WTF?). At least in Panther, there's an icon to set up printers in System Preferences, where it belongs.

11. Help Viewer. OS 7.5 through 8.6 had Apple Guide, which was great, but doesn't count since OS 9 is what we're talking about, and it had the same really crappy HTML app that 10.0 had.

12. The Apple menu. It sucked. It was cluttered with tons of junk, only some of which was useful (who ever used the Scrapbook?). It was configurable! But only if you manually navigated to HD:System Folder:Apple Menu Items. Of course, newbies couldn't possibly be expected to know this. I actually read tips in Mac magazines back then which involved making an alias of the AMI folder, pasting a blank icon on it, giving it a name of a few spaces, and putting it right under the Apple menu on the Desktop so there'd be an easy place to drag files into to put them in the Apple menu, or go in and take them out. In OS X, you can have as many Apple Menus as you want by putting folders in the Dock, and then at least you can drag stuff into them (although it'd be better if they were spring-loaded).

13. Why did OS 9 not ask you if you were sure you wanted to shut down or restart? Really annoying if all you meant to do was Sleep or Empty Trash or something.

14. Ejecting disks. Dragging a disk to the Trash to eject it has got to be one of the dumbest UI decisions in history. "But I don't want to erase the disk! I just want to eject it!" And it makes even less sense to drag a disk into the Trash to burn a CD. At least in OS X the Trash turns into an Eject or Burn icon if you're dragging a disk, so it's more clear what will happen. But much more logical is the Eject button that appears next to each disk in the Finder sidebar. Makes more sense than dropping your disk in the wastebasket, no?

15. In OS 9, there was no way to minimize windows. You could windowshade them, but then you'd end up with a billion windowshaded windows. Some people would drag windows most of the way off the screen to deal with this.

16. Force-quitting apps. In OS X, you get a nice dialog listing your apps, and letting you choose which one to kill. In OS 9, you got something that only worked for the current app, and usually ended up just locking the computer up anyway.

17. Variable-sized thumbnails. In OS X, they just work. In OS 9, they did... sometimes. Sometimes the thumbs would be the same size regardless of what portion of a window you were viewing.

18. OS X's standard toolbar widget for apps. Provides another element of uniformity and consistency among apps. OS 9 has no equivalent.

19. This should have been way earlier in the list. Cocoa and Interface Builder. Yes, it's a development environment and a development tool. How do they relate to the UI? Well, they make it a lot easier for developers to write consistent, well-designed UIs, and the result has been a much higher level of UI quality in shareware applications on the Mac than was present on OS 9, which directly affects the user experience.

OS 9 had the best interface for its time. And what was its competition? Well... Windows 98, and the various window managers available for X11. Not the stiffest of competition in the UI area. OS X is so much better than OS 9, it's not even in the same ballpark, and I will say with a straight face that it's the best UI around, a thousand times.

Oh, and if anecdotal evidence is what you want, well, I know a guy who was a complete technophobe and disliked computers in general. He was using OS 9. Got him an OS X machine, and he discovered that he actually liked using it! So how about that. Apparently not only "nerds" like OS X.

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by wataru:
Holy crap, I didn't realize Twilly Spree was a dick in every thread. Welcome to my ignore list. Anyone else who'd like to ignore his personal attacks and nonsensical ramblings can click here.

Yes when one runs out of arguments one can always fall back on the good old personal attacks

@mAxximo, cla et al

@nerdboys and zealots

@cpac

things have not changed fundamentally in the way we use our machines. OS X has opened up new venues for the Mac, such as server and workstation capabilities but most still use Macs for creative work, personal computing and low intensity stuff like that which calls for the versitility, consitancy and power of the Mac UI that was developed until OS 9. Things have NOT changed in any fundamental way for the regular Joe in the last 10 years. Browsing the web certainly doesn't change the way we use our filesystem. There is a special interface for that which we call a web-browser and that has not been integrated into the OS, like it has been in Windows and has generally been accepted to be a bad idea in retrospect.

Our "world" inside our Macs consists of the home folder, containing relatively few files and the best interface for navigating through hierarchy of such low magnitude is the one developed in OS 9.

The UI is just an illusion put on top of technical things that make up the core of the OS and as such can be ANYTHING you can imagine regardless of the technology underneath. It is NOT tied to it because it is an analogy or a metaphor. Double clicking on a folder to show its contents is a simple analogy that tells the system to run certain invisible commands that actually perform the operation desired. The act itself is nothing. It would be possible in fact to have the OS 9 GUI on OS X in its entirety without any problems. That the technology underneath is very much different is irrelevant.
Even so, that is not the main issue, the main issue is that the spacial option is MISSING more or less from OS X for no apparent reason other than that it has not been implemented. I'd like to see it implemented. Such implementation would have NO EFFECT on the other views or ways that are available to navigate the system today. That is why I simply don't understand the hostility towards it I see from some people.

Technologically OS X is far superior to OS 9 and implements every technology and feature OS 9 had and more. The original poster either does not realize that or was asking in fact about UI features without realizing it. I'm sure he wasn't asking why OS X didn't have unprotected memory like OS 9 or why it couldn't multitask worse like OS 9.. it is absurd to think so.. who'd want THAT back??!

This is a wake-up call: nobody wants the crappy elements of OS 9 and nobody wants any tech from OS 9 (except maybe sprockets, I don't know) but what people want is the UI of OS 9 as an option in OS X. NO it won't look the same, we have Quartz now, but it can ACT the same. OS X looks good, runs good but feels awkward for many people. Namely the non-nerds who don't have thousands of files, who use their Macs for simple personal computing and don't CARE about how the current UI is great for power users. I know I'm one of these people and I bet there are a lot of us. So cut the hostility already power-users, you aren't the only ones using the Mac!

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Now the quote I chose from your post crystalized the fundemental lack of understanding you show. People aren't all nerds like you. The people that chose OS 9 as their Mac system didn't choose poorly. PSST says they were simply people that were not familiar with using a computer and felt comfortable in a UI that shows the consistancy, simplicity and elegance of OS 9. FOUR years after Apple stopped developing it. These people chose wisely, because they chose interface, not features because they are not nerds. They don't care about features. Can the thing run Office? Great!

I have never seen an explanation (in this thread or anywhere else) of what an "OS X that has a UI like OS 9" would look like. It couldn't be exactly like OS 9. Unix permissions alone make that impossible. There are lots of other misfeatures in OS 9 (like extensions) that can't be carried over. All people can ever provide are a couple of trivial features that they miss from OS 9, spatial Finder (ONE FREAKING FEATURE IN ONE APPLICATION) or else they hate the multiuser system model, which is simply tough darts. OS 9 was slightly more user-friendly than OS X, but not that much. Certainly not enough to justify the massive hatred of OS X you embrace.

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
That is what you nerdboys have to get through your thick skulls.

Yes, when one runs out of arguments, one can always fall back on the good old personal attacks.

And you wonder why wataru called you a dick.

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Your elitism pisses me off.

Likewise to your apparent assumption that people shouldn't have basic competency with (or at least not an irrational fear of) the tools they use.

[Detrius]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Yep obtuse. Us southerners know the attitude well. In farm animals and democrats.
...

Southerners? Floridians are all Yankees--not southerners. You should see what kind of attitude this here democrat can get you...

But seriously--let's keep it civil in here. I have no problems with heated OS 9 vs. OS X discussions, or even vs. Windows discussions, but these should be impersonal, logical discussions.

For the record, I ditched OS 9 for Linux because in Linux PPC 2000 was SOOO much better (stabilty, multitasking, remote login, programming) than OS 9. And then I ditched Linux for the OS X Public beta because it actually properly supported my hardware. I am completely in the pro OS X camp. I'm one of those Unix loving guys.

[cpac]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:

@cpac

things have not changed fundamentally in the way we use our machines. OS X has opened up new venues for the Mac, such as server and workstation capabilities but most still use Macs for creative work, personal computing and low intensity stuff like that which calls for the versitility, consitancy and power of the Mac UI that was developed until OS 9. Things have NOT changed in any fundamental way for the regular Joe in the last 10 years. Browsing the web certainly doesn't change the way we use our filesystem. There is a special interface for that which we call a web-browser and that has not been integrated into the OS, like it has been in Windows and has generally been accepted to be a bad idea in retrospect.

Our "world" inside our Macs consists of the home folder, containing relatively few files and the best interface for navigating through hierarchy of such low magnitude is the one developed in OS 9

Ok, here was may just disagree. Here are at least a couple ways I think our computing experience is different:

(1) number of files we use/create/have to keep track of has *exploded* as people receive files via email, download them from the web, and in general become more digital (and yes, this explosion takes place right within our nice happy little home folder, which isn't all that "little" at all...)

(2) we are less dependant on using the file system to find/organize things (many users, especially newbies, find files by looking for the email they were attached to, for example). Spotlight will only make the file system interface that much less important, as people will no longer need to remember whether the information they are looking for is contained in a traditional "file" or if its' in an email, or, say, part of a file (like a single contact in address book, or an appointment in iCal)

Even so, that is not the main issue, the main issue is that the spacial option is MISSING more or less from OS X for no apparent reason other than that it has not been implemented. I'd like to see it implemented. Such implementation would have NO EFFECT on the other views or ways that are available to navigate the system today. That is why I simply don't understand the hostility towards it I see from some people.

"MISSING" is far too strong a word. At best, I'd say OS X's spatial file navigation is "imperfect" -- but all the basic elements are there: Folders Exist as visual objects, they can be opened, in which case their contents are viewed as objects within a window with the same name. You interact with the exhibits spatially - by moving them "in" or "out" of folders, etc..

The only spatial-criticisms that remain seem pretty minor a nit-picky at best:
(1) there exists a column view (so don't use it)
(2) a single folder can be opened into more than one window (sure it can, but this doesn't happen much, especially if you're doing things spatially
(3) OS X doesn't always remember the size & location of windows and the objects within them (annoying, but again, I don't think you run into this much if you use the Finder in a purely spatial manner)

Am I missing something huge that leads you to leap to the conclusion that OS X has no spatial file system at all?

This is a wake-up call: nobody wants the crappy elements of OS 9 and nobody wants any tech from OS 9 (except maybe sprockets, I don't know) but what people want is the UI of OS 9 as an option in OS X. NO it won't look the same, we have Quartz now, but it can ACT the same. OS X looks good, runs good but feels awkward for many people. Namely the non-nerds who don't have thousands of files, who use their Macs for simple personal computing and don't CARE about how the current UI is great for power users. I know I'm one of these people and I bet there are a lot of us. So cut the hostility already power-users, you aren't the only ones using the Mac!

Again, the original poster was put off by more than the UI - namely the fact that he was now dealing with a multi-user OS, and that he no longer knew about mucking around in the System Folder. In my experience, these two issues far outweigh the UI changes in terms of making former OS 9 users uncomfortable in X.

The way I see it, X has simply given users a few more options in how they navigate their files, and in doing so has only slightly broken the spatial metaphor, and not in any important way.

(PS - it's not just power users that might enjoy column view or have large numbers of files - think kids with large MP3 collections (or who have been writing papers/reports and getting assignments on the computer since grade school), people used to Windows' file navigation, etc.)

[Detrius]

Originally posted by PSST:
Hey guys,

I'm back... I had to throw this out there, but what IS this for OS 9, and what does it do? What is it good for?
http://www.tenon.com/products/machten/

That was specifically an X11 implementation on OS 9. Think: ability to connect to a Linux box and see the GUI locally, but not on the Linux box.

This was hacking Unix on top of OS 9. This is roughly similar to how OS 9 has been hacked on top of OS X as Classic, or how Windows is hacked on top of OS X as Virtual PC. You would still be running OS 9 at the core and would not gain any of the benefits of Unix, except being able to run some of the programs.

[analogika]

Originally posted by cla:
But, you should consider the following question:
Is an interface good just because it's designed for beginners? [/B]

The point I'm making:

Is a "good" interface Macintosh if it's NOT designed for beginners?


OS 9 was as good at being Macintosh as Windows 98 was at taking you where YOU wanted to go.

Which isn't saying much.

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by Chuckit:

Yes, when one runs out of arguments, one can always fall back on the good old personal attacks.

And you wonder why wataru called you a dick.

I didn't name any names, but those who felt it applied to them...

I am not surprised that wataru called me a dick, because it reflects his maturity and mentality very well.

In any case, I think I've made my point succinctly and don't have anything to add. I've made my point. Regardless I'm sure Apple will improve the OS X UI and I am sure they will look for the OS 9 UI for inspiration. That's how we got the option to open a new window for each folder in 10.0 and the Apple menu in the upper left corner, the animated opening of windows in 10.2 and labels in 10.3 for instance besides a multitude of other minor OS 9 "inspirations". I look forward to see what OS 9 features they'll bring in 10.4 and future incarnataions of OS X.

@charles_s

There have been improvements for sure in the UI of OS X regarding the networking, printing etc in OS X and they are certainly superior to those found in OS 9 but that doesn't make the OS X UI better because many of the fundamental UI that were good in OS 9 have yet to be implemented in OS X. Where Apple has concentrated their work they've done good things. That they've abandoned many of the good things of OS 9 does not mean they are bad things. Far from it. Were labels a useless relic? Up until 10.3 one might have thought that was Apple's point of view. Things aren't as black/white as you've portrayed them.

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
I didn't name any names, but those who felt it applied to them...

Like the person whose post you were replying to when you used the word "you"?

Geez. If you're going to insult me, just insult me; don't pull this passive-aggressive crap. Or better yet, just be polite in the first place.

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Like the person whose post you were replying to when you used the word "you"?

Geez. If you're going to insult me, just insult me; don't pull this passive-aggressive crap. Or better yet, just be polite in the first place.

So you are more than one person, because I used the plural. But if the shoe fits then it was adressed to YOU Chuckit. You are one of the nerdboys aren't you? Politeness is something YOU have to earn. A start is reading the posts you are replying to and comprehend what is written. It isn't very polite to put words in other people's mouth, such as mine. That is rude and very passive-agressive. And crap.

Throwing stones in glass houses.

[Detrius]

to both of you: don't make me lock this thread just because you two can't get along. Everyone just calm down and breathe.

Keep in mind that nothing is perfect. If 10.3 were perfect, there would be nowhere for 10.4 to go. Anyone who can't admit that there are flaws in 10.3 needs a reality check.

Likewise, the core of OS 9 that users don't see had some serious flaws that could not be fixed. Apple had to ditch it and start over again to get a modern operating system. All apps would have had to be rewritten anyway. Anyone who can't accept that OS 9 was fundamentally flawed also needs a reality check.



On a note closer to reality: OS 9 is bad because it kills kittens and tortures bunnies. Beat that.

[jamil5454]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:


So you are more than one person, because I used the plural. But if the shoe fits then it was adressed to YOU Chuckit. You are one of the nerdboys aren't you? Politeness is something YOU have to earn. A start is reading the posts you are replying to and comprehend what is written. It isn't very polite to put words in other people's mouth, such as mine. That is rude and very passive-agressive. And crap.

Throwing stones in glass houses.

Are you having fun?

I'm going to have to side with Chuckit on this one.

[insult removed by Detrius]

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by Detrius:

Keep in mind that nothing is perfect. If 10.3 were perfect, there would be nowhere for 10.4 to go. Anyone who can't admit that there are flaws in 10.3 needs a reality check.

Likewise, the core of OS 9 that users don't see had some serious flaws that could not be fixed. Apple had to ditch it and start over again to get a modern operating system. All apps would have had to be rewritten anyway. Anyone who can't accept that OS 9 was fundamentally flawed also needs a reality check.

Exactly what I've been saying all along. Great post Detrius!

[PSST]

Hello again guys and gals....

Man, I have to start this post for this thread with this:

Damn, I'm really sad... I'm sad that the Mac community can be so divided over this... I mean come on you don't see Windoze users fighting over varying degrees of b.s. in various versions of Windoze crap.... Come on, WE'RE ALL MAC USERS! All of us...

I'm not TROLLING or anything like that...

Twilly spree was right... Unfortunately I hadn't made myself clear when posting this... I guess it is the user interface that bugs me the most...

That doesn't mean I wanted a return of extensions, or crashes...

But please consider the statistics of OS X to OS 9 users....
"Among the 19 million Mac OS desktop and laptop installations IDC surveyed, just about half were running releases predating OS X"

What I want to be able to do with OS, is comfortablely sit down know what everything in the OS does, dignose it if there is a problem, turn stuff on and off, if I use it or don't, tweak it a little with something like RESEDIT... stuff like that...

I guess I should explain what I thought OSX was going to be when Apple started talking about it BEFORE public beta....

PROTECTIVE MEMORY... granted.
NO EXTENSIONS...
NO CONTROL PANELS...
EVERYTHING FOR A PARTICULAR PROGRAM IS INSTALLED AND KEPT IN THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM'S FOLDER.... so if you wanted to delete a whole program you just throw away one folder and that's it...

I appreciated CharlesS individual description of like and dislikes between OSX and 9, but hey other than protected memory and better memory management, I could care less about the other features he mentioned...

I like the Apple menu... I still think it is still better than having a big hurking dock at the bottom of every little thing you have open....

Besides for OS 9 I use TASKMENUBAR and it suits me fine. Much better than the dock...

What I still can understand if someone could create a program like Switcher for OS 6 to give multitasking to OS 6 like in 7. Why couldn't someone create a protected memory program for OS 9? Also a better memory management program for OS 9?

Again in my mind the main difference and only huge difference between OS 9 AND X is memory management , that's it... If you keep UNIX out of the equation...

But please tell me that WE as a group of MAC users aren't as divided....

In all fairness, I'm giving serious thought to enrolling in some OS X courses that are available through my local MAC store... But that's it...

I want to apologize to everyone who reads this thread for the feuding...

Plus, for the record, I never have insulted or degraded anyone in my postings...

Thanks, and peace....

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by PSST:
What I still can understand if someone could create a program like Switcher for OS 6 to give multitasking to OS 6 like in 7. Why couldn't someone create a protected memory program for OS 9? Also a better memory management program for OS 9?

Er...is that a rhetorical question or do you actually want a lengthy techno-spiel on Mac OS system programming?

The fact is, Mac OS 9 was rotten at the core. All attempts to fix it had pretty much failed. There comes a point where fixing a project is more costly than starting over, particularly when you have a superior base (BSD in this case) that you can use as a start.

Originally posted by PSST:
Again in my mind the main difference and only huge difference between OS 9 AND X is memory management , that's it... If you keep UNIX out of the equation...

That isn't the only big difference. The entire display system is revamped, among other things.

[Brass]

PSST. If you spend enough time using a recent release of Mac OS X, and NOT using Mac OS 9 at all, and then go back to using Mac OS 9, you'll probably find that Mac OS X's interface really is better in may ways.

I could be wrong, and you could be the exception to the rule. But I've done computer support for a lot of Mac OS 9 users during the time when Mac OS X was being phased in. None of them liked the idea of changing their OS completely, as you'd expect for normal users. None of them liked using OS X much at first. ALL of them who've tried using OS 9 recently, without exception, now hate using OS 9 at all for anything.

The moral of the story is, that if you are used to OS 9 and don't like OS X, the chances are that it'll be easily reversed if you spend enough time getting used to OS X.

BY the way, none of the users I worked with took very long to get used to OS X. Most were happy with it within about 2 months.

I think you'll find the number of Mac OS 9 users remaining is declining very rapidly now, as Mac OS X has been the default OS on all Macs for over 3 years now, and most people consider their computers to be redundant after 3 years. Mac OS X has shipped on all Macs for about 5 years, and very few people use computers older than 5 years (yes there are some, but percentage-wise, their number is very small).

[Detrius]

Originally posted by PSST:
...But please consider the statistics of OS X to OS 9 users....
"Among the 19 million Mac OS desktop and laptop installations IDC surveyed, just about half were running releases predating OS X"

What I want to be able to do with OS, is comfortablely sit down know what everything in the OS does, dignose it if there is a problem, turn stuff on and off, if I use it or don't, tweak it a little with something like RESEDIT... stuff like that...

...so if you wanted to delete a whole program you just throw away one folder and that's it...

What I still can understand if someone could create a program like Switcher for OS 6 to give multitasking to OS 6 like in 7. Why couldn't someone create a protected memory program for OS 9? Also a better memory management program for OS 9?...

The first section: I can attest that the vast majority of the people that are running an OS before OS X are running it because that's what came on their machine--not because they like OS 9 better. I have a machine on my bench that is running 8.6. It's not because they think 8.6 is better than 9.

Second: Interface builder is included with the developer tools. You can open up programs' nib files with this. This is the rough equivalent of ResEdit. You can tweak the user interface of programs with this--but you can break them too. You should also look inside the .app folders. Also, ResEdit may actually work on the rest of the programs that aren't compiled as folders.

third: Apple did implement this ability. However, not everyone stuck with it. One of the only big programs that properly followed the drag-and-drop installation concept was [gasp] Microsoft.

fourth: if it were possible Apple would have done it. Period. End of story. Their attempt was called Copland (aka System 8). After spending several years attempting this, they realized it would be cheaper, faster, and more effective to make Unix user friendly. So they bought NeXT and did just that. It took them several more years to make Unix user friendly. That should give you an idea of how complicated of a task it would have been to make Classic stable.


That said, there are definitely areas that OS X could learn from OS 9. Instead of talking about how to add OS X's strengths to OS 9, we should be talking about how to fix OS X's weaknesses and how to add OS 9's strengths (that should be) to OS X. Instead of debating which is better, we should be talking about how to improve what we have. Once someone comes up with a good idea, submit it to apple via their feedback channel. Remember: if you want results, you have to give suggestions--not complaints.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/

It is probably way too late to get anything added to Tiger, but suggestions may well get added to point releases or OS XI.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Yes when one runs out of arguments one can always fall back on the good old personal attacks

Oh, the bitter irony. You must be a troll. I just submitted 19 ways in which the OS X UI is better than OS 9's (and could submit more if needed), yet you simply continue to posit that OS 9's is better for no real stated reason.

What, pray tell, is this "fundamental UI" about OS 9 that's so great? What? The spatial Finder?

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Detrius:
third: Apple did implement this ability. However, not everyone stuck with it. One of the only big programs that properly followed the drag-and-drop installation concept was [gasp] Microsoft.

God. I forgot to mention this.

20. The .app bundle format makes it much easier for developers to make apps that are completely self-contained and installable via drag-and-drop. The result is that far fewer apps require installers than in OS 9.

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Oh, the bitter irony. You must be a troll. I just submitted 19 ways in which the OS X UI is better than OS 9's (and could submit more if needed), yet you simply continue to posit that OS 9's is better for no real stated reason.

What, pray tell, is this "fundamental UI" about OS 9 that's so great? What? The spatial Finder?

The irony is that I've posted 11 entire posts and other members have posted even more describing exactly what "fundamental UI" OS X lacks compared to OS 9. That was the irony, the tragedy is that you can't read. If you could you wouldn't have asked. Of all the people here you are the only one so obtuse that I simply don't care what you think. Everyone elese at least knows what it is I'm talking about and don't come in late on the 5th page of this thread asking what 'this "fundamental UI" about OS 9 that's so great?'!

Bottom line: either you don't read what is posted here or you simply what is written. You're trolling here. Back off from the keyboard Charles_S. This discussion went over your head from the start. You are only here to push an agenda that is both obtuse and clueless. I'm a live and let live kind of guy and I'm just being frank with you here. Maybe you'll do us all a favor and stop posting in this thread. Well one can hope. Your questions have all been answered, distinctly, succinctly, exactly and with way more respect than you've earned.

You picked 20 points where you claimed OS X was superior to OS 9 UI wise. Much is just cosmetic slap and dash, not exactly UI improvements.

1. Quit in the app menu. (you're wrong here)

That is no improvement over OS 9 "Quit in the File menu". Two reasons, There was no app menu in OS 9 and Quit is still in the menu closest to the Apple in the upper left corner. Nothing has in fact changed UI wise there. Apple just kept this one the same as in OS 9.

2. Application menu. (mostly correct)

I didn't know there was an application menu in OS 9. What the heck is that? Applications were in their Apps folder on the HD, with an alias to the most freqently used ones in the Apple menu. In OS 9 the Apple menu was the Dock for normal people. It was fine and people installed DragThing if they wanted more advanced options. DragThing is still better than the OS X Dock. Apple spent more effort into genie effects and QT videos playing minimized than in Dock functionality. Generally the Dock is better than nothing though and certainly better than the default in OS 9.

3. Opening apps with app window appearing. (you're wrong here)

I don't recall many apps that didn't offer you a window when you opened them in OS 9, Photoshop immediately did, so did XPress, so did Word.. in general this was something one would find in simple single purpose apps or specialized science apps that weren't made by any UI experts. Point being this behavior of windows appearing when an app is opened is no OS X first. It was very much used in major apps in OS 9.

4. Memory management (not really correct)

Memory management IS one of two fundamental improvements OS X offers over OS 9. It does simplify the UI but is a consequence from the tech change. MM adds no UI change as such but the UI has to be changed a BIT to acommodate the tech changes.

5. The Dock (see your point 2 - makes your arguments 19 after all)

6. Force drag and drop (yes ok right you are)

You can force drag and drop in OS X, I honestly can't remember if this was possible in OS 9 but the funny thing is it doesn't really matter. Are you kidding me?! Force drag and drop. Chances are the app can't open the file if it thinks so and if it is mistaken then you could open the file from the File menu, open command. This so insignificant I can't believe you brought this up! We're talking about major UI advantages that OS X has over OS 9 and you bring THIS up? Hello?

7. Exposé (oh yes, good point)

I remember being thrilled over Exposé. Still am and when in OS 9 (as rarely as that happens these days) I sometimes hit F11 and then remember this is OS 9.

8. Column view (umm yes and no)

See for some it seems to be a yes, for others a no. I for one find no use for column view and am always faster navigating in icon view or list view. I remember trying colum view for a while in 10.1 but frankly I can navigate faster in icon/list view. So while a major UI change in OS X compared to OS 9, column view is not really an advantage unless you like it. And I don't.

9. Multi button mice (yeps you're right while at the same time you're wrong)

OS X does support them from the box. Why are you wrong then? Because mice aren't UI elements, they are input devices and quite frankly had OS 9 been developed a while longer this would have appeared there too. Like generic printer drivers for lasers, generic mouse drivers aren't rocket science. Simply a support feature that didn't make it into OS 9. Just wasn't a UI feature, else you'd have had a point.

10. Printing (definitely yes!)

Printing UI is so superior to OS 9 it is refreshing.

11. Help viewer (yes you have a point)

I just don't find the current OS X help viewer to be anything to shout about though. It is better than the one in OS 9 and OS X 10.0 and 10.1 (the new one came in 10.2 IIRC) The help in 10.3 is average but still put to shame by the help in OS 8 and System 7. Apple doesn't always keep the best features eh Charles_S?

12. The Apple menu (yes and no)

The Apple menu of System 7 to OS 9 was a pre-dock thing. It was a simple app launcher and relatively customizable but no newbie could be expected to manage it. If you did manage it then the Apple menu was what you made it. Mine was an organized, efficient and uncluttered launch menu for my most frequently used apps. The Apple menu could be damn fine and it could be rather useless. All depending on your knowledge and nerdyness. The Apple menu is still here, albeit not customizable, because so many people wanted it there. Apple listened, so many people must have asked. That's why I doubt it's general uselessness you imply.

13. Confirming shutdowns/restarts (yes there is a UI point)

A very very small one. Shutdown/restarts worked without the Mac asking you if you're sure blah blah. I'll reiterate: We're talking about MAJOR UI changes. The addition of one warning window between you and the restart command isn't the breakthrough you make it sound like.

14. Ejecting (yes granted you have a UI point there)

This one more significant. You probably know the story behind the reason of the eject-through-trash metaphor so I I'll spare you the telling.

15. Minimizing windows (you're right but..)

There was no way to minimize windows in OS 9 but then you didn't really need to in the same way. The Finder would remember the size, shape and position of every window. The window was connected to a single folder. Essentially it was minimized there when the window was closed and when you'r open that folder the very same window would appear before you. Things worked a bit different in OS 9 and there would have had to be some kind of place (e.g. a dock) for the windows to get minimized to.

16. Force quitting (umm huh?)

I don't seem to remember OS 9 having protected memory or pre-empetive multi-tasking.. when an app crashed or froze you'd need to restart. End of story. The crappy menu you got when force-quitting an app reflected that fact. It didn't even work most of the time. Anyway this is a technical aspect and really has nothing to do with UI. OS 9 simply didn't have the tech to handle force quitting safely and effectively like OS X can so a really flexible and well thought out force-quit menu would have been utterly pointless.

17. Thumbnail size (I'm sorry I'm not sure what you're talking about)

18. Toolbar (yes this is an OS X advantage)

And a fine one. Kudos to OS X.

19. Developing (I'm sure you know much more about this than I)

20. The app bundle format (absoloutly, very cool)

I'm surprised you didn't mention really fundamental UI changes like, multiple accounts that can be changed without logging out, pre-empetive multi-tasking, much improved use of contextual menus, improved networking UI and abilites, the Dock interactivity through changes in icons (like Mail giving you the number of unread emails you have, iCal showing today's date, Adium giving you all sorts of feedback etc), the ability to switch languages on the entire system just by changing prefs and logging in and out.. There are so many important UI changes we've seen in OS X. I think it is truly remarkable at times but I can still nevigate faster through OS 9.

This post was for all the people who care to read, comprehend and think. This is not for the knee-jerks, the trolls or the zealots.

I could easily bring up 20+ points where OS X has abandoned perfectly fine and at times incredible UI elements for clearly inferior ones, but I can't be bothered. I feel I already have combined with all the other posters. Just read the thread. All points have been made. It's not my fault some people just can't understand.

[analogika]

Originally posted by PSST:
Again in my mind the main difference and only huge difference between OS 9 AND X is memory management , that's it... If you keep UNIX out of the equation...

I realize that you're only seeing what you want to see (which is fine and normal unless you're an asshole about it *cough*), but I do respectfully submit Exposé as the single greatest innovation in user interface since the mouse and pull-down menus.

It has quite literally revolutionized the way I use my machine, especially with OS X's completely pervasive drag-and-drop functionality (FAR more thoroughly implemented than it ever was in OS 9), and it has made life with 1024x768 (iMac DV 400 and 12" Powerbook) orders of magnitude easier.

-s*

[Detrius]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Oh, the bitter irony. You must be a troll...

Pay attention to the moderator, and stop calling people names. You will have a difficult time coming to an agreement with this kind of attitude. All people have a right to their own opinion.

As my mother-in-law says, "he has a right to be wrong." You need to be able to handle a differing opinion with illogical support (this is not pointed at any specific argument, but clearly this is CharlesS's view).

[leperkuhn]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
The irony is that I've posted 11 entire posts and other members have posted even more describing exactly what "fundamental UI" OS X lacks compared to OS 9. That was the irony, the tragedy is that you can't read. If you could you wouldn't have asked. Of all the people here you are the only one so obtuse that I simply don't care what you think. Everyone elese at least knows what it is I'm talking about and don't come in late on the 5th page of this thread asking what 'this "fundamental UI" about OS 9 that's so great?'!

I've been following this thread, regrettably. It's really gone no where. I agree with the previous poster that you haven't really offered any advantages to os9 except for spacial finder. Is that it? Is that all that you find better?

You've debunked quite a few of the points that were made, but you have been slightly innacurate.

4. Memory management (not really correct)
Memory management IS one of two fundamental improvements OS X offers over OS 9. It does simplify the UI but is a consequence from the tech change. MM adds no UI change as such but the UI has to be changed a BIT to acommodate the tech changes.

Anytime you had to Get Info and change the amount of ram an application used, that's a UI issue. You don't have to make this change in os x, and so it IS a UI change.

16. Force quitting (umm huh?)

I don't seem to remember OS 9 having protected memory or pre-empetive multi-tasking.. when an app crashed or froze you'd need to restart. End of story. The crappy menu you got when force-quitting an app reflected that fact. It didn't even work most of the time. Anyway this is a technical aspect and really has nothing to do with UI. OS 9 simply didn't have the tech to handle force quitting safely and effectively like OS X can so a really flexible and well thought out force-quit menu would have been utterly pointless.

How is this not user interface? Something bad happens, the computer shuts down. You lost all your open documents. That's a great example of poor user interface. The underlying technology of OS X presents a better interface by not losing your open work and forcing a reboot.

User interface is not just the colors on the screen, icons, and menus. It's how the user interacts with the computer, and how the computer responds to what the user is doing.

I wish I could stop reading this thread, but it's like a bad car accident. I can't look away.

[IamBob]

Since I don't recall seeing it mentioned yet, one of the major advantages of Column View is its keyboard navigation - you can go anywhere with just the arrow keys.

This is a *huge* improvement over the spatial Finder's keyboard navigation where you have to press cmd+up/down (and option, if you don't need the folder you came from) to go up and down the hierarchy (after selecting something with the arrow keys or alphanumeric(s)).

I remember accidently launching applications (cmd+down, afterall) while trying to navigate in OS9 which is no longer a problem for me...besides the general time (and sanity) savings.

Maybe keyboard navigation is supposed to be a power-user thing but it doesn't have to be with Column View.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Detrius:
Pay attention to the moderator, and stop calling people names. You will have a difficult time coming to an agreement with this kind of attitude. All people have a right to their own opinion.

Wha? Prior to writing that post I've been called by Twilly Spree:

A kid under 20, an idiot, a whiner, dumb as bread, childish, and too dumb to learn

Obtuse, with the intelligence of a farm animal

Nerdboy

Zealot

Towards other people, he's provided the following insults:

Trollboy

Your opinion is worthless

Plus all the ones I put in the first category which apply to all the pro-OS X people as a group.

[Randman]

Why is this thread even continuing. Apple will never make any OS that harkens back to OS9. Ever.

[alphasubzero949]

Did I just flash back to OS X Talk? Wait...this ain't MFI...

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
The irony is that I've posted 11 entire posts and other members have posted even more describing exactly what "fundamental UI" OS X lacks compared to OS 9. That was the irony, the tragedy is that you can't read. If you could you wouldn't have asked. Of all the people here you are the only one so obtuse that I simply don't care what you think. Everyone elese at least knows what it is I'm talking about and don't come in late on the 5th page of this thread asking what 'this "fundamental UI" about OS 9 that's so great?'!

Bottom line: either you don't read what is posted here or you simply what is written. You're trolling here. Back off from the keyboard Charles_S. This discussion went over your head from the start. You are only here to push an agenda that is both obtuse and clueless. I'm a live and let live kind of guy and I'm just being frank with you here. Maybe you'll do us all a favor and stop posting in this thread. Well one can hope. Your questions have all been answered, distinctly, succinctly, exactly and with way more respect than you've earned.

Ooookay... to compile the list I just posted in the previous post, I had to go back and read your posts. And nowhere did you describe what this "fundamental UI" is that is missing from OS X. So why don't you just throw us a freaking bone here, and explain it, instead of just continuing with the personal attacks, hmm?

Oh, and my handle is CharlesS, not Charles_S.

You picked 20 points where you claimed OS X was superior to OS 9 UI wise. Much is just cosmetic slap and dash, not exactly UI improvements.

1. Quit in the app menu. (you're wrong here)

That is no improvement over OS 9 "Quit in the File menu". Two reasons, There was no app menu in OS 9 and Quit is still in the menu closest to the Apple in the upper left corner. Nothing has in fact changed UI wise there. Apple just kept this one the same as in OS 9.

It's more logical for application commands to be in the application menu and for system commands to be in the system menu. Quit in the File menu was only one example (Shut Down and Sleep in the Apple menu, and Preferences in the Application menu are more), but there are lots of examples of Apple reordering things in a more logical fashion.

BTW, I fail to see what the physical order of the menu has to do with anything.

2. Application menu. (mostly correct)

I didn't know there was an application menu in OS 9. What the heck is that? Applications were in their Apps folder on the HD, with an alias to the most freqently used ones in the Apple menu. In OS 9 the Apple menu was the Dock for normal people. It was fine and people installed DragThing if they wanted more advanced options. DragThing is still better than the OS X Dock. Apple spent more effort into genie effects and QT videos playing minimized than in Dock functionality. Generally the Dock is better than nothing though and certainly better than the default in OS 9.

In OS 9 the Application menu was the menu in the upper right hand corner that let you switch between currently open apps. See, this proves my point - it was not obvious enough that it was there, and too few people knew about it.

The Application menu wasn't an app launcher, but I've already pointed out why the Apple menu wasn't so good at that anyway (new users will never know how to customize it).

3. Opening apps with app window appearing. (you're wrong here)

I don't recall many apps that didn't offer you a window when you opened them in OS 9, Photoshop immediately did, so did XPress, so did Word.. in general this was something one would find in simple single purpose apps or specialized science apps that weren't made by any UI experts. Point being this behavior of windows appearing when an app is opened is no OS X first. It was very much used in major apps in OS 9.

I was talking about apps that are already open. If you double-click an app's icon in OS 9 and that app is open with no windows, chances are, no windows will appear (except in Internet Explorer, ironically enough). In OS X they wrote the guidelines such that clicking an app's Dock icon should always result in a window.

4. Memory management (not really correct)

Memory management IS one of two fundamental improvements OS X offers over OS 9. It does simplify the UI but is a consequence from the tech change. MM adds no UI change as such but the UI has to be changed a BIT to acommodate the tech changes.

I already pointed out that the OS 9 "memory management" required users to do their own. The user had to go into the Get Info windows and allocate the proper amount of memory to each app. This is something that requires user interaction, hence it is user interface in my book.

5. The Dock (see your point 2 - makes your arguments 19 after all)

Actually not, since in #2 I was talking about the app switcher, and in #5 I was talking about its other features.

6. Force drag and drop (yes ok right you are)

You can force drag and drop in OS X, I honestly can't remember if this was possible in OS 9 but the funny thing is it doesn't really matter. Are you kidding me?! Force drag and drop. Chances are the app can't open the file if it thinks so and if it is mistaken then you could open the file from the File menu, open command. This so insignificant I can't believe you brought this up! We're talking about major UI advantages that OS X has over OS 9 and you bring THIS up? Hello?

I use this all the time. There are plenty of apps that think they can't open something even if they can - Word comes to mind, as well as FireFox if you drag an image over it. And sometimes poorly written apps don't register the file types they can open with the system.

9. Multi button mice (yeps you're right while at the same time you're wrong)

OS X does support them from the box. Why are you wrong then? Because mice aren't UI elements, they are input devices and quite frankly had OS 9 been developed a while longer this would have appeared there too. Like generic printer drivers for lasers, generic mouse drivers aren't rocket science. Simply a support feature that didn't make it into OS 9. Just wasn't a UI feature, else you'd have had a point.

If the mouse doesn't fall under the category of user interaction, I don't know what does.

And anyway, contextual menus, scrolling windows, and Exposé are definitely UI features.

12. The Apple menu (yes and no)

The Apple menu of System 7 to OS 9 was a pre-dock thing. It was a simple app launcher and relatively customizable but no newbie could be expected to manage it. If you did manage it then the Apple menu was what you made it. Mine was an organized, efficient and uncluttered launch menu for my most frequently used apps. The Apple menu could be damn fine and it could be rather useless. All depending on your knowledge and nerdyness. The Apple menu is still here, albeit not customizable, because so many people wanted it there. Apple listened, so many people must have asked. That's why I doubt it's general uselessness you imply.

The Apple menu in OS X has almost nothing to do with the Apple Menu in OS 9. It has a completely different function. The reason users clamored for it was because in the Public Beta it was centered in the middle of the menu bar, and did absolutely nothing. Fortunately, in OS X, the Apple menu actually serves a logical purpose - it's the menu for system-wide functions such as Shut Down that used to be scattered willy-nilly throughout the system (including a bunch that were only accessible from specific apps, like the Finder, in menus labeled "Special" of all things).

13. Confirming shutdowns/restarts (yes there is a UI point)

A very very small one. Shutdown/restarts worked without the Mac asking you if you're sure blah blah. I'll reiterate: We're talking about MAJOR UI changes. The addition of one warning window between you and the restart command isn't the breakthrough you make it sound like.

I'm not talking only major changes. If you want those, look at some of my other points, particularly some of the early ones in my list. I'm talking about all the nice things that make me like OS X over OS 9. That includes both major and minor UI changes. And not shutting down by accident saves me a lot of aggravation, so it goes on the list.

Plus, you gotta agree that not confirming first was a pretty dumb move by the classic Mac OS team.

14. Ejecting (yes granted you have a UI point there)

This one more significant. You probably know the story behind the reason of the eject-through-trash metaphor so I I'll spare you the telling.

Yeah, it went back to the original Mac OS, but it was still dumb and unintuitive. Really made the Mac look bad - I've heard so many Windows users bitch about this when they had to use Macs in the lab ("Sure, they say Macs are so easy to use, but to eject a disk you have to drag it to the Trash!"), that it's not even funny.

15. Minimizing windows (you're right but..)

There was no way to minimize windows in OS 9 but then you didn't really need to in the same way. The Finder would remember the size, shape and position of every window. The window was connected to a single folder. Essentially it was minimized there when the window was closed and when you'r open that folder the very same window would appear before you. Things worked a bit different in OS 9 and there would have had to be some kind of place (e.g. a dock) for the windows to get minimized to.

Huh? Speak for yourself!

a. There are more apps than just the Finder with windows that you could want to minimize

b. Regardless of how OS 9 opens a folder window, if you've got a folder nested 7 levels deep and you are going to want it back, you're not going to want to close it because then you'd have to navigate the file system again to get to it.

16. Force quitting (umm huh?)

I don't seem to remember OS 9 having protected memory or pre-empetive multi-tasking.. when an app crashed or froze you'd need to restart. End of story. The crappy menu you got when force-quitting an app reflected that fact. It didn't even work most of the time. Anyway this is a technical aspect and really has nothing to do with UI. OS 9 simply didn't have the tech to handle force quitting safely and effectively like OS X can so a really flexible and well thought out force-quit menu would have been utterly pointless.

An app didn't even have to be frozen. It could be working fine, and then force-quitting it would put the system in an unstable state. It just plain sucked, plain and simple.

17. Thumbnail size (I'm sorry I'm not sure what you're talking about)

Ugh, sorry. Freudian slip, my bad. This is what I get for writing my post as fast as possible before an audition.

What I meant to say was the scrollbar thumbs. They are supposed to grow to reflect the size of the window you're viewing, but in OS 9 this only works some of the time.

I'm surprised you didn't mention really fundamental UI changes like, multiple accounts that can be changed without logging out, pre-empetive multi-tasking, much improved use of contextual menus, improved networking UI and abilites, the Dock interactivity through changes in icons (like Mail giving you the number of unread emails you have, iCal showing today's date, Adium giving you all sorts of feedback etc), the ability to switch languages on the entire system just by changing prefs and logging in and out.. There are so many important UI changes we've seen in OS X. I think it is truly remarkable at times but I can still nevigate faster through OS 9.

I also left out Quartz and all the cool things it provides, as well as all the stuff that's coming in Tiger.

Like I said, I was only scratching the surface. It was to give an example. I said that if necessary, that this was just off the top of my head, and that I could come back with more if necessary. My post was written in haste. This fact only goes to show just how good the OS X UI is!

This post was for all the people who care to read, comprehend and think. This is not for the knee-jerks, the trolls or the zealots.

Oookay, and now back to the name-calling again. It's ironic since you didn't really seem to understand what I was talking about in points 1-4 here.

I could easily bring up 20+ points where OS X has abandoned perfectly fine and at times incredible UI elements for clearly inferior ones, but I can't be bothered. I feel I already have combined with all the other posters. Just read the thread. All points have been made. It's not my fault some people just can't understand.

If you can come up with 20+ points, why don't you just do it? I've read the thread (notice that I was present early on in it), and the only thing that sticks out is the "spatial Finder" business, which, even if you accepted it as a valid weakness in OS X (I don't), would still only constitute a single part of the UI for a single application - the file browser. Certainly not a "fundamental" feature of the UI of the whole OS.

So far, most of your replies have been on the order of either positing that "OS 9's UI is the best in the world, because I say so!" or calling me a farm animal and posting a laughing smiley if I say otherwise. So, if you want to say OS 9's UI was so much better than OS X's, you're going to have to give some reasons.

[alphasubzero949]

All I can say about Force Quit in OS 9: I can't remember a single moment where it actually worked without hanging the system.

If you wanted to use a scroll wheel mouse? Nope. You needed a driver to add to extension hell.

The "apps" in Apple Menu Items also broke consistency of the whole idea of having apps in the APPLICATIONS folder to begin with. Sure you could apps wherever the hell you wanted, but by default Apple System Profiler, Chooser, Stickies, and the like should have been ALIASES in Apple Menu Items and not where the apps actually resided.

Icon view made sense when there were few folders. Icon view doesn't make sense at all when you have to drill down several subfolders to get to where you want to be, spawning a new window with every folder. And if you screwed up? You had to start all over. Personally I wished that icon view wasn't a part of OS X; it was to shut up the X-critics who cried how un-Mac like the system was. Take a look around in OS X and ask yourself if icon view makes any sense given how many nested folders there are. In OS 9 List View was a godsend when I had to drill through nested folders. In OS X column view is mind-blowing. All I have to do is either type the first letter or use the arrow keys to move around.

OS 9 was a steaming pile of crap that all of us put up with as it was still better than Windows, but now that OS X has been refined a lot since, OS 9 continues to be...well...a steaming pile of crap.

[Detrius]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Wha? Prior to writing that post I've been called by Twilly Spree:

A kid under 20, an idiot, a whiner, dumb as bread, childish, and too dumb to learn

Obtuse, with the intelligence of a farm animal

Nerdboy

Zealot

Towards other people, he's provided the following insults:

Trollboy

Your opinion is worthless

Plus all the ones I put in the first category which apply to all the pro-OS X people as a group.

I understand this. The fact that no one got smacked for being rude in this thread for the first five pages does not excuse any of you for name calling. I put my foot down to bring the thread back on track. I'm not going to go back and reprimand every individual for every comment, and I have not taken anyone's side here. No more name calling. Period. This will be a civil discussion accepting differing opinions, or this thread will be closed. The fact that someone else called names first does not make it okay for you to call names back.

[Detrius]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
...

the tragedy is that you can't read. If you could you wouldn't have asked. Of all the people here you are the only one so obtuse that I simply don't care what you think.

...

You're trolling here. Back off from the keyboard Charles_S. This discussion went over your head from the start. You are only here to push an agenda that is both obtuse and clueless.

...

This post was for all the people who care to read, comprehend and think. This is not for the knee-jerks, the trolls or the zealots.

...

Same goes to you. No personal attacks, insults, or name calling.

Now, back to the discussion on which OS kills more kittens...

[PSST]

Hello all.

FIRST OF ALL, ENOUGH WITH THE NAME CALLING!!! PLEASE...

Seriously.

All I wanted to do was create a post to show that I had problems understanding OS X.

To quote Detrius the MOD....

That said, there are definitely areas that OS X could learn from OS 9. Instead of talking about how to add OS X's strengths to OS 9, we should be talking about how to fix OS X's weaknesses and how to add OS 9's strengths (that should be) to OS X. Instead of debating which is better, we should be talking about how to improve what we have.

If anyone had bothered to read my first post, that's all I wanted to discuss and accomplish...

HOW TO MAKE OS X BETTER AND EASIER TO UNDERSTAND, MAYBE INCORPORATE SOME OF OS 9 STRENGTHS.... ALL OF THIS CAME OUT OF MY THINKING THAT IF SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS THE IPOD SHUFFLE AND MAC MINI HAVE ORDINARY PEOPLE USING OS X, MAYBE IT GET EASIER TO UNDERSTAND AND USE.... (This was to show emphasis , I'm not shouting...)

Man, it's just sad that I can't discuss or get advice from some people on these boards without ridicule and name calling, again as I said " WE'RE ALL MAC USERS" Enough with the divisions and prejudices....

[Chuckit]

I left my cat in a room with an OS 9 computer once, came back two minutes later, and all that was left was a bloodstain on the floor. Not accusing the system of anything — I'm just sayin'.

[analogika]

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by wadesworld:
As opposed to the Windows support in OS 9? Oh wait, there was none.

Wade

Yeah... I use my X machine's Windows network support regularly. X would be much less useful if it couldn't integrate with WinXP over a network.

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by voodoo:
If it walks like a duck..

go away troll

I wouldn't dare call Ars Technica's John Siracusa or Daring Fireball's John Gruber a troll. Look on http://www.arstechnica.com and http://daringfireball.net for Findery articles.

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by - - e r i k - -:
I'm sorry. This just invalidates your comments. The desktop is not a place for storing files. You are just a disorganised person with bad habits.

Me, Charles Moore, etc. put gunk on the desktop. Apple's Mac Mini page - software page:
" Best of all, Mac OS X will never nag you about cleaning up icons on your desktop when you’re in the middle of a train of thought, six chats or a sweet groove."

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by goMac:
That is an application which emulates a UNIX terminal on Mac OS X.

Mac OS 9 will never ever come back. The interface was deplorable. I much rather prefered the Windows UI over it. Mac OS 9 was not built for new technology such as the internet, large amounts of applications, networking, or anything else modern for that matter. Rhapsody tried combining the Mac OS 9 UI with the power of X and it failed. Mac OS 9's UI scales very poorly and does not work well for a modern OS.

No, Rhapsody used what you might call the "Mac OS X 9.0" system [] : Mac OS 9 look, NeXT feel. This did not jive well with Mac users, who wanted their tried and true UI back, not a halfhearted imitation that acted like NeXT. I use Mac OS 9.2 or 9.1 on Beige G3 and iMac 333, and I must say that it works just fine. Told only to browse the net with iCab 2.9, Mozilla 1.3, and IE 5, it works great. Games and AppleWorks 6 are also nice apps for Mac OS 9.x machines, and frankly 9 may not be the best anymore, but on older computers it still has plenty of potential and I think should be treated by Apple with respect.

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by goMac:
Again, from a power user perspective OS 9 was fine. But from a newb perspective, it was nothing but trouble. Users were not used to navigating a file system to open programs. In fact most users don't even know about the file system. You install a program, there it is in the start menu. Easy for the user to deal with. OS 9 made the user have to decide where the program was going to be installed, and then the user had to hunt it down once it was installed. OS 7.5 and higher had the applications folder, but this was still alien to the user.

Yes, Mac OS 9 makes it a little more work to understand the fundamentals -- but that was the point! Take the italicized part of the quote. It's bad to not understand the filesystem. To make things easier on themselves in troubleshooting, installing legacy apps, installing bigger hard drives, backing up, and moving up the steps to become more productive and make computers a productivity enhancer, not slowdown, it's important to know the fundamentals of an OS. (Note: Mac OS X users need not know UNIX fundamentals; just GUI stuff will do.) Windows shows that Microsoft doesn't believe that - they try to cope with complete newbies instead of teaching them. To twilly spree: Nice post, but I'm 11. Why do I like Mac OS 9? Four reasons:
I have lots of old, Mac OS 6-9 Macs and dearly love them.
I believe in understanding the computers that you use.
I recognize a good interface when I see one
and I hate the fact that Windows 98/Me/2000/XP are "integrated" with IE 4-6.

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Yep obtuse. Us southerners know the attitude well. In farm animals and democrats.

"OS 9's interface was better than Windows 98's, but that's not saying a whole lot! OS X's interface is better than OS 9's ever was, hands down."

:LOL: confused: You're comparing my political views (I'm democratic, and think G.W. Bush is absolutely horrible at presidency.) to farm animals, and attacking them at the same time? WTH What The Heck? I am not obtuse.:

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by PSST:
Man, it's just sad that I can't discuss or get advice from some people on these boards without ridicule and name calling, again as I said " WE'RE ALL MAC USERS" Enough with the divisions and prejudices....

I think it's mostly a backlash against folks (not naming any names — it's not hard to figure out who they are) who are more interested in insults, whining and negativity toward Apple than in actually improving things. If you say something that reminds people of that sort of comment, they tend to tune out.

I'm not saying it's a good thing. It's just something to consider when you're writing posts.