[mAxximo]

Link.

Once upon a time the design industry was almost exclusively Mac-only. Good job OS X.

[chris v]

Originally posted by mAxximo:
Link.

Once upon a time the design industry was almost exclusively Mac-only. Good job OS X.

Shouldn't you be busy designing something?

[Chuckit]

This isn't particularly less true now than it was in the days of OS 9. Windows is cheaper and it's what a lot of people use anyway, so naturally some "designers" (if I may use the term to refer to someone with so little taste) are going to be using it.

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

Nice try, Maxximo. The design industry was moving towards Windows before OS X was ever released. OS X had nothing to do with the inevitable (but you can pretend otherwise with your chucklehead buddies at thalo.net). As for the magazine:

Q. So why the new name?
A. The magazine has grown, changed, and evolved so much over the past few years that the word �design� doesn�t really explain all that we are anymore. If you�ve read us for any length time, you know we�re also a magazine for digital photographers, with digital photography news, tips, tutorials, and camera and printer reviews in every issue. ...But we found that most photographers and video editors didn�t really know that because they don�t generally reach for a magazine that has the word �Design� in big letters on the cover

Q. So why the name �Layers�?
A. We were looking for a simple, yet bold word that had real meaning for designers, photographers, and video editors alike, and the name �Layers� does that on many levels.

Are you still going to cover Apple stuff?
A. Absolutely. Anything Apple does for the creative community will be covered here in Layers in a big, big way (hey, we�re Mac guys�what can I say)

Linky: http://www.layersmagazine.com/featur...rsmagazine.php

[ManOfSteal]

[mAxximo]

Originally posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn:
Linky: http://www.layersmagazine.com/featur...rsmagazine.php

Blah blah blah.

Of course they are saying the problem with the name of the magazine was the �Design� part and not the �Mac� part. What did you expect? It's up to each one whether to read between the lines or to buy the �we evolved so much� BS.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by mAxximo:
Once upon a time the design industry was almost exclusively Mac-only. Good job OS X.

How exactly has this changed? Read their own FAQ; they have not lost their Mac focus.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by mAxximo:
Of course they are saying the problem with the name of the magazine was the �Design� part and not the �Mac� part. What did you expect? It's up to each one whether to read between the lines or to buy the �we evolved so much� BS.

mAxximo, you do realize that this decision came after a change in management, right? MacDesign was recently bought out by the EVIL ALIEN SERPENT PEOPLE as part of their plan to spread Windows throughout the known universe, just to make you angry.

[saddino]

Originally posted by mAxximo:

It's up to each one whether to read between the lines.

Good advice.

Actually meant by mAxximo:

[JLL]

Originally posted by saddino:
Good advice.

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

Originally posted by saddino:
Good advice.

ahahahahahaha CLASSIC.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn:
ahahahahahaha CLASSIC.

No, "OS9 Pro"

[alphasubzero949]

Originally posted by saddino:
Good advice.

[Chris Grande]

Originally posted by saddino:
Good advice.

haha, made my day.

[Moose]

So, uh, what does this have to do with Mac OS X?

[analogika]

Originally posted by Moose:
So, uh, what does this have to do with Mac OS X?

****-all.

OS 8/9 was when most designers who've switched to Windows left the Mac platform.

[cybergoober]

Are things really that slow in Thaloville...?

[CaptainHaddock]

Ah, it wasn't that good a design magazine anyway. For goodness� sake, they were using the Trebuchet Windows font for their logo! No self-respecting print designer would do that.

I think Design Graphics (http://www.designgraphics.com.au/) is a better Mac-oriented design magazine. Too bad it's so hard to find in Canada.

[Superchicken]

I don't think OS X hurt the design community on the Mac, it just broadened the interest to other groups. That said, I think if you wanna blame anyone blame Adobe. They've been progressively trying to screw Apple for the last little while. Not to mention, Design schools and people who actually think Windows is a decent platform for it. And you can blame M$ for making Windows actually usable enough to do print work now.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Moose:
So, uh, what does this have to do with Mac OS X?

mAxximo hails from thalo.net, a community of OS9-advocates based principally around the following beliefs:

• Prior to OSX, Apple's core market was "professional" users, and especially the design industry.
• OS9 was ideally suited to this "pro" market.
• OSX, because it is not "OS9 with stability enhancements" but rather a substantial change in both interface and usage, is not suited to this market. The top complaints appear to be stripes in the GUI, antialiasing of fonts, and the use of Unix as a backend. These things, according to thalo.net, are not "Mac-like".
• OSX signifies a shift of Apple's focus away from its core markets to crass consumerism. The particular market they're targeting, so thalo.net alleges, is gadget-crazed teenagers and young adults. They call this group "digikids".

These are only the least-controversial of their beliefs, and I have attempted to present these in the most positive possible light. I suggest browsing their forums for yourself, however.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Millennium:
These are only the least-controversial of their beliefs, and I have attempted to present these in the most positive possible light. I suggest browsing their forums for yourself, however.

I suggest you don't. It's a complete waste of time.

[wtmcgee]

That's a total understatement.....

One of the worst sites ever.

[goMac]

I for one am glad we have Thalo.net to stand up for the whole Mac community and demand Apple steer away from create a stable, powerful, easily customizable and scalable operating system, and give us back the crashes and compatibility issues they took away in OS X.

Oh... wait.. no I'm not.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by saddino:
Good advice.

[mAxximo]

Originally posted by Millennium:
mAxximo hails from thalo.net, a community of OS9-advocates based principally around the following beliefs:

• Prior to OSX, Apple's core market was "professional" users, and especially the design industry.
• OS9 was ideally suited to this "pro" market.
• OSX, because it is not "OS9 with stability enhancements" but rather a substantial change in both interface and usage, is not suited to this market. The top complaints appear to be stripes in the GUI, antialiasing of fonts, and the use of Unix as a backend. These things, according to thalo.net, are not "Mac-like".
• OSX signifies a shift of Apple's focus away from its core markets to crass consumerism. The particular market they're targeting, so thalo.net alleges, is gadget-crazed teenagers and young adults. They call this group "digikids".

These are only the least-controversial of their beliefs, and I have attempted to present these in the most positive possible light. I suggest browsing their forums for yourself, however.

Pretty good description if only for a couple of misconceptions.

The main one would be calling us �OS 9 advocates�. I speak for everybody there when I say that all of us were eagerly awaiting for System 9's replacement. Many of us bought the public beta �Public Beta� weeks in advance and couldn't wait to replace the old and very limited OS 9 with the next (not NeXT) great creation from Apple. I personally couldn't wait to put my hands on OS X.

The problem is, it failed so miserably at pretty much *everything* I intended to do with my computer that it felt like a ton of bricks had fallen in my head. I went through all of the betas (10.0, 10.1, 10.2) hopelessly waiting for the necessary interface and usability fixes to no avail. For years after OS X came out OS 9 was still the system that was getting the job done in my industry day in, day out.

Overlooking this part of the story and calling us �OS 9 advocates� as if we were a cult or something is not very accurate. We used to be the ultimate Mac Faithful. Somewhere along the way Apple have failed us. Big time.

[analogika]

Yeah - Apple grew up.

Always a big disappointment, that one.

[goMac]

Originally posted by mAxximo:
Pretty good description if only for a couple of misconceptions.

The main one would be calling us �OS 9 advocates�. I speak for everybody there when I say that all of us were eagerly awaiting for System 9's replacement. Many of us bought the public beta �Public Beta� weeks in advance and couldn't wait to replace the old and very limited OS 9 with the next (not NeXT) great creation from Apple. I personally couldn't wait to put my hands on OS X.

The problem is, it failed so miserably at pretty much *everything* I intended to do with my computer that it felt like a ton of bricks had fallen in my head. I went through all of the betas (10.0, 10.1, 10.2) hopelessly waiting for the necessary interface and usability fixes to no avail. For years after OS X came out OS 9 was still the system that was getting the job done in my industry day in, day out.

Overlooking this part of the story and calling us �OS 9 advocates� as if we were a cult or something is not very accurate. We used to be the ultimate Mac Faithful. Somewhere along the way Apple have failed us. Big time.

Interfaces will change in every revision of any OS. They did each version of Classic Mac OS. They do on Linux. They do on Windows. Get used to it.

Here is the short of it. Mac OS X is different from Mac OS 9. They are not the same thing. If you took some time to learn Mac OS X and get used to it, then there wouldn't be a problem. In the time that you spend complaining about Mac OS X and how it isn't Mac OS 9, the rest of us have already learned how to use the Mac OS X interface, and have become used to the new features it introduces. While you refuse to embrace the new features, we have. Going back to Mac OS 9 would be like going back to the dark ages for us. Mac OS X contains many significant interface enhancements to help productivity which you don't understand because you refuse to learn them. Mac OS X is not Mac OS 9. It does not act like Mac OS 9. It works different than Mac OS 9. It works better than Mac OS 9 if you take the time to adapt to Mac OS X. You've spent four years complaining about Mac OS X, when you could have learned how to use Mac OS X in at most a year. Get over yourself.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally posted by saddino:
Good advice.

POST OF THE YEAR!!

[alphasubzero949]

Originally posted by goMac:
Interfaces will change in every revision of any OS. They did each version of Classic Mac OS. They do on Linux. They do on Windows. Get used to it.

Here is the short of it. Mac OS X is different from Mac OS 9. They are not the same thing. If you took some time to learn Mac OS X and get used to it, then there wouldn't be a problem. In the time that you spend complaining about Mac OS X and how it isn't Mac OS 9, the rest of us have already learned how to use the Mac OS X interface, and have become used to the new features it introduces. While you refuse to embrace the new features, we have. Going back to Mac OS 9 would be like going back to the dark ages for us. Mac OS X contains many significant interface enhancements to help productivity which you don't understand because you refuse to learn them. Mac OS X is not Mac OS 9. It does not act like Mac OS 9. It works different than Mac OS 9. It works better than Mac OS 9 if you take the time to adapt to Mac OS X. You've spent four years complaining about Mac OS X, when you could have learned how to use Mac OS X in at most a year. Get over yourself.

Do you really want him to start his rant sessions again?

[mAxximo]

Originally posted by goMac:
Here is the short of it. Mac OS X is different from Mac OS 9. They are not the same thing. If you took some time to learn Mac OS X and get used to it, then there wouldn't be a problem. In the time that you spend complaining about Mac OS X and how it isn't Mac OS 9, the rest of us have already learned how to use the Mac OS X interface, and have become used to the new features it introduces. While you refuse to embrace the new features, we have. Going back to Mac OS 9 would be like going back to the dark ages for us. Mac OS X contains many significant interface enhancements to help productivity which you don't understand because you refuse to learn them. Mac OS X is not Mac OS 9. It does not act like Mac OS 9. It works different than Mac OS 9. It works better than Mac OS 9 if you take the time to adapt to Mac OS X. You've spent four years complaining about Mac OS X, when you could have learned how to use Mac OS X in at most a year. Get over yourself.

[CharlesS]

thalo.net

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by mAxximo:
Pretty good description if only for a couple of misconceptions.

The main one would be calling us �OS 9 advocates�. I speak for everybody there when I say that all of us were eagerly awaiting for System 9's replacement. Many of us bought the public beta �Public Beta� weeks in advance and couldn't wait to replace the old and very limited OS 9 with the next (not NeXT) great creation from Apple. I personally couldn't wait to put my hands on OS X.

The problem is, it failed so miserably at pretty much *everything* I intended to do with my computer that it felt like a ton of bricks had fallen in my head. I went through all of the betas (10.0, 10.1, 10.2) hopelessly waiting for the necessary interface and usability fixes to no avail. For years after OS X came out OS 9 was still the system that was getting the job done in my industry day in, day out.

Overlooking this part of the story and calling us �OS 9 advocates� as if we were a cult or something is not very accurate. We used to be the ultimate Mac Faithful. Somewhere along the way Apple have failed us. Big time.

Welcome to Thalo.net Lite�.

[goMac]

Originally posted by alphasubzero949:
Do you really want him to start his rant sessions again?

You know, he's a good reason to reopen the Mac OS Classic forum. He can make all his posts there where he thinks the whole Mac world agrees with him, and the rest of us can ignore him and post about real issues...

[frankiec]

I think it's not a bad thing. It'll surely have a Mac slant (at least for awhile) and make the PC people more open to Macs. Let's wait and see.

[Don Pickett]

Originally posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn:
[B]Nice try, Maxximo. The design industry was moving towards Windows before OS X was ever released. OS X had nothing to do with the inevitable (but you can pretend otherwise with your chucklehead buddies at thalo.net).

I've been working in design/print/production/pre-press since 1989, and haven't seen any migration away from Apple in that time, nor have I seen any show/agency/periodical/publication switch from Apple to Wintel because of OS X. Some places waited for a while to make the switch from 9 to X, but this isn't unusual: it's a very conservative industry in some aspects, and it's not uncommon for a large shop to wait six months or longer after a major software release before incorporating it into their workflow. This is especially true with Adobe apps, as you never know what wonderful bugs have crept into the latest version of Illustrator. It's also common for large shops to keep multiple versions of Apps around (say, Illustrator 8, 9, 10 and CS) just in case. Until recently I had versions 9 and 10 of Illustrator in my home machine, because every once and a while people needed them.

The only place you will generally see Wintel machines is in a place which does a lot of web work, as the sites must work and render on all platforms. Even then it is not uncommon for me to see the designers doing all of their daily work on their Macs and using the Wintel machines as test beds and Counterstrike machines.

I know a few OS 9 diehards, but these are mainly older guys (and, for some reason, they're all guys) who are resistant to change. One of them is a QC guy who forces his company to provide him with a G4 running 9.2.2. The IT people have compromised and given him and old G4 next to his new machine running X. It keeps him happy and shuts him up, so it's worth it.

[frankiec]

Originally posted by Millennium:
mAxximo hails from thalo.net, a community of OS9-advocates based principally around the following beliefs:

OMFG! It's like a blast from the past! A time-warp! These people probably still crank their cars to start them!

[Moose]

Originally posted by Millennium:
mAxximo hails from thalo.net, a community of OS9-advocates based principally around the following beliefs:
[snip]
These are only the least-controversial of their beliefs, and I have attempted to present these in the most positive possible light. I suggest browsing their forums for yourself, however.

I don't want to browse their forums. I know what thalo's about. I know what mAxximo's about.

I'm just wondering why you're bashing him instead of locking or moving this mis-placed thread.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally posted by mAxximo:
Link.

Once upon a time the design industry was almost exclusively Mac-only. Good job OS X.

There is no doubt in my mind that OS X is more irritating to use as a designer who is used to OS 9. That said, it was a long time ago when Adobe started to sell more Photoshop copies on Windows than Macintosh.

Most self-educated designers probably use Windows while those who graduate from art and design college use Macs more, but not a lot more.

It is a sign of the times. The Mac is no longer the machine for designers. That's just the way it is. Apple wants the Mac to be a brand, not a niche machine.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally posted by analogika:
****-all.

OS 8/9 was when most designers who've switched to Windows left the Mac platform.

no

[analogika]

Originally posted by Weyland-Yutani:
no

Alright: Mac OS 8/9 was the time when most users who've switched to Windows left the Mac platform.

(I didn't say that most switched, I said that most OF those who switched did during that time.)

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally posted by analogika:
Yeah - Apple grew up.

Always a big disappointment, that one.

I think that Mac OS X is not the Macintosh. Mac OS X is like switching platforms.

Took me a while to see it in perspective but yeah, that's an apt description. I've had computers around me since I was a kid. Worked my way up from an Amstrad CPW, through a Commodore 64, through an Atari ST, through Macintosh (System 7 to 9) and to Mac OS X.

I have no issues switching platforms, I used to do that every once in a while through the 80s and 90s. I'm a quick adapter. From the list above I could add Windows from 3.0 to XP because I am very familiar with them (who isn't these days) and have to work and use that system occasionally even though I don't own one myself.

Point being, Mac OS X is for all intents and purposes a platform switch that was made as painless and invisible as possible by Apple. It is a UNIX derivative - it isn't even built on Mac OS 9 (nor should it but that's my point).

Going from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X is as difficult as going from Mac OS 9 to Windows XP or any other platform. It is called Macintosh, it is made by Apple, it runs OS 9 software in emulated mode.. but it isn't the Macintosh made in 1984. It is the Macintosh made in 2001. That some people resent being forced to another platform is something I understand completely, if they don't like that platform. I certainly don't like it when I'm forced to use XP. I do it because I have to but that's it. I don't have to like it.

To the Mac OS X fans: you are lucky. You like OS X. Those that don't feel like they're being forced to use Windows XP on their shiny Apple computers.

Disclaimer: I'm OS X ambivalent. I think it is a damn fine system that combines much of the best the old Macintosh had to offer while incorporating some of the most cutting edge nerdy stuff in OSs today. Nice job. That said I think it is far from perfect and if people want to dish out at it, go ahead. Credit is only due where credit is due. Pointing at the flaws of the OS is good. Them perhaps they can be fixed. I have not used OS 9 since 2002, and don't particualrly miss it. I'll be darned though if I'll let Apple slack on OS X just because a bunch of people think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

[analogika]

Originally posted by Weyland-Yutani:
I think that Mac OS X is not the Macintosh. Mac OS X is like switching platforms.

See, coming from a sixteen-year Mac background (starting on System 4.2, back when a system folder held maybe 20 objects), it seems patently obvious to me that OS 8 and 9 were not the Macintosh.

Macintosh is a design ethic, an interface concept, more than ANYTHING else. Make complicated processes so transparent and simple that "the rest of us" can use them. (As opposed to the typical Microsoft Clippy approach of "Hi, you're doing something complicated; you need help.")

That idea was almost completely lost in OS 8 and 9. All that was left was a certain interface homogenity, and it wasn't until Apple threw out all the piled-on crap that everybody had come to depend on to overcome the shortcomings of the original system design, to bridge all the modern functionality that it had simply never been designed for, that the original Mac ethic finally returned to Apple's operating systems.

Things like Spotlight and Expos�, global drag-and-drop of everything from text and graphics to file paths, single-click network services... - THAT is what Macintosh is about.

Macintosh was never about designers - they were only incidental and due to the fact that the Mac, being graphics-based, was the first machine that could do a lot of stuff simply unheard of before. They were also an instrumental core market keeping alive the company in the 90s. And so they received features like ColorSync etc., geared towards their market. Though musicians and home users were no less an instrumental core market during that time.

But to claim that designers are the ones that the interface must be geared towards is delusional and denies the whole point of what Macintosh was supposed to be.


<aside>
Though, as a musician, I find it absolutely astounding how Apple has managed to make incredibly complex architectures - system-wide MIDI and audio routing stuff - so brain-dead drag-and-drop-or-just-hook-it-up simple. This kind of stuff could be an absolute nightmare under OS 9, and it never even came close to the same kind of performance it has under OS X on the same hardware (2 milliseconds audio latency by default on a USB! interface on a 400 MHz G3 iMac is simply insane and unheard of elsewhere in the industry).
</aside>

-s*

[chris v]

Originally posted by Weyland-Yutani:
There is no doubt in my mind that OS X is more irritating to use as a designer who is used to OS 9. That said, it was a long time ago when Adobe started to sell more Photoshop copies on Windows than Macintosh.

Most self-educated designers probably use Windows while those who graduate from art and design college use Macs more, but not a lot more.

Adobe may sell more copies of Photoshop for Windows than it does for Macs, but that doesn't mean they're selling it to anyone who has a clue what to do with it. As a pre-press person, I can tell you nothing strikes fear into my heart more than a phone call that begins with "Uh, yeah... I just bought Photoshop for my Dell and..."

Anecdotal: I just last weekend helped the last OS 9 user I know upgrade his whole system to 10.3. He's happy as a clam, has thanked me repeatedly, and is excited about using his computer again for the first time in three years. It was a totally seamless migration-- all his printers "just worked," even an 8 YO HP 2100 laserjet, and he was blown away with how easy all the networking and printing prefs were to handle. He was especially shocked when the thing was online as soon as we'd created his user account. I think he foresaw half an hour setting IP addresses in preference panels, and breathed a huge sigh of relief at that.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Moose:
I don't want to browse their forums. I know what thalo's about. I know what mAxximo's about.

I'm just wondering why you're bashing him instead of locking or moving this mis-placed thread.

I'm not sure I'd call this thread misplaced. He's airing a complaint about the Mac OS, and attempting to use the renaming of a Mac design magazine to prove his point. His point is based on flawed assumptions, and his "evidence" is laughable, but technically it seems to fit here.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Weyland-Yutani:
no

Evidence? From the (admittedly scanty) evidence I've seen, most design shops who switched did so during the lean years of the middle to late 1990s, well before OSX was released or even demonstrated.

[SMacTech]

Originally posted by mAxximo:
Pretty good description if only for a couple of misconceptions.

Many of us bought the public beta �Public Beta� weeks in advance and couldn't wait to replace the old and very limited OS 9 with the next (not NeXT) great creation from Apple. I personally couldn't wait to put my hands on OS X.

OMG, he said this! Old and very limited OS 9. Who would have thought this about OS 9.

At to a cult status of thalo,net. No BROTHER, it is just another forum.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Evidence? From the (admittedly scanty) evidence I've seen, most design shops who switched did so during the lean years of the middle to late 1990s, well before OSX was released or even demonstrated.

My impression is that it is correct to say the exodus began in the OS 8/9 years, although it did continue during the OS X transition.

One of the issues with the OS X transition was not the OS itself, but the app support. It's hard to switch to OS X when neither Quark nor Photoshop exist on it.

HOWEVER, the bigger reason was performance/$. The G4 Power Macs were simply overpriced compared to the Windows competition.

In other words, the exodus has little to do with the OS design per se, but had to do with the hardware value and app availability. Indeed, most I've spoken with either much prefer OS X or else are just indifferent. Very few I've come across seem to prefer OS 9 from the usability standpoint.

[Zadian]

Originally posted by Weyland-Yutani:
I think that Mac OS X is not the Macintosh. Mac OS X is like switching platforms.

To me going to Mac OS X was like coming home. It was like switching platforms, but to me it was switching back to Macintosh.

I liked Mac OS 8 and 9, but I think System 7.6 was the last "true" Macintosh OS that had the Mac spirit.

Starting with Mac OS 8 Apple tried to compensate the short comings in the OS with bolted on things. A new (heavy and kind of depressing) theme, system sounds, spring loaded folders, button folders (system wide click starter), pop up folders, the sorting of the itmes in the menubar made no sense ...

True, the GUI was consistent, every thing looked the same, but the usage of the OS was getting more and more complicated.

Mac OS X is like the direct opposite of Mac OS 9. It's easy to use, things are self-explanatory and logically structured - but Mac OS X has an inconsistent theme.

To me usability is more important than the looks.

[lookmark]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Evidence? From the (admittedly scanty) evidence I've seen, most design shops who switched did so during the lean years of the middle to late 1990s, well before OSX was released or even demonstrated.

Graphic design shops (and designers) have been notoriously loyal to Apple -- designer here since '91 speaking -- through thick and thin. (Web and game development, though, different story.)

What was most upsetting about Apple in the mid to late 90s was just the appalling lack of direction in the company. It was just clearly a company that was flailing in all directions, without coherent pattern, and the Copland disaster proved it. I think the OS stagnation and lack of vision from Apple in this period was one the factors that drove many, many users away. It just didn't seem like Apple was bringing anything new to the table, or was even going to last, and what then was the point of dealing with all the complications and issues of choosing to be a minority? Even designers began to wonder.

As OS X goes, I think it's still tough for a number of designers to deal with both a somewhat slower GUI and so many old applications still being retrofitted and continually tweaked for a new OS. (Quark on OS X is just depressing, for example, and it's still unfortunately too many print designers' bread and butter.) It's getting better with every update, though, and the long-awaited stability, general UI clean-up, Expos�, savvy command-tab, and the Dock (just to name a few) are godsends. And make no mistake about it: OS X must be about a good third of what saved Apple.

At my current job, a team of very good designers who've been using the classic MacOS for many years were transitioned over to OS X some months ago. They'd been waiting impatiently for some time, and once a few kinks were worked out (mostly with things like Quark and Font Reserve) the adjustment was surprisingly minimal. The pleasure in having a non-crashy OS was almost palpable, and I noticed most around take to column view very quickly, like a fish in water. These designers like OS X.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by Weyland-Yutani:
I think that Mac OS X is not the Macintosh. Mac OS X is like switching platforms.

Took me a while to see it in perspective but yeah, that's an apt description. I've had computers around me since I was a kid. Worked my way up from an Amstrad CPW, through a Commodore 64, through an Atari ST, through Macintosh (System 7 to 9) and to Mac OS X.

I have no issues switching platforms, I used to do that every once in a while through the 80s and 90s. I'm a quick adapter. From the list above I could add Windows from 3.0 to XP because I am very familiar with them (who isn't these days) and have to work and use that system occasionally even though I don't own one myself.

Point being, Mac OS X is for all intents and purposes a platform switch that was made as painless and invisible as possible by Apple. It is a UNIX derivative - it isn't even built on Mac OS 9 (nor should it but that's my point).

Going from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X is as difficult as going from Mac OS 9 to Windows XP or any other platform. It is called Macintosh, it is made by Apple, it runs OS 9 software in emulated mode.. but it isn't the Macintosh made in 1984. It is the Macintosh made in 2001. That some people resent being forced to another platform is something I understand completely, if they don't like that platform. I certainly don't like it when I'm forced to use XP. I do it because I have to but that's it. I don't have to like it.

To the Mac OS X fans: you are lucky. You like OS X. Those that don't feel like they're being forced to use Windows XP on their shiny Apple computers.

Disclaimer: I'm OS X ambivalent. I think it is a damn fine system that combines much of the best the old Macintosh had to offer while incorporating some of the most cutting edge nerdy stuff in OSs today. Nice job. That said I think it is far from perfect and if people want to dish out at it, go ahead. Credit is only due where credit is due. Pointing at the flaws of the OS is good. Them perhaps they can be fixed. I have not used OS 9 since 2002, and don't particualrly miss it. I'll be darned though if I'll let Apple slack on OS X just because a bunch of people think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

The old MacOS was stretched beyond its boundaries. In the early days of computing things were easier, because there was less CPU power available, and hence the OS was not as powerful (e. g. multitasking wasn't really important in the early days, because you weren't using more than one app anyway). So a switch was necessary. You can't cram all the functionality of a full-blown OS into 20 objects in the System Folder anymore. Networking was rather the exception, there was no internet (as we know it today) when I got my first computer (Amiga 500 which already had multitasking ).

There were some things OS9 could do better, but at the expense of far less capabilities. I don't miss OS9 at all, OS X was the reason to stay with the Mac (otherwise, I would probably use Linux or FreeBSD).

You say that OS X is not the Macintosh for you. I guess we can argue about this all day, but this discussion would be akin to arguing OS X is/is not Unix. OS X is Apple's latest OS and its (philosophical) predecessors do include all versions of MacOS. So in this way, it is the Macintosh, because Apple sells it.