[baliset]

Does anyone have any inside information about how serious Apple are about acting on the feedback they are receiving on the Beta? I don't envy them for the job they have, as the sheer volume is likely to be daunting, but what if the whole process of giving Apple our opinion is a waste of our time?

If, say, 70% of feedback said that we applaud the overhaul of the underlying technology in the MacOS, but, thanks, we'd rather have an OS-9 Platinum-like interface that's more evolutionary than revolutionary, does anyone seriously suggest that Apple are going to admit they were wrong?

I'd feel greatly betrayed by Apple if, after asking us what we want the MacOS to become, ignored us and pressed ahead with a final OS-X release that's substantially the same as what we're seeing in the Beta. The overwhelming bulk of posts to this forum provide unarguable proof that there are many changes that would result in substantial improvements. Further to this, these improvements are being suggested by articulate & intelligent Apple-advocates who have put a lot of thought into their opinions.

Don't expect Apple to divulge the percentages of people for or against the radical changes made in Aqua, not anytime before hell freezes over, anyway. Some inside info on this one would be very interesting.

------------------
Nathan Zamprogno,
Manager, Baliset Solutions
[email protected]

[mac freak]

Since interface changes were minimal between DP4 and PB, don't expect too much between PB and 1.0.

I really hope Apple is listening to our feedback... I *really* don't want to have to rely on 3rd parties to get things that are integral parts of the Mac OS. Heck, I always have Classic menu, wClock, and OpenStrip running, when all the services these apps provide should really be built in. Not to mention the fact that it doesn't exactly help with Dock clutter or speed to have all these apps running all the time...

------------------
Be Happy.

[Scott_H]

I'm sure they wouldn't bother to set up a feed back page if they weren't going to read it.

Don't expect major changes. The Dock is here to stay. The Apple Menu is not coming back. Pop up folders as we know them are gone....

[mr_sonicblue]

I agree with Scott_H.

There's not a chance that the Apple menu is coming back as a native element. In fact, I hope is STAYS GONE. I hated it always

------------------
-Eric Schneider (SonicBlue)

[Zarafa]

Originally posted by mr_sonicblue:
I agree with Scott_H.


There's not a chance that the Apple menu is coming back as a native element. In fact, I hope is STAYS GONE. I hated it always

I'll second that, minus the emoticon. The Apple menu was a crude hack. I won't dispute the fact that some sort of more-comprehensive application manager is needed than the Dock (the way it currently works, at least), but the Apple menu is NOT it.

Also, I really hope Apple manages to ignore the reactionary voices that are arguing for reverting to old-style window ordering. Individual window layers (rather than grouped-by-application window layers) are so much more powerful and flexible; it really shows the whole reason the kludge of windowshading developed in the first place, because there otherwise wasn't a convenient way to have only the desired windows across multiple apps as the frontmost/"working" windows.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by baliset:
Does anyone have any inside information about how serious Apple are about acting on the feedback they are receiving on the Beta? I don't envy them for the job they have, as the sheer volume is likely to be daunting, but what if the whole process of giving Apple our opinion is a waste of our time?

According to Sal Soghoian in the forum "I'm an Apple employee...," they are very much listening. They also fairly closely follow public discussion on boards such as these.

I suspect that one reason why Public Beta seems so incomplete is that Apple wanted to start with a clean slate, implementing just the basics, and then watching feedback to see what feature set their users most desired.

Actually, I hope that's the reason, because this is the first and best chance Apple has ever had to really let the users decide - they'd be really stupid to miss it.

And I don't think Apple is stupid. At all.

-chris.

Apple will be obviously be making a huge mistake if it ignores it's feedback. If the postings on this and the other Mac forums are any indication of what Apple is hearing, a significant subset of folk want an option for an apple menu, popup windows and other 9-ish features. While there are some like Scott-H and Sonic Blue have made it abundantly clear that they never liked these features and want them gone forever, a good percentage of folk find them useful and will miss them--maybe so much so that they will not upgrade. My guess is that Apple will listen and give us options for at least some of these features and third parties will fill in the rest. That said, the more Apple leaves up to third parties, the more it will be delaying adoption of it's new OS.

I'll bet that the success of X will be directly proportional to how closely Apple listens to it's users. Resistance to change is a fact of life. If OS-X-release is as foreign as OS-X-beta Apple is guaranteeing that a huge percentage of it's users will not upgrade. Despite it's vaunted power and Unix underpinnings to many of us OS X feels like a downgrade. It feels slower and is less efficient for managing projects with large numbers of files.

My own suggestion: At first startup and selectable by user, a choice for an OS 9 theme and behavior or an Aqua theme and behavior (anyone who used DP3 knows that X can have a platinum theme and it can have an apple menu...we also noticed that platinum on X was much faster than aqua). Other 9-ish features such as pop-up folders, windowshading, and anti-aliased font control should be prefs--user settable. This seems to be the simplest easiest way to make the largest number of users happy.

My confusion is with people who demand that one way is better than the other and that the opposing way should be eliminated. These things are a matter of choice and have a lot to do with the work you are doing, your experience level, and your habits. If you use a ton of apps, the loss of pop-up finder windows is a tragedy. If you don't you probably won't miss it... If you open tons of windows while you browse you'll probably miss windowshades, if you browse in a single window you won't ... and so on. Choosing "sides" benifits nobody. Choice, options, and flexibility are the keys to success.

[gabrielf]

Originally posted by newmacity:
My own suggestion: At first startup and selectable by user, a choice for an OS 9 theme and behavior or an Aqua theme and behavior (anyone who used DP3 knows that X can have a platinum theme and it can have an apple menu...we also noticed that platinum on X was much faster than aqua). Other 9-ish features such as pop-up folders, windowshading, and anti-aliased font control should be prefs--user settable. This seems to be the simplest easiest way to make the largest number of users happy.

My confusion is with people who demand that one way is better than the other and that the opposing way should be eliminated. These things are a matter of choice and have a lot to do with the work you are doing, your experience level, and your habits. If you use a ton of apps, the loss of pop-up finder windows is a tragedy. If you don't you probably won't miss it... If you open tons of windows while you browse you'll probably miss windowshades, if you browse in a single window you won't ... and so on. Choosing "sides" benifits nobody. Choice, options, and flexibility are the keys to success.

Couldn't have said it better myself Let people choose and they will be happy, let Apple choose the default settings and everyone will be happy.

The thing I notice the most when changing between OS 9 and PB is the difference in speed and I mean interface responsiveness. If that could be fixed by turning of transparency, shadows and animations (which it can) I'm all for such an option. Just a simple action such as pulling down a menu takes some time on my G3 266 (especially if the menu is pulled down infront of an image) while in OS 9 it couldn't be faster. OS X with a faster interface would be a killer.

/Gabbe

[JLL]

Originally posted by gabrielf:
The thing I notice the most when changing between OS 9 and PB is the difference in speed and I mean interface responsiveness. If that could be fixed by turning of transparency, shadows and animations (which it can) I'm all for such an option.

That can be fixed by enabling 2D acceleration

Apple has stated that 2D acceleration is disabled in many situations in OS X.

JLL

While an extra hardware speed boost might currently be turned off, there are certain realities which will always be true.

Square windows will always draw faster than rounded ones.

Solid windows will draw faster than transparent ones.

Shadowed windows will draw slower than non-shadowed windows.

Un-antialiased text will always draw faster than anti-aliased text.

Solid window dragging will always be much slower than outline dragging.

All these great features should be options...I'm not saying I want them gone... and maybe when Apple releases a 1000mhz machine they will be fast enough for my taste. In the meantime the window candy is nice when I'm casually browsing around on a weekend, but when I am working I just want as much speed as possible.

rg

p.s. "Choice, options, flexibility" sounds like a pretty good mantra. Hmm... time to write a long letter to Apple feedback.

[This message has been edited by themexican (edited 10-16-2000).]

[Millennium]

My guess is, Apple is listening. It makes no sense for them not to do so. Still, I do wish they'd set up something like the Mozilla Project's Bugzilla for feedback. Whatever you might have to say about the Mozilla browser itself, there's no denying that some great development tools have come out of it, and I think Bugzilla provides the right balance of need for feedback versus the load it puts on the programmers. If you want to track a bug's progress, you simply subscribe to it and get e-mail updates whenever something changes (it also provides a forum for developers to discuss bugs).

There'd have to be a few adjustments, of course (since only a few components of OSX are actually Open-Source). But I think on the whole it would work quite well.

[Scott_H]

You have to figure that Apple gets feedback on EVERYTHING and it all contradict one another. 1000 people say they want the AppleMenu 1000 say they are glad it's gone. What's Apple to do?

No matter what Apple does they will displease a lot of people.

[gabrielf]

Originally posted by Scott_H:
You have to figure that Apple gets feedback on EVERYTHING and it all contradict one another. 1000 people say they want the AppleMenu 1000 say they are glad it's gone. What's Apple to do?

Maybe they should leave it up to the user as a option?

They should make an "Appearence" pane in "System Preferences" with stuff like Apple menu on/off, themes/schemes, more Aqua colors, shadows, transparency, solid window dragging, animations, backgroundcolor, windowshade/minimizing etc.

I don't think newbies would be confused Apple could just include a help file which explains everything.

/Gabbe

[Scott_H]

Maybe they should leave it up to the user as a option?

Then people would go on and on about it being too confusing blah blah blah....

[eep!]

I know there is a lot of discussion over the new interface, but look what happend when windows changed it's interface from program manager to explorer, the old interface was there as an option but no-one used it, if Apple spend extra resources implementing a platinum interface (with all the options described above) in OSX and the majority of users (new and old) used the aqua scheme (which I have to admit is the most likley outcome) then the extra resources will have been wasted.

[Geobunny]

In your experience, how many new/novice users actually mess around with the Control Panels in OS 9? In my experience, next to none.

Apple should incorporate the "reported missing" elements, but as an option only, and they should all be OFF by default. If people just can't get by without them, they re-enable them, but we should NOT have to put up with shareware support to cope with the lack of typically standard interface elements.

Novice users who don't mess around in "System Preferences" (a name scary to most non-power-users anyway) will probably never see or hear of the option anyway, so won't be confused by it.

It's a simple way to keep everyone happy.

You have to figure that Apple gets feedback on EVERYTHING and it all contradict one another. 1000 people say they want the AppleMenu 1000 say they are glad it's gone. What's Apple to do?

If the feedback is 50/50 then the issue is obviously a matter of choice and the user should have a choice to set it the way he wants.

I'll bet much of the feedback is not 50/50. I work at an advertising agency full of Mac-heads and we have a bunch of machines running X. I've talked to everyone running it and I hear the same gripes over and over again. I imagine on many issues apple's feedback will be 80/20. The person advocating a choice between an OS 9 theme and an X theme has the most sensible solution to some of these problems.

No matter what Apple does they will displease a lot of people.

Not if they give people choices. Just look at some of the stuff introduced in OS 8-9. You don't hear people griping about smart scrolling because they gave us an option to shut it off (and to control it via applescript). You don't hear about people complaining about System Sound effects because we can turn them off (I love them, but many hate them). The same should be true for OS X's more radical features.

It's funny that someone said the Apple menu is a hack.... it is a hack under Mac OS, but under X the current lack of an Apple menu is a hack. The Apple menu was part of the original design and when you create a Cocoa or Carbon program you still create them with an Apple menu. Right now Aqua is laboriously moving the Quit menu out of the file menu by hand. So in this case it really is silly that Apple doesn't allow us an option at least to see the menus as they were designed (we might even get a speed bump out of it).

[iPond317]

If Apple is listening, then why the hell haven't they offerred any updates to the Beta yet? It needs ATI drivers bad! Along with several bug fixes to the Desktop/Finder. Also, this speed issue has got to stop... my iMac Rev. B crawls to a halt under X with 192MB RAM. And you would think since they included a Software Update program in the Utilities folder, they would give minor updates... not 12MB downloads like OS 9.0.4 was. If they find a way to fix a bug and keep it fixed then post the frickin' thing on the web page Apple!!!!

------------------
Think different.
--------------------
"I'm so afraid, the way I feel. Days when the rain and the sun are gone. Black as night. Agony's torn at my heart too long. So afraid, slip and I fall and I die..." - Lindsey Buckingham

[fmalloy]

I think Apple is listening. However, I think they are only hearing what they want to hear ("Aqua is great") and are fixing bugs. Any complaints about the new interface are tossed in the round file, or more appropriately: redirected to /dev/null.

It doesn't matter if the overwhelming majority wants the old interface back, it's not happening - Steve Jobs will see to that.

Aqua seems to be the heavy price to pay for pre-emptive multitasking and protected memory. Pity.

The good news is that I believe there will be plenty of shareware/commercial utilities to hide the stupid dock, put back the Apple menu and Application menu, put items on the desktop where they belong, restore tabbed windows, the window look-and-feel, windowshade, turn off blurry anti-aliasing and useless animations, etc.

Too many years of experience and a proven user-interface will see to it that developers will create a market to put back our interface where we want it. Kaleidoscope can make an OS9 Mac look like OSX - I'm sure that there will be software to reverse it.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by fmalloy:
I think Apple is listening. However, I think they are only hearing what they want to hear ("Aqua is great") and are fixing bugs. Any complaints about the new interface are tossed in the round file, or more appropriately: redirected to /dev/null.

I don't think so. I do believe that Aqua is here to stay, but I'm sure they're working like crazy to sift through the feedback and see what the most-requested features are.

It doesn't matter if the overwhelming majority wants the old interface back, it's not happening - Steve Jobs will see to that.

I doubt that "the overwhelming majority" wants Platinum back. The functionality, maybe - and this is where the feedback figures in - but not the drab grey look. Especially not since "Pro" Mode.


Aqua seems to be the heavy price to pay for pre-emptive multitasking and protected memory. Pity.
[...polemic stuff deleted...]
Kaleidoscope can make an OS9 Mac look like OSX - I'm sure that there will be software to reverse it.

Actually, OS X will likely make it possible to simply remap the GI in a much more elegant and less processor-intensive and crash-prone way than Kaleidoscope.

I think Aqua will prove to be a rather small price to pay, since the *nix interfacing is so malleable that a) most concerns will likely be addressed by Apple come Final Release, and b) hacks will abound.

You could probably easily make it look exactly like Windows 3.1!

I'm sure you'd like it - no unnecessary eye-candy or animations there...

-chris.

APPLE or any of its employees do not accept or consider unsolicited ideas, including ideas for new advertising campaigns, new promotions, new or improved products or technologies,product enhancements, processes, materials, marketing plans or new product names. Please do not send any original creative artwork, suggestions or other works. The sole purpose of this policy is to avoid potential misunderstandings or disputes when APPLE's products or marketing strategies might seem similar to ideas submitted to APPLE. So, please do not send your unsolicited ideas to Apple or anyone at Apple. If, despite our request that you not send us your Ideas, you still send them, then regardless of what your letter says, the following terms shall apply to your Idea submission.

TERMS OF IDEA SUBMISSION
You agree that: (1) your ideas will automatically become the property of APPLE, without compensation to you, and (2) APPLE can use the ideas for any purpose and in any way, even give them to others.

PRODUCT FEEDBACK
APPLE does, however, welcome your feedback regarding many areas of Apple's existing business. If you want to send us your feedback, and we hope you do, we simply request that you send it to us using the form found at http://www.apple.com/hotnews/feedback.html, or you can choose from the many other listed areas for your feedback. Please provide only specific feedback on Apple's existing products or marketing strategies (do not include any ideas that Apple's policy will not permit it to accept or consider). It's just one more way that APPLE can learn how to best satisfy your needs.

[Millennium]

You have to figure that Apple gets feedback on EVERYTHING and it all contradict one another. 1000 people say they want the AppleMenu 1000 say they are glad it's gone. What's Apple to do?

With a fifty-fifty distribution, there's only one thing to do: leave it out.

Don't forget, Apple's writing an operating system. The single most important thing is getting a powerful, stable, extensible core out. The rest is good, but must take a back seat if the cire is not ready.

The fact is, OSX doesn't need (and certainly should not itself be) The App That Does Everything. Because it's so extensible, authors have already written shareware replacements for the Apple Menu (ClassicMenu) and Pop-Up Folders (Drop Drawers). Some users, myself included, may chafe at the shareware fees for these sorts of things, but I doubt it will be long before an Open-Source replacement for the Apple Menu is released, and popup folders can't be that far behind. That's just how the Unix community works, and by adopting them Apple is better ensuring a rich library of quality free stuff. By doing this, Apple builds with Aqua not an interface, but the foundation for an interface far more customizable, scalable, and powerful than anything MacOS could ever have done on the older architecture.

Apple can only afford to put in features that will benefit the overwhelming majority of users, some 75% or more, at least for a first release. And let's face it: the number of users who truly use the Apple Menu for everything is probably more like 20%. Because OSX is so extensible, almost every OS9 feature can be duplicated by third-party add-ons. As I've said, we have already seen this for the Apple Menu and popup folders, and I've considered looking into replicating spring-loaded folders myself. We've got menubar clocks, vertical Docks, and all manner of other stuff. To include all of these things in the OS is nothing more than bloat; I very much doubt any single MacOS user has ever used more than ten percent of the interface features OS9 provides. Better, then, to make things modular and extensible, so not only does your interface work the way you want it too, but it does so without the cruft other users wanted but you do not.

[baliset]

I appreciate that the core of OS-X is being designed as the "ultimate" base platform for extensible customisation. I've started another thread called "Will we be able to OS-9-ify OS-X?" based on this question. My concern relates to the new way in which fairly fundamental things are presented under the new GUI. Getting the hard drive and the trash back onto the desktop will probably be fairly trivial, but what about restoring Window titles with the name and path of the location of that folder? What about ensuring the "Desktop" is a place, not an application, which sits at the "top" of the file tree (not as an arcane directory in /Users/name/Library/Desktop!) What about moving system "extentions" and "control panels" (or whatever their conceptual replacements are) in and out of the system as easily as I could by using the extensions manager (or by simply swapping the necessary files out of the Control Panels or Extensions folder)? What about dumping the dock entirely?

Look: yes, the extensibility Apple are building into the OS is a commendable thing, but using 3rd party hacks will always, forever more, put at odds the "Apple" way of things and the "way most current Apple OS users would choose". I forsee all kinds of problems when Apple's documentation or Tech help info starts "First, go to the Dock and..." when we're out here in the real world going "Dock? That's the first thing I turned off when I got this new Mac. I now use <insert random 3rd party replacement>..." Apple: "Well, I'm sorry, but we don't support you if you're using third party system extensions". Don't laugh, it is precisely what Apple are doing right now!

It would be like if Apple released OS-9 with the System but gave us something like "Font/DA mover" as the file manager instead of the Finder. We'd all go out and get a third party "Finder" because it did the best job. Then, Apple could conveniently claim that, because they only support their software, we're high and dry.

------------------
Nathan Zamprogno,
Manager, Baliset Solutions
[email protected]

[Sal]

Noting that I'm not responding in an official capacity, I'd like to personally address some of the frustration and anger directed at Apple regarding the "generally accepted wisdom" that:

1) no one is listening
2) it's senseless to post to Apple's response site
3) complaints and concerns should have been addressed by now
4) etc.

To begin with, I can assure you that all the responses to the Feedback Forum are individually read, logged, sorted, and stored. Common complaints and issues are noted, and although the volume of responses is very large, excellent suggestions and ideas have filtered through and are discussed. We do listen.

Secondly, Mac OS X Beta is developmental software released to enlighten our customers and to elict feedback. While it is a tribute to the design, stability, and functionality of this release that many desire to use it all the time, Mac OS X BETA is not intended to be used as your primary OS. As has been pointed out repeatedly, there's still much we're working on for the release.

Lastly, we do care. I'm proud to work with the dedicated individuals who put in long hours and go the "extra mile" everyday with the goal of delivering the "best computer" there is. To me, this is not a trite belief, but a daily experience.

Remember that software development in an evolutionary process that unfolds over time. Having worked on about a half-dozen OS releases, I've learned to look at the big picture. Mac OS X BETA is a work in progress and is an exciting step in the next generation of computing.

[Spheric Harlot]

Thank you, Sal.

Glad to see you here.

-chris.

[Millennium]

Getting the hard drive and the trash back onto the desktop will probably be fairly trivial, but what about restoring Window titles with the name and path of the location of that folder?

Not too tough, but there is a question for Column view: which column do you use to determine a window's name?

What about ensuring the "Desktop" is a place, not an application, which sits at the "top" of the file tree (not as an arcane directory in /Users/name/Library/Desktop!)

Not possible. The Desktop was never a "place" at the "top" of the file tree, even in OS9. That was nothing more than a carefully-crafted illusion. Further, consider that this is now a multiple-user system. If each user has their own Desktop, where do you store them such that they may be kept separate? There is no other place to do it (the only possible alternative might be a /Users/username/.Desktop, but that's not much better).

What about moving system "extentions" and "control panels" (or whatever their conceptual replacements are) in and out of the system as easily as I could by using the extensions manager (or by simply swapping the necessary files out of the Control Panels or Extensions folder)?

There is an app for Linux called tksysv. It is not particularly intuitive, but it provides the same general idea (it does other things too, but those are outside the scope of your question). Instead of moving stuff in and out of folders, though, it simply starts them and stops them. The point is, a similar app would be quite possible for OSX.

What about dumping the dock entirely?

Doable, though there's no GUI for it yet.

Look: yes, the extensibility Apple are building into the OS is a commendable thing, but using 3rd party hacks will always, forever more, put at odds the "Apple" way of things and the "way most current Apple OS users would choose".

Precisely. Which is why Apple is not including them. Aqua, as I see it, is not a GUI in and of itself. Rather, it is the foundation on which a user can take these third-party "hacks" and build their own interface. The only barrier to this, at the moment, is that not many of these hacks have been written. But look at those things that have been done. You have an Apple Menu. You have menubar clocks. You have tabbed windows. I've considered re-doing Spring-Loaded Folders. And the best part is, unlike the extensions and CP's in OS9, these new "hacks" will not affect system stability; you can mix and match basically at will.

I forsee all kinds of problems when Apple's documentation or Tech help info starts "First, go to the Dock and..." when we're out here in the real world going "Dock? That's the first thing I turned off when I got this new Mac. I now use <insert random 3rd party replacement>..." Apple: "Well, I'm sorry, but we don't support you if you're using third party system extensions". Don't laugh, it is precisely what Apple are doing right now!

It's unreasonable to expect them to do otherwise; they cannot possibly support every single piece of software out there. Nor is it reasonable to expect them to make OSX into The App That Does Everything.

It would be like if Apple released OS-9 with the System but gave us something like "Font/DA mover" as the file manager instead of the Finder.

That's such an exaggeration that it borders on offensive. If you don't like their stuff, you don't have to use it, but if you don't then you'll have to go to the people that actually made the software for that.

We'd all go out and get a third party "Finder" because it did the best job. Then, Apple could conveniently claim that, because they only support their software, we're high and dry.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: it's unreasonable to expect Apple to support software that they did not make. However, because of the way OSX is made, this should not be a problem. The various parts of the system can be changed in and out; you could, for example, replace all of the higher-level stuff with X11 if you really wanted to (though you would lose Carbon and Cocoa, which depend on Quartz, by doing so). Apple has made it difficult enough to do this, however, that you can't do it unless you really know what you are doing, and this is good because as I said they cannot support third-party stuff. The only people who can do that are the people that actualy make the software in question.

[Milio]

[quote]
The Desktop was never a "place" at the "top" of the file tree, even in OS9. That was nothing more than a carefully-crafted illusion.
[quote]

And that's exactly why people like the Mac. In fact, that is one of the fundamental precepts of design that makes the Mac a Mac. The design and presentation is crafted to hide that complexity and make the computer easier to use. Now OS X is losing some of that.

Some people see the multi-user capability as enough of a benefit to accept the trade. Other people may find that it adds significantly to the complexity of the system, and they may choose an easier OS instead.

There is an app for Linux called tksysv. It is not particularly intuitive, but it provides the same general idea (it does other things too, but those are outside the scope of your question). Instead of moving stuff in and out of folders, though, it simply starts them and stops them. The point is, a similar app would be quite possible for OSX.

The direct manipulation of files (or the illusion of this) this is what makes the modern Mac what it is. What you are describing is something like Font/DA Mover. A tool to manipulate the files. But we've moved past that. The wonderful thing about the Mac OS now is that you can just grab that file and move it. You seem to be suggesting taking a serious step backwards.

It's unreasonable to expect them to do otherwise; they cannot possibly support every single piece of software out there. Nor is it reasonable to expect them to make OSX into The App That Does Everything.

What you seem to be missing is that Apple has taken out functionality and replaced it with the Dock. Now OS X is The App That Does Less.

Should Apple support 3rd party add-ons? Of course not. But most of those add-ons wouldn't be needed if Apple didn't remove the functionality in the first place.

It would be like if Apple released OS-9 with the System but gave us something like "Font/DA mover" as the file manager instead of the Finder.

That's such an exaggeration that it borders on offensive. If you don't like their stuff, you don't have to use it, but if you don't then you'll have to go to the people that actually made the software for that.

So be offended. It's an exaggerated example, but it's not completely untrue. If the Finder is now less functional and requires tools like tksysv, then there is a problem.

We'd all go out and get a third party "Finder" because it did the best job. Then, Apple could conveniently claim that, because they only support their software, we're high and dry.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: it's unreasonable to expect Apple to support software that they did not make.

The point is, that if more than a few people even need to consider replacing the standard interface with something else, then Apple has provided us with a broken OS.

[baliset]

Thank Zeus for Sal!

If my comments have been unduly harsh, keep in mind that Apple is unique in generating loyalty of truly Star Trek-ian proportions. We see OS-9 as having technical limitations, certainly, but also as being the mature endpoint of over 16 years of development. Apples evolutionary approach has been its most valuable legacy. I still sit down in front of System 6 and appreciate just how inspired the original concepts were, just how right things were designed. I used AppleWorks on an Apple II in primary school. I use AppleWorks today on my FireWire PowerBook. Continuity counts for a lot.

So, if OS-X seems to ignore the best aspects of the legacy upon which it is founded, and does not draw upon the familiarity it's millions of users have ingrained in them, then we, as the Apple Faithful, will point it out. It isn't just about technology, it's about the immeasurable but invaluable know-how we all have because we know how things work. We're open to change, and we're open to better ways of doing things, but we will surely rebel at change for mere change's sake, and we will spurn ny system that treats us all the same (stupid) and removes the power of choice. Apple would do well to remember it's 1984 commercial.

So, to hear from the inside (acknowledged: not in an "official" capacity) that the feedback is doing its work and that we will see some substantive changes between the Beta and the Final Release is heartening. Maybe if Apple gave us some indication of the breadth of "great ideas" they are receiving, or what the most requested features are? The Public Beta should be more than a one way street in terms of feedback. The most gets done when you're in a conversation with your clients and users. Apple can tread bold new ground by making the OS-X development process a truly interactive one. The flow of creativity and trust will generate two huge benefits: 1. "Ownership" of the Mac OS for a whole new generation of users. 2. The best OS in the world. Do the sums. Think Different.

------------------
Nathan Zamprogno,
Manager, Baliset Solutions
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by baliset (edited 10-18-2000).]

[ShortcutToMoncton]

submit that, dude.

greg

------------------
Though the day's been
really long
I still feel I'm close to
nowhere....

Everyone wants an option for everything. What you don't realize is, everyone option you put in there, means one new feature will be left out due to time and manpower constraints. Do you want an option for an apple menu or do you want the location manager? I think Apple will work on getting all the stuff in there first and then if there is enough time include a couple options. Also remember the code is probably not yet optimized and accelerated. I believe OS X final will feel much faster.

[Millennium]

What you are describing is something like Font/DA Mover. A tool to manipulate the files. But we've moved past that. The wonderful thing about the Mac OS now is that you can just grab that file and move it. You seem to be suggesting taking a serious step backwards.

Font/DA mover never manipulated files. It was a bad hack to move raw resources, rather like ResEdit did. Even now, this is all suitcases are in OS9.
No, turning services on and off is better than the bad hack of moving files around. Among other things, the machine doesn't require a reboot. Also, it's far more consistent with the Mac OS interface. Consider the Extensions Manager: nothing in the program gives any hint that you're moving files (unless the moving causes conflicts). It's set up to feel like turning things on and off.

What you seem to be missing is that Apple has taken out functionality and replaced it with the Dock. Now OS X is The App That Does Less.

Apple has been trimming deadweight from the Finder, yes. Things that relatively few people used as designed (spring-loaded folders), or that were inconsistent with the interface (the Apple Menu), or that were implemented much better by numerous third parties (popup folders), or that were being replaced by new constructs (the Control Strip and the Launcher). They've gotten the interface back to basics, this time getting it right: extensible enough that you can take it in any direction you want, without the bloat and instability that comes with tacking on feature after feature.

The point is, that if more than a few people even need to consider replacing the standard interface with something else, then Apple has provided us with a broken OS.

No, it means they did it right. It means you can customize the OS if you really feel the need.

A lot of people seem to be confusing the frontend and the OS. If you want to get technical, the OS is actually Darwin; Aqua/Quartz/whatever is an exceedingly well-crafted (is still a bit rough around the edges) frontend to it. The BSD subsystem is another frontend; you get two of them with PB if you want them. Others can, and have already been, made: check the XFree port if you want an example of that.

Apple's biggest mistake with MacOS was their tight coupling of the GUI to it. Note that tightly coupling a GUI is different from tightly integrating the GUI; the latter can occur without the former (as we see in OSX and its predecessor, OSXServer). By making things more modular, they're increasing stability and customizability, encouraging a rich base of developers to create add-ons, and generally making an OS that's better for everyone. Basic users will get just that: basic functionality. As you get more accustomed to things, you can find more features, in the form of add-ons that only get in the way of basic users, and are thus unnecessary for the basic OS.

Am I saying OSX has no problems? Certainly not; I've submitted some twenty suggestions to Apple myself, and will probably submit more as time goes by and I can examine things even more carefully. But to turn OSX into The App That Does Everything, a philosophy that was severely bloating and destabilizing OS9, is not the answer.

[iPond317]

Okay, is Apple planning on releasing any updates to the beta, or is the version that is out now it until the final?

------------------
Think different.
--------------------
"I'm so afraid, the way I feel. Days when the rain and the sun are gone. Black as night. Agony's torn at my heart too long. So afraid, slip and I fall and I die..." - Lindsey Buckingham

[Boodlums]

Originally posted by Millennium:

Getting the hard drive and the trash back onto the desktop will probably be fairly trivial, but what about restoring Window titles with the name and path of the location of that folder?

Not too tough, but there is a question for Column view: which column do you use to determine a window's name?

The parent of the first (i.e., leftmost column) selected item.

-Walter

[McDriver]

Hi
After reading miles of posts in this and other forums I am beginnig to wonder if the ones complainig about features lacking in X really has tried out the new GUI . A lot of the things people want is already there. All you have to do is to take the time to Think different and use the inside of your brain a little more. Take the apple menu for example. It is only a bunch of aliases collected in one corner of your screen. Now how hard is it to make a hanfull of aliases in a folder called apple menu and put in the dock. It's the same thing only a different corner. The same goes for almost everything else except for popup folders, or is it? Put them in the dock. As for turning of the dock after a few minutes use is a no brainer solution. Take the time to experiment with this BETA and maybe you will find out how it works. How did we all learn the old macos anyway? By trying and thinking. Start doing that with X also.
Magnus

[McDriver]

Hi
After reading miles of posts in this and other forums I am beginnig to wonder if the ones complainig about features lacking in X really has tried out the new GUI . A lot of the things people want is already there. All you have to do is to take the time to Think different and use the inside of your brain a little more. Take the apple menu for example. It is only a bunch of aliases collected in one corner of your screen. Now how hard is it to make a hanfull of aliases in a folder called apple menu and put in the dock. It's the same thing only a different corner. The same goes for almost everything else except for popup folders, or is it? Put them in the dock. As for turning of the dock after a few minutes use is a no brainer solution. Take the time to experiment with this BETA and maybe you will find out how it works. How did we all learn the old macos anyway? By trying and thinking. Start doing that with X also.
Magnus

I can't believe how reactionary a lot of these comments are. Maybe Apple should include an option in the MacOS X installer for you people - click on it and it installs System 7 instead (I mean, that was the pinicle of the MacOS wasn't it ??)

Sal, thanks for setting us straight. While we appreciate that you're comments are not to be taken as an offical line, it's heartening that Apple is taking note of the concerns expressed.

To all you other whingers - have any of you actually used MacOS X ? Despite what Sal says about it not being intended as a primary OS at this stage, I've found that with a few very minor exceptions it meets my personal needs, and offers me a vast array of new options too. At last I can work with 'real' Perl programs (not a dodgy MacOS port), PHP, Apache, MySQL etc, etc, but I can still boot up Photoshop or GoLive when I need to. And it still hasn't crashed.

Not once have I thought "I really miss the Apple menu".

So, just lighten up will ya ! Sheesh !

[Milio]

Originally posted by Gee4orce:
To all you other whingers - have any of you actually used MacOS X ? Despite what Sal says about it not being intended as a primary OS at this stage, I've found that with a few very minor exceptions it meets my personal needs, and offers me a vast array of new options too.

Used it and abused it. And I have come to the conclusion that if it stays anything like it is, I won't be using it. I have also come to learn that Mac zealots can't hold a candle to *nix zealots. I give up.

I think that Apple really does think it's doing the right thing with OS X. But from what I have seen, it sure isn't the right thing for me.

So go ahead, be happy with OS X. I may not join you though.

[MacGorilla]

One thing to remember that Aqua is a Window Manager (look in the process manager and see for yourself) and all of Unix/Linux's Window Managers can be customized. There are rduminetary APIs in Mac OS X already for this. I wouldn't worry about the Aqua look, you will be able to change it. As for the Apple Menu, I don't miss it. I hated it.

------------------
Chris Turkel
CEO, Mac Gorilla, Ltd. http://www.macgorilla.com

[mac freak]

I have also come to learn that Mac zealots can't hold a candle to *nix zealots. I give up.

Well, duh...
We live in an OS that consists of "System" and "Finder" with nothing else needed...



------------------
Be Happy.

One problem about feedback that I've been thinking about:

It makes sense that Apple would only seriously consider popular and recurring responses, right? If you're going to change something, change the one people want changed most. The only thing is, these are Mac users in a UNIX world and I have the feeling a huge amount of people will be asking for things like "get rid of users" and "let me edit the root directory" and "bring back the system folder". I think that Apple's response to the overwhelming number of requests to bring things back to the way they were will be passed over, and those that aren't will be mere grains of sand in the beach of silly and amateur requests that go against fundamental UNIX ideals.

Furthermore, think of the list of things Apple has to do before OSX is truly marketable. When you're working to make an OS that bridges three development environments and spans two generations, programming in an option that lets you turn off the logo in the menu bar probally isn't very high on your list.

In other words, don't expect any big or small changes. Expect the bare minimum of logical improvements.

[mmurray]

Originally posted by McDriver:
Hi
After reading miles of posts in this and other forums I am beginnig to wonder if the ones complainig about features lacking in X really has tried out the new GUI . A lot of the things people want is already there. All you have to do is to take the time to Think different and use the inside of your brain a little more. Take the apple menu for example. It is only a bunch of aliases collected in one corner of your screen. Now how hard is it to make a hanfull of aliases in a folder called apple menu and put in the dock. It's the same thing only a different corner. The same goes for almost everything else except for popup folders, or is it? Put them in the dock. As for turning of the dock after a few minutes use is a no brainer solution. Take the time to experiment with this BETA and maybe you will find out how it works. How did we all learn the old macos anyway? By trying and thinking. Start doing that with X also.
Magnus

Sure a lot of people haven't looked very far for solutions - eg you can make login automatic. But your example doesn't really recreate the Apple menu. The Apple menu is hierarchical - thats IMHO is what is so good about it - and the folder of aliases you describe isn't.

As I use FinderPop all the time which is an add on to 9.0.4 I can't really complain about the basic MacOS X not suiting me - neither does the `basic' MacOS 9. I'm just waiting for DragThing on X or FinderPop on X.

Michael

To all the reactionary "Apple is ruining the OS, bring back Platinum" types, I can only say this: It is time to move on. Let me elaborate.

The "Classic" Mac OS is a superb piece of software. Nobody is debating that. But it is an OS whose time has come. Simply adding protected memory and preemptive multitasking to an OS-9 style OS is NOT going to do the trick. Protected memory, preemptive multitasking, et al are NOT big advantages for an OS, they are simple *requirements* of a modern OS. You are not making *any* progress tacking these new features onto an otherwise 16 year old design.

A multi-user operating system is essentially another requirement for a modern OS, in these networked and Internet-centric days. Now, when I first got started using the OS X PB, I downloaded every shareware app and hack I could to make OS X mimic OS 9. I used good 'ole icon views in folders, used Classic Menu for the Apple menu and app switcher, used the desktop trash and hard drives hack, ran wClock, hid the Dock, etc. But the Classic rules don't work in an OS like this. Now, the only "classic" interface app I run is wClock. The three-column finder view is both much faster and efficient for a multi-user OS; click "Home" and go to your user folder. Compare this to the OS 9 way in OS X. Open your hard drive icon. Open your Users folder. Open your Username folder. You decide -- one click vs. three double-clicks. All in a view that lets you easily see the relationship between your folders and lets you head off in totally different directions on your HD with a single click. Quick, easy, efficient, elegant. Nothing could be more Mac. It's not worse, it's different. But it seems plenty Mac-like to me, just not "Classic" Mac-like.

Aqua is too slow: IT'S A BETA. Apple folks have said, *numerous* times, that 2D accelleration in OS X doesn't work yet for most Aqua effects. Plus, being a beta, the whole OS isn't fully optimized yet. THAT is why window resizing is sluggish. THAT is why the Genie effect can miss frames so easily. THAT is why menu responsiveness can be sluggish. It's not a problem of Aqua, it's a problem of being a beta. It IS possible to have your eye candy and eat it too, once Apple optimizes and accellerates the GUI it won't even seem the same. Video accelleration can make a huge difference in the feel of a GUI.

This whole situation is remarkably similar to what happened in my other interest when the new kid on the block came out. When the New Beetle came out, enthusiasts of old Beetles had the same reaction all the Classic diehards are having now -- "It's not a real Beetle, the engine's in the front, it's front wheel drive, it's watercooled, etc. etc." The thing is, VW could not have sold a rear-engine, aircooled New Beetle in today's marketplace. Even aircooled diehard Porsche has gotten rid of its aircooled engine in the 911 for a watercooled variant. But let me tell you, I currently own an aircooled VW (a Karmann Ghia, true, but it's a Bug underneath) and a New Beetle, and the New Beetle is a true Beetle, it's just different. It evokes the same emotions in its enthusiasts, it fills many of the same needs, it has the style, but it's fully modern. It's different, but it's thoroughly a Bug.

OS X is the New Beetle, and Classic Mac OS is the aircooled Bug. OS 9 still runs fine, but it's long in the tooth, and it's time for a change. Apple wouldn't be able to stick new features onto the old, dated look of OS 9 in the marketplace I think. OS X is different through and through, but IMHO still Maclike. It's got a new look, new guts, and features OS 9 can't even dream of, but if you think about it, I think it still signifies the important Mac ideals. Column view is quick, easy, and smartly designed. Mac traditions. Aqua is gorgeous to look at, and when fully optimized will most likely be much more enjoyable to use. Just like Macs. The Dock needs work, but it's a great idea, and with our help and feedback Apple can make it work. The App menu makes perfect sense. Everything about OS X, to me, screams "Newbies, come and enjoy, you'll be at home here," and at the same time "Power users, dig in, there's lots of cool new stuff to play with, you just have to learn!" It's truly shaping up to be the OS for Everybody, easy for newbies but *insanely* powerful for power users thanks to its Unix roots.

Apple will NOT be dropping Aqua, the Dock, or bring back the Apple menu at this stage. ***Accept it.*** Get used to OS X and Aqua, and send your feedback to Apple. Once you accept the new ways, you can join those of us already there and we will all work and send our feedback to Apple and, I truly believe, will build the finest OS in the world.

[McDriver]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mmurray:
The Apple menu is hierarchical - thats IMHO is what is so good about it - and the folder of aliases you describe isn't.

Sorry but if the finder window that pops up in my suggestion is turned to column view, it's hiearchial. BTW there is a 3d party hack out for apple menu already called classic menu. I have tried it a bit but it turns out I really don't need it. Besides it shows when the screensaver hits in, you can see said menu in the top corners of your screen. My point was that we all should try and find solutions to our personal styles by trial and error and not just flatly turn aqua down with a sneer just because you are to lazy to readjust. There is, and will come, software that will allow you to tailor the UI to your own liking. And don't say that macos9 isn't in need of third party enhancers, I use a few myself.
Magnus