The classic graphical user interface was well suited to an early Macintosh with 128kB of RAM that ran a few applications and about 50 files, “but it doesn’t scale”, says usability design specialist Don Norman. With those few tasks the GUI was a boon. “You didn’t have to remember anything, because you could see everything. Now making everything visible doesn’t work. The space gets too crowded.” As a logical consequence of this, the all-purpose computer should become obsolete, he says.
GUI now too complex — Longhorn designer
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
>The world wants compatibility now, he says. It wants to
>communicate, and this means one brand dominating.
Wich brand could that be?
What a load of BS. So much untrue and biased statements in such a small article. Pffff..MS marketing all the way.
I notice that Apple should get out of the general computer market. Nothing about MS though. Personally I think I’d prefer MS getting out of the general computer market. After all they are the provider that doesn’t want to interoperate, they only want to intra-operate.
Is it me, or did the article have nothing to do with the complexity of GUIs?
“Apple should get out of general-purpose computing, he says, and concentrate on the multimedia production and entertainment market, where its strengths are.”
Well, being a Microsoft employee now I see where he would want that. Linux is not the biggest threat to MS on the desktop, it’s Apple.
If Apple ever ported to x86, the folks at MS would be ending their golf games early to get stuff fixed and try to add value to the windows product.
Unfortunately for people who have no idea how to effectivly organise their data on their hard drive are going to have difficulty finding the files that they want. This article simply seems like an attempt to justify MS controlling the entire IT sector.
I’d love to see Apple ported to x86.
I love the x86 architecture (see: Me being a cheap bastard), yet I really enjoy using the Mac OS. I’d definitly ditch Windows at that point
Hear, hear. This had nothing to do with complexity of GUIs. It did not say how Longhorn is going to fix these problems, nor did it say why Microsoft’s Windows, which uses these same basic GUI design principle was any different from Apple’s operating system. I’m sorry to see this sort of material published at ALL. Those who don’t try to support their assertions shouldn’t express them. Preferences, and feelings aside, of course.
No you didn’t. This is a ad for MS posing as a article.
“The classic graphical user interface was well suited to an early Macintosh with 128kB of RAM”
The “classic GUI” was not at all well suited to early an mac with 128K – as a matter of fact the original mac designers had many sleepless nights because of the Apple management inisisting on the 128K instead of 256 as demanded by the ingeeners. As a result many under the hood shurtcust and hacks were employed.
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Mea_Cu…
“That didn’t matter much at first, because with 128K of RAM, we barely had enough memory to run a single application at a time.”
He cites the functional aspects, to the “pleasant experience” of unwrapping the machine from the box, and “the illuminated logo that tells everyone you’re an Apple user and gives you the feel of belonging to a community”.
Haha, I guess this guy is fascinated by shiny bubble wrap. He sounds like a newborn staring at a mobile.
Of course the industry doesn’t want all-purpose devices anymore. They want that the customer buys a new (expensive) device for every single task. That way they not only sell more devices but they also have much more control.
Don Norman is a genius when you consider his writings, such as the seminal “The Design of Everyday Things”. Which is why this article really shocked me. It must be badly written and completely pointless to make Don sound that stupid. And his “Apple should get out of the general computer biz” quote sounds strange — perhaps taken out of context or needlessly shortened from a longer quote.
I just can’t believe Don Norman is that doofus-y. Must be due to the terrible article. ?!?!?!?!
Jared
I have also read “The Design of Everyday Things” and am a bit startled by that article. It reads to me like someone just took a few of his quotes out of context and arranged them in a more polemic fashion. I just wonder whether it’s the editors from that news page or someone from MS’ public relations department (of course they would like to have a UI guru and former Apple empolyee say “Apple should get out of general-purpose computing”).
MacOSX is probably the best general purpose OS around and it will be even more true with 10.4.
MS has a problem with Linux that they see as a threat on the desktop but they have a bit of time : Linux is excellent but can’t yet afford the best UI designers and bully hardware vendors for drivers and software shops for native versions of their star packages.
MS should use its position (monopoly I think it’s called) to market MacOSX on x86 paying a nominal license to Apple, thus protecting their market share and surely neutralising Linux on the desktop.
Apple will never dare going it alone because of the number of drivers they’d have to get developed, the reaction of developpers and from fear MS would terminate Office for OSX.
But if MS initiates it, none of these problems stands in the way. It won’t earn MS to much cash but would suppress the Linux risk on their main cash cow.
Luckily for Linux (that I consider as the other OS of the future with MacOSX), that will never happen.
I think that he has been at Microsoft to long and imbued too much of there propriatory data ideas. Comunication meaning you can only have one brand? Surely the point of the IBM clones that made Microsoft the company that it is today was that data and programs from one could be transfered from one to another seemlessly without any need to worry about what brand it was manufactured under.
The space gets too crowded.” As a logical consequence of this, the all-purpose computer should become obsolete, he says.
A system is only complex if you make it so.
The fact that the desktop computer is all-purpose is what makes it so great. A machine that lets me create music, art, novels etc. entertains me with games, movies, music etc. lets me communicate with the world, and gives me access to a lot of information almost instantly. All in one single machine that doesn’t cost more than a dishwasher.
How much would you have to spend to get all that with single-purpose devices? And what do you have to gain? I can’t really think of anything.
what a pile of bollocks
“The world wants compatibility now, he says. It wants to communicate, and this means one brand dominating.”
No, this only means companies should promote and respect standards… tell your client, please.
<< The fact that the desktop computer is all-purpose is what makes it so great. […] All in one single machine that doesn’t cost more than a dishwasher. How much would you have to spend to get all that with single-purpose devices? And what do you have to gain? I can’t really think of anything. >>
true, them more you think about it the more moronic this article seems
A little summary:
1. We now live in the age of the Internet
2. Therefore everyone should use MS products to ensure compatibility
3. Apple focussing on the consumer market hinders point 2. and should therefore only focus on its “creative” niche.
Indeed, nothing on complexity.
Let’s not forget that Sun recently said “compatability is the most important thing (about java)”.
Obviously microsoft have a lot of respect for that “compatability”
man if macOSX was for x86 I wouldn’t hesitate to switch to it and use only Windows for the stuff that runs best on it such as Windows only games (don’t mention virtualPC please). until it does, Microsoft will dominate the desktop because nobody wants to throw away their pc
why he doesn’t work at Apple anymore.
It amazes me that there are these so-called experts that have been there, done that got all the answers. If they are so knowledgeable of Apple, why are they not employed by them anymore. These prophets of Apple doom have been around for ages, ‘predicting’ Apple’s downfall and ‘advising’ what Apple should be doing. Who want’s to rule this chaotic world anyway! The fact is we would all like to drive the best car, but if you can’t afford the best well… better yourself so you can instead of moaning and moping. This is not a perfect world and never will be, so make peace with yourselves and let Apples be apples and pip’s be pip’s. Let individuals decide between style and stale!
I found it amusing because of the GUIs I use, OS X’s is the one that makes it the easiest on the user. Everything on the Mac can be controlled by easy to use utilities in the System Preferences.
Both Windows and Linux with KDE or Gnome strive for the same kind of ease of use, and both fall short. But to be fair, the GUIs of today, all of them for the most part, do their jobs fairly well. WinXP’s GUI is easy enough to use, and I don’t need to have everything displayed to me at one time. Once my system is up and running to my liking, I don’t need to see all the settings and apps. I run two or three at a time, and seeing those three is enough.
Gnome, in my opinion, is the GUI to beat in Linux, but I don’t want to get into a flame war.
Hector
I wish there were 10 more “Apples” in the world. Can you imagine if the only realistic choice was to buy a Daewoo brand television?
If Daewoo controlled 90% of the market, didn’t respect international broadcast standards, and then strongarmed the cable companies and networks to support their inferior proprietary protocols, then we’d all be buying Daewoos and wishing we could use Sonys or even Bang & Olufsen.
So the author got it dead wrong, IMO. Apple and anyone else who has a good idea for a standards compliant OS should step right up and provide alternatives!
If Apple was not already working on an X86 or X86-64 version of its MACOSX OS it got so pissed of by the guy that the did start porting it.
Talk about compatebility….MAc OSX and Linux both do smb,nfs,appletalk,make, bash,X, etc. Its the most logic thing to do if you want competability Apple mixed with Linux/BSD.
Windows just got obsolute.
Beware MS. Apple and Linux are becoming friends. What is better than Mac and the desktop and Linux/BSD on the server? Ok. Linux/BSD on the desktop and on the server
Good times are coming.
A usability expert concludes the world is “unusable,” and therefore, its days are numbered.
Wow. After reading this article, I was amazed. I read the whole thing, then read the title again. “Complexity of Gui”. Then I read the whole article once more and the title again. I felt somewhat more stupid after reading the article and a little voice inside me told me to flush KDE and FreeBSD.
porting OS X to x86 would be the death of Apple. currently they have boxes and laptops that you can buy, plugin and just work. you go get software that has an X on the box and you can expect it to work.
now my mom goes into the store and wants to buy iLife and she has to decide whether to get the x86 version or the PPC version? that’s probably too simple since apple would provide both binaries on a single disc, but what about going to version tracker to download Joe’s Freeware App? You think Joe cares about supporting two architectures?
you could say what about the server market? by why would apple want to ship Opterons in its XServes when its marketting campaign is based on the G5 beating the pants off any other consumer processor on the market?
it doesn’t sound like apple’s interested in a homebrew computer scene, and i think that’s a good call on their part. by using commodity parts (RAM, hard drives, cd/dvd-roms, etc) they allow people to upgrade their own systems (heck if you go on ebay you can build your own). and that’s not a bad thing. i don’t think having them license clones again would be a bad idea, but ultimately, i think it would just take sales away from them like it did last time.
to those who love cheap hardware: save your pennies for a few months and go get a mac. if you hate OS X you can throw linux on it (if that’s your preference). if the whole experience is terrible for you, the resale value of a mac is almost equal to your original purchase price almost a year after your purchase, so all you’re out is a little time, and i’m sure you’d hate wasting your time messing with a new computer.
sorry to go OT, but i’m tired of hearing the OS X on x86 moans.
As a logical consequence of this, the all-purpose computer should become obsolete, he says.
For at least every 2 years since I started using computers (back in 1993), I have heard some expert or other proclaiming that the general-purpose computer is soon to be dead. What is it that the elites hate about the computer? I think they hate the idea that people in general should be able to make their own decisions instead of being that wonderful statistical business unit call the ‘consumer’. I am so tired of this constant assumption that the consumer is a mindless idiot.
In fact, they have been predicting the death of the personal computer for almost as long as the PC existed, and yet the PC becomes more and more ubiquitous all the time. I think these predictions are more wishful thinking than anything else. The personal PC makes the user an expert, which is something the official experts don’t want.
This means two or more incompatible ways of doing things is counterproductive.
Apple should get out of general-purpose computing, he says…
wait, since Apple, Linux, Unix-like OSes, and pretty much everyone but MS impliment standard protocols that are compatible, doesn’t that make MS the one doing incompatible things and aren’t they the ones being counterproductive?
i think his assertion is right: two or more incompatible ways of doing things is counterpoductive. his conclusion is dead wrong though: MS should start supporting open standards. (like that would ever happen).
janeiro you’re forgetting all the $ we’ve spent on the pc, all the Windows software and then we have to spend more $ to buy the same apps in the mac version.
A better option would be to have some card with an x86 cpu that you can stick in a mac so I can run all my Windows apps and share all the other hardware such as the fancy video card instead of buying 2 of everything.
<<now my mom goes into the store and wants to buy iLife and she has to decide whether to get the x86 version or the PPC version? that’s probably too simple since apple would provide both binaries on a single disc, but what about going to version tracker to download Joe’s Freeware App? You think Joe cares about supporting two architectures?>>
I don’t take OSX on x86 seriously because I think it’ll never happen, even if I’d like it.
That being said, the argument against supporting 2 or more architectures is void. In the Windows world, you have to support at least XP and 2000 and Win98/Me if you are commercially serious. It’s not a problem because there are developper’s tools for that.
Plenty of software is already available for a multiple platforms (Opera, Limewire, skype,MSOffice,Itunes, RealPlayer, Unreal Tournament, need I say more ?) , supporting windows, MacOs, Linux and more. There are various proven technical solutions, depending of the problem you want to resolve. They must be cheap/easy to implement because a lot of this kind of software is cheap or free.
With your kind of logic, everybody gets the same car/hifi/haircut because it’s simpler for the provider. And stop describing grandmothers as idiots. They’ve chosen washing machines, vacuum cleaner, drive cars and brought up your parents so reading MacOs or Windows is within their grasp godammit. A lot of them read finer prints to make sure their grandchildren don’t eat things they are allergic to.
The bottom line is that I don’t care about the problems that it poses to manufacturers, I care about not being forced into anything.
This article says “give all this billions to MS and the rest of the software development community but please, don’t make their life complicate by asking for choice”. I suppose you agree then…
apple should just become a media company because MICROSOFT won’t interoprorate? yeah that makes sense. how about the government of both the US and EU forcing the twice convicted monopolistic company to split up and force them to adhere to open standards for interoperation so we don’t have this one-OS-to-rule-them-all problem anymore? i remember when there was competition in the OS world. it was amazing how fast microsoft copied apple. ya know why? because there was still a lot of competition back then. now they don’t have to do a thing. look at IE. totally UNCHANGED in 3 years even though firefox slaughters ie in features/security.
I believe in the end, it comes down to 2 things: Compatibility and market share. I think it would be difficult for Apple to push it’s OS to current x86 owners- we’d have to rebuy software (Office), learn a new OS (for those Windows users…OSX is really just a gui to BSD), and other software (both commercial and in-house) (not to mention drivers!) would become quite an issue, I would think.
Don’t get me wrong, I would love to have a copy of OSX running on my P4 or my 1700+, but it just isn’t (at present) a viable option for Apple. If nothing else….I feel like Apple would lose a SIGNIFICANT amount of revenue in loss of its hardware sales. Apple hardware sux (price-wise) when compared to the more open, x86 architecture.
In the end what am I saying? It would be costly both to consumers and to Apple. Unfortunately. And Apple knows this.(btw, I’m pretty sure Apple already has OSX running on x86 machines….but there is a reason why they’ve not released it…)
——
Re: The Article:
How lame! I concur, this article was more piecemeal and about why Apple has screwed up than about GUI design. The article seemed like it kinda … dropped off … at the end, as well.
About GUI Design:
To the comment bashing the default XP interface – LOL! However, you must understand that to a first-time pc user (think…elderly), they LOVE the prettiness of an OS. If it looks pretty, with nice large buttons and (somewhat) easy to understand controls, they can get into it. (Hence the “Start” button)
I feel that as users progress in their abilities and their demands of the machine increase, so should the usability of the interface. This isn’t to say I think the OS should be adaptive….that would get annoying. But I believe that users should have maximum, flexible control of their GUI (as time progresses), to help increase productivity. (I’m not getting into that argument again…don’t go there).
A well-designed OS GUI will provide simple controls for the beginner, yet be flexible enough to provide extensibility for the power-user. I’ve found that most GUI’s thus far seem to cater to one of the extremes, rather than adequately addressing all users. And thus was born the need for skinning…..
I think I’m done with my rant now. maybe.
i think the guy have a point. the gui of today makes any job a task of datamineing.
personaly i have been thinking about 2 systems. one is the console like personal system where you load a office cd/dvd to get a spreadsheet, wordprosessor, mail client and web client. only files stored on hd is non-binary files so that viruses have less to grab a hold of. want to play a game? remove the office disc, insert game disk and start playing. again only save files are stored on hd. interface for any stuff would be usb or firewire. want to burn something? plug in the burnder in a port, put the burn software disc in the main drive and your on. the only thing available from the gui when no disc is loaded is a tivo like system where you can record tv and radio (be it net or air) and access music and video files stored on the hd of the unit.
the second system is a extention of the above. its mainly a fileserver that you put somewhere and forget about. it will be available for any unit you either plug into ethernet or via wifi. by useing this system you can stream music and video to the diffrent units plugged into the network. want to extend storage space? the server should come prebuildt with the ability for hotswapable hds. want more storage space then insert a new hd thats allready put into a standard cradle. when the first servers slots are used you may be able to buy a new one that you can hook to the old one as a slave or master unit. this could go on forever.
the user should never need to go inside any of the units for upgrade reasons. hds should be hotswapable but the rest should be fixed from series to series. this way one have more stable hardware stats to work with and security is tighter as apps are never run from a rw enviroment. you got a virus? reset the unit and its gone.
if you want tighter security you could hook a security unit into the server system, this unit will enable you to set up a login enviroment and control who have access to the server files. this way a user that fires up the office disc and wants to open a file on the server would get a login prompt (biometics and smartcards should be supported via plugin units in the usb ports) and this would be stored in memory until the client unit is reset.
one could still in theory do the general purpouse pc with this stuff tho. take one knoppix like disc and your on…
A very creditable threat is mounting from the *nix/BSD camp; Linux and OSX- and MS fanboys get scared.
This article was inspired from fear- and they should be
just to let you know, there is nothing closed about the Apple hardware.
I like the Idea of a console work PC. just like Console Games sqweese more out of the hardware in the console, ISVs will have to squeeze more out of the console. I think MS might one day offer a home productivity kit for the Xbox that has a bootable CD with WinCE or something and Pocket work and Pocket excel and some print drivers.
A very creditable threat is mounting from the *nix/BSD camp; Linux and OSX- and MS fanboys get scared.
This article was inspired from fear- and they should be
What on earth are you talking about? GNU/Linux and OS X are members firmly lodged in the *Nix camp. So why would either community be afraid of *Nix/BSD? GNU/Linux is a cousin and OS X is a BSD descendant.
I am curious to what that threat might be. The Open Sourcing of Solaris? Or the “fact”that FreeBSD 5.x is beginning to look a lot like your average Open Source distro. I haven’t seen a threatening resurgence of either proprietary UNIX or a killing uprise from the BSD’s.
It’s OK to like BSD, but don’t (ab)use your ability to post to make BSD users look silly.
“I like the Idea of a console work PC. just like Console Games sqweese more out of the hardware in the console, ISVs will have to squeeze more out of the console. I think MS might one day offer a home productivity kit for the Xbox that has a bootable CD with WinCE or something and Pocket work and Pocket excel and some print drivers.”
The trouble here is what the guys seems to be proposing. Your computer being one big search engine, probably avoiding duplicate documents by finding your other document using the text in the one you just wrote. Popping up windows to tell you that the system’s constant search as found a duplicate document (hopefully not deleting it while it sat their in a tmp folder waiting to be burnt to cd).
The hardware needed to do this, without it being slow, is quite hefty. He basically wants your computer to be your mother. It constantly picks up your toys for you and when you need one you just ask for it.
This is more productive for people who are utterly disorganized (Joe schmo home user). But it’s counter-productive for intelligent people who can remember where they saved the file they made yesterday.
They’re also going to have to include several workarounds for this, so you can shut it off. Gamers are not going to want to give up half their framerate to keep a database of their files….
Nice search utilities are good. Hopefully they do something smart like build it into the task bar, and make sure it’s quick and not a system performance killer.
I agree with many that if Apple does ever decide to port their software to x86 then Microsoft will have another competitor instead of just Linux.
As for game play requiring a Windows OS is untrue. Transgaming has put a lot of R & D into making Win32 games that require DirectX work on Linux. Their recent release of Cedega 4.0 (formally WineX) plays several popular titles. They even recently started to offer porting software for OSX.
http://www.transgaming.com/
People rip their CDs to mp3 for a reason. It’s easier to find a track even without proper meta data than find a CD in even a modest collection.
I seriously can’t see as a progress to be obliged to swap media whenever I want to swap tasks. I often have a few tasks loaded and I like to Alt-tab them.
The solution is bigger screens ! It’s easier on my 19” at work than on my 15″ at home ! When they are cheaper, I’ll get 2×19″ for home and multiple applications won’t be a problem anymore.
Contrarily to the author, I think people like to have something to do more than one thing (a car that can drive in town and highway, an amplifier that can be used for music,TV and DVDs, a computer to write email, play games and keep track of finances) and they also like to have multiple things that can do the same thing according to the context: a laptop for the lounge and a desktop for the study, mountain bike for the week end, a foldable bike for commuting, a mobile phone and a landline phone, a hifi and a portable music player.
All these perspectives will live concurrently regardsless of what this or that designer/vendor says.
I thinkj the article spent about two lines on Longhorn and was almost totally focused on how Apple screwed themselves years ago.
Totally misleading title.
is not for general computing but just to give the home user a productivity suite for hardware they already have. that is why I said MS would probably do this with a CD or DVD with WinCE and Pocket Office.
An interesting observation is that the commercial sector and other, in the near future will possible move more toward multimedia integration, including Operating Systems. To semi-quote a MS longgone… I mean longhorn lieutenant, “We want to enhance how people interface with the PC” . “We want to give the user a pleasant and 3D graphical environment to work in”. If I was at Apple, I wouldn’t disclose to many Tiger ideas. Why do they at MS like so much to bite the hand that feeds them?
my point was about windows gaming on a mac. on a pc i don’t even need to worry about wine (thanks for the link though) because I have Windows anyway. i can switch from linux to windows at any time-no problem. But the Mac way means owning 2 computers, 2 monitors, 2 bank accounts, etc
Were would that leave linux/bsd? The best distro would be OSX. I tell you what – my KDE/Gnome desktop doesn’t look like THAT! Plus, all my favorite apps are now ported to OSX already. Maybe the fact that linux/bsd is still free would be enough to keep it alive…
Now about this article – I think the open source desktop needs serious help. I do have great respect for the developers of the desktops but some of these flamers talk like the linux desktop will put MS out of business soon – not likely. Usability in the desktops are still catching up to XP [still a ways to go until you never have to use command-line] but in case you didn’t notice, MS isn’t competing with it – they’re jumping the board with their next generation desktop technology. Longhorn is very promising. Maybe they’ve learned a little from Apple which is scary. What you don’t want if you’re competition is MS new security initiatives and competitiveness mixed with Apple creativity. God bless us all if this is where we are moving.
that lst one was a joke right?
anyway, if you want one monitor, then just get a KVM switch.
“Apple should get out of general-purpose computing, he says, and concentrate on the multimedia production and entertainment market, where its strengths are.”
You mean they(macs)shouldn’t be used for supercomputers anymore, like Virgina Tech, and the Army and writing reports/books?
I thought this article was on Longhorn!
You should come here. Some people here at work have 4 of them. I have a number of bank accounts (as do most people who have money), a number of people have 2 cars some have a few houses….
It sounds like the article was a free association on the part of the writer. We start off talking about how GUI’s have become more complicated as the size and number of tasks we accomplish with computers has increased. Then it moves into a session of Apple bashing. I didn’t realize that MS GUI’s were so much less complicated than OSX GUI’s…yeah right.
What is his solution to the myriad of files that he has to find to create his e-mail attachment? A unified database. Then all you have to do is guess the right search string to find your file in a homogeneous list of millions of files. Sounds wonderful to me. I liked the BFS, now new Apple FS, way over treating everything the same. A database is not a panacea for every storage problem.
The last line is perhaps the most obtuse thing he could have said though. “The world wants compatibility now, he says. It wants to communicate, and this means one brand dominating,” he states. Of course that would be his brand. So that would be Apple if he was working for Apple still, HP if he was still working for HP but now he means MS.
Hey if MS wants to make Longhorn a cross platform open specification without patent and trademark booby traps, I’m sure all of us would love to at least try and play along. Just because it can load in IE on the next version of Windows doesn’t make it a universal standard. God help us if Microsoft’s concept of pervasive properietary protocols actually reachs fruition.
Basically, if Apple wanted, they could have made an closed architeture even with x86. Do you know why they didn’t?
Because PPC is better. Period.
You can emule a x86 under PPC with no problem.
I think you all have felt PearPC’s speed…
[HELL SCENE INTO MY MIND: Imagine you at a store buyin’ a Pegasos and Windows XP for PPC…ill]
Well, with the advent of Java, .NET and Mono (and several others) there isn’t much problem of “platform”.
In real world, for pda development, the norm is to support several cpu and pda with only one “code”.
There are several tecnical solutions to solve the problem of packaging, setup and running the correct “binary” in the correct “platform”.
To get some things straight:
1. It’s compatibility. not compatability. Is that really so difficult? I know many of you are using *NIX, so get KDE 3.2 with spell checking in web forms.
2. Why does everybody want Mac OS X on x86? The x86 architecture (basically all CISC architectures) is legacy crap. It wastes lots of energy and generates lots of heat.
If PPC chips were manufactured in the same amounts as x86 hardware is today, they would most probably be cheaper because the architecture is simpler (and BETTER).
I can only wish MICROS~1 and Intel / AMD would only play a minor role in computing.
3. Apple has already ported Mac OS X to x86. Ask some Apple employees about this, they will give you this “I neither say yes nor no” reaction.
It’s just that they will never release those builds. They are jsut to ensure the system stays portable, because only good code is portable, especially for an OS.
4. It’s Mac OS X, not MacOS X or MacOSX or OSX or whatever. Note that Mac OS X is also not called “Apple” (someone said “i hope they will port apple to x86”. Of course in all-lowercase and without any full stops, for better readability.)
5. Don’t mention how much MICROS~1 sucks. We all know this, and those who are not willing to realize will likely regard this as an opportunity to start a flamewar.
The only problem with OS X is high cost due to hardware incompatiblity…only PPC… Porting OS X to i86 would expose the weak hardware support and (at best) usher in an era of uncomfortable flux for Apple. I think they have resigned themselves (to a certain degree…maybe
) to simply being Mac OS X, running on their machines and doing a damn good job of it. But, I won’t be buying a MAc soon, because I get much more bang for my buck with a PC running Linux.
Plus I ***GASP*** actually LIKE Linux!
…change in this industry is very much like rolling a snowball down a hill… starts out very slow and small, gets bigger and faster all of a sudden, halfway down the hill and then flies to the bottom, getting bigger all of the time, then it stops dead, this giant ball of snow.
Microsoft had its roll down the hill. Now Linux and hopefully Mac OS X are going to get their roll down the hill.
For the people out there who say “they will never catch Microsoft, no one will” you must not appreciate or understand the dynamicism of a free market. :/ I am not saying Microsoft will lie down and die anytime soon, but over time, well, we’ll see…
For examples, look at the automobile industry… start with FORD in the early 1900’s and now look around. Ford dominated the [American] market at first, smaller companies stepped in… and the industry sort of leveled off over time.
Mike
Compare the price of an iBook with some IBM or Sony Vaio Notebook. Compare the price of an eMac with a desktop computer with adequate abilities. And now claim again that Macs are so expensive! It’s BS.
I use all three OSs, although OS X a little less because I dont’ have a mac, yet. I go between Gentoo Linux and Slackware Linux and love them both. I’ve had a few issues with the distro’s but nothing a little online surfing couldn’t solve.
Windows, I don’t know, it’s ok, I guess. I use Windows at work, and usually when I go to fix someone else’s machine they’re running Windows as well. I just hate how Windows is the only OS out there to some people, but in some cases that’s perfectly fine.
I use OS X when I go to the library and I absolutely love it, that’s all I really have to say about it. I love OpenTalk, aka Rendezvous, and the new video confrencing that was shown at the Tiger conference with iChatAV.
I think I’ve argued this point more times than I care to.
I shall be brief, and to the point:
1. iBook = bad model to use in the argument. Comparable laptops usually have larger screens, and have better (read:faster) processors.
2. eMacs are better models for the debate, but I can still build an x86 machine that will easily outclass the eMac for less or the same. I challenge you to look at the ArsTechnica budget box for an example (link: http://arstechnica.com/guide/system/budget.html ) (please note that the upgrade options on budget box are in much more abundance). The total cost the ars box, with modem, and Linux, is about what? $775? Add the additional RAM and upgraded hard drive to the eMac, and your total is $924. I shall rest my point.
3. I *do* believe that performance/dollar amount, Apple is behind. I wish this weren’t the case, but sadly it is. In the very end of it all, I’ve purchased a 2.6 ghz, 512mb RAM Dell for $499, (free shipping), which was less than the eMac, and because of that, I’m stuck with an x86 box for the next…3 years? (At least until my wife says we can afford an Apple Macintosh….)
Re other comments:
Hehe…cartridge computing… I wonder if we’ll have to blow on the disks to get them to work…or use rubbing alchohol….(really doing well when you can get them to “whistle” when you blow on them)…
I’ve noticed weird trends towards Terminal-Mainframe computing….when we had such a large movement AWAY from said T-M systems towards desktops…. lol. It’s kinda funny. We’ll never figure out what we really like, I guess.
Plenty of software is already available for a multiple platforms (Opera, Limewire, skype,MSOffice,Itunes, RealPlayer, Unreal Tournament, need I say more ?) , supporting windows, MacOs, Linux and more. There are various proven technical solutions, depending of the problem you want to resolve. They must be cheap/easy to implement because a lot of this kind of software is cheap or free.
With your kind of logic, everybody gets the same car/hifi/haircut because it’s simpler for the provider. And stop describing grandmothers as idiots. They’ve chosen washing machines, vacuum cleaner, drive cars and brought up your parents so reading MacOs or Windows is within their grasp godammit. A lot of them read finer prints to make sure their grandchildren don’t eat things they are allergic to.
no, i’m not saying everyone should get the same car/hifi/haircut because its easy for the provider. i’m saying users of a given platform should run compatible hardware because its easy on the users. and yes, i’m saying typically users don’t know what they’re doing when they buy computer stuff, and don’t know what any of the specs on the box mean. they know they have windows or the have a mac. that’s about it. i’ve banged my head too many times when one of my friends or relatives buys something and then is disappointed because it doesn’t work with their setup, whether it be hardware, software, or whatever. and software’s a bad bet because once its open, typically stores won’t let you return it.
i’m not saying reading Mac or Windows. that’s easy enough. i’m saying looking for Mac for x86 or Mac for PPC. Wondering why there are thousands of programs for PPC and none for their $250 x86 Mac they just bought.
and if you haven’t ported software to various platforms don’t say it must be easy. all the software you mentioned is backed by huge companies that have the time and resources to get things working in multiple platforms. it takes microsoft a year or longer to get features from Windows Office to Mac Office. but that wasn’t even my argument so i don’t know why i’m disputing it. i was saying joe consumer shouldn’t have to buy software for a certain platform and a certain architecture. for us tech saavy that’s fine, but not for joe average. he should just have to look for the big X that means OS X or the windows logo that means windows. not search infinitely small text to see what architecture the software supports.
also apple alienated a lot of their customer base with the switch to OS X. doing that again by adding or switching architectures would be nothing but bad for them.
someone pointed out earlier that pocket pc (and perhaps palm) development includes multiple architectures. somethign like this would have worked for apple IF they would have gone this route when releasing OS X. give developers tools for releasing fat binaries for a different platform.
the problem still remains: THE x86 ARCHITECTURE SUCKS!
instead of pushing for OS X on x86 you should be looking at ways of reducing the cost of OS X compatible PPC mobos and parts. Apple tried that once before and they lost money on it. maybe now’s the time that they could make money licensing out to third parties. instead of dragging around a tired old architecture, isn’t it time to move to newer better designed processors? Intel and AMD have moved to RISC processors beneath CISC interpretters, so why not just cut out the middle man and go plain RISC? make it microsofts problem that they need to move to PPC, not apple’s problem that they need to move to x86.
/end rant mode.
if you love OS X for the nerdy reasons, Darwin’s available for on the x86 and PPC architectures for free.
if you love OS X for the GUI reasons, save your dough, and buy an e/i/Mac/Book. i don’t think you’ll be disappointed. and like i said before, the resale price is only a fraction lower then your purchase price so if you feel like its the worse thing you’ve ever done you can sell it on eBay and recoup your losses.
you can mod your daewoo to look like a BMW, but you’d still have a crappy 4 cylinder engine. you could have OS X on x86 (google: apple rhapsody), but you’d still have a crappy architecture.
@onejdc
terminals and servers are in fact better for a networked office then desktops as it allows the sysadmin more control
over the enviroment. and the boxes i suggested was not realy terminals.
as for your comment about cartridge computeing. cartridges would in fact be faster as you didnt have to load the software into memory and execute the binary. instead your just presented with a menu and get on with the job. oh, and i didnt talk about cartridges (alltho i talked about hotswapable hds as a storage medium, most useful for the media server so that you didnt have to shut it down to expand its storage space). what i talked about was cd and dvd media, just like what the xbox and ps2 uses (in fact the ps2 with a linux kit is quite similar to what im talking about).
@dukeinlondon
and you would be able to have multiple spreadsheets, text documents, webpages and so on up at the same time as long as your useing the office disc. but do you leave them in the background when you go off to play a game?
allso, your examples for items that do multiple things is flawed. cars do one thing, they drive. if its a contry rode or a highway it dont care as it interacts the same. the same with a amplifier, it takes the in signal, amplifys it and spits it back out, it dont care where the signal comes from.
allso, with the amount of ram this system would have you could in theory be able to load the office disc and then remove it afterwards as all the apps had been loaded into memory. one could even allow for suspend to disk type moves so that you load the apps from cd/dvd media, and then if you want to load something else the memory content could be put onto the internal hd and a new app loaded into memory from disc media. in fact this is what windows does when you load a game and it starts requesting more mem then is available at the moment, it swaps out memory content that is at the moment not in use.
but these boxes are not supposed to be a full replacement for a pc, for that they are to limited. but for your avarage joe use it would be perfect as it would not be as complicated to use as a full blown computer. and computers could interact with the network enviroment these boxes creates perfectly.
point is that computers today are overkill for most users. they just want to be able to check mail, surf the web, play some games and do some basic office tasks. all this can be done on a console style unit without the need for installing a os or any apps (there would be a overblown bios enviroment on chip tho for basic config tasks and for the media playback so that you didnt need a disc for that).
I believe the author was reffering to somebody elses take on removing an Apple machine from the box. Besides, the description was an attempt to make sense out of the marketing success of Macs with particular people.
Congratulations. I am pleased that you get great enjoyment in building your own computer and save money at the same time. I can build lots of things and do both save money and enjoy the experience. Whoopee for both of us.
If you want to make a comparison then at least use comparable factory built computers (with the same quality of parts, etc.). Then, maybe, people will stop trying to correct you.
3. I *do* believe that performance/dollar amount, Apple is behind. I wish this weren’t the case, but sadly it is. In the very end of it all, I’ve purchased a 2.6 ghz, 512mb RAM Dell for $499, (free shipping), which was less than the eMac, and because of that, I’m stuck with an x86 box for the next…3 years? (At least until my wife says we can afford an Apple Macintosh….)
Man if xou can afford to run this energy sucking P4 for three years, xou could have easily afforded a mac. I really don’t know if i yhould say this as a joke or seriously, because in the server market, Xserves ARE cheaper than Linux or *BSD boxes just because they consume less power.
personaly i have been thinking about 2 systems. one is the console like personal system where you load a office cd/dvd to get a spreadsheet, wordprosessor, mail client and web client. only files stored on hd is non-binary files so that viruses have less to grab a hold of. want to play a game? remove the office disc, insert game disk and start playing. again only save files are stored on hd. interface for any stuff would be usb or firewire. want to burn something? plug in the burnder in a port, put the burn software disc in the main drive and your on. the only thing available from the gui when no disc is loaded is a tivo like system where you can record tv and radio (be it net or air) and access music and video files stored on the hd of the unit.
Do you know what that reminds me of? 1985. That’s why we have hard disks so we don’t have to swap out floppies/ CDs/ DVDs every time we want to perform another task. It enables this nifty thing we call “multi-tasking.” I do a lot of that and so do most designers.
He cites the functional aspects, to the “pleasant experience” of unwrapping the machine from the box, and “the illuminated logo that tells everyone you’re an Apple user and gives you the feel of belonging to a community”.
Haha, I guess this guy is fascinated by shiny bubble wrap. He sounds like a newborn staring at a mobile.
>
>
What a terrible thing to do to a newborn, comparing him or her to this *BRAIN-DEAD* GUI designer.
At least the newborn is trying to learn something, and in the process of learning tryin to improve him or herself even if they don’t realize it.
then you grab a full blown computer. like im trying to state, this is for someone what dont need all the multitasking horsepower of a full blown pc but rather just want something to check the mail and watch movies on…
For a long time Macheads would pathetically cry out “multitasking is overblown” in response to jeers from the PC crowd about Apple’s absolutely disgraceful memory management implementation. Every single one of them were liars. Oddly enough, I still don’t use OSX at home:)
Anyway, when OS 9 (8?) finally gave memory management some lip service, it satisfied some of us, although it still wasn’t up to Windows 95+ or any *nix standard.
Claiming users don’t need multi-tasking and to have a single purpose machine for the desktop isn’t going to work anymore. With the muscle in today’s PC, clicking an icon is infinitely easier than loading and unloading a bunch of CDs.
It works for games and movies because they are single focus tasks. But let’s look at workflow. What apps will you bundle with the OS?
I’m a 7th grader doing homework. I’m writing a school paper. First I need to do research. I get on the net, Encarta/ Britannica, etc. How do I cut n paste my notes and references? Will there be a bundled clipboard app? TextEdit? Notepad? Word? Will they have to flip CDs?
Then I start writing my paper so I unload my encyclopedia or browser and load my Word CD. Wait, I need more info. I swap out my Word CD for my IE CD. Wait, that was on my Encarta CD. Unload, load. Oh there it is. Unload, load my Word CD…
I’m a teenie girl. I have my IM client. Bundled or CD? I wanna talk on my net phone and IM at the same time. Bundled Net phone or CD? I wanna do email too. Bundled or CD? Have you ever seen a teen girl multi-task? I was at a friend’s house. His daughter was watching the TV, AIMing, listening to music on her PC, talking on the phone, and waiting on email.
I’m an Office drone. I live on email. I have a presentation due. I use my email as a calendaring and appt system so it’s important to have the alarms running in the bg, even if the window doesn’t have focus.
What about browser plugins? Will they dl like XBox Live updates? Is Flash Player an Application? What about Photoshop Filters and related plugins? Sure PS will be reserved for a “full blown computer” but plenty of other apps use plugin-type technologies as well.
So if you bundle X apps, you no longer have a single purpose box. Don’t forget the days when bundling a screensaver brought out howls of protest. Or when MS bundled the TCP/IP stack into the OS.
I work exclusively with single-purpose boxes and they have their places (usually closets or highly secure facilities).
You must have never had to work in DOS or Mac OS <9. No one wants a Web TV.
@hob:
I know you didn’t mention cartridges..that’s just what I was reminded of…and as for remote storage…take a look at Network Attached Storage….we’re already there, dude… ;P
@Ronald:
I would have to say that the machine I would build (a la budget box, for instance) would consist of parts just as high in quality (if not better) than what I could buy (from any box-vendor). Not always the case, but I like to think I use higher-quality components…and even then come up with a comparable system. As for buying instead of building…look at the cost of my p4 dell (which I accidentally bought, btw…I ordered one for my grandparents..order didn’t go through…resubmitted…apparently order *did* go through…kept the 2nd box
)…and compare that “engery sucking” system quality/speed/build/price to that of said emac. The comparison is uhm…well there isn’t much of one.
I want a *good* mac. I just can’t afford it. ‘nuf said.
The world wants compatibility now, he says. It wants to communicate, and this means one brand dominating.
It was people confusing the words ‘compatible’ and ‘same’, which gave Microsoft a monopoly. In this day and age no-one (especially a tech journalist) should be making that mistake.
i was not talking about a device to replace the pc for power user, that cant happen. but im talking about replaceing it for joe blow user use it like a glorified typewriter and that find cellphone for anything other then calling complicated. to thenm the single task, single disc will be helpfull in keeping things organized.
yes i have seen teenage girls (and to a lesser extent boys) multitask like crasy, at times its actualy kinda fun to watch.
plugins? files that are loaded into the control of the browser. they cant be used outside of the context of the browser in any way. these are safe to leave on a rw medium as they cant be infected…
i feel the pc have to become more task centerd and less app centerd. your contact list allso is your im list, being able to edit images from the gui of the mail client instead of haveing to fire up a overgrown beast like photoshop to just rotate the image and so on. hmm, it would be interesting to load haystack as a “desktop”…
oh and my first experience with computers where amiga and 486 with dos.