I don't know for certain that Mac OS X will be a great computing
interface, but I do know several things about it and have used it in
the DP4 stage. I have also used both of its progenitors, NeXTstep and
Mac OS. This article shares my belief of what the Mac OS X interface
is meant to be. It is opinion.
I have now read the umpteenth article lamenting the demise of the
Mac OS and proclaiming Aqua a poor follow on. As "traditional"
Macintosh utilities like the Control Strip and the Apple Menu
disappear, there is much weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. I
am sick of it. I hope to spread a little rationality here and a
little understanding of what OS X is.
Firstly, I would like to start with some perspective. Let us not
start with Mac OS 9 as the comparison for Mac OS X. Why? Because Mac
OS 9 was not designed for consumers, it was designed for Macintosh
aficionados and Windows users. It just so happened that at its core
it was the Mac OS, which was designed for consumers, that has allowed
it to keep its lead in ease of use. The proper comparison for Mac OS
X is System 6. (If you have a pre-1992 Mac, you can download a copy
of System 6.0.8 from this page.)
I select System 6 as a discussion point because it is easier to
argue that it was based almost entirely on the original Macintosh
vision and design, as opposed to OS 9 which was designed subsequent
to the disbanding of much of Apple's human interface research groups.
Also, System 6 was probably the most widely used of the original
Macintosh OS versions and likely the best known. Therefore, I can
touch on common experience better by referring to it. Finally, for
the most part System 6 differs little from the original Macintosh
interface, while OS 9 is very different.
Many of you reading this may never have heard of, or actually
used, System 6. It was a version of the Mac OS way back in the days
before it was called "Mac OS." It was designed almost exclusively to
make a computer easier for new customers to use. Macintosh interface
design was still in active development and programmers actually still
communicated with real human factors engineers about the best way to
add features. Furthermore, for the most part Apple even followed
their own guidelines.
If you have the opportunity in the near future, take a copy of
System 6 for a spin on an SE/30.
It is a delightful OS, but you will note that many of the features of
the interface of the modern Mac OS are not there - pop up folders,
window shade, control strip, and other widgets were not available.
Even the Apple menu did not provide the same functionality that it
provides today. You might find this lack of features at first
restrictive and perhaps feel somewhat claustrophobic. But if you are
a new computer user perhaps you won't (you definitely won't).
Have you ever tried to teach an adult who has never used a
computer how to use one? You quickly discover that, whether it is
Windows or the much beloved Mac OS, it just isn't easy. I can set up
a Windows or Macintosh machine to be easy for a limited number of
tasks. I just put a couple of aliases on the Desktop and set the
default file folder to a single one ("Documents" on the Mac). Then
the new user can perform email tasks, surf the web, write the
occasional note, or deal with a few pictures. But if they attempt to
venture beyond that, they run into complexity, significant
complexity.
In the current Mac OS, there are at least four separate ways I can
think of to make a program easily accessible. New computer users
don't like this flexibility, because it generates uncertainty about
what they "should" do. This is especially true when new programs
require them to use a way that they typically don't by installing
components into the Control Strip or Apple Menu.
In the current Mac OS, when your computer crashes, freezes, or
whatever, there are several simple repairs you must memorize how to
do. They require things like understanding the extensions folder to a
certain degree. This is a level of complexity that new users find
difficult to learn, if not frightening.
In the current Mac OS, connecting to the internet can require the
manipulation of three poorly designed control panels, not to mention
installing lots of software.
In the current Mac OS, exploration is inhibited by system
instability. The Mac OS's ease of use was originally designed to be
discovered by exploration.
The interface in the current Mac OS is inconsistent because of
haphazard and piecemeal development. Because of changes to the
interface, selecting a non-PostScript printer in the current Mac OS
is like entering a completely different world.
Further inhibiting exploration in the current Mac OS, much of the
functionality is not easily discovered through exploration. For
example, popup folders would almost never be accidentally discovered
by a new user. It is important that, as you explore, it is easy to
discover the features. Burrowing might be discovered, but not easily,
and not without some trepidation about what that magnifying glass
actually does.
The Desktop can quickly become very cluttered in the modern Mac
OS.
Modern Macs operate too quickly for many interface features to
serve their intended function correctly (like zoom rects).
Multiple Users is a fine stop gap measure in OS 9, but it really
is not a true answer to handling the needs of multiple users of a
single computer. The Mac OS design is clearly not for multiple
users.
Multitasking in the current Mac OS is mediocre at best. You can
learn to live with it, and it will function OK on a fast machine, but
many times it is frustrating. Feeling you have to hurry through menus
so that the download in the background doesn't fail is not good. Not
understanding this and finding out that the download in the
background has timed out unexpectedly is even more frustrating.
These are just some of the problems with the current Mac OS in
terms of interface (yes, multitasking can be discussed purely in
terms of interface). In spite of all of these problems, Mac OS 9 is
the easiest to use and most elegant operating system available to
consumers today. I believe that one of the primary goals of Aqua is
to fix these interface problems. It is supposed to be easy to use for
someone who has never used a computer. It is not supposed to be an
ideal setup for the "power" Mac or Windows user out of the box.
Mac OS X will be virtually crash proof. This will encourage user
exploration, which will foster learning of the interface. Aqua has
one unified way to present the most commonly accessed documents.
Aqua, with its true multiuser capability, has a default location for
documents specific to each user, making saving and opening documents
easier. Aqua has very detailed icons which, after using a NeXT for
some time, are clearly superior for new users (if somewhat slowing
for experienced ones). Aqua uses a single window interface by
default. With no windows to manage, there is less interface clutter.
Mac OS X has a more unified and streamlined internet setup
interface.
A little more perspective is in order now. When the Macintosh came
out it was thought to be a useless interface by many "experts". The
use of the screen for all those pictures and the waste of processor
speed drawing to the screen when a "text mode" could render the names
of the files instantly were just the beginning. The GUI only approach
didn't allow one to futz with the innards. The lack of WordPerfect
for word processing was considered a serious drawback. The same is
true of Lotus 1-2-3. It had no expansion slots (and later
"incompatible" ones). It didn't come with a BASIC programming
language in the box.
The Mac was criticized and condemned every which way. Some of the
most vocal (the most vocal) opponents were Apple II users.
Does that sound familiar? Who are the most vocal opponents of OS X?
Mac pundits. The PC press seems overall impressed by the operating
system. I have read no scathingly negative reviews of the beta from
the PC press. These have only come from the Mac press.
One might question if Apple should go with a simpler and less
powerful GUI interface for their new OS. I believe they should. Users
have to get up to speed with the new concepts, and much of the
untapped consumer market is not waiting for a P4 with Windows 2001.
They don't know it, but they are really waiting for something more
like the re-release of the SE/30 for $699.
Power users will have little to worry about. There are already
downloadable replacement widgets for almost every missing feature of
the current Mac OS. It will be customizable. Don't let the fact that
OS extensions are unavailable scare you. There is an even simpler
method of modifying the OS, and it is easier to fix and makes the
machine more stable (faceless background apps, just like the current
desktop printing and controls strip).
My 4 favorite PowerBooks, 05.28.
The PowerBook 150 has a big screen for a vintage PowerBook, the 165c has color, the 100 is diminutive, and Lombard has USB and a great keyboard.
Apple gave Psystar enough rope to hang itself, Frank Fox, Stop the Noiz, 07.18.
By not filing suit against Psystar immediately, Apple allowed the company to do enough to give Apple an air-tight case.
Best Power Mac G5 deals, Low End Mac Deals, 07.18.
Used 1.8 GHz single SuperDrive, $600; dual, $799, 2.0, $979; 2.3, $899; 2.5, $1,100; 2.7, $1,249; 2.5 Quad, $1,500.
Best 17" MacBook Pro deals, Low End Mac Deals, 07.18.
Used 2.16 GHz Core Duo, $1,275; 2.33 Core2, $1,888; refurb, 2.4, $1,899; new, $1,949 a/r; 2.5, $2,558 a/r; 2.6 Santa Rosa, $2,449 a/r; more.
Best Mac OS X 10.5 'Leopard' deals, Low End Mac Deals, 07.18.
Mac OS X 10.5.1 single user, $99; 5 users, $158; 10.5 Server, 10 users, $450; unlimited, $900.
Mac of the Day: Power Mac G4 Cube, July 2000 - compact, powerful, and attractive with limited expansion and a high initial price doomed the Cube.
List of the Day: MichiMac is our list for Mac users in Michigan.
July 19 in LEM history: 00: To partition or not to partition? - 01: What price rankings? - Owning the market - 02: Free mac.com email becomes fee mail - G4/500 WallStreet and Lombard upgrades - 04: Sometimes you feel like a dolt - 06: Mac OS X 10.5: Which Macs should make the cut? - Why run Linux on a low-end Mac? - Upgrade your Pismo with a dual-layer DVD burner - 07: Apple's first phone never made it to market
Best Mac Pro deals, Low End Mac Deals, 07.17.
Refurb 2.66 GHz 4-core, $1,888; 2.8 8-core, $2,399; new 4-core, $2,124 after rebate; 8-core, $2,589 a/r; 3.0 $3,399 a/r; 3.2, $4,169 a/r.
Best titanium PowerBook G4 deals, Low End Mac Deals, 07.17.
Used 400 MHz DVD, $500; 867 MHz Combo, $550; 1 GHz Combo, $678; SuperDrive, $899.
Best iPod nano deals, Low End Mac Deals, 07.17.
Used 2 GB iPod nano, $70; refurb 4 GB, $99; new, $139; refurb 8 GB, $149; new, $180.
All of our advertising is handled by BackBeat Media. For
price quotes and advertising information, please contact
at BackBeat Media
(646-546-5194). This number is for advertising only.
Problems viewing this page with Internet Explorer
5.5 or 6? It works fine in other browsers, including IE 7. We
recommend Firefox
for those using Windows, as it is standards based and more
secure than IE 6 (and earlier). More LEM visitors use Firefox
than any other browser.
