Elliotte Rusty Harold states on his site Cafe au Lait that "Windows XP and Mac OS X are significant steps backwards on their respective platforms, at least as far as the GUI goes, so they've lowered the bar Linux has to hurdle." Hey, what's wrong with Mac OS X?
I installed Red Hat Linux 8.0 on my two-year old Dell laptop last night. Linux is definitely improving. This is leaps and bounds beyond the last variant I tried (Mandrake 8.2. I haven't tried Mandrake 9.0 yet.) Visually, I'd say it's even better than Ximian Gnome 1.4, my previous favorite GUI. For the first time, I think I've seen a Linux that's on a par with current versions of Windows and the Mac OS. Also, a first: the fonts are deuglified by default. (I still don't think this is the prettiest GUI I've ever seen. Windows 2000 and Mac OS 9 are both superior. However, Windows XP and Mac OS X are significant steps backwards on their respective platforms, at least as far as the GUI goes, so they've lowered the bar Linux has to hurdle.)
I installed Linux on laptops twice, maybe three times, over the years, and I never quite got it working. I have only used laptops for many years, and felt trapped on Windows. What I really wanted was UNIX. In the spring of 2001 I was just about to buy yet another Windows laptop with plans of attempting to install Linux, when I saw Ken Arnold running Jini on a Macintosh. I couldn't believe my eyes, but there was UNIX on a laptop with a nice GUI. I bought a Titanium G4 laptop with Mac OS X, and have been very happy with it.
There are still a handful of GUI features of Windows that I prefer over their Mac OS X counterpart. I think my favorite graphical way to navigate a file system is the Explorer of Windows 95, for example. Also, I can't seem to switch between apps/windows as quickly on the Mac. But overall, my user experience of using OS X is very pleasant.
I didn't really use Macintoshes much before OS X, which is perhaps why I don't feel a sense of loss not to be on OS 9. I am curious what others think about the relative merits of desktop GUIs of current operating systems.
I don't think there is anything wrong with Mac OSX, I even think it is pretty cool. The problem, for me, is that it requires expensive hardware to run on. PowerBooks or Titaniums have a cool design but are too expensive and untweakable for me. That's why I run a Linux/Windows combo. Interface wise I think Windows is still superior to the other OS'es. The fact that most major desktops for Linux are immitating Windows says a lot in my eyes. My major complaint with the Mac OS GUI is the file navigation, like you Bill I'm hooked to the file explorer of Windows. It's simple and fast, all I need. Fortunately KDE, GNOME etc are designing similar file browsers.
> Interface wise I think Windows is still superior to > the other OS'es.
What in particular on Windows do you like?
In particular, I tend to get frustrated trying to do things on Windows. For example, moving a laptop from one network connection to another was always a pain on Windows, and seems to still be a pain in XP. In XP, I can enter two different network configurations, which are detected automatically. But I need more than two. I move around a lot, and on the Mac I just pick a location under that applet menu. I can store any number of network configurations I want. This makes sense to me.
That's just one specific example, but a general difference I've found between Windows and Mac OS X is that doing things with the OS is much more straightforward and sensible on the Mac.
Although I may sound like one, I never was a Mac bigot before I actually started using one. I always kind of shook my head when people foamed at the mouth about how great the Mac was. I got Mac OS X so that I could have UNIX on which I could also run commercial software (primarily FrameMaker), not for the Macintosh ease of use. But I was pleasantly surprised by that ease of use. As I said, there are still some UI aspects of Windows I prefer over the Mac, and much of my contentment really comes from the fact that I get to use UNIX all day long, but a lot of it really is that Apple user-oriented design thing.
As someone who's just spent a week in OS9 after using OSX for months (and various Windows at work for years) - the main difference about OS9 I found is one of certainty.
If a window is in the background, I know I can click on it ANYWHERE to bring it to front without accidentally clicking a control on it. With Windows and OSX it dependes upon the window, the app or the controls.
I also like the fact when I open a folder, it reopens in exactly the same place every time (and I get feedback that it is opened - the original folder icon is greyed out) - both Win2K and OSX try to do this, but occasionally fail. And occasionally failing is part of the point, as its the certainty I (and definitely novice users) want.
However, I discovered that it's all irrelevant if the computer crashes (as it did on a few occasions), as you feel so powerless that all the certainty goes out of the (excuse the pun) window.
It's not that the other OS's are bad - just that, from watching novice users and my own experience - a lack of control of the environment makes people scared to play with, and therefore learn, the system. And OS9 is definitely the best (apart from the crashing) for feeling in control.
I think the fact that Windows keyboard shortcuts tend to be prevalent and consistent, not only in the OS but also in the applications, is enough to keep me from going to another platform. However, I also realize that I am in the vast minority... how many computer users even know what the little underlined letter means?
I really love the look of Mac OS X though. I definitely lust after those Ti notebooks.
I have Red Hat 8.0 running at home, and it is definitely a big improvement over the other distros I've seen. Still, there's something about it... it just lacks the refinement, polish, and responsiveness you see in both Win XP and Mac OS X (well, maybe not responsiveness so much on Mac OS X).
> I think the fact that Windows keyboard shortcuts tend to > be prevalent and consistent, not only in the OS but also > in the applications, is enough to keep me from going to > another platform. However, I also realize that I am in > the vast minority... how many computer users even know > what the little underlined letter means? > Yes, that is another thing I prefer in Windows. I use keyboard mnemonics a lot when I use Windows. I felt it was easier on my hands. With OS X, I must use the mouse a lot more. Nevertheless, I did get used to it.
There are keyboard hotkeys on the Mac (as on Windows), but you have to memorize them . Mnemonics were nice because they have the underscore there to remind you. Plus I still have never taken the time to figure out what all the icons stand for on the Mac hotkeys.
I've been thinking about what I like about Windows and Mac, and I've noticed a pattern. The things I prefer on Windows usually fall into the category of basic gestures, such as keyboarding with mnemonic keys, quickly switching back and forth between windows with keys, and so on. (File Explorer is an exception to this pattern.) What I tend to find better on the Mac is actually doing tasks.
Part of it may be that apps and system controls on the Mac offers fewer features, so their dialog boxes can be simpler. But I think much of is probably taste and the emphasis Apple places on making things simple. Perhaps there's a fundamental difference in the values that MS and Apple GUI designers place on simplicity versus features. Perhaps MS values features more, and Apple simplicity more. It seems like Windows dialog boxes (such as in the control panel) are crammed with all kinds of options and possibilities most of which I never use. But its not just that. On Windows I often feel frustrated by things that seem to have been done in an awkward way. On the Mac, it seems like the dialog boxes have only what I need, cleanly presented, in a way that makes sense to me.
As I said before, probably the main reason I like the Mac over Windows is because I get to use Unix. I have a style of development that often has me using the command shell, and I have always hated DOS and was still frustrated when using cygwin. After using Windows for years as my main development platform, I love having a real Unix shell all day long, finally
Perhaps Rusty Harold put this idea in my head, but I just installed Red Hat Linux 8.0 on one of my laptops, a dual boot with Windows XP. It went very smoothly. Everything seems to be working except perhaps for the sound. I'm posting this from that very laptop running Red Hat. It's pretty sweet.
I don't have my own laptop, but am using one provided by the customer i currently work for. I really don't want to install a new operating system on it, but i have a really good solution: knoppix. This is a bootable debian cdrom, just pop in the cd, boot and run. No installation needed. I remaster the original cd to include jdk1.4.1, eclipse, uml tool. It's perfect, fast enough, and all the tools i need.
Previous Topic
