Cool Mac Gear• iPod Video • iPod nano • iPod 1G-2G • iPod 3G • iPod 4G • iPod Mini • PowerBook-iBook • Garageband |
My colleague at MacOpinion, Marc Zeedar, has this week posted an interesting deconstruction of a critique of Mac OS X by The Register's Andrew Orlowski, that sparked some Mac Web controversy a month or so ago. Mr. Orlowski allowed that he had given OS X a fair trial and found it wanting, his main complaint being the Aqua GUI, which I likewise am not overly fond of, and which Marc Zeedar agrees: "the Mac OS X Finder is unquestionably the most frustrating part of Mac OS X." However, Marc asserts that Andrew is missing the point about OS X, and explains why at considerable length. I encourage you to read the article, as well Andrew Orlowski's piece, and draw your own conclusions, but I will address a couple of the points he made here.
One comment that especially resonated with me was:
"At present I wouldn't recommend it for most people who need to get real work done under deadline, for graphic designers, musicians, or others who need to use myriad programs and hardware working in concert. Mac OS X still has too many holes (being filled as we speak), there are glitches and strange quirks, and many times it's just easier and faster to work in good old familiar Mac OS 9.
"But we're talking power users, people that use their equipment 8+ hours a day. People that depend on a certain level of functionality and speed. For those users, even a slight change in interface slows them down. Technical problems with unknown solutions means years of experience are worthless: Mac OS X is a different animal and the old solutions don't work. For those users, switching to Mac OS X is premature. But for the average person, Mac OS X is fine: better than fine in most cases." I think that Marc has hit the nail squarely on the head with this observation, and it captures why generalizing about these issues is futile. We don't all have the same needs or tastes. I don't dispute in the slightest that for a new or casual computer user, or one forward-migrating from the Windows platform, Mac OS X very likely is more intuitive in easy to learn and use than the legacy Mac OS. Newbies and folks who use their computers mainly for doing a bit of e-mail, letter-writing, Web surfing, and playing games, are not as a rule operating under time constraints, so the balkiness and hesitation that is characteristic of the OS X Finder, at least on the modestly fast equipment I use, would not be a problem for them. As for Windows users, they're used to computer ambiguity and crankiness, and OS X on a Mac must feel like a breath of fresh air. However, for people like myself, working under constant time pressure and relentless deadlines, all those extra seconds that OS X requires add up over the course of eight or 10 hour day, sabotaging productivity, and robbing us of time that we can't afford to lose. No doubt some of this is unfamiliarity. After working with nearly every legacy Mac OS version from System 6.0.1 to 0S 9 2.1 over a period of 10 years, the Classic OS is second nature to me, as I'm sure it is to many other veteran Mac users. Even on a relatively slow machine (at least by today's standards), like my 233 MHz WallStreet PowerBook, the legacy OS is slick and fast, and at least since OS 9.0, also admirably stable. I can definitely work faster and more efficiently on the WallStreet under OS 9 then I can on my 500 MHz Pismo under OS X. However, I would also argue that a is not just familiarity. The traditional Mac OS, especially in its OS 9.x variants, lends itself a extraordinarily well, once you learn have to take advantage of and exploit its highly developed feature set, to the sort of production work I do, using a task force of mostly small and fast programs, and a few selected third-party add-ons to the system. This contrasts with 0S X, at least at its current stage of refinement, which, to paraphrase Andrew Orlowski, feels like "it's fighting you every step of the way." On the other hand, Mac user's like my son, who mainly do a relatively smaller number of longer-duration tasks, where OS X's preemptive multitasking a and superior memory management can distinguish themselves, find OS X to be a major leap forward. It is dramatically better for that sort of use, where you can set the computer to a task (or several tasks) and let it do its stuff--no argument. But for me, OS X slows me down, a lot, and I don't think that at its current level of development, it can ever be as fast and slick as the legacy 0S at doing this sort of work I do, which is mostly a linear progression of relatively small tasks involving a lot of repetitive Finder navigation, and where multitasking is of limited utility. I think that Aqua has plenty of potential, but in order for it to be realized, it needs a rethink of Finder protocols, to allow greater flexibility and versatility, so the user will be able to do things his/her way, as I do in OS 9, rather than struggling to conform to its way. PowerBook 1400, Mac OS and OSX Dock troubles Re: The Dock On Top, And Other TinkerTool Tricks Defragging OSX OSX Thoughts (Network) Okito Composer Spell Checker Tom Bennett's problem with Mail Lexmark Printers and OS X OS X speed on Pismo, adding memory, OWC not up to speed From Jeb Charles, Simultaneously motivated and worried by your recent disappointing upgrade in memory to your Pismo 500, I went ahead and did the same to my Pismo 400. However, my results were quite different in two ways. First off, my Pismo is noticeably snappier. I upgraded from an already respectable 192 megs to a solid 384 megs. The Finder response, window actions and Genie effect are all nicely sped up. A speed demon, no. Especially when compared to my G4-733 with a gig-o-ram. But in general, I’m happy with my $70 investment. It has made the machine seem more in line with OS 9 although certainly lacking in a few areas. I’m sure that future upgrades to OS X will make me even happier. I have been happily running OS X for a couple months and haven’t rebooted in 9.1 in 3 weeks. What didn’t make me happy was OWC’s performance. I once bought an external hard drive from them some years back and was not pleased at all then. I decided to order the memory from them as per your recent experience. Once again, they did nothing to impress me. My order was placed on Feb 1 and I just received it today, 10 days later, even after paying for second day air. My complaint (lodged after one week) was acknowledged as follows:
We installed a new system last week. The shipping of orders was delayed for a few days. We are working as had as possible to get caught up. We hope to be caught up in the next couple of days. Sorry for any inconvience this may have caused.
Thank You
Although the response was polite and timely, I can’t see how a new system would prevent someone from addressing a small package to me and enclosing a small chip that was in-stock. 10 days is not acceptable if one wants to earn return business. The fact that I received the chip 3 days after the complaint was emailed makes me suspect that they had misplaced or ignored the order. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.... Jeb
Hi Jeb;
It seems our experiences are dissonant in both contexts. I expect that my RAM upgrade from 256 MB to 640 MB has improved things a bit in OS X (I didn't do any stopwatch comparisons) but not nearly as much as I had hoped. Interestingly, there seems to be a significant speed improvement from what was already very satisfactory performance with the Pismo booted from OS 9.
OTOH, I have never had anything to complain about with OWC. having purchased a computer, two separate RAM upgrades, and a hard drive from them over the past 18 months or so. Very satisfactory service.
Charles PowerBook 1400, Mac OS and OSX From Katherine Keller You said: "BTW, what OS version were you using on the PB 1400? I still find the Application Switcher tear-off palette minimized to the extreme right of the screen the slickest means of navigating among open applications (and ONLY open ones show up there, unlike the Dock, which lets me know what is up and running at a glance)." On the PB 1400 I was using OS 8.1, which I had been reccomended as being the best for that generation of PBs. (It has the original 133 processor.) It also didn't help that I was thrown into a not entirely familiar OS while trying to meet a deadline while my PC was down with a dead motherboard. (When I went back to use the PB for an extensive word processing project I found it easy to use and had a less frustrating time. [But I still wanted my task bar.]) Don't get me wrong, I think that the Mac way of moving about w/in a program makes much more sense than in Windows. I had an app switcher menu, and after I got the hang of using it (after a Mac using friend pointed it out) things got better, but I never found moving between multiple programs/windows as fast and easy as in W9x. Even with app switcher I found myself digging through windows and bars trying to get to a program on my desk top. I even had a chance to work on a 9.1 machine (and a sweet wicked fast one at that) and still found myself having some of the same problems. Some of the shareware programs you describe are probably way keen, but I think an OS should come with tools like that built in. My transition to X wasn't without a few rough edges. I was used to working on a Mac having a certain look and feel and I had to make a few adjustments to things having changed in a few menus, but all in all, it didn't take that long. And make no mistake, OS X is what seduced me to the Mac. My PB 1400 was (and is) a reliable machine. My friend Laura's G4 tower was an impressive machine, but I just didn't like the look and feel of Classic. I hated having to reboot everytime an app crashed. I hated the mediocre multitasking (even under 9.1) But then again, I'm coming in as somebody who hasn't had a decade of doing things in Classic OS so it was easier for me to lay down the new neural trails. OS X just feels "right" to me on every level, and my next goal is to turn it into my main productivity machine (once I find a good free FTP program and HTML editor.) Different Strokes ... -Katherine-
Hi Katherine;
I agree that OS 8.1 is the optimum OS version for a PowerBook 1400/133. You would need the shareware HoverBar to get the floating palette Application Switcher function. There is also a shareware utility that gives you a Windows-like Task Bar in the Classic OS.
Some people prefer the cooperative multitasking in the legacy OS, which allows you to assign the lion's share of processor power to the frontmost application. Makes particular sense with lower powered machines.
Also, I usually don't reboot after an application crashes. I have MacsBug (free downloadable Apple utility) installed, which allows me to return to the Finder and keep going without a restart about 80 percent of the time. I restart my PowerBook maybe twice a week on average, whether it needs it or not.
Free FTP client: Captain FTP:
Free HTML Editor (carbon):
I use Tex Edit Plus heavily customized with free AppleScripts for HTML editing. It's not freeware, but is only $15.
Charles From Kenny Sabarese Just saw yer article on ViaVoice I have it installed on OSX but it will not work with the built in mic in my Titanium or the plaintalk mic on my G3 blue and white. Both of the mics work with OSX built in speech recorgnition....any ideas? Kenny Sabarese
Hi Kenny;
Yup. ViaVoice X's biggest flaw is that it won't support analog sound input. You have to use the USB mic that comes with the program for full functionality, although I have found that a PC style mic headset (non PlainTalk) works fine for dictation through a Griffin iMic USB adapter, but the sound playback doesn't.
I hope IBM can be persauded to add analog mic input support to this program, which is on most other respects the class of the field.
Charles From Colin Robertson Hi Charles, Interesting articles! I do have a suggestion for one of your issues... Like yourself I get annoyed at the Dock's 'master of none problem' One solution that helped me a lot, without any 3rd party software is this: (against Apple's default set-up) force the Dock's 2 sides to specialize. 1. The problem on the left side is that the black triangles are too small to quickly distinguish programs running vs. aliases. The answer, I found, was to ditch the aliases from the left side of the dock. Now only running apps appear -- thus turning it into the application switcher. 2. Next, on the right, create folders of aliases to different programs, docs, and put those aliases on the doc -- the right side of course. This makes the right-side a launcher via pop-up menus. Add some iconfactory.com icons to these folders make them easily distinguishable: http://www.iconfactory.com/Preview.asp?type=search&id=143&query=woa Finally, any apps you use all the time can have just have aliases on the desktop -- so that just as the OS 9 'browse the web' alias was there, I have an IE alias now. With frequent OS updates, I try to avoid 3rd party hacks as much as possible to cut down of the opportunity for conflicts -- so this seemed like the best solution. Sort of a granola additive-free solution. :) Anyways -- just my two cents! -Colin
Hi Colin;
Thanks for helping some ideas I already had forming in my mind to gel. I already have a "Launcher" folder full of application aliases in the Dock, replacing the pop-up window I have for the same function in the legacy OS. It works, although I miss the one-click Button View mode in OS 9. Another missing favorite feature.
Yes, getting rid of at least most of the Launcher/Application aliases in the Dock would make perfect sense to me. Some "poofs" coming up.
Like you, I prefer to use third-party hacks for the same reason, viz. my recent problems with ASM conflicting with the ViaVoice X installer. OTOH, some of those hacks are pretty cool, like TinkerTool 2.
Charles Re: The Dock On Top, And Other TinkerTool Tricks From Mark St. John Charles, I am no fan of the Dock either. I liked it initially, for a couple of days, and then saw all sorts of shortcomings, much as you brought up. One of the problems you point out is that icons in the dock are difficult to see. This I find is particularly bad on LCD screens. I attribute this partially to the transparency of the Dock. Apple has overused transparency all throughout OS X (just because they could, now was that form or function we wanted first?!). Anyway, TransparentDock1.5.8 (http://homepage.mac.com/kfkel/) is a nice set of AppleScripts that walk you through changing the Dock's appearance in a number of ways that are actually built into OS X but not available through the dock's Preference Pane. I found that changing the background of the dock to totally opaque makes icons much more visible (see attached). You may, too. I know this is perhaps the least of your gripes with the Dock, but it is some improvement nonetheless.
Cheers,
Hi Mark;
You're no doubt correct about the transparency issue.
On the other hand, I have found since moving the dock to the top, that transparency allows me to click a window's close button through the Dock, although I can't drag the window out with the titlebar.
Charles From Krishna M. Sadasivam Hi Charles, I’m enjoying your “OSX Odyssey” articles — keep up the fantastic work! I have a question that maybe you or one of your readers might be able to help me out with. I would like to know what the best tool to use for defragmenting an OSX disk. I have DiskWarrior 2.1 residing on a HD partition dedicated to the “classic” MacOS. Can I safely use DiskWarrior on OSX? Thought I’d ask before I tempt fate. :)
Thanks again,
Hi Krishna;
I don't think DiskWarrior will defrag a drive. It's a Directory rebuilder (and a superb one). I *think* I heard that there was an OS x version in the works, perhaps out in beta.
Norton's SpeedDisk is the most common defragging tool, although Alsoft (DiskWarrior's developer) does make one as well. You can use a legacy OS version of these programs to defrag your OS X volume. You have to boot from another volume to do it, which is another reason why multiple partitions is so convenient.
Charles From John Kelley Mr. Moore: I've been following yours and Mr. Knights exploits in working in OSX for sometime now. You might have been told this already but a short explanation of how to get OS9 to be able to connect to an OSX machine.
In the Network control panel of OSX make sure you are on Built-in Ethernet. From the configure menu choose Manually from the pull down menu. It should show "IP Address, Subnet Mask, Router" all with text boxes next to them.
IP Address: 192.168.1.2
In the sharing control panel make sure file sharing is turned on.
On the OS9 Machine open up the TCP/IP control panel make sure the connection is set to "Built in Ethernet" and Configure is set to manually.
The 192.168.X.X IP range is for private networks. I use this setup to share between my G4 Desktop and my Wallstreet 266 both either running 10.1.2 or 9.2 at different points. As for the desktop which one are you trying to reach? The Users desktop is /users/username/desktop The OS9 Desktop is /Desktop Folder I've been running OSX on my desktop since X was first Public Beta and on my Wallstreet (266/192megs RAM) since last September, I use each with Finalcut pro, PhotoShop, Dreamweaver etc. without any major problems, the only major lacking on the Wallstreet is the lack of video card drivers which makes video playback suffer. John Kelley
Thanks John for the clearest and most concise explanation yet of how to do this. I'll try it.
Charles From James Huston You mentioned Okito Composer with a spell checker would be nice, but it already has one. The cocoa services includes a spell checker, and has check spelling as you type option. This is the read me for the dictionary file it uses:
In Okito Composer it can be called by pressing command-; and to get the files to a text file, open the rtf file in TextEdit and convert it. On that note Okito Composer doesn't offer anything that TextEdit in page view with command-R pressed to show rulers.
Hi James;
I was referring to Okito Composer's support of the cocoa spellchecking facility in my comment.
Okito Composer is a lot prettier than TextEdit, and it has that cool drawer.
Charles Tom Bennett's problem with Mail From Rick Marolt Hi Charles, I think you should suggest to Tom Bennett, who wrote to you on 2/12, to try mail.iquest.net instead of smtp.iquest.net in his OS X Mail settings, even where Mail specifically wants an SMTP server. It worked for me.
Thanks.
Thanks for the tip, Rick.
Charles From James N. Ellison I have been suffering through my own OS X Odyssey. Most applications or a substitute seem to work just fine except that Quartz rendering of PDF files with complex graphics is unacceptably slow. It feels about 1/4 the speed of 9.2. But this is not the killer. I have not been able to print using my Lexmark Z 53. (Yes I did the "not optional" cartridge installation). The printer worked for awhile then stopped. The support utility can talk to the printer and get the ink levels, but when printing, it just stalls and I get an error message about not being able to communicate etc. If I go back to 9 everything is fine. None of the various help sites have been able to and Lexmark technical support was no help at all. Anybody else using a Lexmark Z53? Did you have a problem and solve it? Jim Ellison
Hi Jim;
I do very little printing myself, but as Terry Devlin recently chronicled here, printing from OS X can be a nightmare.
Can anyone help Jim with his Lexmark?
Charles
The OS X Odyssey archives may be accessed here:
Note: Letters to Moore's Mailbag may or may not be published at the editor's discretion. Correspondents' email addresses will NOT be published unless the correspondent specifically requests publication. Letters may be edited for length and/or context. Opinions expressed in postings to Moore's MailBag are those of the respective correspondents and not necessarily shared or endorsed by the Editor and/or Applelinks management. If you would prefer that your message not appear in Moore's Mailbag, we would still like to hear from you. Just clearly mark your message "NOT FOR PUBLICATION," and it will not be published. CM
Page: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
|
Cool Mac Gear• iPod 1G-2G • iPod 3G • iPod 4G • iPod Mini • PowerBook-iBook • Keyboard Skins • Garageband
| ||||||
|
| ||||||||
