It has been extremely frustrating to watch Apple’s software quality control go downhill. With the Forced Spyware 10 release I no longer consider Windows an option for anything but virtual machine testing. Linux has a lot of positives, but commercial software support and ease of use are not among them. (It’s getting better. But it’s still the OS that makes you pull your hair out any time you have to use the command line or mess with a config file.)
OS X was the safe haven. Fast, efficient, stable, intuitive, and UNIX. But if Apple doesn’t get a handle on OS X quality control then the future looks dim on the desktop.
Most of the time it works fine with the Apple Trackpad, sometimes not so well. But Bluetooth itself is flawed, my PS4 has issues with it’s own bluetooth hardware, and sometimes when you stream audio over bluetooth the game gets choppy (with Sony headphones).[quote=267182:@Christoph De Vocht]Yes, thats definitely something I was looking for … NOT .
What about fixing important bugs instead of added useless features?[/quote]
Coz bugs keep users upgrading for years, features make them think they’re getting better value.[quote=267187:@Daniel Taylor]But if Apple doesn’t get a handle on OS X quality control then the future looks dim on the desktop.[/quote]
I hope they get an over-all control on software quality, not just their desktop. I think they will in the next 2~ 4 years, once the iOSification of OS X is complete and then the only differences are the separate interfaces.
That implies the problems are due to significant changes being made to the OS X code base from the iOS code base. Problem is, iOS is OS X. It always was. Just compiled for ARM with some additional frameworks and APIs to support the touch UI and walled garden.
My fear is that Steve Jobs was the driving force on software QC. An organization as large as Apple doesn’t change overnight, but once he was gone it started to change. Features and release dates are being prioritized over solid, working code. And Tim Cook isn’t going to come scream at you when something doesn’t work.
I don’t feel the same about Apple’s hardware. My guess is that Jonathan Ive still has a handle on QC when it comes to hardware.
I’m always struggling with Spaces.
I do NOT want OS X to ‘rearrange things based on most recent use’.
I just want my Chrome always in Desktop 1, Thunderbird always in Desktop 2, Xojo Always in Desktop 3. (And the same for a few other Apps on my second display.)
Also after I quit the App and start again or after a reboot. Just stay where they are please. Why is that so hard?
System Preferences - Mission Control - uncheck “Automatically rearrange”.
Now create the number of spaces you want.
Go to each one. Launch the app you want in that space (or move its windows to that space if it’s already running). Then right-click the app icon in the dock. In the popup menu choose Options - This Desktop.
At this point your spaces should remain stationary and the apps should always launch into their assigned spaces. While they are running you can still move them to other spaces. But on relaunch they should go back to the space you chose.
I’ve also gone into System Prefs - Keyboard - Shortcuts and set shortcuts for my permanent spaces (your spaces will appear in the Mission Control section). Basically control + the space number. So for me it’s muscle memory now that my browser is control-2. Xojo is control-5. I actually have 12 total and use option-N for the last two.
The only wrinkle in all of this is Apple’s full screen mode. Apps which follow their guidelines full screen into a new space with no key shortcut. I hate that, so I don’t use full screen. I also switched from VMWare Fusion to Parallels entirely because Parallels lets you choose Apple’s default behavior or the behavior of taking over the assigned space when going full screen. So my main Windows VM is always on option-1 (space or “desktop” 11) like I want.
Which they are; one show stopping bug I had with El Capitan has been present on iOS for 3 years before I found it. There’s another that wasn’t present on OS X till El Capitan, which Apple didn’t fix but I found a workaround for. They’re in the Core Image framework, where no iPhone is going to process images at 75mpx or higher.
At some point iOS and OS X divided and went in their own directions, because of the success of iOS, that’s the one that’s gained the most attention over the years, so it does make some sense to use that at the ‘core’. Trouble is a desktop computer works very differently than a mobile phone. Look at Apple’s Photos, it’s basically the iOS version with a new interface.
I agree, we’ve all heard the stories where Steve gets very pissed off with second rate tech. The other thing I think that Jobs did, which Cook doesn’t is question everything. Cook is very much a calm and nice guy, he doesn’t question why things are done a certain way. Jobs was downright rude to people, but it’s what made Apple.
I’m not so sure, every Mac I’ve owned since 2009 has been repaired under warranty. That’s 4 Macs. Meanwhile an iMac purchased in 2007, only had to have it HDD replaced last year, everything else still works.
After I took the 2015 MacBook in for repair, I was bit surprised when they asked if I had backed up because the wi-fi had failed. I was about to say, why can’t you just swap the wi-fi card… When I recalled why… To replace the one broken key on the keyboard, they had to replace the entire top of the laptop base, I’m not complaining because the paint had worn off, but it is such a waste. Mind you the machine weighs about as much as my wife’s iPad, only it’s actually useful, unlike the iPad.
Today, the first computer is not a desktop or even a laptop, it is a phone. It is probably unavoidable that over time the UI will be the same, and all screens will be touch enabled. I also fear OS X as we know it will dissolve into the iOS ocean sooner rather than later. One more reason why I resent so much the little efforts of Xojo with iOS. I have survived so many transitions since the beginning of personal computing, it has made me more alert to the need to surf the wave rather than be slammed by it.
For better or worse, Desktop is getting increasingly like the melting iceberg onto which we polar bears stand. Sure, iMac held its ground for 2015 while PC sales dropped some 15%. But the writing is on the wall. Future will be mobile.
Ever since the Apple IIc, I never had any Apple computer die on me. Even during the Amelio tenure, and boy was that a bad time. In the meantime, I had to mourn quite a few PCs.
If we want ultra thin, ultra light computers, there is no other way, for instance for the MacBook. It becomes more questionable for Desktop. The older iMac used magnets to keep the glass over the screen, so a simple suction cup would suffice to open it. The new 5 millimeters thick edged iMac is glued like an iPad, so now changing a drive becomes major surgery. On the other hand, I do not think there was any other way in such a small space.
Now, do I love these slicker, smaller form factors ? You bet.
Now, do I love these slicker, smaller form factors ? You bet.[/quote]
Not me! Give me a nice big crate that you can work on - like the last Mac I bought - G4 mirrored drive doors - that was easy to work on. These fiddly little thin things are not for big hamfisted types like me.
I am also astounded to read that RAM is not upgradeable and soldered on, and that you cannot swap the hard drives/SSDs - what happens when they go bad on you?
You bring it to Apple and they repair it. Which costs a bit, and might not possible if it is an old Mac (my 24in iMac is from 2007, and I don’t think Apple still stores replacement parts. My parents-in-law have an old G5 iMac from 2005 still running strong).
New logic board. Basically you but the extended APP, then once’s it’s expired you buy a new machine
I remember back in 2000, talking to an Apple designer. At that time they were concerned that computers were too easy for customers to get in and brake things. I do not recall the percentages, but there was a high volume of people who tried to tinker and broke the machine, then try to get Apple to fix it for FREE, or a brand new machine. Obviously the unrepairability of modern machines, pretty much solves this problem.
I do appreciate the design of Apple’s laptops and the iMac. I think the Mac Pro Vase is wrong. A machine aimed at people who want power and flexibility should be able to get that with Apple products, otherwise coupled with the lack of reliability and reduced interest in pro software, spells trouble for Apple in the long run.
Never forget Apple sells hardware. Creating machines that cannot upgrade forever is the best way to sell the new. Look at eBay : full of two years old, and sometimes one year old equipment. How do you think they became the most profitable company ever ?
Most PCs today proceed slightly otherwise : most components are pretty crappy and die on duty. Heck, in the last 3 years I had to replace twice the power supply, and once the master board on mine. No need for programmed obsolescence, the lesser quality insures renewal for eastern manufacturers that starve on ultra low margins. The nice thing is that overall it costs way less than an entire new computer.
There is nothing new, though. Look at the first Mac, and the first PC : one is entirely closed, not upgradable, while the other is modular and extends easily. IBM chose the GIllette model, Apple the Bic one
Most PCs today proceed slightly otherwise : most components are pretty crappy and die on duty.[/quote]
I don’t really buy that argument. Of course, you can buy cheap components but there are many quality brands out there. And I am far from convinced that Apple build quality is what it used to be 10-15 years ago, and even then it was not necessarily better than that of good PC components. Cheapo Quantum hard drives, optical drives that were really c-rap quality: it takes me back.
I think we would differ on the term “significant.” Yes, iOS is a fork. And yes, some code will migrate from the iOS fork to the OS X fork. But OS X is not undergoing a transformation equivalent to, say, the Win98 to 2000 upgrade. OS X and iOS are largely the same and largely identical, stable code. Apple can’t blame significant architectural changes or code upheaval for an increase in bugs.
They simply are not maintaining the QC that existed under Jobs. Why should a bug persist in iOS for 3 years? Why should it then pass the OS X team members to arrive in El Capitan?
I have sympathy for smaller companies and individual authors when it comes to software QC because it’s a numbers game. But Apple very clearly has the deep resources necessary, and also very clearly has fallen from where they were.
I agree 100%. Microsoft learned this the hard way with the Windows 8 fiasco. Apple keeps flirting with the same issue. My Mac is not my phone and I neither expect nor want them to have the same UI.
Spot on analysis.
You may be right. Immediately after posting I thought of an IT admin who was complaining to me about iMacs failing due to various issues.
The non-retina MacBook Pros are possibly the easiest notebooks in the world to service and upgrade. They were already very thin and light. I get that the even thinner and lighter models are popular, but I was very disappointed when Apple discarded serviceability to shave another fraction of an inch and pound.
IMHO there should basically be two lines. The ‘plain’ line should consist of ultra thin/light models like the current MacBook and MacBook Airs. A lot of people clearly want this even though it cannot be serviced and involves performance trade offs (due to thermal issues). The ‘Pro’ line should go back to the pre-Retina thickness and serviceability.
On the desktop I think it’s foolish to pursue thinner and thinner iMacs. Nobody carries an iMac around each day. I would rather have an iMac I can open up to swap any component in 15m or less.
And I know a few people who have gone to Hackintosh builds because Apple ditched the long lived aluminum tower. Some people want a tower with a big power supply, lots of drive bays, normal card slots, etc.
I don’t blame anyone who does. But Apple is the only game in town for officially supported OS X hardware, so I wish they would continue to offer a choice.
Actually, the very real Windows 8 fiasco was due to a crappy UI implementation.
After 16 years of constant desktop GUI (since Windows 95), professional training and all, professional qualification on Windows in corporate environment and stuff, the team of idiots who decided to impose the tiles and dispose of the Start menu is an irresponsible bunch of loonies. I hope most of them got fired.
Nevertheless, the idea to have a unified OS between devices is in itself valid. Windows 10 is a demonstration of what should have been done with 8 : leave the desktop alone, but make room for tablet computers. When tablet, use the tiles, when desktop use the good old Start menu and mouse just like all times. From what I understand, Surface sells very well, and the uncanny resemblance of the iPad Pro seems to show the concept was not that bad.
Now Apple has not done its own revolution here. In spite of the similarities with Surface, iPad Pro cannot use a mouse or a trackpad. Steve’s long shadow or not, OS X disguised into iOS remains input devices neutered. Sure, it is one and kinda the same OS, but made to be strictly incompatible between desktop and mobile.
When Windows has all these convertible machines growing in number, there is still iOS on one side, and OS X on the other. No mouse on iOS, no touch screen on OS X.
And let’s not forget the most used system of all, Android : a tablet fitted with an HDMI screen, a keyboard and a mouse, has little to envy a convertible PC.
Apple is between two stools at the moment. I am sure if and when the time comes, they will present the joining as “revolutionary” !