or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Who thinks OS X is way to complicated!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Who thinks OS X is way to complicated! - Page 2

post #41 of 64
I will be god-damned if I pick up a manual to learn something about the MacOS.

In Windows:
Right-click on file select "Sharing" or "Security". BAM

Not complicated.

I'm sure it will improve in a while, but as it stands now far too much of it is complicated.

(And what's this madness about not being able to pick drivers in XP? It has driver rollback for God's sake.)

[ 12-12-2001: Message edited by: groverat ]</p>
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #42 of 64
For the first time in years Macusers have to learn something new and they call that complicated.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #43 of 64
Well it was easy for me to access shared drives and such over the network. I used the GO command in the finder and connected to the workstation that had the share, Authenticated myself and then said what drive I wanted to mount that was available. Too easy. Apple could get it down to a few less steps and less typing if they introduced a browsing feature on the networks that works better, but for now it is not impossible. And it will get better. Of course I have also installed X-Windows and other command line apps successfully so I may be a bit more used to these commands than some of you are willing to get.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #44 of 64
[quote]Originally posted by bradbower:
<strong>Oh quit being whiners. How many users need to worry about permissions? How many users care? I can only see one reason they would, and that would be filesharing. Which is solved very well by how users on the same computer can access (read and write) just about everything other than that in other users' Home folders, and how Public folders are shared when you turn filesharing on. Seems like it works pretty good for most dummies. (And if you're not dummy, surely you can install a piece of software called SharePoints as I pointed out above, or dig into NIM, or if you otherewise want o screw with permissions, get a UNIX manual and discover Terminal.app.) Besides, there is never going to be an easy way for a user to go around tweaking permissions on files scattered around the whole unix system--it wasn't exactly easy nor elegant in OS 9, and it hasn't improved much with OS X, but a solution has at least been put in place so users don't HAVE to mess with all of that.

Damn, it isn't even that hard. If you need-to-know, you should be in-the-know, Michael.

*mutters something about go-tards*</strong><hr></blockquote>

I love how you say never. Obviously you have a very imaginiative and creative mind
post #45 of 64
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>For the first time in years Macusers have to learn something new and they call that complicated. </strong><hr></blockquote>

I think the point is that Apple hasn't made significant advances in ease of use since 1984. if anything they have just added on to their basic design making things more complex when in reality they should have been thinking of how to redesign whatever new feature in best.

Learning something new is not the point and you of course miss that as usual.
post #46 of 64
Applenut,

If you would stop pontificating for just a moment you might notice that ( as has been stated in another thread ) 90% of the complaints about a steep learning curve are about operations being different from OS 9. Not about things being more complex.

" Intuitive " can be a very subjective thing just ask any Windows user. I happen to still think that the MacOS ( and yes I mean X ) is still easier and more preferable to Windows but, that's just my opinion. Someone who has worked on Windows all their computing life may prefer that.

One other thing............in 1984 ( god I was 31 then ) the Mac OS ( and anything else out there ) was a lot more simple and feature bare ( no DVD player back then ). It's very difficult to draw an even level of performance and increasingly complex features with ease of use.

I like OS X and find it very easy to use right down to something as simple as launching a browser ( 1 click for X, 2 clicks for 9 ).

OS X is here to stay. Peace Applenut.

[ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #47 of 64
My mother calls me twice a week with problems she's having with OS9, so if she switches to OSX how many times is she gonna be calling me? More, or less? That to me is the bottom line. Cause if it's more, she's going back to OS9. I don't care about the future , about permissions, about anything geek, I care about my phone not ringing when I'm playing Diablo, after all, what else matters?
post #48 of 64
[quote]" Intuitive " can be a very subjective thing just ask any Windows user. I happen to still think that the MacOS ( and yes I mean X ) is still easier and more preferable to Windows but, that's just my opinion. Someone who has worked on Windows all their computing life may prefer that.<hr></blockquote>

What intuitiveness boils down to in such cases is familiarity with a rule set and how well programs adhere to it. It's not entirely debatable that Mac OS X dispenses with some of the rules we've been familiar with, and not always with a good reason. So, we'll get used to it, but I don't think we should have had to try in all cases.
We're investigating reports of indecent acts being committed at the YMCA.
Reply
We're investigating reports of indecent acts being committed at the YMCA.
Reply
post #49 of 64
[quote]If you would stop pontifIcating for just a moment you might notice that ( as has been stated in another thread ) 90% of the complaints about a steep learning curve are about operations being different from OS 9. Not about things being more complex.<hr></blockquote>
Icons on the OSX Desktop do behave differently than OS9, but this difference is not about learning curve, its about broken UI features. If you look carefully at many complaints about OSX it is because some things in OSX are less functional, or simply broken compared to OS9, whether its something that "power users" take advantage of like contextual menus, or something simple like icons staying put, or Finder window settings sticking--little stuff like this makes a bigger difference to an everyday user than changing the System font and adding pinstripes. Broken stuff will always be noticed first and complained about the most.
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
post #50 of 64
Cowerd,

Your icons don't stay put? Mine have since 10.1 and I haven't used contexual menus that much ( I'll ask the friends I know that use a Mac but, I'll bet they don't ether ). See, subjective.

Sometimes to improve something you have to ripp out a lot of the old to make something better.

When PCs went from DOS to Windows 95 ( some went staight there instead of going to 3.1 ) a lot of people actually complained they didn't want to use that mouse thing! These " power users " wanted to still type in commands for everyday tasks ( because that's what they were used to ). And god forbid if they should have to learn something new.

[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #51 of 64
Groverat: I'm still baffled about what makes security and file permissions so hard in OS X?

In the Finder: command-I, "Privileges"

Missing anything? Seriously, I'm sure I'm missing something, but I don't know what.
post #52 of 64
[quote] they just need every thing to be oviose.
<hr></blockquote>

oviously not posted with OmniWeb...

But seriously folks, It ain't over till the fat lady is the default OS on new Hardware...

VF
This Post Disabled on PowerMac G5s
Reply
This Post Disabled on PowerMac G5s
Reply
post #53 of 64
[quote]Your icons don't stay put? Mine have since 10.1 and I haven't used contexual menus that much ( I'll ask the friends I know that use a Mac but, I'll bet they don't ether ). See, subjective.<hr></blockquote>
They're a little jittery, and I'm always interested to see what happens to them after the next minor update . Dude--Finder Pop--finest thing since sliced bread. On a positive note--Apple seems to have added some CMM API as Stuffit now appears in the Finder contextual menu.

Regards the new stuff--I'm grooved about Apache and PHP in my own boxen--only I just play around with webstuff, I make my money with print work and my workflow is very particular--can't do it in OSX yet.
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
post #54 of 64
[quote]
If you would stop pontifIcating for just a moment you might notice that ( as has been stated in another thread ) 90% of the complaints about a steep learning curve are about operations being different from OS 9. Not about things being more complex. <hr></blockquote>

I'm no even talking about that. I'm talking about how Apple is afraid to take any risks in favor of ease of use and how "mac users" are now going against everything we used to praise. look at this thread. I could have sworn that some of the responses from you guys were windows users 4 years ago. "Buy a book and learn"? great

[quote]
" Intuitive " can be a very subjective thing just ask any Windows user. I happen to still think that the MacOS ( and yes I mean X ) is still easier and more preferable to Windows but, that's just my opinion. Someone who has worked on Windows all their computing life may prefer that.<hr></blockquote>

considering the lead Apple had its much too close to be a deciding factor. Apple has sat on their asses while MS unfortunately has slowly made improvements.

[quote]
One other thing............in 1984 ( god I was 31 then ) the Mac OS ( and anything else out there ) was a lot more simple and feature bare ( no DVD player back then ). It's very difficult to draw an even level of performance and increasingly complex features with ease of use. <hr></blockquote>

what the hell does a DVD Player have to do with anything? no shit there was no DVD player. and what does the DVD Player mean in the issue of ease of use and how complex the OS has become?

[quote]
I like OS X and find it very easy to use right down to something as simple as launching a browser ( 1 click for X, 2 clicks for 9 ).<hr></blockquote>

yet there still is not a great solution to the issue of app organization and launching. Why must I go to my app folder anytime I want to open an app not in the dock? no I'm not going to put 40 icons in my dock and no I'm not going to put a folder with a pop up menu in the dock. If anything, Apple should implement Launchbar into the OS. Launchbar solves many "issues" I have with OS X.

[quote]OS X is here to stay. Peace Applenut. <hr></blockquote>
who ever said it wasn't? and why can it not be improved? you guys are so set on this crap that mac OS X can't be the easiest OS in the world simply because its UNIX. That's BULL.

peace
post #55 of 64
I'm still not convinced that MS is really getting a hell of a lot closer to Apple in the ease-of-use department. They've managed to refine their error dialogs to less than ten lines of passive voice run-on sentences and smoothed over most simple behavior. But their UI advances as others have pointed out are in areas like wizards, paper clips, and other presumptuous behaviors (Office 2k menus as another example though they've learned not to do this in XP). Besides, their app UI guidelines (which many don't follow for various reasons) aren't nearly as intelligent or flexible as Apple's. The difference between the CADD program we use at work compared to my old MiniCAD (or Photoshop for that matter) is pretty interesting. Compare the Aqua UI elements (menus, modal windows, windows, palettes, dock, tabs, drawers, sheets, wells, buttons, pop-ups, boxes, toolbars -- oh heck, just open Interface Builder) with the Windows equivalents (button bars, tabs, tiles, dialogs, menus, boxes, pop-ups, modal dialogs, buttons, parent-child windows). Look at how each handles tabs, how each uses toolbars, how each handles modal dialogs, hierarchical buttons/bevel/menus, etc.

For as much as Windows is smoother in some respects than OS X, OS X has a better fundamental philosophy (user control at all times) about its interface and consequently a lot more benefit to users. And the two are growing apart IMO.

I can't sleep in case you can't tell.
post #56 of 64
Applenut,

Ok, I admit the DVD thing was more of a poke in the ribs for you ( since in the early days of X it seemed to be your pet peeve ). But, what I was trying to say is that a modern OS has a lot more to contend with than the one back in 1984 so OSs have had to become more complex to incorporate these things.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #57 of 64
[quote]Why do I have to re-enter my password to install some apps? I'm already friggin' logged in!<hr></blockquote>

This is one of the best features of the OS... in Windows, stuff can modify the registry frequently - including viruses, unwanted spyware, and other crap.

In Mac OS X if you want to modify your system, you are given a slight deterent... programs cannot freely do this and install their crap without this deterent. I think it's great.
post #58 of 64
[quote]I will be god-damned if I pick up a manual to learn something about the MacOS.
In Windows:
Right-click on file select "Sharing" or "Security". BAM

Not complicated.

I'm sure it will improve in a while, but as it stands now far too much of it is complicated<hr></blockquote>

And in Mac OS X you can turn on sharing and share everything out of your home directory (where personal files should be put anyway rather than scattered all over the place. Most new users really don't care where there files are, as long as they can find them.. this GREATLY helps with organization and security of personal files). What's hard about that?
post #59 of 64
[quote]yet there still is not a great solution to the issue of app organization and launching. Why must I go to my app folder anytime I want to open an app not in the dock? no I'm not going to put 40 icons in my dock and no I'm not going to put a folder with a pop up menu in the dock. If anything, Apple should implement Launchbar into the OS. Launchbar solves many "issues" I have with OS X. <hr></blockquote>

How is this different than OS 9? There was no launch bar, unless you count that half baked launcher control panel.

I agree with you COMPLETELY OS X should be simple, but I think it already fundimentally is. There are parts in it that seem complex to us in implemenation, but these seem to be bugs - not the direction in which Apple is going. A good example is permissions... they *should* be transparent, but occasionally they rear their ugly head for all of us.

For example, I should be able to add users to the /Users directory as admin with a simple drag and drop... each user folder's contents should be off access to me though.

However, this will be fixed. The concept of a home directory is a good one (as it is for OS 9), the concept of blocking off access to things which shouldn't be altered is a good one, and the concept of detering us in making system changes by entering our admin password is a good one. There are issues with the implemenations, but hopefully temporary.

It is NOT hard to connect to servers, do file sharing, etc. or at least it is no harder than OS 9 IMHO.

I've yet to hear an example of a genuine complexity (not a bug) with OS X. I think Apple has done a wonderful job with offering us things like packages/disk images, simplying Unix's complex file structure, and providing us with security without overwhelming us. In other words, they have done a great job in making something very complex quite simple (in relative terms). It is quite evident that ease-of-use is still paramount to Apple, IMHO.
post #60 of 64
[quote] If you would stop pontifIcating for just a moment... <hr></blockquote>

Pointification isn't a word. I wonder if there is some underlying irony that I am pointing out that pointification isn't a word.

...well i haven't slept in a couple of days, might as well try at it again tonight...


<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Another garbled attempt to use the English language by your local physicist.
Reply
Another garbled attempt to use the English language by your local physicist.
Reply
post #61 of 64
Yes, it's true pointifacating isn't a real word. However, pontificating is a derivative of pontiff ( like the pope ). For those of you unfamiliar Webster's defines this as : " to speak or express opinions in a pompus or dogmatic way. "

I first noticed it's use in the movie " Anne Hall " back in the late 70's.

Get some sleep.

[ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #62 of 64
[quote]Originally posted by Michaelm8000:
<strong>If you want to suft the net check, E-mail, Right a letter, or make an iMove OS X is great. But if you want to Try to fix your system, setup users with selected folder they can acsses, mess with network settings, connect to a server, anything slightly advanced OS X is not intuitive and takes time and ether far amount of computer knolage or a users manual. This kinda pisses me off! OS X has SO much potental in these areas! Right now they are just flat out to hard to do to call them selves a part of a MAc OS.

Dose anyone else feel the same way?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Most of these things are very easy in Mac OS X SERVER. If you want to do advanced administrator tasks in Mac OS X, get the right software (i.e. server sw). Otherwise you are stuck with NetInfo and the command line.

Just my 2c
-- Denis.
Reply
-- Denis.
Reply
post #63 of 64
This may be off the subject but does anybody have any idea how much faster VPC 5.0 would run if it you could run it in Darwin? The reason I ask is that I read the VPC 5.0 will never be as fast as in classic because of several layers (quartz, aqua, etc) and multitasking. Well, Darwin has much less layers so wouldn't VPC run faster?

- Mark
post #64 of 64
How exactly could Connectix MAKE VirtualPC without frameworks, a windowing system, or a GUI? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
art may imitate life, but life imitates tv.
Reply
art may imitate life, but life imitates tv.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Who thinks OS X is way to complicated!