DuhSesame said: MacBook Pros used to be around 200-250 days average, and since this WWDC haven’t mentioned anything hardware related, it will be another 500 days at least. That’s pretty slow compared to the past.
It's entirely possible that Apple won't follow the traditional trends any longer (I hope, anyway). But, my concern is more that given the state of things, Apple isn't doesn't seem more concerned or shift their policy more in terms of communicating with their customer base better. Unless you're cutting edge (a possible excuse for not doing so), secrecy and lack of communication with customers is seldom a good thing (often, it's a huge warning sign).
DuhSesame said: I don’t think the UI have degraded, why did you think of that?
For a bunch of reasons I probably should have collected in some document somewhere, as I often get this kine of question... but I've paid quite a bit of attention to UI/UX design over the years, and it's just something I see, but have a hard time identifying on the spot. I can give a few examples though...
One that really bugs me on the Mac each day is the design of Spotlight. When you had an item picked, it used to show you the path and you could pick a point in the path. Now, you have to hold a key to even see the path and can't pick it. How is that an improvement?
Flat design - it's a design trend that got popular, but comes with a bunch of downsides. It's main purpose (aside from taste) has more to do with web-coding and websites. It has brought a bunch of poor UI trends along with it. While we didn't need felt, there was no reason for Apple to so such a drastic divergence from good practices just to match another OS out there and some web-design trends. (And, as you may have noticed, they have gradually backtracked a bit from their original stark, flat design)
Removal of color - while stark gray interfaces might look cool and 'modern', they aren't nearly as good in terms of UI. When you put a row of tools that are color vs B&W ones, the color one will win in terms of productivity.
Interface consistency - One of the things that made the Mac great, were the guidelines that kept software packages more similar than random in terms of where to expect tools and options, and what some of those core options and tools were.
Security - Apple has made a bunch of bozo moves in recent times in terms of UI around Apple-ID and settings related security. For example, I often go through days of time where 'enter your Apple ID' dialogs pop up all over the place while I'm using my device. This is really, really bad in terms of training users to get phished (aside from being really, really annoying!). There should be ONE place in the system settings where the Apple ID/password gets entered... and that's it. Any dialog that pops up from some app that needs it (for whatever reason it gets disconnected from it) should reference people going to this setting to fix things.
Feature consistency - Since iOS, this has become a newer problem with Apple's software. For example, I still can't do a simple thing like duplicate a calendar event on iOS.
Quality control - There was once a time that Apple's interfaces were pretty darn rock-solid. They looked great and there was an attention to detail. Then I'd go to Windows and notice text askew, or overlapping, or things not aligned right, etc. Now I run across this stuff on the Mac regularly. I could paste in screen-shots here of lists and such where text is overlapping, etc. It's just sloppy in a way that is very un-Apple. Then, there have been the software bugs that while not unique, have certainly increased in frequency, if not impact.
I've also had friends tell me (who pay more attention to these things) about falters or quality drops in some of Apple's longer-term, rock-solid core technologies, like the way fonts are handled and drawn to the screen, or how the screen gets drawn for things like remote access sessions... bugs in audio/video handling, etc. It's like the attention to detail or maybe the decision making around modifying these things just isn't there any longer.
User trickery - Even stuff like how Apple now tries to trick users into installing updates, really bugs me. Like when the dialog pops up notifying you of an update and you hit 'Later' and then it pops up your password entry box (with a little tiny 'no, I actually meant later or another time, Apple!' text underneath it to bypass entering your password. And, if you enter your password, you've essentially told the OS to go ahead and update later on. Maybe that pushes Apple's goal of more devices updated, but it's bad UX.
I could keep going if I wanted to spend more time thinking about it.
Does that mean I'd go back? (which is the common argument you'll hear) Well, no... they've added to many features I need, and it is just unreasonable to stick with old software. That doesn't mean I wouldn't like the older attention to UI to be applied to current UI and those new features, though.
It's entirely possible that Apple won't follow the traditional trends any longer (I hope, anyway). But, my concern is more that given the state of things, Apple isn't doesn't seem more concerned or shift their policy more in terms of communicating with their customer base better. Unless you're cutting edge (a possible excuse for not doing so), secrecy and lack of communication with customers is seldom a good thing (often, it's a huge warning sign).
Yeah it should have no excuses why the updates on hardware are so slow and inefficient, yet just keeping silence all around like nothing happened. I'd guess they either want to skip the 8th generation CPU like the 5th generation ones, or update the specs soon. At least, please NOT bumping the spec when the processors are almost getting a refresh.
Flat design - it's a design trend that got popular, but comes with a bunch of downsides. It's main purpose (aside from taste) has more to do with web-coding and websites. It has brought a bunch of poor UI trends along with it. While we didn't need felt, there was no reason for Apple to so such a drastic divergence from good practices just to match another OS out there and some web-design trends. (And, as you may have noticed, they have gradually backtracked a bit from their original stark, flat design)
Actually, macOS did not use flat design, or not completely. A true "flat design" should feel almost nothing third-dimensional, like so:
Which if you pay a more close attention on icons of macOS, there are still lots of detail, like Xcode and Hard drive:
And unlike iOS or the Linux one I put above, the UI of macOS still implying curves and grooves, while certainly "flatter" than before, it's more like "abstract" than "flat".
Removal of color - while stark gray interfaces might look cool and 'modern', they aren't nearly as good in terms of UI. When you put a row of tools that are color vs B&W ones, the color one will win in terms of productivity.
Not sure what you mean, you're talking things like forward/back buttons on top of a Finder or a Safari? It has always been a gray-ish one.
Interface consistency - One of the things that made the Mac great, were the guidelines that kept software packages more similar than random in terms of where to expect tools and options, and what some of those core options and tools were.
Security - Apple has made a bunch of bozo moves in recent times in terms of UI around Apple-ID and settings related security. For example, I often go through days of time where 'enter your Apple ID' dialogs pop up all over the place while I'm using my device. This is really, really bad in terms of training users to get phished (aside from being really, really annoying!). There should be ONE place in the system settings where the Apple ID/password gets entered... and that's it. Any dialog that pops up from some app that needs it (for whatever reason it gets disconnected from it) should reference people going to this setting to fix things.
Feature consistency - Since iOS, this has become a newer problem with Apple's software. For example, I still can't do a simple thing like duplicate a calendar event on iOS.
Quality control - There was once a time that Apple's interfaces were pretty darn rock-solid. They looked great and there was an attention to detail. Then I'd go to Windows and notice text askew, or overlapping, or things not aligned right, etc. Now I run across this stuff on the Mac regularly. I could paste in screen-shots here of lists and such where text is overlapping, etc. It's just sloppy in a way that is very un-Apple. Then, there have been the software bugs that while not unique, have certainly increased in frequency, if not impact.
I've also had friends tell me (who pay more attention to these things) about falters or quality drops in some of Apple's longer-term, rock-solid core technologies, like the way fonts are handled and drawn to the screen, or how the screen gets drawn for things like remote access sessions... bugs in audio/video handling, etc. It's like the attention to detail or maybe the decision making around modifying these things just isn't there any longer.
User trickery - Even stuff like how Apple now tries to trick users into installing updates, really bugs me. Like when the dialog pops up notifying you of an update and you hit 'Later' and then it pops up your password entry box (with a little tiny 'no, I actually meant later or another time, Apple!' text underneath it to bypass entering your password. And, if you enter your password, you've essentially told the OS to go ahead and update later on. Maybe that pushes Apple's goal of more devices updated, but it's bad UX.
I see. there are something that truly bugs me when think about it (I'm thinking about Fantastical where they have their own set of icons, instead the one used from Mac, or apps that's not from the App Store, like Virtualbox), but all seems more like a glitch that can be easily fixed, like the font issue, or mismatching icons. But for things like "flatter", I think it's all about another style.
It is an interesting idea, but I wonder if they could produce a pro-level core unit and still sell it at mini pricing, just with lower-level components. If we assume the GPU(s) go external, I suppose it could be something like the 2013 Mac Pro, but actually be more feasible this time. However, I think they'd get complained into oblivion if it were too similar to the cylinder.
DuhSesame said: Actually, macOS did not use flat design, or not completely. A true "flat design" should feel almost nothing third-dimensional ... And unlike iOS or the Linux one I put above, the UI of macOS still implying curves and grooves, while certainly "flatter" than before, it's more like "abstract" than "flat".
Yes, I'd agree there. I think you have to keep some of that when you have overlapping windows and such. I just heard a podcast where they were discussing the difficulty of dark-mode, as shadows play such a crucial role. But, there are other aspects of layout and buttons to links and stuff that more mimics web-based flat design which I'm not crazy about. But, yes, it's more of a hybrid.
DuhSesame said: Not sure what you mean, you're talking things like forward/back buttons on top of a Finder or a Safari? It has always been a gray-ish one.
I meant more stuff like tool-bars. For example, in an email app, having the 'delete' icon/button be red while maybe 'send' is green or something is very helpful compared to if you made both black&white/gray. After the initial move, a lot of stuff got 'gray-ized' and has now swung back a bit.
It is an interesting idea, but I wonder if they could produce a pro-level core unit and still sell it at mini pricing, just with lower-level components. If we assume the GPU(s) go external, I suppose it could be something like the 2013 Mac Pro, but actually be more feasible this time. However, I think they'd get complained into oblivion if it were too similar to the cylinder.
Internal GPU will always be better since it can utilize all of the PCI-E lanes. I think what he mean is they're essentially the same platform but two different form, although I have no idea how that'll work (how can a ultra low voltage and workstation board sharing similar board design).
Yes, I'd agree there. I think you have to keep some of that when you have overlapping windows and such. I just heard a podcast where they were discussing the difficulty of dark-mode, as shadows play such a crucial role. But, there are other aspects of layout and buttons to links and stuff that more mimics web-based flat design which I'm not crazy about. But, yes, it's more of a hybrid.
I just saw an argument about the new dark mode, and don't think is a really big issue. Most of the CLI interface were still based on a dark background even today (which obviously include some really glossy IPS panel), yet most who used don't think is a issue. Computer screen were designed to be used more in a room than under direct sunlight, and I'm sure most people will got their brain tired before they have eye-seizures. Even then, there's lots of dark system themes across all of the platforms that people just think it looks cool. I think the point is take a break if you need, or avoid using any dark-theme under direct sunlight.
Of course, that's just something people can choose to turned it off anyway.
DuhSesame said: Internal GPU will always be better since it can utilize all of the PCI-E lanes. I think what he mean is they're essentially the same platform but two different form, although I have no idea how that'll work (how can a ultra low voltage and workstation board sharing similar board design).
Yeah, it just depends on how much you need all the PCI-E lanes. I think most of Mike's eGPU tests showed that with TB3, there is little performance loss (if any) unless you 'loopback' (i.e.: go to eGPU, then back to the internal laptop display). Storage is another one that depends. RAM obviously has to be internal.
My impression (however limited it is) is that the speculation of that article is kind of flawed. I'd love if it were true though, as I've noted wanting something like the Mac Pro cylinder, but with option to use an i5/i7, regular RAM, more regular SSD, cheaper GPUs, etc. in order to bring the cost down. I don't need that pro of level hardware, but I need it's cooling efficiency (silence and increased reliability).
DuhSesame said: I just saw an argument about the new dark mode, and don't think is a really big issue. Most of the CLI interface were still based on a dark background even today (which obviously include some really glossy IPS panel), yet most who used don't think is a issue. Computer screen were designed to be used more in a room than under direct sunlight, and I'm sure most people will got their brain tired before they have eye-seizures. Even then, there's lots of dark system themes across all of the platforms that people just think it looks cool. I think the point is take a break if you need, or avoid using any dark-theme under direct sunlight.
The problem has more to do with edges of windows, shadows, transparencies, and such when talking about a multitasking OS GUI. In-app is less of a problem, though I'm sure a developer could do it very poorly.
But, it's going to take a while as even if we set macOS in dark-mode, we'll have to wait until all the apps we regularly use get 'themed' as well, or it would be nasty. I like it in general, though.
Yeah, it just depends on how much you need all the PCI-E lanes. I think most of Mike's eGPU tests showed that with TB3, there is little performance loss (if any) unless you 'loopback' (i.e.: go to eGPU, then back to the internal laptop display). Storage is another one that depends. RAM obviously has to be internal.
My impression (however limited it is) is that the speculation of that article is kind of flawed. I'd love if it were true though, as I've noted wanting something like the Mac Pro cylinder, but with option to use an i5/i7, regular RAM, more regular SSD, cheaper GPUs, etc. in order to bring the cost down. I don't need that pro of level hardware, but I need it's cooling efficiency (silence and increased reliability).
It might work better if they decide to use their own processors, but for Intel, almost everything is different in a workstation platform than a ultra low voltage one. A Xeon cooler may be even bigger than a Mac mini.
Speaking about mini, I've just had a talk with a friend yesterday, which he thinks that Apple is using older design or products to exploring the lower-end market. They've learned from 5c that making a entirely-different lower-end products will not have enough profit, which is why we saw the new iPad now is an Air 2 with a beefier processor and a "downgraded" screen. That might explained why there's no updates for the mini.
Not sure if there’s people that still purchasing MacBook Air & Mac mini, but there could be quiet a few (Other than purchased from organizations).
Not sure if there’s people that still purchasing... ...Mac mini
I’d buy one if they updated it. The PSU in my iTunes server Late 2006 white iMac started leaking, so I have to get a replacement computer for it. I’m not paying FULL FUCKING LAUNCH PRICE for a 5 year old computer, though. If Apple kept selling old products while keeping the same margin percentage, gradually decreasing the price as it ages, that’d be one thing.
DuhSesame said: Speaking about mini, I've just had a talk with a friend yesterday, which he thinks that Apple is using older design or products to exploring the lower-end market. They've learned from 5c that making a entirely-different lower-end products will not have enough profit, which is why we saw the new iPad now is an Air 2 with a beefier processor and a "downgraded" screen. That might explained why there's no updates for the mini.
Not sure if there’s people that still purchasing MacBook Air & Mac mini, but there could be quiet a few (Other than purchased from organizations).
Yea, Apple had been selling old products more as budget models, which I think is a really bad practice. I hope they fix that and develop true lower-end products if they want to serve (and compete in) that market... though even low-end for Apple is generally pretty expensive, and more premium.
I guess I miss the 2000s when Apple did a fairly good job or selling premium products within reach of average consumers. The MacBook Air and mini are perfect examples, though people found other uses as well.
As an aside, my wife bought an MB Air about a year ago, as she looked at the MBPs and wasn't happy with them (and MB wasn't quite enough power). So, the Air is more a hold-over until they make something more fitting for her (a MB that's powerful enough, or a better-designed MBP).
DuhSesame said: Speaking about mini, I've just had a talk with a friend yesterday, which he thinks that Apple is using older design or products to exploring the lower-end market. They've learned from 5c that making a entirely-different lower-end products will not have enough profit, which is why we saw the new iPad now is an Air 2 with a beefier processor and a "downgraded" screen. That might explained why there's no updates for the mini.
Not sure if there’s people that still purchasing MacBook Air & Mac mini, but there could be quiet a few (Other than purchased from organizations).
Yea, Apple had been selling old products more as budget models, which I think is a really bad practice. I hope they fix that and develop true lower-end products if they want to serve (and compete in) that market... though even low-end for Apple is generally pretty expensive, and more premium.
I guess I miss the 2000s when Apple did a fairly good job or selling premium products within reach of average consumers. The MacBook Air and mini are perfect examples, though people found other uses as well.
As an aside, my wife bought an MB Air about a year ago, as she looked at the MBPs and wasn't happy with them (and MB wasn't quite enough power). So, the Air is more a hold-over until they make something more fitting for her (a MB that's powerful enough, or a better-designed MBP).
Not sure if there’s people that still purchasing... ...Mac mini
I’d buy one if they updated it. The PSU in my iTunes server Late 2006 white iMac started leaking, so I have to get a replacement computer for it. I’m not paying FULL FUCKING LAUNCH PRICE for a 5 year old computer, though. If Apple kept selling old products while keeping the same margin percentage, gradually decreasing the price as it ages, that’d be one thing.
That's the thing. If they're just using an older design with the latest performance, it will be more acceptable. Unfortunately is much worse.
MacBook Air should be replaced by a larger MacBook even back in 2015.
Comments
For a bunch of reasons I probably should have collected in some document somewhere, as I often get this kine of question... but I've paid quite a bit of attention to UI/UX design over the years, and it's just something I see, but have a hard time identifying on the spot. I can give a few examples though...
One that really bugs me on the Mac each day is the design of Spotlight. When you had an item picked, it used to show you the path and you could pick a point in the path. Now, you have to hold a key to even see the path and can't pick it. How is that an improvement?
Flat design - it's a design trend that got popular, but comes with a bunch of downsides. It's main purpose (aside from taste) has more to do with web-coding and websites. It has brought a bunch of poor UI trends along with it. While we didn't need felt, there was no reason for Apple to so such a drastic divergence from good practices just to match another OS out there and some web-design trends. (And, as you may have noticed, they have gradually backtracked a bit from their original stark, flat design)
Removal of color - while stark gray interfaces might look cool and 'modern', they aren't nearly as good in terms of UI. When you put a row of tools that are color vs B&W ones, the color one will win in terms of productivity.
Interface consistency - One of the things that made the Mac great, were the guidelines that kept software packages more similar than random in terms of where to expect tools and options, and what some of those core options and tools were.
Security - Apple has made a bunch of bozo moves in recent times in terms of UI around Apple-ID and settings related security. For example, I often go through days of time where 'enter your Apple ID' dialogs pop up all over the place while I'm using my device. This is really, really bad in terms of training users to get phished (aside from being really, really annoying!). There should be ONE place in the system settings where the Apple ID/password gets entered... and that's it. Any dialog that pops up from some app that needs it (for whatever reason it gets disconnected from it) should reference people going to this setting to fix things.
Feature consistency - Since iOS, this has become a newer problem with Apple's software. For example, I still can't do a simple thing like duplicate a calendar event on iOS.
Quality control - There was once a time that Apple's interfaces were pretty darn rock-solid. They looked great and there was an attention to detail. Then I'd go to Windows and notice text askew, or overlapping, or things not aligned right, etc. Now I run across this stuff on the Mac regularly. I could paste in screen-shots here of lists and such where text is overlapping, etc. It's just sloppy in a way that is very un-Apple. Then, there have been the software bugs that while not unique, have certainly increased in frequency, if not impact.
I've also had friends tell me (who pay more attention to these things) about falters or quality drops in some of Apple's longer-term, rock-solid core technologies, like the way fonts are handled and drawn to the screen, or how the screen gets drawn for things like remote access sessions... bugs in audio/video handling, etc. It's like the attention to detail or maybe the decision making around modifying these things just isn't there any longer.
User trickery - Even stuff like how Apple now tries to trick users into installing updates, really bugs me. Like when the dialog pops up notifying you of an update and you hit 'Later' and then it pops up your password entry box (with a little tiny 'no, I actually meant later or another time, Apple!' text underneath it to bypass entering your password. And, if you enter your password, you've essentially told the OS to go ahead and update later on. Maybe that pushes Apple's goal of more devices updated, but it's bad UX.
I could keep going if I wanted to spend more time thinking about it.
Does that mean I'd go back? (which is the common argument you'll hear) Well, no... they've added to many features I need, and it is just unreasonable to stick with old software. That doesn't mean I wouldn't like the older attention to UI to be applied to current UI and those new features, though.
That being said, I saw an interesting suggestion yesterday: https://www.macobserver.com/columns-opinions/editorial/apple-new-mac-mini-mac-pro/
Actually, macOS did not use flat design, or not completely. A true "flat design" should feel almost nothing third-dimensional, like so:
https://github.com/erikdubois/Surfn
Which if you pay a more close attention on icons of macOS, there are still lots of detail, like Xcode and Hard drive:
And unlike iOS or the Linux one I put above, the UI of macOS still implying curves and grooves, while certainly "flatter" than before, it's more like "abstract" than "flat".
Not sure what you mean, you're talking things like forward/back buttons on top of a Finder or a Safari? It has always been a gray-ish one.
I see. there are something that truly bugs me when think about it (I'm thinking about Fantastical where they have their own set of icons, instead the one used from Mac, or apps that's not from the App Store, like Virtualbox), but all seems more like a glitch that can be easily fixed, like the font issue, or mismatching icons. But for things like "flatter", I think it's all about another style.
This says the most of what I’m feeling.
Yes, I'd agree there. I think you have to keep some of that when you have overlapping windows and such. I just heard a podcast where they were discussing the difficulty of dark-mode, as shadows play such a crucial role. But, there are other aspects of layout and buttons to links and stuff that more mimics web-based flat design which I'm not crazy about. But, yes, it's more of a hybrid.
I meant more stuff like tool-bars. For example, in an email app, having the 'delete' icon/button be red while maybe 'send' is green or something is very helpful compared to if you made both black&white/gray. After the initial move, a lot of stuff got 'gray-ized' and has now swung back a bit.
I just saw an argument about the new dark mode, and don't think is a really big issue. Most of the CLI interface were still based on a dark background even today (which obviously include some really glossy IPS panel), yet most who used don't think is a issue. Computer screen were designed to be used more in a room than under direct sunlight, and I'm sure most people will got their brain tired before they have eye-seizures. Even then, there's lots of dark system themes across all of the platforms that people just think it looks cool. I think the point is take a break if you need, or avoid using any dark-theme under direct sunlight.
Of course, that's just something people can choose to turned it off anyway.
My impression (however limited it is) is that the speculation of that article is kind of flawed. I'd love if it were true though, as I've noted wanting something like the Mac Pro cylinder, but with option to use an i5/i7, regular RAM, more regular SSD, cheaper GPUs, etc. in order to bring the cost down. I don't need that pro of level hardware, but I need it's cooling efficiency (silence and increased reliability).
The problem has more to do with edges of windows, shadows, transparencies, and such when talking about a multitasking OS GUI. In-app is less of a problem, though I'm sure a developer could do it very poorly.
But, it's going to take a while as even if we set macOS in dark-mode, we'll have to wait until all the apps we regularly use get 'themed' as well, or it would be nasty. I like it in general, though.
Speaking about mini, I've just had a talk with a friend yesterday, which he thinks that Apple is using older design or products to exploring the lower-end market. They've learned from 5c that making a entirely-different lower-end products will not have enough profit, which is why we saw the new iPad now is an Air 2 with a beefier processor and a "downgraded" screen. That might explained why there's no updates for the mini.
Not sure if there’s people that still purchasing MacBook Air & Mac mini, but there could be quiet a few (Other than purchased from organizations).
I guess I miss the 2000s when Apple did a fairly good job or selling premium products within reach of average consumers. The MacBook Air and mini are perfect examples, though people found other uses as well.
As an aside, my wife bought an MB Air about a year ago, as she looked at the MBPs and wasn't happy with them (and MB wasn't quite enough power). So, the Air is more a hold-over until they make something more fitting for her (a MB that's powerful enough, or a better-designed MBP).
That's the thing. If they're just using an older design with the latest performance, it will be more acceptable. Unfortunately is much worse.
MacBook Air should be replaced by a larger MacBook even back in 2015.