I only half agree about the window size and positioning issues are a shortcoming of macOS. Individual applications have always been able to implement the ability to retain their window positions and sizes themselves. I’ve implemented such behaviors in apps myself and most drawing apps with floating pallets and toolboxes do this.
I suppose the operating system could provide additional support for this capability, beyond what is already provided in terms of making screen metrics available to query and firing events for things like screen resolution changes, but each application is much more aware of what its own needs are and how to move its controls around to make sure that the UI still functions correctly when the operating system enacts changes in the overall UI. I still see it at least as a shared responsibility between the OS and apps.
My complaint isn't with app windows, or controls in general, but the basics, and in particular, the Finder.
My style of workflow carries over from Classic OS, where every window, without fail, would retain its characteristics (size, position, content view), and used with multiple windows. The Spatial Finder paradigm that John Siracusa has repeatedly ranted about. Fix the F*cking Finder (FTFF).
In turning NeXT's foundation into OS X, some useful concepts were brought over, like column view, but the basic approach was different. Some concessions were made to have the OS X Finder more closely resemble the Classic Finder, but it's as if they were made through the prism of a non-Mac user's perspective, and therefore not quite right.
(Also recall that during that time, early peeks at OS X revealed a menu bar with a centered Apple that was purely ornamental, and not a functional menu. Sanity prevailed, and that was abandoned, but it did reflect the kind of "WTF is going on" thinking from the people who were shaping the new OS.)
That persists to this day (or at least through Mojave, which I still use because I have a couple essential 32-bit apps; but I doubt 10.15 or 11 are any different), and manifests itself though things like opening a folder, and finding that it no longer has the desired size, position, or content view characteristics it was set up with.
I find that still happens every so often, which is both maddening and frustrating. And when it does, trying to recreate the desired view doesn't necessarily "stick," which leads to more frustration. Create a folder, set up the desired views, close it, and reopen it again to find it has reverted to the default setup. That's now how the Finder should work, especially when it didn't before.
There is an element of uncertainty to how windows act, and that should not be the case, even if one chooses to adopt the single window "portal" style Apple prioritized after the switch. As @Xed points out, these are fundamentals that shouldn't require a piece of 3rd party software to fix, and should have been fixed long ago.
UIs do change and evolve. But consistency and predictability are traits that should be present in any interface, and sometimes that's still not the case.
Microsoft also says that it wants to encourage open commerce on its operating system. It will allow apps downloaded from the Windows Store to have independent commerce systems within the app.
FUCK NO THANK YOU!!! That's an ATROCIOUS system for end-users, who will now have to deal with MULTIPLE payment processors, MULTIPLE billing points, MULTIPLE billing systems PASSWORDS, FUCK THAT!!!
Geez. 99% of the time I buy something outside of the Mac App Store, which is the bulk of the software I own, I just autofill my contact and credit card shit in Safari which takes like three seconds. But get real mad about it!
And more often does it try to fill in the wrong shit in the wrong fields. It’s not a great system (and because of the nature of HTML, mostly pre-HTML5), it can’t be, due to the lack of proper semantics.
Microsoft also says that it wants to encourage open commerce on its operating system. It will allow apps downloaded from the Windows Store to have independent commerce systems within the app.
FUCK NO THANK YOU!!! That's an ATROCIOUS system for end-users, who will now have to deal with MULTIPLE payment processors, MULTIPLE billing points, MULTIPLE billing systems PASSWORDS, FUCK THAT!!!
Geez. 99% of the time I buy something outside of the Mac App Store, which is the bulk of the software I own, I just autofill my contact and credit card shit in Safari which takes like three seconds. But get real mad about it!
And more often does it try to fill in the wrong shit in the wrong fields. It’s not a great system (and because of the nature of HTML, mostly pre-HTML5), it can’t be, due to the lack of proper semantics.
I have no issues with Safari’s auto fill of payment and address information. I can’t remember the last time it got anything wrong. So I’m sceptical of your “more often” claim.
Microsoft also says that it wants to encourage open commerce on its operating system. It will allow apps downloaded from the Windows Store to have independent commerce systems within the app. This differs from Apple's requirements to tie in-app purchases from App Store apps to Apple's commerce system.
That's quite the contrast to Apple. Microsoft will collect 0% if a developer brings their own commerce system.
Which would lead to no one using it. That would plain suck. Might as well just use the web browser and use their online store.
If you’re using an OS app that needs any kind of financial transaction, you need to trust it and it should be the exact same experience every single time.
We have come a long way from the days of being bandied about by every developer with their own quirky systems.
An OS developer should at minimum have a commerce system in place and with fair pricing.
Opening up to a third party developer for their apps is just abusing your customers who deserve a streamlined and easy to use/memorize service that they can trust.
macOS has a dock for 20+ years. 2021, Microsoft announces whiz-bang dock, where nothing stays where you put it. June 7, 2021, iPadOS 15 multitasking gets panned. June 24, 2021, Microsoft announces iPadOS 15-like multitasking. Apple lowers commissions. Microsoft lowers them further, in all-out effort to coerce more malware to the Mac. 2020, Apple brings iOS apps to the Mac. 2021, Microsoft brings Android malware to Windows.
I was looking for some decent summary.. this did it perfectly
Stupid: the reason a Start menu is at a FIXED location and in a CORNER is, that no matter where the mouse is, with an AIMLESS flick of the wrist, one can fling the cursor to where it needs to be: muscle memory and cursor dynamics work for things to work.
A MOVING menu starting at the center of the screen requires AIMING and OBSERVATION.
NOW, how’s that supposed to be better?
It’s novelty for the sake of novelty, brought to Windows users by design loonies without any regards for productivity, workflow or ergonomics.
Microsoft + Windows + Amazon + Android = bye, bye, privacy!
"Bye, bye"?
How does something that never existed go away?
All of those are open systems which means you gain flexibility while sacrificing security, privacy and stability.
In my IT days I ran mission critical enterprise level systems that I locked down tighter than a drum. Users could only do what I let them do, how I let them do it. Yes, it was restrictive. But those systems were bullet proof. They never once failed.
-- The cost? The almost complete loss of user power and flexibility
-- The Benefit? Unrivaled security and reliability. (Nobody wants to hear they're not getting paid because "the computer is down". Failure of any sort was not an option).
Conversely, I was originally hired by that company to design and develop an automated invoicing system. After looking at it, I determined and recommended that they simply hire somebody who knew Lotus to do it (mostly) manually because: With only a few, high value, highly customized invoices, flexibility was more important than anything a full blown computerized system could offer. I thought I had recommended myself right out of job -- and it took the Controller 10 years to forgive me. But he changed his mind when we took over a company who had done exactly what he wanted -- and it was monster they wrestled with every month.
Like Apples and oranges, one is no better or worse than the other. They're just different. And, you go with what best meets your needs.
A desktop OS will be running Android (tablet) apps. Hmmm....
It sounds like the wall between desktop OS's and tablet OS's continues to crumble.
As more and more uses, applications and systems take advantage of the merger, we will see desktops relegated to power systems while laptops & tablets give way to 2 in 1's.
I got an eyeful of that helping my grandson through cyberschool: he could not have done it with only a laptop nor could he have done it with only tablet. Not even one of each could have done it because some single assignments and exams required both -- there wasn't an option to switch back and forth from laptop to tablet.
Only a 2 in 1 was able to do the complete job (and that's elementary school! -- hardly the epitome of technology -- or is it?)
(By the way, all of the tablet work was done with tablet & pencil -- drawing or handwriting stuff.)
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
It will be interesting to see if Windows becomes even more of a virus magnet by allowing Android apps. If it does, that may help support Apple's point about iOS and MacOS security and third-party stores. But that would require the Windows 11 OS to gain traction, which typically is not through upgrades but instead forced upon users when they buy new hardware. So maybe in a couple of years.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
Microsoft is releasing a dev kit for Windows on ARM later this summer. It bears a striking resemblance to the Apple TV. Its CPU is a lot slower than the M1 but there is no technical reason why Apple could not release a Mac Nano in an Apple TV form factor at a very low price. Do it for Steve! https://developer.qualcomm.com/hardware/windows-on-snapdragon/snapdragon-developer-kit
I run several flavors of Windows on my Macs. Macs have been the best Windows machines I've ever owned.
I run all mine under VMWare Fusion. I hope there's a method to run Windows 11 as a virtual machine. I would think there has to be a way virtual machines are quite prevalent in the enterprise.
It's why I bought a top-of-the-line 2020 iMac knowing I'll be running Windows a years to come.
Not sure the hate. Sure, my personal life is all MacOS, but for many of us enterprise developers, Windows is still necessary. Lighten up.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
Well, some of it is 4 year old hardware. But the guts of it (# of cores & RAM) are more like 20 years old.
Microsoft has always supported older hardware for as much and as long as they could.
They sell software -- the more types of hardware it runs on the more money they make.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
Well, some of it is 4 year old hardware. But the guts of it (# of cores & RAM) are more like 20 years old.
Microsoft has always supported older hardware for as much and as long as they could.
They sell software -- the more types of hardware it runs on the more money they make.
They are going to limit any limitations they can.
All of the above is why MS can't get out to its Wintel rut and into ARM. Too much value to Windows customers in legacy support. (note to self; consider Windows 7 upgrade this decade),
On the other hand, Apple is a year away from ARM across all of its platforms, and all of it devices. With that, Universal Control is going to be widely adopted by Apple's customer base within the next year, creating an even larger moat, and new opportunities for developers.
One can only hope that this will put an end to the "a Windows machine cost less" FUD. Those specs should raise the base computer price?
Come on, did you even read the article? It is clearly mentioned - "Microsoft's requirement of TPM 2.0 and other requirements will limit processors to ones delivered in approximately the last six years.". We are talking about specs that belong to 6 year old computers here. How and why would that increase cost, that too to Apple levels?
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
Thank you for the information. Even then, my point still stands in context to the post that I replied to. Arrival of Windows 11 is not magically going to increase the cost of entry-level PCs, with 4-year old hardware capable of running it.
Well, some of it is 4 year old hardware. But the guts of it (# of cores & RAM) are more like 20 years old.
Microsoft has always supported older hardware for as much and as long as they could.
They sell software -- the more types of hardware it runs on the more money they make.
They are going to limit any limitations they can.
All of the above is why MS can't get out to its Wintel rut and into ARM. Too much value to Windows customers in legacy support. (note to self; consider Windows 7 upgrade this decade),
...
So supporting your customers and their billions of dollars of investment in your systems is a bad thing!
Microsoft also says that it wants to encourage open commerce on its operating system. It will allow apps downloaded from the Windows Store to have independent commerce systems within the app.
FUCK NO THANK YOU!!! That's an ATROCIOUS system for end-users, who will now have to deal with MULTIPLE payment processors, MULTIPLE billing points, MULTIPLE billing systems PASSWORDS, FUCK THAT!!!
Geez. 99% of the time I buy something outside of the Mac App Store, which is the bulk of the software I own, I just autofill my contact and credit card shit in Safari which takes like three seconds. But get real mad about it!
And more often does it try to fill in the wrong shit in the wrong fields. It’s not a great system (and because of the nature of HTML, mostly pre-HTML5), it can’t be, due to the lack of proper semantics.
I almost never have this problem. It also has nothing to do with HTML5 (contrary to popular belief, it’s not much different than 4), it has to do with sloppy form markup and I see that far more often in less critical situations than payment processors which tend to get it right.
from Parallels--Note: this article applies only to the virtual machines running on Intel-based Mac computers. The use of TPM modules in Parallels Desktop virtual machines running on a Mac computer with Apple M1 chip will be introduced in future updates. --so there is the potential for it running sometime in the future. As for VMware/Fusion, not sure if VMWare will ever run on M1 platform.
That's cool but VMs on INtel Macs won't be of any real use for serious gaming which is the only reason many Mac users have a PC or BootCamp. I can run GTAV or RDR2 at 2.5K on a 2103 Mac Pro with parallel GPUs in BootCamp for example. In a VM they won't even start. That said I use a PC and a GTX 1080 and run 4K, the Map Pro just got too hot.
As to M1s, I am running Windows 10 on my M1 test Mac using Parallels and I will go see now what that says about Windows 11 in the insider program test.
Comments
A MOVING menu starting at the center of the screen requires AIMING and OBSERVATION.
NOW, how’s that supposed to be better?
It’s novelty for the sake of novelty, brought to Windows users by design loonies without any regards for productivity, workflow or ergonomics.
It will be interesting to see if Windows becomes even more of a virus magnet by allowing Android apps. If it does, that may help support Apple's point about iOS and MacOS security and third-party stores. But that would require the Windows 11 OS to gain traction, which typically is not through upgrades but instead forced upon users when they buy new hardware. So maybe in a couple of years.
Hey Sweeny, you have a new platform for Fortnite.
https://developer.qualcomm.com/hardware/windows-on-snapdragon/snapdragon-developer-kit
It's 4 years, not 6 years. That's because the earliest Intel CPU Architecture that's supported looks to be Coffee Lake, from 2017. It's basically the same with AMD, but potentially a year later, with Zen+ being the earliest, there.
On the other hand, Apple is a year away from ARM across all of its platforms, and all of it devices. With that, Universal Control is going to be widely adopted by Apple's customer base within the next year, creating an even larger moat, and new opportunities for developers.
A 2103 Mac Pro. Really?