I Thought Bryan Chaffin was smarter than this
MacObserver Editorial on Tiger
I first became aware of Chaffin when he debated Enderle about the Mac. I thought he did a fair job and thought I'd keep up with his posts but after reading his assesment of Tiger I now have serious doubts about just how much of a "Power" user he really is.
I love when people say "There's not much that can be improved" History is littered with people who couldn't think outside the box like this. Henry Ford's accountant for one
Sure ...Tiger's just a Service Pack. Core Image/Video, Core Data, Fine Grain Locking and other Kernel ehancements, HDR image support, PDF 1.5 enhancements, etc etc etc are "small" sure.
Yeah it's really hard to go to http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/automator/ and download some ready made Actions.
WTF? RSS Geeky? This guy actually calls himself a "Power User" ..talk about delusions of grandeur.
I'm being a bit harsh and obtuse but when you get excellent writing and reviews from the likes of Sircusa and Jon Gruber you kind of don't want the "fast food" mentality of the plain Mac Web writers. Give me more. I'm a Mac user so obviously I'm smarter than the average bear
I first became aware of Chaffin when he debated Enderle about the Mac. I thought he did a fair job and thought I'd keep up with his posts but after reading his assesment of Tiger I now have serious doubts about just how much of a "Power" user he really is.
Quote:
Yet for everything that Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger has been made out to be, there's an awful lot that it simply isn't, or that it at least won't be for a lot of people.
My take on Tiger in a nutshell follows: with more than five years of Mac OS X development under its belt and already three major upgrades to the operating system, there simply isn't as much room on the surface for Apple to improve the general day-to-day experience of using a Mac. Accordingly, the major improvements to Mac OS X that Tiger brings to the table are primarily under the hood and not so much in the form of new features that you'll wonder how you ever lived without.
Yet for everything that Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger has been made out to be, there's an awful lot that it simply isn't, or that it at least won't be for a lot of people.
My take on Tiger in a nutshell follows: with more than five years of Mac OS X development under its belt and already three major upgrades to the operating system, there simply isn't as much room on the surface for Apple to improve the general day-to-day experience of using a Mac. Accordingly, the major improvements to Mac OS X that Tiger brings to the table are primarily under the hood and not so much in the form of new features that you'll wonder how you ever lived without.
I love when people say "There's not much that can be improved" History is littered with people who couldn't think outside the box like this. Henry Ford's accountant for one
Quote:
Tiger isn't like 10.1 Puma, which actually made Mac OS X usable and added such obvious features as DVD playback. It's not like 10.2 Jaguar, which delivered a substantial performance boost and really started to set Mac OS X apart from the competition. It's not even like 10.3 Panther, which brought all-new technologies like iChat AV to the table.
Tiger isn't like 10.1 Puma, which actually made Mac OS X usable and added such obvious features as DVD playback. It's not like 10.2 Jaguar, which delivered a substantial performance boost and really started to set Mac OS X apart from the competition. It's not even like 10.3 Panther, which brought all-new technologies like iChat AV to the table.
Sure ...Tiger's just a Service Pack. Core Image/Video, Core Data, Fine Grain Locking and other Kernel ehancements, HDR image support, PDF 1.5 enhancements, etc etc etc are "small" sure.
Quote:
Automator is similarly geeky. It's not as niche as AppleScript -- and many of us probably remember that AppleScript was supposed to be scripting for the rest of us -- but I believe it will still be too techie for most.
Automator is similarly geeky. It's not as niche as AppleScript -- and many of us probably remember that AppleScript was supposed to be scripting for the rest of us -- but I believe it will still be too techie for most.
Yeah it's really hard to go to http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/automator/ and download some ready made Actions.
Quote:
Safari 2.0/RSS is the best Safari to date, but as an RSS reader it pails in comparison to more robust readers. Its best purpose may be to introduce the world of RSS feeds to those surfers unfamiliar with the technology, but RSS is still too much and too geeky for the majority of users I know.
Safari 2.0/RSS is the best Safari to date, but as an RSS reader it pails in comparison to more robust readers. Its best purpose may be to introduce the world of RSS feeds to those surfers unfamiliar with the technology, but RSS is still too much and too geeky for the majority of users I know.
WTF? RSS Geeky? This guy actually calls himself a "Power User" ..talk about delusions of grandeur.
I'm being a bit harsh and obtuse but when you get excellent writing and reviews from the likes of Sircusa and Jon Gruber you kind of don't want the "fast food" mentality of the plain Mac Web writers. Give me more. I'm a Mac user so obviously I'm smarter than the average bear
Comments
I think one of the most frustrating things for developers is making cool stuff that people don't want to use because they don't want another learning curve no matter how small.
Originally posted by asdasd
He is totally wrong about Tiger, although I agree with him on the examples he has chosen as being somewhat geeky ( like automator and RSS) . He seems to miss spotlight. spotlight is revolutionary. For a novice user.
The funniest thing I continually read is
"Well I organize my data well so Spotlight can't help me"
exsqueeze me?? It's one thing to know where "you" put your files and a totally different knowing where you OS put stuff. Good searching is about finding stuff that you need but haven't necessarily placed in a define directory yourself. It's like the internet. Google/Yahoo etc allow me to search the internet and find stuff despite the fact that I have no idea about how the directory is setup.
iChat AV sounds gimmicky until you realize that there are people with families that have to travel and seeing your child on the computer screen can make a bad day good instantly. Another feature people don't know about. You can take the output from an application and conference that as well. Say you're in Final Cut Pro and you've worked out some edits. You can stream the output whilst the client and you discuss the video. This should work in more apps. I read it from a NAB blog. Now that can be useful.
Quote from Bryan
Accordingly, the major improvements to Mac OS X that Tiger brings to the table are primarily under the hood...
Quote from hmurchison
Sure ...Tiger's just a Service Pack. Core Image/Video, Core Data, Fine Grain Locking and other Kernel ehancements, HDR image support, PDF 1.5 enhancements, etc etc etc are "small" sure.
Well, to be fair, aren't those things basically under-the-hood for the most part?
Still, as a Mac guy, you'd think the subte improvements that add up would not go unnoticed by him. It's sort of like comparing PCs based on the highest numbers in their spec lists. That list really doesn't tell the story, and the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts.
Bryan Chaffin's name must have been a place holder. The writer looks to be Misha.
That makes sense I didn't get the sense that this was the same Chaffin going head to head with Enderle.
Yes I think Tiger has enough external elements to shine and plenty of internal goodies as well.
I just chafe a bit when people get into what's "revolutionary" vs "evolutionary". There's really no way to quantify that.
Nothing is going to be revolutionary to a person with basic internet and word processing needs. Editorials that say "I don't see anyone using this feature" are fine until they start looking like a review. There are 10+ million OS X users with different needs.
The hardest part about dealing with Tiger naysayers is getting them to give you stuff that is "missing". It's one thing to say an upgrade doesn't have compelling features and then back that up with a list rather than come with nothing.