I'd much rather use the word "daring" to describe Leopard than "conservative". The look of Tiger is getting boring and I don't want this look to continue in Leopard.
Don?t you think too much eye-candy would be distracting?
Don?t you think too much eye-candy would be distracting?
I my humble opinion, no. Some people don't want anything distracting them. I'm not someone worried about distractions. I prefer distractions. I use my Mac for fun, not for business. I like flashy eye-candy whenever I can get it, but I don't want to use Haxies in order to achieve that. The link I provided above amazed me. It showed many OS X features and yet blew away Tiger visually. I'd love to have those features available to us in Leopard. For those stuffy people out there that want boring gray screens with absolutely nothing interesting on them at all, the features ought to be able to be turned off in Preferences.
I have this great MacBook Pro that doesn't use it's muscle most of the time when I'm not editing video, playing the occasional game, or working with photos. Most of the time it's rarely using much at all. We ought to be able to have the option to put it to work and make it look cool like the video showed.
Tiger is pretty boring visually. There's nothing exciting visually aside from Dashboard. We've had enough boring looks in OS X. How about one that looks amazing without being boring?
I my humble opinion, no. Some people don't want anything distracting them. I'm not someone worried about distractions. I prefer distractions. I use my Mac for fun, not for business. I like flashy eye-candy whenever I can get it, but I don't want to use Haxies in order to achieve that. The link I provided above amazed me. It showed many OS X features and yet blew away Tiger visually. I'd love to have those features available to us in Leopard. For those stuffy people out there that want boring gray screens with absolutely nothing interesting on them at all, the features ought to be able to be turned off in Preferences.
The problem is that your type of use is only part of the diverse user base. I'm not sure if a glitzy UI is even beneficial except to its own end. So far that I've seen, Apple only does that sort of thing if it can be justified to help make the UI make sense.
Exactly. The Genie effect when minimizing windows is a good example of this - it gives the user feedback that "your window is going *here*, okay?" instead of just disappearing. (There's no difference in feedback at the window location in Windows between minimizing and closing it. It just goes away. If the user doesn't know to look in the Taskbar, they're likely to think it's gone.)
Eye candy that gives the user useful feedback is good. Eye candy that doesn't is just a waste of cycles, unless you're playing a game, of course.
Exactly. The Genie effect when minimizing windows is a good example of this - it gives the user feedback that "your window is going *here*, okay?" instead of just disappearing. (There's no difference in feedback at the window location in Windows between minimizing and closing it. It just goes away. If the user doesn't know to look in the Taskbar, they're likely to think it's gone.)
Eye candy that gives the user useful feedback is good. Eye candy that doesn't is just a waste of cycles, unless you're playing a game, of course.
It's a waste of cycles to YOU. I have tons of free cycles to play with. I ought to be able to have the cool eye-candy if I so choose. What's the point in buying a more powerful laptop if the activity monitor shows next to no activity? It's not being used.
I know you all hate anyone that thinks Tiger is stuffy and boring. I love the OS, but come on. Make the thing LOOK GOOD rather than be all conservative and boring. That clip showed animated backgrounds. If Linux can do it, why can't Macs?
It's a waste of cycles to YOU. I have tons of free cycles to play with. I ought to be able to have the cool eye-candy if I so choose. What's the point in buying a more powerful laptop if the activity monitor shows next to no activity? It's not being used.
I know you all hate anyone that thinks Tiger is stuffy and boring. I love the OS, but come on. Make the thing LOOK GOOD rather than be all conservative and boring. That clip showed animated backgrounds. If Linux can do it, why can't Macs?
Whilst I don't have anything against Apple providing the option (by default off) for overkill eyecandy per se, there are other things I'd rather they spent their time on. Like making the Finder not shit.
Whilst I don't have anything against Apple providing the option (by default off) for overkill eyecandy per se, there are other things I'd rather they spent their time on. Like making the Finder not shit.
And this is where we see people with different priorities. I have yet to find anything wrong with the Finder. I want to find something, it finds it. Simple. Tells the story. But for some people, they think it's not able to find what they need.
You think the Finder needs more work, I think the visual side of things needs more work. It depends on what you use your computer for I would guess.
And this is where we see people with different priorities. I have yet to find anything wrong with the Finder. I want to find something, it finds it. Simple. Tells the story. But for some people, they think it's not able to find what they need.
You think the Finder needs more work, I think the visual side of things needs more work. It depends on what you use your computer for I would guess.
I think you'll find, however, that there are more people who get pissed off on a daily basis by the Finder, whereas there aren't that many that are pissed off that OS X doesn't have more eye candy.
In terms of the number of people who would benefit, a revamped Finder that's not shit far outweighs more eye candy.
I think you'll find, however, that there are more people who get pissed off on a daily basis by the Finder, whereas there aren't that many that are pissed off that OS X doesn't have more eye candy.
In terms of the number of people who would benefit, a revamped Finder that's not shit far outweighs more eye candy.
I'll give you that. I hear a lot of people complaining about the Finder, though I never understood why - probably the same reason why most can't understand my complaints about the visual side of OS X.
My guess is that they have a technician or two working on Finder. I doubt they have many working on the look of Leopard. If iTunes is any indication, I'm not close to being impressed.
It's a waste of cycles to YOU. I have tons of free cycles to play with. I ought to be able to have the cool eye-candy if I so choose. What's the point in buying a more powerful laptop if the activity monitor shows next to no activity? It's not being used.
I know you all hate anyone that thinks Tiger is stuffy and boring.
No, not at all. It's that Apple has limited resources, and needs to concentrate on adding features that provide *value*, not bling. If you want bling, Windows is a *fantastic* choice for you. If you want bling, Linux is also great. Neither will get you the easy-to-use functionality though. For me, I'll take that over purposeless eye candy, any day. Been there, done that, ready to move past the ZOMG! customizations to get work done.
Quote:
I love the OS, but come on. Make the thing LOOK GOOD rather than be all conservative and boring. That clip showed animated backgrounds. If Linux can do it, why can't Macs?
Er, they can. Go forth and scratch that itch.
I think what you're running into is a design philosophy difference. Apple has a minimalist aesthetic, while Windows and most Linux UIs simply try and pile on the eye candy in lieu of usability. Options != ease of use.
There are Haxies and such to do what you want, or at least give you the hooks so *you* can write what you want it to do.
But as for putting purposeless eye candy in the basic OS? Not gonna happen, with the current team in charge in Cupertino.
I think what you're running into is a design philosophy difference. Apple has a minimalist aesthetic, while Windows and most Linux UIs simply try and pile on the eye candy in lieu of usability. Options != ease of use.
I thing I love about Jobs' Apple is the tension between minimalism and the desire to wow.
And if that sounds like a paradox to some, it's not. It can be done -- just check out the iPhone UI. You can use a ton of animation (watch the demos and count up all the effects) in a way that feels integrated, natural, and drop-dead gorgeous.... instead of glossed on, like sadly a great number do, in Vista's design.
That's what I'm expecting from Leopard's updated UI.
No, not at all. It's that Apple has limited resources, and needs to concentrate on adding features that provide *value*, not bling. If you want bling, Windows is a *fantastic* choice for you. If you want bling, Linux is also great. Neither will get you the easy-to-use functionality though. For me, I'll take that over purposeless eye candy, any day. Been there, done that, ready to move past the ZOMG! customizations to get work done.
Er, they can. Go forth and scratch that itch.
I think what you're running into is a design philosophy difference. Apple has a minimalist aesthetic, while Windows and most Linux UIs simply try and pile on the eye candy in lieu of usability. Options != ease of use.
There are Haxies and such to do what you want, or at least give you the hooks so *you* can write what you want it to do.
But as for putting purposeless eye candy in the basic OS? Not gonna happen, with the current team in charge in Cupertino.
Kickaha, I already find OS X usable. I am just amazed that I am such a minority in all of this. Like I'm the only one that looks at the OS and sees that it's bland visually speaking. Furthermore, please don't direct me to other operating systems to get what I want in this one. I'm well aware that the other operating systems are far more visually appealing than what Tiger provides. I understand, as you stated above that the current team in Cupertino is only focused on a minimalistic aesthetic.
To use a metaphor, the car drives great, it just doesn't appeal to me visually.
Check out this thread and this thread. My posts (providing a list of things that I think need fixing) from said threads are here and here.
Mr. H, having read your posts, I agree with what you said, though I've never been bothered by the things you pointed out in Spotlight. I hope they fix them all for you though in Leopard.
I thing I love about Jobs' Apple is the tension between minimalism and the desire to wow.
And if that sounds like a paradox to some, it's not. It can be done -- just check out the iPhone UI. You can use a ton of animation (watch the demos and count up all the effects) in a way that feels integrated, natural, and drop-dead gorgeous.... instead of glossed on, like sadly a great number do, in Vista's design.
That's what I'm expecting from Leopard's updated UI.
I'd like to see significant change to the look of OS X, and I agree that the iPhone would be a great step in the right direction (I'll own one when they come out). Most on this thread don't seem to mind the way it looks and have lists of other things they want done to the OS instead of UI's looking good. I, for one, hope that both get addressed. Apple employs a person or two. I just hope that some of them are interested in visual improvements because they didn't provide much in Tiger.
Mr. H, having read your posts, I agree with what you said, though I've never been bothered by the things you pointed out in Spotlight. I hope they fix them all for you though in Leopard.
Cheers, Brian. I think you'll get your wish for visual changes, I'm just not sure how far they'll go.
I found another post of mine with another list later in one of the threads. It is here. Honestly, I'm a bit dumbfounded by the number of stupid little bugs in the Finder. I haven't bothered filing bug reports on all of them because 10.5 is around the corner. Once it's out, I'll see if any bugs remain (I expect they probably all will ) and report them then.
The moving background appears to be a modified version of xsnow, which has been done on unix systems before Linux came along. I think a Cocoa app can do that, it's just a matter of finding a developer that wants to do it.
I really don't know what those Beryl effects will do for people other than induce motion sickness. I think they look cartoony and gimmicky. I know it's easy to enable or disable effects, but I think Apple keeps it minimal because it's easier to maintain and involves fewer things that are likely to break.
I think I understand what you mean, but frankly, you are the only person I've come across that calls OS X "bland". To abuse a metaphor, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but you need to find more squeaky wheels.
Frankly, if I were you, I'd advocate a bigger leap ahead by asking that the OS integrate multitouch, then maybe adding some more effects would make sense, and it would probably help push a major overhaul in the appearance. I want multitouch such that I'd be willing to install Linux to get it if that's what it takes, or install it on my Windows system, just to experiment with it.
The moving background appears to be a modified version of xsnow, which has been done on unix systems before Linux came along. I think a Cocoa app can do that, it's just a matter of finding a developer that wants to do it.
I really don't know what those Beryl effects will do for people other than induce motion sickness.
I think I understand what you mean, but frankly, you are the only person I've come across that calls OS X "bland". To abuse a metaphor, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but you need to find more squeaky wheels.
Frankly, if I were you, I'd advocate a bigger leap ahead by asking that the OS integrate multitouch.
JeffDM, I just don't like being limited by the OS in terms of what the desktop is. I can rotate pictures and all that fun stuff, but the animation in Beryl looked amazing to me. As for the motion sickness, I don't get motion sickness. Bring it on.
I do call OS X bland. I mean, take a good look at it without your heart on the line. We all love the OS. We all know that. But look at it. It's totally conservative in the same way my grandmothers car is conservative. The brushed metal theme that is used is completely bland in my eyes. What that Beryl video showed me is that far more can be done to make an OS visually stimulating. I've got the free cycles, my CPU is barely being used, let me put them to work if I so choose. Sadly, I just don't think people care. They'd rather have this look, and that's depressing.
Sadly, I just don't think people care. They'd rather have this look, and that's depressing.
My interpretation is not that people don't care, it's that in my experience, they would generally disagree with you. Also in my experience, most people mac and non Mac users do think it's very nice. I don't think that's bad on either side, they are simply opinions of taste. Aesthetics is always about matters of taste, and that differs between people.
You have discounted people's complaints about other technologies in OS X, but the difference is that those complaints are echoed far more widely than yours, and for much longer, and those complaints still haven't been addressed that we can see, so how can you expect Apple to cater to your opinion? Apple can't be everything for everyone, which is why there are so many third party developers, both commercial and hobbyist, to extend the system in the way that users desire. If you want to call them haxies, that's your business, but there are options you can use now without depending solely on Apple to grant your wish.
My interpretation is not that people don't care, it's that in my experience, they would generally disagree with you. Also in my experience, most people mac and non Mac users do think it's very nice. I don't think that's bad on either side, they are simply opinions of taste. Aesthetics is always about matters of taste, and that differs between people.
You have discounted people's complaints about other technologies in OS X, but the difference is that those complaints are echoed far more widely than yours, and for much longer, and those complaints still haven't been addressed that we can see, so how can you expect Apple to cater to your opinion? Apple can't be everything for everyone, which is why there are so many third party developers, both commercial and hobbyist, to extend the system in the way that users desire. If you want to call them haxies, that's your business, but there are options you can use now without depending solely on Apple to grant your wish.
And that's fair. Mr. H put together several lists of things that are wrong with OS X. Those all ought to be addressed. If Apple doesn't have enough people now to make that happen, they ought to keep hiring until they do. I agree with all of that. I didn't intend to discount someone's complaints in regard to the OS. If that's the way it read, I apologize for that. I'll just go on being disappointed in the aesthetic of Tiger, while others continue to be disappointed with functionality issues they face. As things are going, we'll all probably continue to have our lists of disappointments.
Comments
I'd much rather use the word "daring" to describe Leopard than "conservative". The look of Tiger is getting boring and I don't want this look to continue in Leopard.
Don?t you think too much eye-candy would be distracting?
Don?t you think too much eye-candy would be distracting?
I my humble opinion, no. Some people don't want anything distracting them. I'm not someone worried about distractions. I prefer distractions. I use my Mac for fun, not for business. I like flashy eye-candy whenever I can get it, but I don't want to use Haxies in order to achieve that. The link I provided above amazed me. It showed many OS X features and yet blew away Tiger visually. I'd love to have those features available to us in Leopard. For those stuffy people out there that want boring gray screens with absolutely nothing interesting on them at all, the features ought to be able to be turned off in Preferences.
I have this great MacBook Pro that doesn't use it's muscle most of the time when I'm not editing video, playing the occasional game, or working with photos. Most of the time it's rarely using much at all. We ought to be able to have the option to put it to work and make it look cool like the video showed.
Tiger is pretty boring visually. There's nothing exciting visually aside from Dashboard. We've had enough boring looks in OS X. How about one that looks amazing without being boring?
I my humble opinion, no. Some people don't want anything distracting them. I'm not someone worried about distractions. I prefer distractions. I use my Mac for fun, not for business. I like flashy eye-candy whenever I can get it, but I don't want to use Haxies in order to achieve that. The link I provided above amazed me. It showed many OS X features and yet blew away Tiger visually. I'd love to have those features available to us in Leopard. For those stuffy people out there that want boring gray screens with absolutely nothing interesting on them at all, the features ought to be able to be turned off in Preferences.
The problem is that your type of use is only part of the diverse user base. I'm not sure if a glitzy UI is even beneficial except to its own end. So far that I've seen, Apple only does that sort of thing if it can be justified to help make the UI make sense.
Eye candy that gives the user useful feedback is good. Eye candy that doesn't is just a waste of cycles, unless you're playing a game, of course.
Exactly. The Genie effect when minimizing windows is a good example of this - it gives the user feedback that "your window is going *here*, okay?" instead of just disappearing. (There's no difference in feedback at the window location in Windows between minimizing and closing it. It just goes away. If the user doesn't know to look in the Taskbar, they're likely to think it's gone.)
Eye candy that gives the user useful feedback is good. Eye candy that doesn't is just a waste of cycles, unless you're playing a game, of course.
It's a waste of cycles to YOU. I have tons of free cycles to play with. I ought to be able to have the cool eye-candy if I so choose. What's the point in buying a more powerful laptop if the activity monitor shows next to no activity? It's not being used.
I know you all hate anyone that thinks Tiger is stuffy and boring. I love the OS, but come on. Make the thing LOOK GOOD rather than be all conservative and boring. That clip showed animated backgrounds. If Linux can do it, why can't Macs?
It's a waste of cycles to YOU. I have tons of free cycles to play with. I ought to be able to have the cool eye-candy if I so choose. What's the point in buying a more powerful laptop if the activity monitor shows next to no activity? It's not being used.
I know you all hate anyone that thinks Tiger is stuffy and boring. I love the OS, but come on. Make the thing LOOK GOOD rather than be all conservative and boring. That clip showed animated backgrounds. If Linux can do it, why can't Macs?
Whilst I don't have anything against Apple providing the option (by default off) for overkill eyecandy per se, there are other things I'd rather they spent their time on. Like making the Finder not shit.
Whilst I don't have anything against Apple providing the option (by default off) for overkill eyecandy per se, there are other things I'd rather they spent their time on. Like making the Finder not shit.
And this is where we see people with different priorities. I have yet to find anything wrong with the Finder. I want to find something, it finds it. Simple. Tells the story. But for some people, they think it's not able to find what they need.
You think the Finder needs more work, I think the visual side of things needs more work. It depends on what you use your computer for I would guess.
And this is where we see people with different priorities. I have yet to find anything wrong with the Finder. I want to find something, it finds it. Simple. Tells the story. But for some people, they think it's not able to find what they need.
You think the Finder needs more work, I think the visual side of things needs more work. It depends on what you use your computer for I would guess.
I think you'll find, however, that there are more people who get pissed off on a daily basis by the Finder, whereas there aren't that many that are pissed off that OS X doesn't have more eye candy.
In terms of the number of people who would benefit, a revamped Finder that's not shit far outweighs more eye candy.
I think you'll find, however, that there are more people who get pissed off on a daily basis by the Finder, whereas there aren't that many that are pissed off that OS X doesn't have more eye candy.
In terms of the number of people who would benefit, a revamped Finder that's not shit far outweighs more eye candy.
I'll give you that. I hear a lot of people complaining about the Finder, though I never understood why - probably the same reason why most can't understand my complaints about the visual side of OS X.
My guess is that they have a technician or two working on Finder. I doubt they have many working on the look of Leopard. If iTunes is any indication, I'm not close to being impressed.
So what's the verdict? We'll both be miserable.
It's a waste of cycles to YOU. I have tons of free cycles to play with. I ought to be able to have the cool eye-candy if I so choose. What's the point in buying a more powerful laptop if the activity monitor shows next to no activity? It's not being used.
I know you all hate anyone that thinks Tiger is stuffy and boring.
No, not at all. It's that Apple has limited resources, and needs to concentrate on adding features that provide *value*, not bling. If you want bling, Windows is a *fantastic* choice for you. If you want bling, Linux is also great. Neither will get you the easy-to-use functionality though. For me, I'll take that over purposeless eye candy, any day. Been there, done that, ready to move past the ZOMG! customizations to get work done.
I love the OS, but come on. Make the thing LOOK GOOD rather than be all conservative and boring. That clip showed animated backgrounds. If Linux can do it, why can't Macs?
Er, they can. Go forth and scratch that itch.
I think what you're running into is a design philosophy difference. Apple has a minimalist aesthetic, while Windows and most Linux UIs simply try and pile on the eye candy in lieu of usability. Options != ease of use.
There are Haxies and such to do what you want, or at least give you the hooks so *you* can write what you want it to do.
But as for putting purposeless eye candy in the basic OS? Not gonna happen, with the current team in charge in Cupertino.
I hear a lot of people complaining about the Finder, though I never understood why
Check out this thread and this thread. My posts (providing a list of things that I think need fixing) from said threads are here, here and here.
I think what you're running into is a design philosophy difference. Apple has a minimalist aesthetic, while Windows and most Linux UIs simply try and pile on the eye candy in lieu of usability. Options != ease of use.
I thing I love about Jobs' Apple is the tension between minimalism and the desire to wow.
And if that sounds like a paradox to some, it's not. It can be done -- just check out the iPhone UI. You can use a ton of animation (watch the demos and count up all the effects) in a way that feels integrated, natural, and drop-dead gorgeous.... instead of glossed on, like sadly a great number do, in Vista's design.
That's what I'm expecting from Leopard's updated UI.
No, not at all. It's that Apple has limited resources, and needs to concentrate on adding features that provide *value*, not bling. If you want bling, Windows is a *fantastic* choice for you. If you want bling, Linux is also great. Neither will get you the easy-to-use functionality though. For me, I'll take that over purposeless eye candy, any day. Been there, done that, ready to move past the ZOMG! customizations to get work done.
Er, they can. Go forth and scratch that itch.
I think what you're running into is a design philosophy difference. Apple has a minimalist aesthetic, while Windows and most Linux UIs simply try and pile on the eye candy in lieu of usability. Options != ease of use.
There are Haxies and such to do what you want, or at least give you the hooks so *you* can write what you want it to do.
But as for putting purposeless eye candy in the basic OS? Not gonna happen, with the current team in charge in Cupertino.
Kickaha, I already find OS X usable. I am just amazed that I am such a minority in all of this. Like I'm the only one that looks at the OS and sees that it's bland visually speaking. Furthermore, please don't direct me to other operating systems to get what I want in this one. I'm well aware that the other operating systems are far more visually appealing than what Tiger provides. I understand, as you stated above that the current team in Cupertino is only focused on a minimalistic aesthetic.
To use a metaphor, the car drives great, it just doesn't appeal to me visually.
Check out this thread and this thread. My posts (providing a list of things that I think need fixing) from said threads are here and here.
Mr. H, having read your posts, I agree with what you said, though I've never been bothered by the things you pointed out in Spotlight. I hope they fix them all for you though in Leopard.
I thing I love about Jobs' Apple is the tension between minimalism and the desire to wow.
And if that sounds like a paradox to some, it's not. It can be done -- just check out the iPhone UI. You can use a ton of animation (watch the demos and count up all the effects) in a way that feels integrated, natural, and drop-dead gorgeous.... instead of glossed on, like sadly a great number do, in Vista's design.
That's what I'm expecting from Leopard's updated UI.
I'd like to see significant change to the look of OS X, and I agree that the iPhone would be a great step in the right direction (I'll own one when they come out). Most on this thread don't seem to mind the way it looks and have lists of other things they want done to the OS instead of UI's looking good. I, for one, hope that both get addressed. Apple employs a person or two. I just hope that some of them are interested in visual improvements because they didn't provide much in Tiger.
Mr. H, having read your posts, I agree with what you said, though I've never been bothered by the things you pointed out in Spotlight. I hope they fix them all for you though in Leopard.
Cheers, Brian. I think you'll get your wish for visual changes, I'm just not sure how far they'll go.
I found another post of mine with another list later in one of the threads. It is here. Honestly, I'm a bit dumbfounded by the number of stupid little bugs in the Finder. I haven't bothered filing bug reports on all of them because 10.5 is around the corner. Once it's out, I'll see if any bugs remain (I expect they probably all will
I really don't know what those Beryl effects will do for people other than induce motion sickness. I think they look cartoony and gimmicky. I know it's easy to enable or disable effects, but I think Apple keeps it minimal because it's easier to maintain and involves fewer things that are likely to break.
I think I understand what you mean, but frankly, you are the only person I've come across that calls OS X "bland". To abuse a metaphor, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but you need to find more squeaky wheels.
Frankly, if I were you, I'd advocate a bigger leap ahead by asking that the OS integrate multitouch, then maybe adding some more effects would make sense, and it would probably help push a major overhaul in the appearance. I want multitouch such that I'd be willing to install Linux to get it if that's what it takes, or install it on my Windows system, just to experiment with it.
The moving background appears to be a modified version of xsnow, which has been done on unix systems before Linux came along. I think a Cocoa app can do that, it's just a matter of finding a developer that wants to do it.
I really don't know what those Beryl effects will do for people other than induce motion sickness.
I think I understand what you mean, but frankly, you are the only person I've come across that calls OS X "bland". To abuse a metaphor, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but you need to find more squeaky wheels.
Frankly, if I were you, I'd advocate a bigger leap ahead by asking that the OS integrate multitouch.
JeffDM, I just don't like being limited by the OS in terms of what the desktop is. I can rotate pictures and all that fun stuff, but the animation in Beryl looked amazing to me. As for the motion sickness, I don't get motion sickness. Bring it on.
I do call OS X bland. I mean, take a good look at it without your heart on the line. We all love the OS. We all know that. But look at it. It's totally conservative in the same way my grandmothers car is conservative. The brushed metal theme that is used is completely bland in my eyes. What that Beryl video showed me is that far more can be done to make an OS visually stimulating. I've got the free cycles, my CPU is barely being used, let me put them to work if I so choose. Sadly, I just don't think people care. They'd rather have this look, and that's depressing.
Sadly, I just don't think people care. They'd rather have this look, and that's depressing.
My interpretation is not that people don't care, it's that in my experience, they would generally disagree with you. Also in my experience, most people mac and non Mac users do think it's very nice. I don't think that's bad on either side, they are simply opinions of taste. Aesthetics is always about matters of taste, and that differs between people.
You have discounted people's complaints about other technologies in OS X, but the difference is that those complaints are echoed far more widely than yours, and for much longer, and those complaints still haven't been addressed that we can see, so how can you expect Apple to cater to your opinion? Apple can't be everything for everyone, which is why there are so many third party developers, both commercial and hobbyist, to extend the system in the way that users desire. If you want to call them haxies, that's your business, but there are options you can use now without depending solely on Apple to grant your wish.
My interpretation is not that people don't care, it's that in my experience, they would generally disagree with you. Also in my experience, most people mac and non Mac users do think it's very nice. I don't think that's bad on either side, they are simply opinions of taste. Aesthetics is always about matters of taste, and that differs between people.
You have discounted people's complaints about other technologies in OS X, but the difference is that those complaints are echoed far more widely than yours, and for much longer, and those complaints still haven't been addressed that we can see, so how can you expect Apple to cater to your opinion? Apple can't be everything for everyone, which is why there are so many third party developers, both commercial and hobbyist, to extend the system in the way that users desire. If you want to call them haxies, that's your business, but there are options you can use now without depending solely on Apple to grant your wish.
And that's fair. Mr. H put together several lists of things that are wrong with OS X. Those all ought to be addressed. If Apple doesn't have enough people now to make that happen, they ought to keep hiring until they do. I agree with all of that. I didn't intend to discount someone's complaints in regard to the OS. If that's the way it read, I apologize for that. I'll just go on being disappointed in the aesthetic of Tiger, while others continue to be disappointed with functionality issues they face. As things are going, we'll all probably continue to have our lists of disappointments.