331–340 of 379 posts
Modern-day Apple is focused on form, neglecting function.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d pay for a decent macOS keybinding theme for gnome, any price. Who gives a damn about the look, app marketers?
Heck, figure out how to let me use macOS keybindings on Windows and I'll give you a medal. The need to use (non-idiomatic, clumsy) Windows shortcuts on my MBP's keyboard is the reason I don't use Boot Camp.
Didn't see anyone mention this, but one of the main reasons for making macOS look more like iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and watchOS is because at some point we will be able to run apps written for the other systems natively in macOS. Seems like an obvious move, why is everyone so surprised? It just means less duplicated interface code for multiplatform products.
It looks like iPadOS, so instead of adding more functions to iDevices, it seems like we'll be seeing more "dumbization" for macDevices :-(
Genuine question: Have they removed any features that make it less functional? There seems to be this belief that if it looks closer to iOS or iPadOS, then its “dumber” since in the past those product lines have been less capable than the Mac.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not my point. This new OS version is not OS X.
Neither was the last one!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not saying people are losing sleep over it but it's just bad UX. If you download and install an app, it shouldn't have the side-effect of a new disk appearing on your desktop. It's obvious, ask any UX designer if you don't believe me.
It's not bad UX. Apple provides three other app installation options that don't create a new disk on your desktop. The fact the the developers don't want to use those 3 methods is not Apple's fault. Blame the developers for that. Now if Apple where to follow you suggestion and lockdown the app installation for better UX, there would be pitchforks everywhere. In fact, the pitchforks where out just last week for this i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd pay for a well engineered macOS 11 theme for GNOME. Perhaps when GTK4 is out end of this year with support for blurred transparency shaders. Though I got to say Adwaita improved a lot recently.
> I'd pay for a well engineered macOS 11 theme for GNOME. elementaryOS is probably pretty close already...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not saying people are losing sleep over it but it's just bad UX. If you download and install an app, it shouldn't have the side-effect of a new disk appearing on your desktop. It's obvious, ask any UX designer if you don't believe me.
Again, UX paradigms aren't inherently bad or wrong simply because they're not what _you_ are used to. macOS users are aware (even though they might not know the technical terms in question) that a .dmg is not "an app". It's a virtual disk format - something reinforced by the literal disk that's its file icon - and using one is reminiscent of inserting a CD or USB stick to get files from. _That's the point_. You inser…
I've been using Mac OS for years, so I'm used to it. And good UX works well even for people who're not used to it. See iOS, you just tap "install" in the App Store and the app installs, that's how it should be.
Seriously, ask a good UX designer what they think about this - or just ask normal people why they think there's a virtual disk drive on their desktop and whether they know what a virtual disk drive is. I don't have the time or energy to convince you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm genuinely curious: why do you want to create new directories at the root level? Is this something you're just used to doing and it breaks your customary way of working? Is it a "general principle" thing (which I suspect is a lot of the objection the HN crowd really has at the root, no pun intended)? I've been using OS X-based Macs since 2002 and used Linux and FreeBSD for a decade before that, and I don't recall…
I put all developer libraries that I do not want to put into a system path into /DevelopLibs. On Windows I put them in C:\DeveloperLibs. That way I can build supporting libraries of different versions software under there, eg. /DeveloperLibs/abc-1, /DeveloperLibs/abc-2 and test that I have a self-contained executable that runs on my development system without relying on anything in $PATH. It was a habit on macOS sinc…
The second, is that I am able to create root folders, I just have to remount as rw before creating it and after that I can mount any data folder to `/foo`. I'm not entirely clear why not having `/` as rw by default is such an issue, but you are cetainly not prevented from doing it if you wanted to.