Live data from Hacker News

My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

joshparnham.com

21–30 of 65 posts

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#21
post #4

I too would welcome if iTunes could return to be a music player. It must be a huge pain even for Apple to work on such beastly monolithic app that does almost everything except the laundry.

I will be happy if there's a way to sync podcasts across devices.

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#22
Some things one agrees with and some that sound like typical non-programmer (and sadly, some-programmer) lists.

E.g "Return Apple to its roots with minimalism - does a photo manager have to be 707 MB?"

Yes it has. People think the binary is "bloated", while in actuality it's mostly templates for photo books and such, that doesn't get loaded or impact performance at all if you don't use them.

>Unix package manager - basically an official version of Homebrew/Macports/Fink.

And what good would that do? Do you really want to wait for Apple to release new versions of third party programs?

>Replace AppKit with UIKit.

Does not even make sense.

>[re: iTunes] Apple, this needs to stop. Even if the segregation of all of these components into separate, modern apps was the only new feature in 10.9, I would gladly pay my money and walk away a satisfied customer.

Really? People keep saying that, to sound smart (in how they condemn "bloat"), but I think it's wrong. You know what is worse than using one app to handle 15 tasks related to your media/app collection? Using 15 apps to do the same. How would that work? At best they can break it down to 2-3 apps --which you would still have to use every time you want to sync your phone.

>We all know the Mac needs a new, modern file system to ditch the ancient HFS/HFS+.

I for one do not know that. What's the problem with HFS+ again? I mean the actual problem that matters for the common user and that ZFS is supposed to solve in a desktop/laptop machine.

Does this guy even know how ZFS works? In a space constrained SSD disk it would be a disaster. And managing logical volumes and consistency with 1-2 drives is not exactly it's core strength. It's design is all about the enterprise and the server space.

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#23
As far as I understand, the versioning implementation in OS X is built on top of SQLite, which has one-reader/writer-at-a-time-only transaction semantics. I wonder how much this contributes to the beach balls.

Save As must come back.

iCloud syncing of Notes is broken. Notes which are supposed to be in iCloud often get branched to On My Mac without me noticing, where I continue editing them, only to create conflicts.

TextEdit list view should stay open if you want it.

Notes and TextEdit need to be merged. I like the note browser view, but prefer TextEdit's white background.

A package manager as good as apt-get would be great.

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#24
post #13

Just a couple of points. 1) .DS_Store is necessary for compatibility with UNIX/Windows who do not support the HFS+ resource fork/Finder metadata. There is no way around it and they are optional. Perhaps just add it to your .gitignore like everyone else does. 2) ZFS is unnecessary. Most of the use cases that haven't already been solved elsewhere e.g. Time Machine/Versions are only for super-advanced users. In which ca…

It's a list of feature requestes; none of this is necessary . But ZFS would be very nice to have.

Why? Do you have half a SSD to spare for checksums and additional metadata? Or does the common OS X user have several disks that he wants to see as a logical volume, while also understanding the risks after one of the dies? Do they even have the storage redundancy needed?

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#26
post #4

I too would welcome if iTunes could return to be a music player. It must be a huge pain even for Apple to work on such beastly monolithic app that does almost everything except the laundry.

>It must be a huge pain even for Apple to work on such beastly monolithic app that does almost everything except the laundry.

For all we know, iTunes could be (and probably is) a fully modularised code base, with minimal cross module dependencies. The fact that we see it as one application tells us nothing about the underlying code.

Even the UI parts for different functionalities can be neatly modularized in different IB files, the only thing they all have to share is the main menu.

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#27
The biggest problem for iTunes is actually Windows. Imagine telling a new, novice user to download and install ten different applications in order to sync their media to their phone, one for their music, another one for their photos, another one for their podcasts and so on. That would be suicide.

iTunes is just bad[1] software.

I personally love it on the mac, but it's gotten bloated with the years. I avoid this problem by mainly using it for music, nothing else, plus I hear on windows is painfully slow. It needs to be rewritten and it's architecture rethought.

[1]bad in the sense that it may be overkill, because it hasn't crashed for me in years. Despite all it flaws, it always works.

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#28

Just a couple of points. 1) .DS_Store is necessary for compatibility with UNIX/Windows who do not support the HFS+ resource fork/Finder metadata. There is no way around it and they are optional. Perhaps just add it to your .gitignore like everyone else does. 2) ZFS is unnecessary. Most of the use cases that haven't already been solved elsewhere e.g. Time Machine/Versions are only for super-advanced users. In which ca…

In what way is .DS_Store necessary? Littering files in visited directories is an unacceptable and offensive way to store user-specific preferences. Put that crap in ~/.finder or something similar.

If .DS_Store is a dependency of HFS+, that's enough reason for me to wish for a filesystem replacement. I don't care if it's ZFS or not.

Obviously, there's a lot of hate for .DS_Store and there has been for years. That Apple has never addressed this is a sore point for a lot of people.

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#29
post #15

I've given some thought to the iTunes problem. I think the best solution is to break it up into smaller apps. The tricky part is no one wants to have a dozen different apps installed separately so iTunes would have to still be distributed as one big monolithic application. So instead of trying to cram everything into one window I would suggest something like a Springboard style UI to greet the user when iTunes is lau…

A springboard on top of a springboard?

Look, it doesn't actually have to be so many apps. I'd split it into "Music", "Videos" and "Devices" for the synched data.

Re: My in-depth OS X 10.9 wishlist

#30
post #27

The biggest problem for iTunes is actually Windows. Imagine telling a new, novice user to download and install ten different applications in order to sync their media to their phone, one for their music, another one for their photos, another one for their podcasts and so on. That would be suicide. iTunes is just bad[1] software. I personally love it on the mac, but it's gotten bloated with the years. I avoid this pro…

They could break up iTunes under the covers and maintain a legacy 'unity' interface for a cycle or two.

And the sync problem is solving itself as iOS devices continue to migrate away from iTunes as the repository manager.

Post reply on HN