Live data from Hacker News

macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

arstechnica.com

101–110 of 160 posts

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something to improve my mess of ~22 active terminal windows comes to mind.

Have you tried other 3rd party terminal applications? (Iterm, ghostel, CMux) They have many quality of life improvements over the basic terminal.

I use Ghostty. I’ve tried iterm and cmux.

I think we can do better. It’s a hard problem, admittedly. But important.

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#102
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a tool in a tool box. If a technician avoided a tool outright, I would (and do) question their biases.

A nuclear weapon is a tool in a tool box. And nobody's used it since WWII for a good reason.

regular people have access to this?

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#103
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something to improve my mess of ~22 active terminal windows comes to mind.

Christ. On some level, this is probably something your terminal emulator should handle, just as your web browser should handle a mess of 22 tabs, but I don't think we've really come up with good solutions there either. It's hard to implement features nobody's though of.

Terminal emulators have tabs and windows already, even macOS’ built in terminal, so what do you mean?

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#104

"...Golden Gate needed a whopping 17GB more space on the M1 MacBook Air, thanks to a mandatory multi-gigabyte language model download that kicks in automatically the first time you connect a freshly restored Golden Gate Mac to the Internet." This is the main thing stopping me from updating iOS/macOS. It's completely unacceptable to park a bunch of space on my devices right when that storage is at its most expensive i…

The real problem with iOS is that there’s no way to clear an app’s cache without uninstalling it. Every non-indie internet-connected app on my phone has a massive and unneeded cache that consumes gigabytes of space.

Same with system cache. Why they can't have some way to clear it still confuses me.

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using macOS and KDE for almost the same time (~20 years), I still find that I need yet another app on macOS for a standard KDE feature. Interesting observation, that is.

Like what?

From top of my head:

File renaming. What Forklift or other dedicated file renamer comes as a standard with both Dolphin and KRename. Latter can drive circles around what's available in macOS, in any form.

AudioCD ripping: kio:// protocol has a native ripper. Just drag and drop. Settings are integrated to system settings directly. Which format do you want? Yes.

Remote connections: While finder can connect to servers, but FTP read access and SFTP requires external apps. IOW, what Cyberduck provides is already available in Dolphin, again.

KDE's standard window management capabilities need Magnet or something more advanced in macOS.

Git/SVN/CVS needs external tools in macOS. Dolphin can detect these repositories and let you work on them on the spot.

KRunner is arguably more Capable than spotlight in some cases. Needs another fair shake though.

If you add your mail accounts and calendars to KDE via KMail or something else, they become available system-wide. macOS is good in that regard, but KDE is betterer. If you use KMail, your mail will sync at the background even though your mail client is not running.

You need to buy another application to be able to edit id3 tags of audio files, but KDE has kid3. I even use its macOS version because it's that good.

I'll not get into customization capabilities, because they are fundamentally different and worlds apart, but this is due to their philosophy.

Keyboard shortcut management are equally powerful in both, AFAICS. macOS used to lag there.

K3b is infinitely more capable than macOS optical media authoring tools.

These are what I can remember with my tired brain, away from my KDE system for the day. The thing is, both side by side, I mostly prefer KDE because I can work way faster on that one, and it's not I'm hating macOS or anything, and as I said, using both for a very long time.

The apps I have given as examples are KDE's default apps and maintained by KDE project themselves. They are part of the default installation.

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#106

Hmm, I remember when Ars Technica macOS reviews were the gold standard. This one isn't bad, but I miss having more in-depth information about the improvements. In my opinion, the details here complement the Ars Technica article nicely: https://www.macstories.net/stories/macos-27-the-macstories-r...

Agreed. While Andrew's done an okay job stepping into some big shoes, I too miss the reviews John Siracusa used to do for Ars. Same could be said for a lot of the old internet when you had people like Siracusa, Anand Lal Shimpi at AnandTech among others, providing very detailed deep dives on the latest technology.

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using macOS and KDE for almost the same time (~20 years), I still find that I need yet another app on macOS for a standard KDE feature. Interesting observation, that is.

Like what?

Homebrew/nix: The most obvious one. MacOS just has no good package manager. It's even worse than Windows, which is also pretty bad, but at least on Windows you can install an app and manage it in a central "Add and Remove Programs" view, and they've standardized an installer format that cares about and manages versions and upgrades.

Middle Click: This is a galling one.

Rectangle: Far better than the MacOS's native snapping, which is half-assed.

AltTab: MacOS's keyboard driven app and window switching are terrible. It feels like they don't test for use that's not entirely mouse-based.

Mac Mouse Fix/LinearMouse: Real mouse support on MacOS sucks, and the unified settings between mouse and trackpad really sucks when you have to occasionally use both and don't want them to behave identically.

Karabiner: MacOS's keyboard mapping is incredibly underpowered.

AeroSpace/yabai: I don't use these anymore, because these also were pretty buggy for my use case; instead, I just use MacOS without Spaces. I hate MacOS window management, but find it less painful if I just lean heavily on tmux. MacOS Spaces are completely broken, especially on multi-monitor. They never do what you expect. I could write a screed on exactly how broken they are, but I won't in this post.

Ice (might be sketchy now; had an ownership change): Lack of menu bar overflow on MacOS is awful. I have icons that just disappear into the notch and can not be clicked, and there's not space for much, especially if you use something like Stats to see resource use.

BetterDisplay+MonitorControl: Non-retina monitor management on MacOS is bad.

SoundSource: Per-app audio control just doesn't exist otherwise.

These are all things that work fine out of the box on KDE and even Gnome. MacOS, for a very UI-focused OS, is simply terrible to use graphically if you're not baby-ducked into it from a young age. I've been using it for years at work (because my options are MacOS and Windows, and MacOS for all its flaws is still less painful than Windows), and I still can't get used to all the bad decisions. Spaces are the most shocking example of something that should work that doesn't, and they still don't fix it year after year.

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What exactly do you miss about the Mac desktops when using gnome's? For me the only thing I've noticed is lack of independent desktops per monitor though Windows also suffers that deficiency. No independent desktops is indeed a big one and irks me just as much under Windows (which somehow in 2026 still can't even set per-monitor desktop pictures without glueing images together in Paint). On a whole, GNOME is just t…

> It almost feels like they took a tablet OS and then adapted it somewhat to desktop use. GNOME is designed to be touch-agnostic, which makes better use of padded UIs than macOS 11+ does. With a rumored touchscreen Macbook still coming down the line, I think GTK and the GNOME developers skated to where the puck was headed. macOS and iPadOS are both constrained for touchscreen users. GNOME is kinda the perfect UI for…

And that’s fair, GNOME doesn’t need to be a macOS-alike, but it’d be nice if something was!

As an aside, I have yet to be convinced that touch on desktop operating systems makes any kind of sense and the MacBook Ultra or whatever it ends up being called is unlikely to change my opinion on that. I much prefer an old-style low-whitespace, data-dense, pointer-first UI like OS X used to have. I’m tired of the virtual real estate on my screens declining year after year for the sake of functionality I’ll never use.

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#109
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A functioning window system would drastically enhance OSX productivity.

Window management (and indeed, desktop environments in general) are rather subjective I think. As someone who's been using Macs in some capacity since 1996 I'd be upset if macOS suddenly resembled a traditional Windows desktop or tiling WM thing, and the absence of Mac-like desktops on Linux (no, GNOME and elementary/Pantheon are not that) is one of the primary factors keeping me from switching.

Same, I enjoy both the current macOS and iPadOS windowing systems. Everything else I tried on linux felt like an extreme downgrade.

Re: macOS 27 Golden Gate – Review

#110
post #11
post #4

When was the last time you felt excitement for a macOS release? Me? Snow Leopard. When I transitioned to Linux I rediscovered OS excitement. I'm on KDE Plasma now and every update has exciting features that serves my interests.

If only KDE actually paid attention to UX and maybe cared about the looks and consistency a bit more. I'm sorry for being blunt but their visual design people's have no taste...

Seriously KDE is so extremely ugly and dated looking compared to macOS, GNOME and even modern Windows. I don’t care about the 30 million configurable options if it looks like a total eyesore. You’d think they’d put some effort into a consistent style / UI framework.

People hate on GNOME for its rigidity but it’s the one desktop actually trying somewhat to provide Linux with an environment that the average person (not an HN user) won’t immediately turn their nose up in disgust at.

Post reply on HN