Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The new MacBook

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: The new MacBook

#851

Post by makeitsuckless »

nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers were never any good. They were afterthoughts, always have been.

I've been an Apple user for about 15 years, never used any of Apple's own software besides the OS, Keynote, the Mail app, and I've regularly replaced the latter for long periods.

The notion that Apple's application software was ever on par with their hardware and OS is a myth. Keynote is pretty much the only exception.

For ten years people have been posting this BS about Apple application software going downhill, while in reality it was always mediocre to start with.

Re: The new MacBook

#852

Post by kagamine »

WorldWideWayne wrote: post #841
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

What could your problem with Windows Explorer possibly be? It is generally considered to be the gold standard as far as I know. It's far better more robust than Finder, it's got a much more powerful plugin environment and the keyboard acceleration actually makes sense, unlike Finder.

Personally I hate it, I use NexusFile whenever I can. It may just be personal preference but I think Explorer is hard to use, doesn't preview anything like Finder does (and the Enlightenment File Browser also does on Linux). I think a lot of my dislike actually stems from the Windows file system, I just don't like the way in which files are organised (in comparison ti unix-like systems).

Re: The new MacBook

#853

Post by frik »

vidoc wrote: post #511
nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

This is a very good point. I'll also add to this what might still be the biggest burden of Macos: its file-system. It's amazing that they can get away still providing this horror in 2015!

Apple planned to replace its very old HFS(+) filesystem with ZFS, there were even dev beta releases and demonstration to the media. But OSX 10.5(?) didn't ship with ZFS. So OSX is stuck with an decades old filesystem almost as basic and bad as FAT32, where Windows has NTFS (and ReFS, ExFAT), Linux has Btrfs/XFS/extfs4 and *BSD/Solaris has ZFS.

Re: The new MacBook

#854

Post by entrode »

zer0defex wrote: post #808
darcyparker wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree - I'd love to see them re-think Finder. I just don't grok Finder... I do most of my work in the terminal and occasionally midnight commander or nerdtree inside vim. I tried free ones like muCommander but don't like the overhead of starting a java app... Similarly I don't want the overhead of running an X server so I can use an X based file manager. And I don't want to buy some 3rd party File Manager. We shoul…

Give Xtrafinder a look: https://www.trankynam.com/xtrafinder/ In my experience, trying to replace core OS apps with 3rd-party replacements just never quite works 100% in all situations. My preference is more toward apps that augment/improve the core OS apps. Xtrafinder is of this type, adding additional functionality to Finder, rather than being a wholly separate app like TotalFinder.

Have used TotalFinder for a couple of years, just tried XtraFinder. Found that the side-by-side view and shortcuts for sliding in the pinnable Finder just didn't work, even after a couple of uninstall/reboot/install/reboot cycles. Has some nice features and seems like it should cover what I want from TotalFinder, but just isn't there yet.

I also don't understand your sentiment for preferring it over TotalFinder... they both feel and act like augmentations. I got the impression that XtraFinder would work alongside the normal finder, but that's not the case.

Re: The new MacBook

#855

Post by kagamine »

makeitsuckless wrote: post #851
nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers were never any good. They were afterthoughts, always have been. I've been an Apple user for about 15 years, never used any of Apple's own software besides the OS, Keynote, the Mail app, and I've regularly replaced the latter for long periods. The notion that Apple's application software was ever on par with their hardware and OS is a myth. Keynote is pretty much the only exception.…

Have to take issue with you on Pages, I have always thought it to be far easier to use than Word. Many a time I have started out with a Word doc and after half an hour just scrapped it and used Pages or, more recently, LibreOffice instead.

Re: The new MacBook

#856

Post by yaeger »

foz wrote: post #565
cheald wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a guy with small children, the loss of MagSafe is actually a huge downgrade for me. The number of times MagSafe has saved my laptop and/or power cable from damage after a child blitzed through the living room and tripped over the power cable is not insignificant.

Maybe at 2 pounds, the laptop is so light that maybe magsafe is not effective any more.

I have doubts about that. Sure, you possibly could drag the laptop by the MagSafe without it disconnecting if you drag carefully. But I feel like when you really yank on it, like you would when tripping over the cord, that even a 2 pound laptop would disconnect from the MagSafe without flying off the table.

Re: The new MacBook

#857

Post by jsz0 »

frik wrote: post #853
vidoc wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very good point. I'll also add to this what might still be the biggest burden of Macos: its file-system. It's amazing that they can get away still providing this horror in 2015!

Apple planned to replace its very old HFS(+) filesystem with ZFS, there were even dev beta releases and demonstration to the media. But OSX 10.5(?) didn't ship with ZFS. So OSX is stuck with an decades old filesystem almost as basic and bad as FAT32, where Windows has NTFS (and ReFS, ExFAT), Linux has Btrfs/XFS/extfs4 and *BSD/Solaris has ZFS.

OSX has ZFS via OpenZFS.

Re: The new MacBook

#858

Post by madaxe_again »

SiVal wrote: post #509
nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

Because you can't really tell how well software is working when looking at the device edge-on, and that's apparently the way Apple looks at them most of the time. I mean this more metaphorically than literally, but I'm so tired of complaints about the ridiculously primitive Finder being met with, "the edge of the iMac now appears even thinner, now that we've repositioned formerly convenient connectors and such into a…

Yup. The MacBook Pro I use today is likely to be my last Apple machine - I've been using their kit for decades - but they've stopped being about software, or hardware.

They're all about brand. This was ok when they had technically excellent products to talk about, but their products are today mediocre, arrogant, and speak of a new, stupider, wealthier target audience.

Fucking gold!

Re: The new MacBook

#859

Post by madaxe_again »

nsxwolf wrote: post #561
SiVal wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you can't really tell how well software is working when looking at the device edge-on, and that's apparently the way Apple looks at them most of the time. I mean this more metaphorically than literally, but I'm so tired of complaints about the ridiculously primitive Finder being met with, "the edge of the iMac now appears even thinner, now that we've repositioned formerly convenient connectors and such into a…

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

Oh, I don't know, basic things like not crashing when you look at it wrong. Having copy and paste reliably work rather than being a crapshoot?

I use the cli (not via terminal.app, it crashes too), largely because finder does not want to be used.

Re: The new MacBook

#860

Post by maigret »

bithush wrote: post #300
jader201 wrote: post #210

Is the world really as obsessed with smallness as Apple thinks it is? From what I keep hearing (and this is anecdotal, of course), it seems that most people would prefer to (reasonably) maximize the battery life with the downside of adding a bit more heft. Of course, there's always a balance that has to be stricken, but it seems like Apple always pushes much more to the side of size over battery vs. what seems to be…

I would love a bigger battery for a slightly bigger device but this isn't what Apple is aiming for. Apple design the hardware to work with what they want it to look like not design a device around the hardware. I used to think that was stupid but it clearly works for Apple. Their business is not making the best device spec wise but the "best" device design wise (in their view obviously).

Is the new battery life still not good enough for you?

Also please all saying this is only "design". This is design made from user problems. Apple is a master at solving actual user problems, and that's why they are so successful. As a side product, their hardware look handsome. But that's actually the less important side.

Real users don't care about 10% more processor or 20% more storage. They care that they can wear their laptop everywhere (and in their purse, many Apple customers are women), that they can type fast and not be bumed by the noise of the computer.

Call it design, I call this utility, and I'm glad Apple tackle those issues. They really care about the whole and are not just assembling off the shelf pieces together.

Post reply on HN