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

It Just Works

danielandrews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 192 posts

Re: It Just Works

#151

Post by volaski »

kazinator wrote: post #79
volaski wrote: post #76

I switched to mac when when MS lost its mind and came up with Vista--it was unusable, so much so that switching cost to mac was lower than trying to get Windows to work. Nowadays the only reason I stay with Mac is because I make iOS apps and realize it will be annoying if I abandon Mac. Apple is no more in a "just works" business. It's in a lock-in business. I used to be delighted to download their new OS's, and I'm…

> Apple is no more in a "just works" business. It's in a lock-in business. No such change has happened between 2007 (MS Vista time frame) and now. People familiar with Apple since 1980-something know very well that it's always been about both of the above: just works for the end user, and a lock-in business. If anything, it's less locked in now than it used to be, because of the use of Intel processors (that was a bi…

i could have phrased it better. What I really wanted to say was Apple doesn't seem like a Missionary company it used to be anymore. Sounds ironic to say this to one of the most valuable companies in the world, but everything it does nowadays feels like it comes out of neediness and not out of a long term vision. They used to keep users because Apple devices "just worked" and it's obvious the existing users wouldn't leave. But nowadays I'm at the same point where I was when I was about to make the decision to jump ship from Vista to mac back then. As I mentioned, the reason I can't easily do that is because of their "lock-in" mechanism, not because they have great products. These lock-ins will break eventually unless they step up and do something about this, and I don't think it will ever happen

Re: It Just Works

#152

Post by gress »

bsder wrote: post #148
gress wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All software has bugs. Apple software has a giant audience and the Internet can magnify an issue that affects a small number of users to make it seem as though it's a giant problem. If a problem affects 5,000 users it's easy for it to appear as if it's a huge issue when it in fact is affecting a tiny % of the user base. Not that bugs should be ignored, but an active forum posting is not evidence that there is a major…

Dude, there are Bluetooth mice that are incompatible with current versions of OS X. Let that sink in. Apple screwed up their Bluetooth stack so badly that it is incompatible with a mouse. Something which has been in the Bluetooth standard forever . Something which is solely dependent upon their software because they use the same chip as everybody else. That is beyond a bug. That's contempt for the end user.

Almost all Bluetooth mice are compatible with current versions of OS X. Apple does support the human interface device standards.

You have found a mouse that doesn't implement the Bluetooth spec properly. That is contempt for the end user.

Let that sink in.

Re: It Just Works

#153

Post by bsder »

gress wrote: post #152
bsder wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, there are Bluetooth mice that are incompatible with current versions of OS X. Let that sink in. Apple screwed up their Bluetooth stack so badly that it is incompatible with a mouse. Something which has been in the Bluetooth standard forever . Something which is solely dependent upon their software because they use the same chip as everybody else. That is beyond a bug. That's contempt for the end user.

Almost all Bluetooth mice are compatible with current versions of OS X. Apple does support the human interface device standards. You have found a mouse that doesn't implement the Bluetooth spec properly. That is contempt for the end user. Let that sink in.

> You have found a mouse that doesn't implement the Bluetooth spec properly. That is contempt for the end user.

The mice I have work perfectly with all incarnations of Windows I have (XP, 7, and 8) and OS X version 10.6 (don't have access to 10.7 and 10.8 anymore).

So, which is more likely, those mice all implemented the Bluetooth spec wrong yet still managed to work, or Apple screwed up their stack?

Re: It Just Works

#154

Post by bsder »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #83

I don't understand why the hacker scene these days is full of proud OSX users. What happened to the proud Linux hackers we've always had? They told me to use OSX at the job I recently started, and I only lasted a week before I told them I wanted to install Linux.

Display and networking.

Graphics is so much easier to deal with on OS X than Linux it makes me cry. I take my laptop between a 4K monitor on Thunderbolt, a 2560 monitor on HDMI, and a 1920 monitor on DVI. And I don't have to edit a single file on OS X. I shudder with the thought of that on Linux.

Networking just works on incarnations of OS X prior to 10.10. I can pop my laptop open and it pretty much connects anywhere with no configuration changes and only asks when I have to cough up a password. Linux still regularly makes me do wonky command line dances when the interface suddenly disappears or goes down.

Re: It Just Works

#156

Post by jen729w »

tonylemesmer wrote: post #123
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If I do plug my iPhone into the computer, I should be able to drag and drop..." This may sound petty, but this is the biggest reason I don't use an iPhone. Smartphones are more than consumption devices. They are tiny computers and I want the flexibility of using a tiny computer.

Not at all petty. This and being forced to use iTunes are my primary reason for disliking iPhones. Having said that, my Android phone is rooted, so there's probably an argument that I could have an iPhone and root it to achieve what I want.

Not disagreeing that it's horrible, but you don't actually need to use iTunes to use an iPhone. I can't remember the last time I opened iTunes.

iTunes Match worked great for me, but now Spotify has all but replaced any dependence I have on Apple for music.

Re: It Just Works

#157

Post by jen729w »

ohitsdom wrote: post #85
geophile wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify is a possible replacement (even without their streaming and music finding services), but I find that application quite buggy.

Spotify seems determined to force me to listen to albums on shuffle.

After you've tapped a track in the main list of tracks to start it playing, tap the skinny "playing" bit at the very bottom. It should pop up the full screen player. Is the shuffle icon selected (green)?

I had the same issue a while back and I was infuriated at myself for not figuring out the solution.

Re: It Just Works

#158

Post by maxwelljoslyn »

kaffeinecoma wrote: post #52

Do you rely on Time Machine? Drop to the shell right now and try "tmutil compare -n" to see which files are not making it onto your backups. For me, Time Machine randomly ignores certain files, for no discernible reason. Files that have sat on my disk literally for years will never get backed up. It's happened to me on two different Macs, and I've lost data because of it.

"-n" doesn't seem to be a valid flag for "tmutil compare". (OS X 10.8). What flag or comparison property did you mean?

I'm running the unflagged command now. Thanks for the heads up. I appreciate it. If this comes up bad I'll need a second backup solution.

Edit: Thanks again, parent: Time Machine was indeed missing some of my music!

Re: It Just Works

#159

Post by gress »

bsder wrote: post #153
gress wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost all Bluetooth mice are compatible with current versions of OS X. Apple does support the human interface device standards. You have found a mouse that doesn't implement the Bluetooth spec properly. That is contempt for the end user. Let that sink in.

> You have found a mouse that doesn't implement the Bluetooth spec properly. That is contempt for the end user. The mice I have work perfectly with all incarnations of Windows I have (XP, 7, and 8) and OS X version 10.6 (don't have access to 10.7 and 10.8 anymore). So, which is more likely, those mice all implemented the Bluetooth spec wrong yet still managed to work, or Apple screwed up their stack?

It's entirely possible that a mouse can have a noncompliant implementation and happen to work with a relaxed implementation of the host. Perhaps Apple made their stack more compliant.

If your logic were correct then all Bluetooth mice would have stopped working. They haven't.

Re: It Just Works

#160

Post by pascalo »

bsder wrote: post #154
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #83

I don't understand why the hacker scene these days is full of proud OSX users. What happened to the proud Linux hackers we've always had? They told me to use OSX at the job I recently started, and I only lasted a week before I told them I wanted to install Linux.

Display and networking. Graphics is so much easier to deal with on OS X than Linux it makes me cry. I take my laptop between a 4K monitor on Thunderbolt, a 2560 monitor on HDMI, and a 1920 monitor on DVI. And I don't have to edit a single file on OS X. I shudder with the thought of that on Linux. Networking just works on incarnations of OS X prior to 10.10. I can pop my laptop open and it pretty much connects anywher…

To give a counter example, I run Ubuntu 14.04 on a NUC with a Dell U2713H via displayport and a samsung 24 inch via HDMI. The whole thing was a matter of install, and be ready to go. No command line dances needed.

I think it comes down to picking hardware that is supported well, i.e. Intel stuff. Apple of course for the most part knows it's hardware and doesn't have to include a gazillion drivers for graphics boards of all make and model.

Post reply on HN