Live data from Hacker News

It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

tonsky.me

491–500 of 984 posts

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#491

This is an excellent article. Apple has been rudderless on the interaction design front for over a decade now. The windowing mess is evidence of it. We now have the cmd+tab (app switcher), Spaces, Mission Control, (full screen) split screen, Stage Manager, and now tiled window control. None of those interaction metaphors have been expanded upon since their initial launch. I'm a "mac guy". I understood why Apple initi…

I strongly believe we need to return to the drawing board and design a Window Environment from scratch because we've gone so far down the "everything's a mess" route that it's impossible to work our way out again. Here's an example: panes, tabs, windows, apps, spaces. These things all fight against each other, have their own little silos, get treated differently by every single app, etc, etc.

> Here's an example: panes, tabs, windows, apps, spaces. These things all fight against each other, have their own little silos, get treated differently by every single app, etc, etc.

Disagree. The fact that these are independent is a huge organizational boon for those who know how to apply some combination of them.

Example: I set up spaces (virtual desktops) to have themes: one of general web, one for iOS dev, one for Android dev, etc. within that, it’s useful to be able to further organize with windows and tabs — windows can represent projects for example, and tabs can represent files. These work together to prevent a Cambrian explosion of windows that would be impossible to manage no matter how your environment works.

It’s useful for apps to be distinct from windows, too. This allows things like moving all windows belonging to a particular app between screens, or minimizing/maximizing them all, hiding them all, etc. Panes in most circumstances are an entirely different beast than tabs and windows… it wouldn’t be useful to turn an inspector palette into a tab.

They work together as long as one’s mental model isn’t overly simplistic.

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#492

Interesting. The article starts with this: > Sequoia → Tahoe It’s bad And I look at the image... And I like it? I agree with the author that it could be better , but most of the icons (new, open recent, close, save, duplicate, print, share etc), do make it easier, faster and more pleasant for my brain to parse the menu vs no icons. Again, I don't disagree that you could do it better, I just disagree with the premise…

most of your points are refuted in the article. but I'll pick this one : "Display density has increased dramatically" Yes, it has, and Tahoe does not take advantage of this, infact the icons are smaller, and harder to read, using fewer pixels than windows icons of 25 years ago.

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#493

I tend to disagree with the author on this. Reading actual words takes time (and, for me, mental energy). I have to look at each character, say the word in my head, then visualize what action that word means. Where as icons have a lot more built in meaning (but lack specificity). I tend to use them as a _local_ fuzzy filter (unless it's a common, well known icon like share) then read the words to understand exactly w…

But that's the author's point, no? Icons are great when used as visual shortcuts, but the way they're implemented makes absolutely no sense to the point of being detracting. They're inconsistent from menu to menu, even in the same application, and don't even necessarily represent the action they're assigned to.

> They're inconsistent from menu to menu, even in the same application, and don't even necessarily represent the action they're assigned to.

My point is that none of that matters. They just need to represent something within the context they're being used.

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#494
post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not how you get promoted though. Plus implementing complex UIs is challenging which engineers like. The incentives are off.

It's not only not how you get promoted, it's a pretty good way to get canned as well. If you don't like the work you're being asked to do, your options are pretty limited to doing it or going elsewhere. There are a million UXers and engineers who'd love to work at Apple and would be happy making whatever their boss suggests.

That's how you know the "culture" and the "vision" really do have to come from the top, and how you know Steve Jobs really was providing value.

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#495

I'm still on Sequoia, almost 100% of the reason is how bad OSX26 looks. There's absolutely nothing compelling me to update right now

Same. All my colleagues had to update, and I feel dread just looking at their screens. There is something very deeply disturbing in this new design that I cannot even pinpoint.

I wait and hope that some point apple will revert certain changes, or at least give more options for disabling some stuff.

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#497
post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not only not how you get promoted, it's a pretty good way to get canned as well. If you don't like the work you're being asked to do, your options are pretty limited to doing it or going elsewhere. There are a million UXers and engineers who'd love to work at Apple and would be happy making whatever their boss suggests.

Seriously. People got canned for resisting the corporate overlords. That’s capitalism. Corporations run by their employees? Guilds? Cooperatives? Hah! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynbgMKclWWc Just that usually the forcefed initiatives have to do with corporate profits for shareholders, or trends like shoving AI into everything. Imagine saying no to that! Even at the supra-corporate and supra-national level, if the…

I don't think corporate profits are the reason Apple has shitty UX because it's hard to argue how shitty UX correlates to higher profit, especially when it costs more to create a shitty UX than to keep the good one you already have.

I reckon it's more that some Apple VP has to justify their million dollar equity package by creating work for their org, because otherwise why should you still have a job?

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#498
post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% this. I recall watching their launch video about Liquid Glass. It was filled with ego-driven "we're changing the world here" nonsense. They were designing in a bubble and wanted to do something different so they could justify the work. It was never about the user.

You’re not looking far enough ahead. Liquid glass isn’t about Mac. It’s about VisionPro and wearables. This is a strategic play by Apple.

Apple just reduced Vision Pro production, but Liquid Glass was in motion well before that. What leaves me scratching my head is I never got the impression Apple believed in Vision Pro. It launched because after years of research, management wanted to see if the effort was worth continuing to invest in, but that wasn't a vote of confidence.

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#499
post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are definitely not the same as in 1992 when it comes to their everyday knowledge of computer interactions. And even if human cognition itself were unchanged, our understanding of HCI has evolved significantly since then, well beyond what merely “feels right.” Most UX researchers today can back up their claims with empirical data. The article goes on at great length about consistency, yet then insists that text…

Most UX researchers today can back up their claims with empirical data. HCI work in 1992 was very heavily based on user research, famously so at Apple. They definitely had the data. I find myself questioning that today (like, have these horrible Tahoe icons really been tested properly?) although maybe unfairly, as I'm not an HCI expert. It does feel like there are more bad UIs around today, but that doesn't necessari…

I there not any user testing as we know it today, mostly top down application of priciples.

This was all experts driven in that time to my knowledge.

Empirical validiton did not really take off until the late 00s.

https://hci.stanford.edu/publications/bds/4p-guidelines.html

Don had the explicit expert knowledge first stance in 2006 and 2011, nothing inherently wrong with that, but it's defenitly no research driven.

"Always be researching. Always be acting."

https://jnd.org/act-first-do-the-research-later/

Tognazzini and Norman already criticized Appple about this a decade ago, while the have many good points, I cannot shake the feeling that they simply feel like the were used to just brand Apple as user friendly in the 90s and that Apple never actually adopted their principles and just used it as it fit the company's marketing.

https://www.fastcompany.com/3053406/how-apple-is-giving-desi...

there are a bunch of discussions on this

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10559387 [2015] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19887519 [2019]

Re: It's hard to justify Tahoe icons

#500
post #243
post #98

I’ve always respected macOS for being the 'stable' choice for not-as-techy people. But recent versions feel like a mess. Running Tahoe on my 2019 Mac Pro (Yes the cheese grater one) has been surprisingly frustrating. Simple things are broken: Ableton couldn't even trigger a microphone permission prompt, forcing me to meddle with a SQLite database, which is definitely not meant for end users to touch, just to get it w…

The talk you cited is excellent. I recommend it if anyone is interested in design, UIs and UX :P

It recently made the rounds on HN with discussion[1].

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46256834

Post reply on HN