Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s declining software quality

sudophilosophical.com

681–690 of 723 posts

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#681
post #33

It feels a little clichéd to say it, but I do feel that Snow Leopard, outdated now as it is, was some kind of fortuitous confluence of factors that resulted in OS X being as close to perfect as it's ever been. Even putting aside the iOS-style elements being added, my experience has been that each version of OS X has been slightly worse than the last, and tends to introduce strange little anomalies and instabilities o…

I think you have rose colored glasses about Snow Leopard. It had plenty of bugs and hiccups. People deride the "iOS style" features of El Capitan but first, what specifically are you referring to besides Launcher? Do you think adding Notifications to OS X is bad? I find them extremely useful, and like the integration better than the spotty support Growler had among third party software. I never use Launcher but it's…

> People deride the "iOS style" features of El Capitan but first, what specifically are you referring to besides Launcher?

So much hideousness.

Like breaking Save As... with a clunky autosave set up.

Like a badly thought-out full screen mode that couldn't even cope with an external monitor being connected (this being something that worked on the 512k Mac).

Like automatically terminating background apps, and purging resources within apps (so that Safari would reload all your background tabs randomly).

Like App Sandboxing which is so restrictive as to rule out an entire class of applications from the piss-poor Mac App Store, and to continually fill the Console with Apple's own system services getting dinged for sandbox violations.

Like discoveryd.

Like abstracting away the filesytem, so that you hit "Move" on an document and get a crippled filepicker appearing from the title bar.

Have they actually added anything good since 10.6? Some window management has improved a bit. Startup is immensely better. iMessage is getting there (though iChat AV was still better at group video chat than anything since, including Hangouts). You mention AirDrop, but that's a mess (and the awful Chooser was still a better way of finding other Macs to connect to than the Finder is today).

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take a crack at that: - UI non-responsiveness: it is extraordinarily frequent that I will chord a tab change in Safari or in iTerm2, and the system will not respond for sometimes multiple seconds. It's the same with creating tabs in Safari. ⌘-t or ⌘-{ do not respond. - Application switching focus failures: ⌘-tab will raise another window, but window focus will not follow. This has caused me to lose work. ⌘-tab,…

Just a quick nitpick: discoveryd was reverted on the last release... OSX is back using mDNSResponder again. You can't really say "It amazes me that such bugs stick around" if you're not actually on the newest version.

True, I conflated tvOS with OS X here, but it's still software by Apple.

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#683
post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the initial Windows release of Safari. Apple insisted on doing their own font rendering, and the result was blurry headache-inducing text.

Wasn't that a Windows issue, though? I feel like font-rendering on Windows, in general, is far inferior to font-rendering and aliasing on the Mac. Especially with the new HiDPI displays popping up, Apple's stuff looks far better to me than any display I've ever seen on Windows.

They actually went back on that decision because Windows users complained so much that the text was antialiased properly.

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You seem to be interpreting it as an accusation based on the idea that a person making this statement about himself is very unlikely to be incorrect. I'm interpreting it as an accusation based on the prior explanation, which is less about likelihood of correctness and more about questioning the single authoritative root source of information. In truth, that reasoning is really my explanation of what I see in practi…

In my experience, calling bullshit is almost always about saying the person is wrong, not lying. Maybe carried away by braggadocio, but not outright lying. You say it's questioning the single authoritative root source of information. I say there is no authoritative root source of this information. People's memories are bad, even about their own lives, and when they say something improbable about their own lives, it's…

> In my experience, calling bullshit is almost always about saying the person is wrong, not lying. Maybe carried away by braggadocio, but not outright lying.

I'm not sure that follow most people's interpretations. Wikipedia[1] even asserts it's usual use in response to statement that are "deceiving, misleading, disingenuous, unfair or false". Personally I see it used, and use it myself (sparingly) when responding to someone you think is knowingly misleading you (possibly in jest). I would be offended if anyone but a close friend called my statements bullshit and I believed them, as I would interpret that as an accusation of me intentional misrepresentation.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit

> I say there is no authoritative root source of this information.

Sure there is, in the instances I am (and have been) referring to. That doesn't mean it's infallible, but in the absence of a third party witness or evidence to the contrary, sometimes all you have is the statement of the person about themselves. The only way to find a fault in those situations is for them to admit it. Related to what we've been discussing, I'm not sure I would distinguish between a lie or a mistake when someone recants immediately after a statement and questioning of said statement when in regards their own actions in the way we've been discussing. I consider both acts of bad faith (if someone puts so little thought into their words that they must recant at the slightest questioning, then I view it as not better than a lie).

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, calling bullshit is almost always about saying the person is wrong, not lying. Maybe carried away by braggadocio, but not outright lying. You say it's questioning the single authoritative root source of information. I say there is no authoritative root source of this information. People's memories are bad, even about their own lives, and when they say something improbable about their own lives, it's…

> In my experience, calling bullshit is almost always about saying the person is wrong, not lying. Maybe carried away by braggadocio, but not outright lying. I'm not sure that follow most people's interpretations. Wikipedia[1] even asserts it's usual use in response to statement that are "deceiving, misleading, disingenuous, unfair or false". Personally I see it used, and use it myself (sparingly) when responding to…

"I'm not sure I would distinguish between a lie or a mistake when someone recants immediately after a statement and questioning of said statement when in regards their own actions in the way we've been discussing. I consider both acts of bad faith (if someone puts so little thought into their words that they must recant at the slightest questioning, then I view it as not better than a lie)."

I'd suggest you really ought to lighten up, understand informal discourse for what it is, and stop projecting your own harsh views of other people onto other people.

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, sure can. https://access.redhat.com/ecosystem/search/#/vendor/Lenovo?s...

Mostly ;) http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&page=1&rh=n%3A565108%2Cp_n_o... (amazon shop --Laptop -- PC )

Frankly i suspect MS would love to ignore the consumer world, except that then they would lose their beloved "total cost of ownership" argument for doing B2B sales.

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#687
post #642
post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iPhoto was pretty bad, but it seems better than Photos. Perhaps I'm just more used to it. Thanks for the tip about the hearts, but I didn't mean in the title bar of the program, I meant overlaid on the photo itself -- the old flagging method was much easier to see at a glance. I actually like the photostream. It's an easy way of getting recent phone snapshots onto my computer for exporting or doing whatever I want --…

You can display hearts on the photos by going to the view menu! (As well as titles if they exist, the file format, …) That info is overlaid! (I also think it’s entirely reasonable to only have the thumbnail bar for photo navigation. I think the one in iPhoto worked exactly the same? It just maybe wasn’t displayed by default? If you give it all the functionality of all the other views there are consequences to that, k…

Ah, I see, if you turn things on in the view menu, it enables it to be overload ONLY in the main thumbnail view mode. When you're viewing a single photo, the heart/title/etc is not overlaid on the full size photo or the nav bar thumbnail.

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#688

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In my experience, calling bullshit is almost always about saying the person is wrong, not lying. Maybe carried away by braggadocio, but not outright lying. I'm not sure that follow most people's interpretations. Wikipedia[1] even asserts it's usual use in response to statement that are "deceiving, misleading, disingenuous, unfair or false". Personally I see it used, and use it myself (sparingly) when responding to…

"I'm not sure I would distinguish between a lie or a mistake when someone recants immediately after a statement and questioning of said statement when in regards their own actions in the way we've been discussing. I consider both acts of bad faith (if someone puts so little thought into their words that they must recant at the slightest questioning, then I view it as not better than a lie)." I'd suggest you really ou…

> understand informal discourse for what it is, and stop projecting your own harsh views of other people onto other people.

I don't think it's overly harsh to expect people, when talking about their own actions (and obviously when understanding the topic and terminology), and when in a discussion which is not a light hearted banter, to expect someone to put enough thought into that statement to make it true, at least to the degree it requires additional information to make them reconsider.

This theoretical exchange in a discussion regarding the merits of Chicken illustrates my point of view: Person 1: I don't eat chicken. Person 2: Are you sure? Person 1: Okay, yes, I eat chicken.

Person 1 has, at this point, proven themselves unreliable in their statements. Whether that is from a lie or mistake is both unprovable,and to me, irrelevant, because the end result is the same. I may or may not converse with them further, depending on other cues, but functionally, what's the difference to Person 2 or observers. I don't think that's overly harsh, just stating the realities of the situation. Sometimes people tell small lies, sometimes they make mistakes, but every occurrence affects your view of them slightly unless you expected that statement to be untrue.

So, to bring this full circle, the original commenter that asserted they didn't use default Apple apps may have lied, but it's far more likely they were mistaken, but in the end, I'll view their statements with a bit more skepticism now, as they've proven themselves capable of making a simple, assertive blanket statements about their behavior that they will recant at the slightest question.

Even so, I still feel the original reply carried an implied accusation of deception, for the reasons we've covered in depth. Regardless of whether the replying commenter was eventually correct, I don't think they had cause to use the wording they did at the time they did. We don't agree, which is fine, but that's why I felt compelled to make the statement I did, and while my wording may have been overly harsh (which I've already admitted), I don't believe my message was.

I assume we're done here, since your last statement was a single sentence whose purpose was to call into question my attitude, understanding, and actions, and offered little additional to discuss? In truth, I found that somewhat belittling, but am trying to ignore that aspect, as I may be misinterpreting it (and I try to be more forgiving of speech directed towards myself than to others). I've tried to be civil, and while this discussion wasn't light hearted, I did find it informative.

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an engineer,this is the correct response.

Well as an engineer, I think we all know that manufacturing defects can creep in even after prototypes pass. It's also the case that it's incredibly hard to test things like battery life, wifi connectivity and the effects of heavy processor workloads in a systematic way. You hope that your vendors do a good job (and I bet Microsoft's contract with Intel involves penalties for these major defects to try and incentiviz…

That's not what I'd call a bug that "crept in". Surface Book I bought crashed unprovoked _several times a day_. That's deliberately shipping a completely faulty product that any self-respecting customer will take right back to the store. Which I did.

Re: Apple’s declining software quality

#690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every business (and I'd argue project) needs to grow and change with how the world is developing. The Palm Pilot software was perfectly fine in 2004(?) but wouldn't stand a chance serving users-needs in 2016. The Linux distro's actually serve multiple 'customer' segments. On the client side there are at least two customers (at a minimum), one is end-users, the other is the OEM's who pay for Linux to be preloaded. The…

> wouldn't stand a chance serving users-needs in 2016 I'll allow some simili-troll (only in appearances) rewrite : ... wouldn't stand a chance serving users-needs-that-they-think-they-have in 2016. Trends go both ways, people think new shiny will make their life gloriouser so they run after that, then business run after that 'need' because that's what the milk machine wants. This leads to a constant spiraling where t…

> I don't know how to describe mobile. I believe it will be the tail of the so called computer era, not a next phase.

I agree with you, mobile is more of an extrapolation, or an evolution than an entirely new phase or era. We're into the point where English becomes imprecise to define where something is truly different.

And, I completely agree about the loop between being customer-driven and then finding out that it's just a short-term shift. The worst part is that it's fundamentally difficult to tell if something is a short-term trend or a long-term shift.

Where I was going was a much more limited view of 'trends', more like a season in the fashion market. Most businesses have to respond on an annual basis to what their customers wants - they can believe that something is a temporary trend, but can't afford not to respond.

Perhaps we're in violent agreement on the nature of trends, and divided by time-frame and response.

Post reply on HN