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

X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

imore.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 128 posts

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#91

Post by gizmo686 »

xutopia wrote: post #24

What I find disturbing here is the expectation that they would include it. I was speaking to a Microsoft evangelist two years ago and asked him why it took them so long to release a new version of Windows. He essentially told me that Microsoft does the best legacy support in the world and wanted to ensure that every single piece of important software could still be installed and work with the new version. He also exp…

The expectation in the article was not that apple would include X11 in the OS, but rather that an in-place update to the new version of the OS would not remove X11

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#92

Post by jlarocco »

xutopia wrote: post #24

What I find disturbing here is the expectation that they would include it. I was speaking to a Microsoft evangelist two years ago and asked him why it took them so long to release a new version of Windows. He essentially told me that Microsoft does the best legacy support in the world and wanted to ensure that every single piece of important software could still be installed and work with the new version. He also exp…

> What I find disturbing here is the expectation that they would include it.

If it's always been included in the past, why wouldn't it be included now?

Maybe it's just me, but when I buy an "upgrade", I expect it to be a better version of what I already have.

Also, the installer didn't just not include X11, it actively removed the version he had installed. If the current install isn't compatible with Mountain Lion they could have popped up a message box or prompted him to upgrade the next time he ran an X app. There's no reason to delete things from his machine without telling him.

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#93

Post by kalleboo »

untog wrote: post #43
tomstuart wrote: post #4

Imagine if Apple removes [the floppy drive] itself in the next version of [the Mac], or decides [wi-fi] is the future and gets rid of [the Ethernet port]?

Removing the floppy drive and ethernet ports have clear and straightforward benefits, though. Removing software, less so.

OS X is now download-only, so I imagine pruning bloat has an immediate benefit for any users without infinite, speedy broadband.

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#94

Post by snowwrestler »

derleth wrote: post #77
NelsonMinar wrote: post #61

Apple should remove Terminal.app and replace it with a stub that prompts you to install iTerm2.

Apple may well decide that the Macintosh should go back to being a Macintosh and remove Terminal.app period . It's undeniably what Jobs would do.

Jobs was in charge of Apple as they shipped numerous versions of Terminal.app for a period of over 10 years. If he was going to remove it, he would have.

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#95

Post by swdunlop »

That is a lot of excitement for something that was available at http://xquartz.macosforge.org/ on release day. I didn't even notice or care until I realized that libpng's headers were considered part of X11.

When Apple introduced X11.app, I regarded it a tactic to get UNIX developers onto the platform. At the time, MacOS developers were sticking to Carbon like glue, and I think that by improving the POSIX compatibility and adding X11, Apple was trying to get other communities excited about OSX.

X11.app did not integrate well with OSX, let alone Apple's shrinkwrap vision of the Desktop. I'm not surprised to see they treat it like an optional add on package, and I am somewhat relieved to see it continue as an open source project with support and recognition by Apple. It's the right way to handle a legacy framework in my opinion.

As for the loss of RSS from Mail.app and Safari.app. Srsly? People use that who don't have a six paragraph definition for "semantic web"?

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#97

Post by snowwrestler »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #39

I wonder if Apple risks losing its technical (i.e. programmer) users. If OS X stops feeling like a UNIX-like OS to technical users, and they move away, OS X may receive less attention from developers. And that won't be good for the platform.

The whole point of this move is so that technical users will get a fully up-to-date version of X11, rather than whatever old version was up-to-date when the OS went gold master. Technical users will have little trouble installing it (Apple makes it easy), and will appreciate being up to date. Meanwhile my parents won't miss it.

Another example of this way of thinking is that Apple apparently removed the web server software from Mountain Lion as well. As someone who builds LAMP sites for a living, this is fine with me because the Apple versions of AMP were always out of date or had some quirks. Everyone I know who develops for LAMP on Mac OS X runs MAMP or Virtual Box, not the software that ships with OS X.

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#98

Post by mikeash »

Zak wrote: post #67
tomstuart wrote: post #4

Imagine if Apple removes [the floppy drive] itself in the next version of [the Mac], or decides [wi-fi] is the future and gets rid of [the Ethernet port]?

I actually found the removal of the floppy drive to be rather premature. It took several years for any of the currently popular alternatives to reach critical mass for most people. It wasn't reasonable to assume, for example that Internet access would be available on a computer you wanted to bring a file to. USB flash drives weren't available (or at least cheap and common), and it was more likely than not that a dest…

If they hadn't kickstarted the process, how long would it have taken for the removal not to be premature? Often these things have to be done before their time in order for their time to come at all.

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#99

Post by mikeash »

derleth wrote: post #75
nicholassmith wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they're generally right as well.

Tell that to jwz: http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/07/apple-dicks/ The fact it was eventually resolved changes nothing about how idiotic the process to that point was.

How is that in any way related to this conversation?

Re: X11 and the disturbing trend of Apple removing functionality from OS X

#100

Post by X-Istence »

jlarocco wrote: post #92
xutopia wrote: post #24

What I find disturbing here is the expectation that they would include it. I was speaking to a Microsoft evangelist two years ago and asked him why it took them so long to release a new version of Windows. He essentially told me that Microsoft does the best legacy support in the world and wanted to ensure that every single piece of important software could still be installed and work with the new version. He also exp…

> What I find disturbing here is the expectation that they would include it. If it's always been included in the past, why wouldn't it be included now? Maybe it's just me, but when I buy an "upgrade", I expect it to be a better version of what I already have. Also, the installer didn't just not include X11, it actively removed the version he had installed. If the current install isn't compatible with Mountain Lion th…

Except that the old version came with the old OS... also XQuartz installs itself as part of the system so that you don't run into issues using an older version of XQuartz when you upgrade your OS. I just re-ran GIMP, and it prompted me to go download X11. Downloaded, installed, and now everything works as expected.

I really don't see an issue with this. It is not like it is completely removed (XQuartz BTW is completely open source, so if Apple stopped developing it someone else could pick it up).

> Also, the installer didn't just not include X11, it actively removed the version he had installed. If the current install isn't compatible with Mountain Lion they could have popped up a message box or prompted him to upgrade the next time he ran an X app. There's no reason to delete things from his machine without telling him.

Instead it removed the software, and on first run it told him he would need to download XQuartz which is available freely ... The old software is not compatible, leaving it in place could have caused issues. I don't see why the solution Apple used is so wrong, they clearly did present a popup and didn't just let it fail without errors.

Post reply on HN