Thoughts on OSX Leopard
by matt
Karl just blogged about installing OSX 10.5 Leopard on his Mac. And I began to leave a comment on his post – but realized it’s a full blog post. So here’s what I think…
I was excited as anyone about Leopard. I was hoping to use it as justification to buy a new Mac. But after reading the reviews, I have to say it looks like a waste of time. It’s no secret that Apple moved their top developers onto the iPhone two years ago and this seems to be reflected in the sad lists of improvements that are popping up everywhere.
Let’s have a look:
- Spaces? Okay. Much appreciated, but Linux was doing that in 1999.
- The stacks look cool. But apparently they’re not so user-friendly. I’m eager to play with them.
- Time Machine? Is this a joke? Even Apple themselves are calling it a giant leap backward. I already have a system back-up.
- And according to Dave Winer, the new menu bar is hard to read and he wants the old one back.
- But this takes the cake: Spotlight is now a calculator? MacWorld mentions this in the paragraph after they list the “big changes”. This is 2007 – why wasn’t Spotlight already a calculator? Only Steve Jobs could make people pay for this.
I think I knew Leopard was going to be a disappointment when Walt Mossberg put Steve Jobs and Bill Gates on the spot by asking them (I paraphrase): “Are we going to see anything truly new any time soon? Basically, it’s been twenty years and we’re still using Windows 3.1.” and Steve and Bill just sat there uncomfortably looking at their shoes.
But no problem – between Gmail, Google Calendar, Google Reader, Picnik, and Google Notebook – I think we’re seeing some truly exciting OS developments. Sadly, not on the Mac.
I just read the brilliantly-written Ars Technica review of Leopard that everyone is linking to: “If Apple is going to make mistakes, let them be made in service of a truly daring design.”
Nicely put.
Comments
Umm… comparing OSX to Windows 3.1 is beyond ridiculous. I still have to use 95 at work and it’s nearly crippling compared to using Tiger at home. Leopard is on two of our three computers at home. While it may not be revolutionary, and is disappointing compared to the initial press releases of what it was going to do, it’s still well liked.
Hey Mike – Well, I’m glad to hear it’s well-liked, since I’ll have to upgrade at some point.
I think Walt Mossberg was referring to the fact that we’ve been using the same folder/window metaphor for operating systems for twenty years. I think a lot of us realize there is much great potential for design here. Google realizes it too – and while they’re not perfect. At least they’re innovating.
This is echoed by John Siracusa in his Ars Technica review when he says, “I’m looking for a discontinuity, a new beginning, in all aspects of the OS.”
I’m one of those people who is looking for a something new at a fundamental level, and I think for the amount we collectively spend on Apple products, we have a right to demand it.
That may indeed be true, but I’m wondering if it won’t take a fundamental change in hardware first. I can’t help but think that the iPhone is a step towards that. I do have to question the idea of having something new over the folder/window metaphor; is there really a dire need to change that? What about it doesn’t work well? Generally, I want my OS to sit quietly in the background and do what I need when I need it. It’s like a lot of new web 2.0 websites (especially some art sites) in that there is so much done with the presentation and design of the sites, it gets in the way of the content. I also have to question the idea of constant or radical change in that it mostly ends up costing people a lot of money. This is hard to take when studies have shown that, for all the advancement in desktop computing, the actual payoff in performance hasn’t really changed.