No, no one wants that (I hope). Read the Gruber preview and you'll feel more at ease. OS X and iOS are not merging. He describes Mountain Lion as "a series of steps toward defining a set of shared concepts, styles, and principles between two fundamentally distinct OSes."
OS X Safari tabs were added to the iPad version of Safari in iOS 5.
Most of the rest of the features that people are listing don't seem right, like both iOS and OS X have a search called Spotlight but they aren't very similar in UI.
The ports of iWork and GarageBand felt like that to me. iOS changing from a web-driven OS into something that can be much better compared to a desktop machine.
This strikes me as more of a transition period. Eventually mac sales will be controlled completely via the app store and its highly structured sand boxed environment. Gatekeeper allows runtime control. Icloud replaces the local file system. The style guide moves to the ipad side. And in a few years the mac just fades away...
I read the Gruber article too and I'm not totally at ease yet. In terms or UI I don't mind the new look of things but I do worry about things like iCloud. It's a really excellent idea but I'm not sure if I want my file system in the cloud. Not for security but just for control. I've been in love with the Mac for over five years now and I'm starting to worry. What if I want a different cloud file system other than iCloud? What if I want no cloud file system? Sure, right now it's no problem but what about the future?
It's no secret that Apple is basically creating a hardware software empire where everything from the physical computer to the peripherals to the software and even web services are all Apple. I've been fine with that because the Mac never tried to force things on me. I've always had the option to use a different email client, Dropbox, music player, etc. without any trouble but I'm afraid Apple will move OS X in the direction of Windows where the OS assumes you're going to use its preferred software and services and if you don't it either makes it a hassle to use alternatives or it continuously throws up those annoying notifications.
All that aside, I'm most afraid for how friendly it will be to developers. Snow Leopard was the last OS X that was perfect for me as a developer. In Lion I have to deal with things like LLVM as the default compiler outdated command line tools, some Ruby gems give me problems, the system won't allow you to save hidden files (i.e. ".htaccess") and the list goes on.
I know that developers and power users are in the minority and that for average folks who are all about media and entertainment with a little work thrown in Mountain Lion will be aweso,e out of the box. I'm glad they're making such an awesome system for those people but I feel like they're leaving developers out and not even giving us a way to switch off some of those default behaviors.
I'm only 25 but I feel like I sound like the old guy who thinks things were better "back in the old days". Maybe I am just resisting a good thing and I hope I learn to love it.
I believe your concerns are completely warranted. Lion was a a significant step in the wrong direction, and this sounds like an enthusiastic leap along the same unfortunate lines.
Sort of tangental, but I know the command line tools are not GNU but are they otherwise outdated? I used to install various GNU coreutils packages but decided they weren't really adding anything and in some cases (ls) they were removing functionality.
> the system won't allow you to save hidden files (i.e. ".htaccess") and the list goes on.
I don't believe that is true, unless you're having problems with a specific editor?
You're not. The continuing IOSification of OSX is something that has been bugging me too and part of why, to date, I've yet to upgrade to Lion. It looks like Apple wants to create a more iOS-like approach across all its products, which is fine if you buy into the whole ecosystem.
It also seems there's a trend here, with Apple bringing iOS increasingly into OSX and Microsoft bringing Windows Phone into Windows 8, the only operating systems which still are aimed primarily at computer users are Unix or Linux based.
At the end of the day, the Mac is still the developer platform for iOS Apple has been really good to Mac developers, and I don't see them stopping anytime soon (it is totally against their interest in having a great apps ecosystem on iOS).
Lion is great. Swiping between full-screen desktops is a huge productivity boost. Touchpad gestures instead of hotkeys to bring up Expose is awesome. Yes it's iOS-ified, but it takes the good things from iOS that fit naturally with the touchpad.
At the same time, the UNIX guts of OS X keep getting better. Grand Central is an awesome API that you can use from C. 64-bit support is almost seamless. You can swipe just fine between full-screen terminal windows. Xcode keeps getting less shitty, LLVM and LLDB keep getting better. Objective-C keeps seeing feature and performance improvements. The API's keep being improved.
People are afraid that the gains for iOS means losses for OS X, but all I've seen so far are gains for OS X, largely focused on revamping the UI to take full advantage of the multi-touch capabilities of modern Mac hardware.
Are you kidding? XCode 4 is one of the most unstable pieces of software that Apple has ever released. It crashes all the time and is borderline unacceptable as an IDE.
I have yet to use Lion, so I cannot comment if the iOS metaphor suits the personal computer, but I am all for the vendors trying something new. The desktop metaphor has been used for multiple decades now, with very little variation. While it has proven to work well, is it the best we can do, or are we stuck with baby duck syndrome?
98% of the time for me at least Lion remains near identical to previous OS X versions from a UI perspective (with the exception of full screen which was just a glaring omission from all previous version IMHO).
The "Back to the Mac" line might be good marketing but massive over sell if viewed as literal truth. What they did was identify a few holes in the UI (for instance that you might not have every application you wanted in your dock but that going through your applications folder was a pain) and fill them with iOS-ish solutions.
But if you don't want them, you don't use them, they've not taken any of the old stuff away.
Why in the hell would navigating a bunch of sequential screens full of huge icons be less of a pain than an applications folder? Thank god for application launchers in any case.
And they did screw with the old ui stuff in Lion. For example, they completely fucked up Spaces when they merged everything into Mission Control. It now takes twice as long to move between spaces; you're treated to a stupid iOS-style "fade in" animation, wasting even more of your time; the steps to move a window between spaces is now more complicated; and they removed rows. Why? I assume they wanted to make it look exactly the way it does on iOS, where you just have a horizontal series of windows. This is simple and intuitive. It's also stupid as hell.
> Why in the hell would navigating a bunch of sequential screens full of huge icons be less of a pain than an applications folder? Thank god for application launchers in any case.
Because you can organise them, group related stuff together and so on as opposed to having a single long list. I admit that I don't really use it (I prefer stacks in the dock) but it's better than the application folder.
> And they did screw with the old ui stuff in Lion. For example, they completely fucked up Spaces when they merged everything into Mission Control. It now takes twice as long to move between spaces; you're treated to a stupid iOS-style "fade in" animation, wasting even more of your time; the steps to move a window between spaces is now more complicated; and they removed rows. Why? I assume they wanted to make it look exactly the way it does on iOS, where you just have a horizontal series of windows.
Fair enough, I didn't really use Spaces previously so I'd not noticed the changes, though I'm not sure what you mean about the fade in. Mine transitions very quickly between spaces with no fade in.
> This is simple and intuitive. It's also stupid as hell.
Can you explain this? Simple and intuitive are good. How is that stupid.
This worries me too, and I hope it doesn't go too far. However I am using Lion and in general I don't really notice it in this OS.
In fact, other than the reverse scrolling behaviour (which would be easy to revert if I cared) I rarely notice any difference in behaviour between my Lion laptop and my girlfriend's Snow Leopard laptop.
Last time they took inspiration from iOS we ended up with "Launchpad", an inverted scroll-wheel, and the god-awful "restart all applications after reboot"-nuisance that cannot be fully disabled.
Yes, because then they don't all start at once, fight for RAM and swap around while leaving my computer a useless lagging mess when I just want to open a browser. It's probably okay in some cases, but it shouldn't be the default. Instead of prompting before shutdown, it could display a dialog on boot with a list of applications that had been running. Click on one to restore it, and have a "Restore All" option at the bottom.
I noticed on my old MacBook there was a considerable delay relaunching apps, but with my new one, between more RAM and the SSD it's pretty instantaneous, as is the restart itself. I was always careful about quitting apps to free up RAM on the old machine though, but just relaunching Chrome and bringing all my tabs back up was enough to do the same thing.
This is a much smaller burden to me than having to wait for OSX to launch all sorts of random apps after every single reboot. Most of which I simply close right away anyway because there's no point in having them clutter my screen until I actually need them again.
Or when you need to restart the machine because of a low-level software update... or because something has gone wrong with the software or the hardware.
Interesting. When I want to quit applications, I quit applications. When I'm done running the machine for awhile, I sleep it. I only ever reboot because of software update anymore.
Well, to add insult to injury, resume plain out doesn't work as soon as you leave the beaten path ever so slightly.
I.e. I really don't need iTerm to resume because it can't restore my sessions anyway. And even most regular apps fail to resume for me because almost all of my files are on a network share that OSX fails to auto-mount.
There are better solutions than restarting applications in that case -- specifically, c/r solutions aren't too hard, and require no work from app developers to support.
I would love it if it restored things to the proper desktop. When it actually matters (i.e.: you have multiple desktops setup with different browsers for different purposes, making re-opening them all in the proper place a pain) it is useless.
For the record, neither the iPhone nor the iPad restarts applications after reboot; the only applications that are started when the device boots are MobilePhone, sometimes MobileMail, and any app marked with "run in the background" permissions that explicitly request it for scenarios such as VoIP (e.g. Skype, so it can sign in to the service on boot).
Launchpad is great and the scrolling behavior makes total sense. We also got fullscreen mode, which is the first multiple desktop like thing I've ever gotten used to using (even after years of using Linux, where I could never make use of virtual desktops because I couldn't remember what windows had gone where). The iPad-inspired improvements in Lion were probably the biggest jump in my desktop productivity since I got a Mac to begin with (around 10.4).
It's not change but in the case of Launchpad poor implementation. No control over what gets added without a 3rd party utility, no admin interface for serious arranging and even if you do wipe the database and manually add icons, it still winds up reseting once you install an application after the fact. Try installing Adobe CS to see how badly messed up it can get.
I wonder if this is a glimpse of what it's like to not have SJ being around to say "this is shit!" and make them do it better.
On inverted scroll, it's great until you have to use someone else's mac or a PC then it just gets painful.
Tim Cook said the other day that the iPad is helping the Mac gain marketshare. That tagline is telling all of the iOS users. You liked your phone? Why not try a computer that integrates with it perfectly.
Why is it that a consumer product can not also be a workhorse?
I have been running Lion and do not feel that it makes my computer less of a workhorse. I dont think that ML will make it less of a workhorse. I see this update as adding a bunch of stuff, some of which will be useful to developers, and not removing anything that made me fall in love with my Mac as a dev platform.
As a non-Mac-user, I've always had the impression (from Apple and the general public) that Macs are consumer-oriented devices (or at least non-corporate machines). The only significant impact they've had in business in my view is for creative professionals like yourself, and only because for a while Adobe tools worked better on Mac (which may or may not be the case anymore).
Schools used Macs because they were cheap (for the schools). Creatives used Macs because the tools were better. 99% of the other Mac users used Macs because it was more consumer friendly than the business-oriented Windows. Apple has never been in the business of catering to business.
1) you think you are different than a consumer how?
Anybody reading this page is likely to be told they aren't a "consumer." I was having that problem with Ubuntu Linux, for goodness' sake, though in Linux they call it a "Real Person(tm)" instead of a consumer. As in, "Of course XYZ doesn't work out of the box if you run an alternative window manager, because a Real Person doesn't run alternative window managers, and Ubuntu is for Real People."
Based on that, I think it's a valid concern that in focusing on "consumers" or "normal people" or however you want to put it, Apple might fail to take care of the artists, designers, and musicians who have historically been a strong part of its user base. One consistent goal for the Mac has been to be a computer for people who don't want to learn how to use their computer. That could be interpreted to exclude designers, artists, musicians, and so on, because they use very sophisticated software tools with steep learning curves. It would be very easy to lose sight of the distinction between people who enjoy having a sophisticated understanding of their computer (nerrrrds! not a high value or high prestige market) and people who have to use sophisticated software to get their work done (artists, designers, directors, musicians -- a high prestige, trendsetting market.)
> 1) you think you are different than a consumer how?
For me the distinction is this. If a feature is being taken from a consumer (e.g., me as a consumer), I say bummer and find a new hobby. No Apple remote and Front Row anymore? Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.
If I use a feature in a professional workflow and it disappears, then I want at the very least a big fat warning before upgrading, but it'd be better if nothing disappeared altogether; or alternatively, if I could stay on the older version.
The current trend with Apple is to radically drop features that are only used by <n% of users and to always require the latest OS for everything. You cannot sync contacts off a 32-bit Mac anymore because MobileMe is running out and Lion/iCloud is 64-bit only. And on my 64-bit machine, I only found out that iSync was gone after I upgraded and held a (replacement) dumbphone in my hand.
Or look at OS X server, which I am happy I didn't buy. The reviews on the MAS are devastating and I was wondering if it would ever rise from beta software quality. If you relied on OS X server, well joke's on you.
That said, I think 10.8 in particular is only 10.7 with lipstick to directly compete against Windows 8. (Notice even the version numbers?) But 10.7 did cause lots of damage.
So you think OS X server and iSync that I just mentioned were peanuts? Keychain syncing? Xcode is a mess too, Xcode3 is barely supported on 10.7 and breaks when you upgrade your device, and Xcode4 is not backwards compatible with anything.
OSX Server gained a simple user interface mode but otherwise is basically the same thing and now it's only $50. Just install the Server Admin package. It's exactly the same as 10.6 You can do HTTPD, VPN, POP/IMAP mail server, net boot, software update server, DNS, DHCP, etc. From what I can tell all the same functionality is there. Maybe there are some small things missing?
iSync is a relic of a bygone era that hasn't seen any updates in many years. There are better tools available like The Missing Sync. This company focuses on making a really good tool for the small number of people who need it. Apple can't cater to every niche. If they can't do it right they shouldn't do it at all IMO.
Keychain syncing is one thing I would agree on. I found it very useful. I suspect it will be coming back in the future. Apple may not have been totally comfortable with managing the keychains of 100 million people quite yet.
I don't think these changes have anything to do with iOS-ification or whatever. They were going to happen either way.
OS X server was definitely peanuts: they never took it seriously as a product and it's an expensive area to be in. The “support“ process was basically gated by you telling your Apple rep how many Macs you couldn't buy until a bug was fixed.
Put another way, in 2009 at MacWorld there was unanimous consent among my fellow IT track speakers that anyone with non-trivial needs should be using Linux servers for Mac clients, due entirely to the obvious low priority of the server product. Making it a $50 app store add-on is the first step in simply acknowledging that Apple is really a consumer product company and unwilling to devote the significant resources needed to stay competitive in the traditional IT market.
I'm not happy with the way things are headed either and you make some good points but I think you were out of line with the version number comment. Apple isn't trying to compete with Windows, at least not in the way you're implying. They're a whole different animal and they're setting the pace for everyone else, not the other way around. In any case, as far as version numbers go, OS X jumps one full decimal with each major release. Mountain Lion being 10.8 is not marketing (if it is it has nothing to do with windows) its pure coincidence. If anything Windows is using version numbers for marketing purposes. Win7 came out when OS X 10.7 was out and if I'm not mistaken, Windows is actually at version 6.2 if I remember right. If you don't believe me then open up a DOS prompt and ask it yourself.
1) When I started on mac it was targeted at (mostly) professionals in desktop publishing etc. So it was more B2B than B2C. I accept that this has been changing for a long time already, probably since OSX. Now I am a consumer, that's my point.
2) Nothing. But now I'm buying a consumer product to do my work. It's like Iron Maiden using Garageband, or Philip Halsman using Instagram. (not that I would compare myself to them, but you get the idea)
It feels to me like the problem people have here is pretty much all in the marketing. You still have all the features and more from when you considered it a creative professionals machine, it's just the feel imparted by the focus and marketing is different.
it's even more than that. they made (are making) the tools so accessible to everyone, that what was once considered a craft (fine tuning a $50,000 recording desk) has now been reduced to a few settings on an $800 laptop.
That's just way of the world, I'm not complaining, it's great to get these creative tools to as many people as possible. But my original point still stands.
Of course you still have to have a tallent to make anything of these tools, no matter how point-and-click they are, even so they're robbing me of that feeling of achievement and pride that I had in being able to handle a tool that not many could... and yes, I'm aware that I'm beginning to sound like an old man.
Yeah. I fiercely admire Apple for having the balls to fix what was obviously backwards but heavily entrenched in the minds of the public. They almost always do the Right Thing.
It's not just your girlfriend's computer that will be a problem for you -- it's _any_ other computer.
Personally, I think it was a big mistake for Apple to do this. I find it very un-intuitive. Even if the design of the way windows scroll was ultimately an arbitrary decision, it's ingrained now. I think it was silly to change it.
What's un-intuitive about it? On touchscreen—you move your finger up, content moves up. On Lion—you move your finger up, content moves up. Took me 40 minutes to get used.
No your not. I want my stuff to sync without issues like my notes, contacts, mail but I don't want my laptop/desktop to feel like my phone. Example: Launch pad, is anyone really using this?
I never use Launchpad, but I'm glad it's there since I've always had trouble explaining the Applications folder vs the Dock to people, and Launchpad solves that very nicely for non-technical people (especially ones with iPhones/iPads).
Nope, and you don't have to. But for those users that are new to the platform (and I have watched quite a few) it makes them feel at home. They instantly know where to look for their apps, they can re-arrange them however they like. It is not for those of us who grew up on Mac OS, then Mac OS X, Linux and Windows, it is for those that have had an iPad or an iPhone and know there is a single location (home) where all your apps are. Launchpad fits that bill nicely.
I use it. Sometimes I actually forgot what apps I have installed or forget the names of them if I don't use them frequently. If my hand is already on the trackpad I just have to pinch in and there they are. Quicker than going to the Applications folder.
I've been using OS X for years as my main OS, and I do occasionally use launchpad. I've got a boatload of stuff installed and I don't always remember what I have. Launchpad provides a nice way of viewing all the apps.
I don't use it everytime I launch somthing (I use alfred for that), but to refresh my memory every now and then.
It doesn't work exactly like I would like it too, but it's not bad, and it's very out of the way if you don't like it.
You might want to move away from Mac's then. For some reason that's where it's all heading. By the end of 2012 you will be squeezing and swyping all over your 27" screen.
I actually like the idea of it being both (and and ipad becoming a desktop) Launchpad for ipad like utility, the normal desktop for desktop things, have both on both systems. Lets be honest here, we are moving away from a central computing device model, to a model with many peripheral devices. I'd like it if they all acted the same, and were capable of displaying the same content, as well as providing the same ability to create.
Is there any specific reasons you wouldn't want AirPlay, Notes/Reminders/Messages, notifications, etc? It seems to me those are all very good features to add to OSX that happened to debut on iOS first.
I feel the same way. But what in Mountain Lion sounds anything like that?
All I see is popular out-of-the-box iOS apps/features being brought to the out-of-the-box OS X experience.
What power users don't already have growl, dropbox, a dedicated notes app, a dedicated reminders app, an integrated chat client, etc?
These Mountain Lion features are only iOS-like inasmuch as iOS had them out-of-the_box, while OS X users looked to third parties to provide them. If you ask me, Mountain Lion sounds like a more reasoned approach to "bring what works about iOS to OS X" than misfires like "Mission Control".
Exactly. Apple isn't trying to replace OSX with iOS. If anything, they want the two to talk to each other better. And, perhaps OSX could benefit from some of what they've learned developing UIs for the iPad.
Am I the only person that doesn't want an ipad on the desktop?