i'm a (clueless) mac

[merzbau]

regarding those annoying ads where the mac is presented as this wannabe indie-rock turd-handle, standing around casually in unbuttoned shirt and fashionably scuffed converses, i think a more appropriate spokesperson would be a braindead useless hippie stoner, because that's what the OS is really like, partially creative, but mostly obstructive, spaced-out and clueless. cruisey, until you have to get something done.

me: not again.. why won't you eject, you hopeless slacker. there's no activity, the disc isn't spinning, no files are being accessed...

MAC: hmm. i'm not sure man. maybe you could go through all the processes, shutting them down one by one, until you get to the right one and it releases the disc..?

me: forget it. why can't i rename a file extension without having to hit a requester asking me if i really want to rename the file? of course i meant to do that - i wouldn't have f*cking done it otherwise. and it's a pointless warning, because you should still be able to open the file REGARDLESS OF THE EXTENSION. changing the extension does not change the CONTENTS of the M*THERF*CKING FILE. and as for renaming a filename with letters of a different case...

MAC: oh.. wow. wow. i just gotta sit down for a bit.

me: i just moved something into a folder, and it's not showing up. why is there no refresh button?

MAC: hey, like, why don't we just make a new folder in the same directory and then delete that folder (after hitting a requester asking if you really want to delete it), and the file shows up. totally simple, dude.

me: no, it's a headache! and why don't you have a file manager installed as standard? how the f*ck am i supposed to find things, scatter them over the desktop?

MAC: chill out man, just, like, scope out the spotlight bar, yeah?

me: i don't want to use your crappy "search" function. if you allowed me the option of making an organised filing system that "just works" instead of scattering everything all over the place and taking an aeon to search for it, i'd know exactly where it was. and why doesn't it understand wildcards? if i name my file "car" it'll come up with everything on my harddrive with the name "car".. well that's f*cking useful, just like you!

MAC: whoa, quit harshin' my buzz maan...

me: i just want to get work done, quickly, efficiently and sensibly, with the minimum of fuss, so i can get through my day, go home and start drinking. you imbecile.

MAC: hey man, sounds like someone's a slave to the capitalists. you should relax, there's more to life, dude. take it from me, if you look good, you don't need to work.

me: i give up. the only thing apple has going for it is marketing.

 

[420MuNkEy]

 

[Cogwulf]

It isn't just marketing that apple rely in, the also have subtle tricks to tie you into using only their products

 

[nickgray]

Is there actually a point in getting a mac? Besides for using specific mac programs? Macs are ridiculously overpriced and there are enormously more apps for win32 than macos.

 

[flow]

.. I enjoy my mac. I like its interface, I don't play computer games or use it for anything other than listening to music and interneting.. Idk, if you're a hardcore computer nerd I'm sure you've got a thousand reasons why you despise macs. I love mine to death.

 

[Cogwulf]

So in general macs are better if you only use them for a few simple things like browsing the internet and using office programs and such, so if that's the case they should actually be cheaper than PCs which can do those things and anything else.


Although a mac user I know would respond to that by saying he can install windows on a second partition

 

[flow]

Woah woah woahhhh, did I say 'macs are better'? Come on! To each his own. I enjoy my mac, that's all I'm saying. I can't justify the premium price tag, I do know that I haven't had any virus problems (because apparently the d-bag's who create them only go after their own kind) and I LIKE how it works. I don't talk shit about PCs, I really don't understand why the PC users are so hurt that some of us like Macs more. Wahhhhhh differences in opinionnnnnn.

Seems to me that all this PC angst stems from some kind of loathing for Mac user's satisfaction with Macs. It's like we're happy using our computers, therefore we must all be idiots. Seems entirely ridiculous to me. If PC users weren't always complaining about this and that, we'd probably not pick on you as much. I hope Windows 7 works out for everyone. It's funny how Windows Marketing is so similar to Ford's marketing. Yeah, our past shit didn't really work well, but we've been here the longest and our newest product is better than anything else we've ever made (gasp)! While Mac marketing is a lot like Honda or Toyota: Our products consistently keep our consumers happy.

 

[Cogwulf]

There isn't much which makes me emotional, but things along the lines of exaggeration and bending the truth make me really angry, and hearsay and fallacies as well. I've got nothing at all against macs or people owning them, but I hate apples marketing of them and I hate it when people regurgitate the marketing as if it was their own opinion.

And secondly, something common to the entire human race is their disparity in the attention paid to positives and negatives. People will talk for hours about all of the negative points of windows but will say very little about the positives, and most of what are cited as the benefits of macs are simply the absence of negatives, not true positives.

If advertising was entirely fact based.
PCs: Their benefits outweigh their faults.
Macs: There's nothing wrong with them.


And a similar analogy I've just thought of:
Macs are like vanilla ice-cream, PCs are double choclate chip ice-cream laced with laxatives, some people would rather have the chocolate ice-cream even though it means they'll be on the toilet for an hour

 

[420MuNkEy]

Retail Operating Systems are going down the toilet imo. They are all sterilized and cushioned to ensure that average consumer doesn't do something stupid and mess their system up, while simultaneously forcing a specific a trademarked look onto you (Like Aero from M$). Pretty much every 'advance' in newer os's is just a move to make it easier to sell to the public without any real added functionality. I understand that this is done to appeal to the public, but those of us who actually like tweaking computer systems are being left out in the cold.

I have tried OSX, Vista, and 7, and still XP and *nix distributions are the only things that don't give me the distinct feeling that I have a major corporation holding my hand and coercing me to assimilate into their cult. Btw, it's interesting to note that M$ has disowned the people who still use XP so much that they didn't even bother adding the XP style to Vista or 7 (while they still have the Windows 95 style).

 

[Tunesimah]

I use a mac and a PC... they both have their place. I tend to hate Apple advertising, and the 'aura' about their products and users... to the point that it was nearly a detriment to buying a Mac.

I use a Mac and will continue to use one for basically one reason: Logic Studio is a fantastic piece software at an amazing price.

Once you get used to the Mac way of working, it tends to be simpler and easier to do work in. The settings and key, commands and usability seems to be streamlined slightly better than on Windows. The thing is, Windows isn't completely horrible... at least to the point that most people know how do to all the tasks that they are used to. A Mac user can say, it just works... a PC user could say, its what were used to and it works too.

Two finger scrolling is about the best usability feature I've ever used. I want to have a multitouch track pad on every computer...

Macs are also pretty expensive. You do get what you pay for, and its a fine machine... but you often have to make compromises to get features or the price point you want. I don't think I would ever pay retail for a mac, just a bit too over the top expensive. I'll continue to use macs, but I'll only buy used or refurbished... the student discount is good too... but sometimes even that is not enough to make a mac a good value.

A couple more thoughts, Macs still can have strange usability issues. Despite enjoying Logic Studio, it still crashes from time to time. The Finder and Dock aren't perfect... they have strange quirks you have to work around. iTunes is an annoying piece of software, so bloated and crippled. I use it, because I'm too lazy to find a better music solution on the mac... and I don't listen to music on it often... but when I do using iTunes is a pain.

Apple often choses looks over just plain ergonomics, I got an apple mouse with the scroll ball... I liked the scroll ball... but right click and comfort is not this things calling in life. I really regret buying it, I used one at school and really enjoyed it, Until I started doing a lot of work and learned to hate it.

Another thing about the Mac, PC debate... I've seen average computer uses try a Mac... they are so accustomed to the PC way of doing things that they view the Mac way as difficult. It's almost like the Qwerty/Dvorak change on keyboards, it may be slightly better so way change... someone would say.

 

[Cogwulf]

Two finger scrolling is about the best usability feature I've ever used. I want to have a multitouch track pad on every computer...

I found a keyboard for my desktop that has a multi touch pad on the side, it's brilliant, and it works as a number pad as well

 

[Waterstiller]

This video explains my love of Apple design.

YouTube- "Objectified" - Jonathan Ive talks about Mac design & Unibody MacBook manufacture

But I still don't know if I'd ever purchase a Mac. I still have never owned an Ipod. I admire them and if they were cheaper and easier to repair/upgrade, I'd definitely make the switch. I wish other companies would adopt similar design philosophies.

All the NF's in my life seem to adore Macs. The NT's seem to either use Windows or Linux, overall.


Does anyone else want to objectify Jonathan Ive, though? I mean.. damn.

 

[sagewolf]

I have a Mac. I generally like the interface better than I did windows, although I haven't really looked hard at Windows 7 yet. There are two things I can generally say I like about OSX a lot:

1. Copy ANYTHING to the desktop as a pseudo-file. I do that a lot with text snippets, urls, images, whatever, if I see it on the interweb and I want to keep it, or I want to cut something from my writing but don't want to lose it entirely, I can just click, drag, and nt lose the flow of what I'm doing with opening a word-processor (even a simple one like Notepad) and saving it as a .txt file. Or an image. Not a huge feature but it makes my life easier.

2. The dock. All my applications, system preferences (i.e: control panel), documents, finder,etc, all in front of everything all the time. No having to close every window I have open just to get to the desktop and open a folder, which is really beginning to annoy me at work with XP. Granted, I know Vista had that, but I haven't seen it on 7, so I don't know... If 7 does have it, I'll drop this as an advantage when I talk to people.

3. If I'd had a conventional desktop... I honestly don't know where the tower would have gone in my room last year. (The flipside of that is that if I'd gotten a PC, I could have afforded a laptop, but I like the sheer size of the iMac's screen anyway.)

The first two things, admittedly, aren't selling points, and they definitely aren't worth the price of a Mac, but they do make a difference, especially when you're used to them. That and, marketing aside, I have seen people using their old Powerbooks, which were (I was told) between 3 and 6 years old, so I can reasonably expect my Mac to last me at least through college. My family tried to donate a 6-year old PC to Africa after we heard about an appeal for old but serviceable computers. They wouldn't take it: too old. (Given, the opinion of an individual and the policy of an organisation can be two very different things, so...)


God I can't spell today for some reason.

 

[merzbau]

the funnest thing about macs is the font management.
if ramming a corkscrew into your eye socket is your idea of fun.

i think it'd be difficult to imagine a worse system for organising and wrangling fonts. if you have a corrupted font (quite common), you have to uninstall it from the OS. unless it's being activated by suitcase or whatever (no one questions why macs need third-party software to manage fonts), in which case you have to delete/replace it manually. except there could be a myriad (ho ho) of different types, scattered all over the hard drive, with no real way of telling if it's the corrupt version or not because they all have the same file name. say goodbye to half an hour of of your lifespan you'll never get back.

and anyone who regularly works with indesign or quark on a mac will know how problematic it is when you get artwork packaged with PC fonts. OMG postscript?!?! wow what an obscure format.

we had major problems with one of the G5s, and when the tech was fixing it (incidentally by re-installing the entire OS from scratch), he told me to make sure you don't install the fonts to the OS, because macs can't handle it. it causes all sorts of "issues". and everyone keeps telling me they're better for graphic design.

fun like herpes.

 

[Cogwulf]

2. The dock. All my applications, system preferences (i.e: control panel), documents, finder,etc, all in front of everything all the time. No having to close every window I have open just to get to the desktop and open a folder, which is really beginning to annoy me at work with XP. Granted, I know Vista had that, but I haven't seen it on 7, so I don't know... If 7 does have it, I'll drop this as an advantage when I talk to people.

windows 7 has a button in the corner of the taskbar that minimises and restores all open windows with one click, and folders and things can be pinned to the taskbar for quick access.

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

All versions since XP (and perhaps earlier) have a 'show desktop' button that does that.

 

[Cogwulf]

All versions since XP (and perhaps earlier) have a 'show desktop' button that does that.

I don't remember it so therefore it didn't exist.

 

[420MuNkEy]

I don't remember it so therefore it didn't exist.

I remember it, therefore it did

Edit: As a matter of fact, I can see it. Am I merely delusional?

 

[Felan]

I'm not a fan of Macs myself but from a user interface perspective they do some good things.

One of the best is the menuing system. You can basically throw your mouse up and vertically speaking it is stopped over the first level of menu options then it is just moving side to side to get which one you want. Windows users can't do that because of the whole title bar nonsense, so we have to more slowly aim both vertically and horizontally.

But context pie menu's are a far better choice anyway and I'm still surprised they aren't more prevalent.

 

[Madoness]

All versions since XP (and perhaps earlier) have a 'show desktop' button that does that.

I guess it was also on Windows 98 .
The quick launch function on Vista, as Cogwulf used Vista before, should not be enabled by default if I remember correctly, and 'show desktop' button is in it.
If he did not enable it, there is no way to remember.

I don't like the new approach on Windows 7 though, quick launch bar was way better than this tiny button on the bottom right corner. Odd place to be.

On the Mac's side... I've not used them much, so far my experiences using them are nothing spectacular.
Well, we all have different tastes. Mac is not for me. At least not yet.

 

[420MuNkEy]

I guess it was also on Windows 98 .
The quick launch function on Vista, as Cogwulf used Vista before, should not be enabled by default if I remember correctly, and 'show desktop' button is in it.
If he did not enable it, there is no way to remember.

I don't like the new approach on Windows 7 though, quick launch bar was way better than this tiny button on the bottom right corner. Odd place to be.

On the Mac's side... I've not used them much, so far my experiences using them are nothing spectacular.
Well, we all have different tastes. Mac is not for me. At least not yet.

You can always just do WinKey+D

 

[sagewolf]

windows 7 has a button in the corner of the taskbar that minimises and restores all open windows with one click, and folders and things can be pinned to the taskbar for quick access.

Didn't see that when I played with a friend's laptop. I'll see if I can get another look-- but the dock still removes a step. It's still more efficient. And the taskbar gets crowded enough without sticking stuff all over it forever.

Ah, yes the menus-- I like the menus better too, in particular the function that allows you to open a subfolder and just have it appear as a list, next to the list that the previous folder was in. It makes file management so much easier, especially when I'm rearranging all my story folders and dragging stuff from subfolders up a level or two... easier than opening three windows, anyway.

Yeah, I think I'm a a vanilla person. (Chocolate is bad for wolves anyway. ) ...So what does that make Linux?

(And I'm at work, so... yes, I recognise the irony of posting "I still like OSX better" when there's an XP logo under my avatar. )

 

[Madoness]

You can always just do WinKey+D

Somehow never used it.

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

Felan: context pie menus?

 

[Felan]

Felan: context pie menus?

Wikipedia has an article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pie_menu

Basically when you click for a context menu (typically referred to as right click) all the pertinent options in circle around your mouse pointer. The center space is will dismiss the menu. To select any particular menu option you move toward the pie slice with that option. If there is a nested option then it will get rid of the old pie menu and render a new one of the new options, if you need to go back to the previous pie click the center spot where your mouse pointer starts.

Long chains of menu options at the top are pretty inefficient. Worse yet are submenues as they have a tendancy of disappearing on you and closing the menu (though there are ways to minimize that).

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

I actually sort-of emulate that with my current Firefox setup. I have removed absolutely everything from the interface besides the address bar (and the status bar, and the things the OS puts on the window). All commands like stop, back, reload, etc. are handled with mouse gestures, most of which are drawn while holding the right mouse button as a directional pattern on the screen. 'back' is left, 'next tab' is up and right, 'stop' is down and up and down, and there are tons of other useful ones for interacting with the contents of a page.

 

[Zero]

To Comic:
I've heard there are viruses for Mac OSes. But there are about as many viruses as there are games for Mac... So... what?

Like Five?

I hear they totally f-up the computer though.

There are Linux viruses out there, but figuring out the damn OS and updates and all that shit are enough for Linux Users.

 

[Kuu]

I own a mac, and before this I owned another mac. That was before they even popular. I despise windows... it annoys me to death. I don't despise OS-X (yet). Sure it has its quirks, but there is no one OS to rule them all.

I understand why people hate its marketing. I love it. Not because I'm a sucker that believes all that he's told (after all it was me who said marketing was the most evil profession of mankind, next to lawyers) but because I understand and appreciate their genius at the dark arts of marketing. Their lies are so seductive, so effective on their targeted audience. And better designed and coherent overall. Watching it is like a well coordinated ballet. Watching Microsofts marketing is like watching a bunch of epileptics writhing to a cacophony of noise.

And I concurr with Waterstiller's opinion. Linux users may get all the nerdgasms when it comes to software control and user freedom, but certainly Apple's design philosophy makes me have lots of designergasms. Their hardware makes me hard, so to speak (I apologize for the now unthinkable images imprinted in your brain ) It's not as strong in their software, unfortunately, but still mostly above average.

Like the latest MacBook Pros with the superthin, supersharp aluminium unibody and large glass trackpad... like the one I'm typing this on. So Erotic.

In terms of features, expose was and continues to be a godsend, now even more with the added multitouch gestures. Whenever I grab a windows laptop, I get so frustrated without my two finger scrolling, et al. Also quicklook.

Also, the way the system preferences are arranged now is so simple and straightforward. Unlike anything I've seen in Windows. For non technical users its great and easy to set up most stuff rather quickly and hassle free.

Also, merzbau, they fixed the eject issues in snow leopard (I assume you're not using it.. if you are, then...).

And my last laptop lasted me YEARS more than any other laptop I've ever used, or all of my friends. My sister is still using her 6 year old powerbook.

I do think they're a bit overpriced, but I'm still (well, my dad is ) willing to pay that price for the quality that I perceive. Stupidly though, he got a super cheap netbook and now he's hating the guts out of it, and he's probably end up tossing it in some 4 months or so

 

[420MuNkEy]

Almost all of the great 'features' are directly stolen from open source (linux) software. Just take a look at an old project called Beryl on youtube (now merged with compiz and has become Compiz Fusion). This project started before any of those nice features started popping up in any retail OS. The reason Apple was able to steal the good ideas first is due to the fact that M$ was/is closely watched by the government and OpenSourcers everywhere because they dominate the market. If Apple steals an idea or two, no one really notices, but if M$ did it, there would be tons of lawsuits.

I'm not trying to say linux is better, because for the average user, it's not. I'm just trying to help explain why useful features don't always make it in.

 

[Ogion]

<-- Loves Arch Linux. Though Arch is of course just the distribution, i love it's KISS and let the user decide nearly everything philosophy.
That does of course not say anything so far about the interface. You can find all sorts of interfaces on a GNU/Linux machine.

I use a tiling window manager, which means that the window manager handles where the windows are on the screen, and how they are to be sized/positioned to each other etc, according to predefined Layouts. Meaning, on my first workspace, "irc", i have a few windows, chat windows, in tiling/Tall mode. The wm then resizes all windows there so that the maximum screen space is used (except a small bar at te top for some info like which owrkspace i'm on, what Layout i use, Window title of active Window, CPU/RAM/NET usage, time, systray). This may sound as if the window manager would 'control' me, but that's not the case. With keybindings (i can do nearly everything with them, and define them on my own) i can tell it to use a different layout, to put one or more windows in the "Master Pane" (the windows there get a different preference when the wm gives windows screen estate), resize the master pane, put, if need be, a window in floating mode (that's what you all know as standard, Windows that you resize with your mouse, and position on your screen). All Windows do not have any Window Decoration (the titlebar with those "Close" "Maximize" and so on Buttons). I use 9 Workspaces in total, half of them with 'funtions' (so i just put all chats on the first, browser second and so on). I have inactive windows being reduces in opacity to 80%, so they are a bit transparent, which helps contrast the active window.

Then, i use a lot of console programs, like file management i only do via console commands; i use the vimperator Plugin for Firefox, so i can control Firefox nearly totally with the keyboard (just some stuff like Flash-internal menus and so need a mouse). In the past i used Mouse gestures a lot, and sometimes i do so now as well. My desktop bakcground is just that, a background image. I don't have any icons or anything on it whatsoever.

Now, i know this is a bit offtopic, but i just wanted to show there are actually really different designs and philosophies to 'user friendliness'. So from my perspective MSWindows and Macs are really not that far frmo each other. The topic of user friendliness, handling, design is really a very personal, imo. For me it is far better to start programs by doing "modkley+p" (modkey is in my case the windows key), which starts a little tool at the top of the screen where i type the name of the program i want to start and it shows me all matches for what i have typed so far, than to take the mouse, click on some "Start"-Button or similar Menu, browse the Menu in search for the program and then click on it. But, very personal as i said. My method is probably not the most comfortable thing to another user. This is why i do not think "My method is the best, everybody should use it". That would be stupid. Instead your preferred software should give you the possibility to adjust it to your best usage design, or you should be able to choose a different software, that does that. I think all those Flamewars between users of idfferent software (classical examples are Windowmanagers, text editors, OSes, etc) stem from the fact that some people just don't want to accept that different povs and usages for software are valid and that the personal preferences is just that, a personal preference.

Ogion

 

[Kuu]

Almost all of the great 'features' are directly stolen from open source (linux) software. Just take a look at an old project called Beryl on youtube (now merged with compiz and has become Compiz Fusion). This project started before any of those nice features started popping up in any retail OS. The reason Apple was able to steal the good ideas first is due to the fact that M$ was/is closely watched by the government and OpenSourcers everywhere because they dominate the market. If Apple steals an idea or two, no one really notices, but if M$ did it, there would be tons of lawsuits.

No there wouldn't be lawsuits. They'd have to steal the implementation, not just the concept, to get a lawsuit.

Actually stealing ideas is not a bad thing (or possible, once spoken they are free!). Which is also funny when you speak about open source... and then talk about lawsuits.

 

[420MuNkEy]

No there wouldn't be lawsuits. They'd have to steal the implementation, not just the concept, to get a lawsuit.

Actually stealing ideas is not a bad thing (or possible, once spoken they are free!). Which is also funny when you speak about open source... and then talk about lawsuits.

M$ gets sued over stuff they didn't even steal.
Also, a lot of Open Source software is licensed in such a way that it does not allow for it to be distributed with proprietary software, hence the viability of legal recourse.

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

Ogion++;

Arch Linux is great. A tiling window manager... my first impression is bleh, but I might, with more practice, become more productive with it. I wonder if there have been psychological studies comparing different window manager or general UI paradigms. I know they do it for things like mouse ergonomics and keyboard layout, it's not much of a leap.

 

[Zero]

My Win computer pretty much does everything my Mac and other computers can do.

Maybe when I get more into programming and it seems more practical to do that I'll go with more Linux.

A customized OS sounds awesome, but also more time consuming than WoW-obsession. MMOs now have messages to tell you take a break every hour.

 

[420MuNkEy]

MMOs now have messages to tell you take a break every hour.

Good thing my obsessions aren't controlled by other people. I'd hate to have my hex editor or debugger tell me to take a break because I've been using them for 16 hours straight

 

[del]

My rough classification of the OSs is this:

Windows: gaming
Linux: everything else
Mac: ??

I seriously can't figure out any reason to use a Mac over Linux. I've never been impressed with Mac applications, and there are open source alternatives for pretty much every feature I've liked in OSX.

That's just my perspective, though. On the other hand, you'll find people that hate Windows and aren't gamers who don't want to be bothered to learn Linux -- and for them, Macs are great. That's a perfectly understandable position; even though I'm a Linux advocate, no distribution is ready for the masses yet.

That said, I really do like a lot of the design of Macs. Using a Mac is enjoyable. But there's a lot cooler stuff that does everything and more in Linux and... it's free.

Windows still firmly holds the top spot for gaming, though.

 

[Zero]

I don't obey, until it gets to four hours. Then I think... maybe it is time to take a break.

Apparently some people were like in the Matrix, they weren't doing... normal body things you need to do to stay alive.

Don't have that problem with Linux, it gave me a enough frustrations that I quit playing it for a while....

I like free stuff, that's what it comes down to.

 

[Aiss]

(Yeah, I know, neither Linux nor OS X are perfectly stable. But Windows isn't perfectly userfriendly either.)

 

[Ogion]

Well i know what the graph wants to show, but i just disagree.
User friendliness is imo a very 'instable' thing, in so far as every person may define it differently and everybody would be *right* about it. What i see as userfriendly is def. not what someone else sees as userfriendly. So while i might not be able to work on a mac efficiently and "userfriendly" someone else would find the interface i use horrible and un-userfriendly, yet that of Mac great. And you know what, i would be right in seeing the interface i use as userfriendly and he would be right in seeing Mac as userfriendly, because userfriendliness is really defined in the observer/user.

Ogion

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

And this explains why I use Linux.

User friendliness FTL

 

[Aiss]

Well i know what the graph wants to show, but i just disagree.
User friendliness is imo a very 'instable' thing, in so far as every person may define ti differently and everybody would be *right* about it. What i see as userfriendly is def. not what someone else sees as userfriendly. So while i might not be able to work on a mac efficiently and "userfriendly" someone else would find the interface i use horrible and un-userfriendly, yet that of Mac great. And you know what, i would be right in seeing the interface i use as userfriendly and he would be right in seeing Mac as userfriendly, because userfriendliness is really define in the observer/user.

You've just stated the reason Linux isn't very popular - because the word "user" means something different than to the rest of the world. Most of the "users" out there don't even know what a command line is. So "userfriendly" in the common meaning isn't what any particular user finds friendly, it's more along the lines of what anyone, no matter how ignorant, could easily use. Linux (well depending on distro of course) is a great OS, but it isn't "userfriendly" in this way. Ubuntu tries to go there, but it seems to lose on stability in the bargain. If we were to undersand "userfriendly" as you've explained it, calling anything "userfriendly" wouldn't make sense, except in relation to a particular user, so it can't be how it used in the graph.

BTW in your example - unless you mean things like GUI themes - I'd say you could probably use OS X the same way you do Linux, and the other person could use Linux with things like dock gadget if they liked.

Anyway, I've posted this picture just as a joke, I'm using all three at times...

 

[nickgray]

You've just stated the reason Linux isn't very popular - because the word "user" means something different than to the rest of the world.

Yep. Imo, ideally users should interact with the OS itself as little as possible, and if they do that interaction should be made user friendly. However it should also be possible to go way deep into the OS - as in Linux, with the ability to change everything. I think that Windows is customizable to some extent, while remaining pretty user friendly, which is certainly what the most people want - they want to interact with their apps, not their OS. Linux, on the other hand, needs you to have a lot more knowledge to customize it, and for the most part you are required (if you wish to be efficient with it) to know way more than even a current Windows "power user".

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

Yeah, that's a good way of putting it. Linux has a different idea of "user" in the context of user friendliness. Or, at least, it should... Ubuntu tries to go with the usual definition.

For me, user friendliness is being friendly to my needs. My needs are functionality, stability, and security. If I have to lose on any of those for a gain in "ease of use," as defined for the average Joe, I won't take it. And almost always, more "ease of use" means less functionality. Or at least, the functionality is hidden and not immediately available.

 

[del]

Eh, I agree: "user friendliness" has multiple meanings.

As far as the "user friendliness = the average person can happily use it," I would argue that once Linux is properly set up, it's extremely easy.

I have my 80 year old grandma using Debian Lenny. She likes it much more than Windows, but then again all she does is use the internet and email and sometimes uploads pictures. The extent to which she customizes her system is changing the background every once in awhile, lol --- but, you know what, that's how most people are.

The problem is getting Linux "properly set up" -- and of course I had to set it up for her, but if Windows didn't come preinstalled for so many people, I don't think it would have the reputation of being "user friendly" either. I don't know about you guys, but I've probably suffered more grief with Windows installs than Linux installs, although that could just be because I'm more used to Linux.

 

[Zero]

I would say it's difficult to get Linux to be "userfriendly".

There were hardware compatibility problems when I first tried Mint and until I went to Ubuntu (because it seemed easier). I still have hardware issues with Ubuntu.

Stability and Security are good things, who doesn't want those? But for me compatibility is a big issue. I need hardware and software that are compatible and don't need a lot of hacking, cracking or run arounds to get things working...

The average Joe doesn't tend to think of Linux as userfriendly. Everyone who hears I have Ubuntu on my laptops (usually needs me to explain that it's a version of Linux) and then they're impressed. (Some people don't know what Linux or an OS is.) Works Out of The Box is userfriendly to most.

I don't think I understand how one goes about getting more functionality out of Linux if it seems like there is a lot of stuff not compatible with it.

 

[Ogion]

Let's ditch the term "userfriendly".

To me, GNU/Linux and the great mass of free software out there has empowered me so much, gave me so much fun, is perfectly user-friendly to me (srsly, i don't know anything more userfriendly than a quick "cp /path/to/filea /path/to/new/folder/". Or take my preferred window manager. I can tweak that thing to perfectly fit my usage behaviours. Or the elegance of wget, or beauty of cronjobs etc etc.)
I never had compatibility issues/hardware-driver problems.
Oh and btw, i barely ever touched the OS, because the actual operating system, the Linux Kernel, is doing it's job just fine and in the background.

I'm not saying, please don't misunderstand me, nobody ever has problems. Of course there are lots of problems. And not all of them are PEBKAC ("Problem exists between keyboard and chair"). So really, generalizing this topic just doens't work. (Not if you want to be honest).

Ogion

 

[Kuu]

srsly, i don't know anything more userfriendly than a quick "cp /path/to/filea /path/to/new/folder/"

Lmao! Thank you Ogion, I laughed so hard...
You just made my 10-minutes-before-going-to-sleep.

 

[Nicholas A. A. E.]

Ogion: What's your preferred window manager?

 

[Ogion]

For a long while now i used Openbox, but that was more out of being too lazy to find something interesting and nice. It was small/lightweight and worked and had some easy GUI config tool.
Before Openbox i used fvwm and fvwm-crystal. I used to think fvwm will be the pinnacle and where i should end up when i find the strength to tackle its config :P

Well, and then like 2 weeks ago i found tiling wms, first "awesome" and then the next day xmonad, and now i'm with xmonad and can't imagine ever straying away from this

Ogion

 

[420MuNkEy]

Ogion: What's your preferred window manager?

Gnome w/ compiz fusion