Upcoming Apple announcements
 

In the next few days, there will be a lot of news coming from Apple. Some of it will be exciting, some will be disappointing. Here's my perspective.

Interface changes:

Apple is a profit making company. Making profits in the short term means getting more people to buy computers. By that measure, it's possible to think of metal Finder windows as being a successful addition to OS X. It can be though of as something that makes the computer look cool, look more desirable when it's sitting at the Apple Store.

I think some of the improvements "wished for" here at MacOSXHints forums are great, but they may not sell computers in the short term. It could be argued that devoting too many resources to fine tuning the OS for people who use it constantly is doing a disservice to the stockholders, who would be better served by devoting these resources to making the Mac more attractive to those who walk into an Apple store and say, "Hey, what's this Mac thing all about anyway?"

If you are hoping Apple will adopt your favorite improvement to OS X, ask yourself this: "If Apple changes this the way I want, how many more Macs will they sell in 2004?"

New Product/Feature Announcements:

Apple new product announcements are not always based on reality. In the past many announcements of new products have not come true. Shipping dates change, features are removed or added, etc.

I think Apple is just following the industry standard here. Everybody does it. Microsoft is out there spreading manure around about Longhorn, so Apple has to keep up, and announce exciting things for people to look forward to. That doesn't mean these announcements have to be believed or taken seriously.

Ummmm, what? Lost me with this one, really. Clearly you have inside info on some future Apple announcements, which is fine. However, your post really doesn't make any sense to me without the context that you have.

That said, guess I'll just keep an eye on the PR newsire for the next little bit. I seriously wasn't expecting anything from Apple until WWDC in late June...

-rob.

There are four obvious classes of product announcements one might expect at WWDC:

10.4 Tiger; we already know this is coming, although from Tevanian's intimations perhaps not by the end of the year.

G5 PowerMacs; clearly the 3 gHz mark was aimed for at the last developer conference, and despite all the issues something will happen at this one,

iMac; since there was no update to the iMac along with the eMac and portables, something must be happening here,

iPod; if it rates its own division now the product line will probably expand.


These are just based on reasoning from what has gone on up until now, as far as details we may not know any unless 'premature specification' rears up again as it did last year.

Craig, that all makes sense, and is about what I'm expecting, too ... but what throws me off is the first sentence in mclbruce's post: In the next few days, .... WWDC is more than a few days away; it's about 70 days away by my count :).

-rob.

My mistake! I keep getting, and ignoring, all of these emails from apple trying to get me to go to WWDC; I thought it was sooner. I think Craig did a great job in laying out the probablilites, I don't have anything to add to that.

If all Apple was concerned about was keeping their stockholders happy and not their userbase, they would lose both. I have been a Mac user since the late 80s and an avid fan, but Windows lures me back with many of its navigation and networking abilities. If Apple does not seek to fine tune the OS for the poweruser, they may sell a few more units at the Apple store, but many more will be sold on eBay to cross back over to PC. To fine tune the OS is to please the power user--the one who is going to buy the desktop G5s. To add fun and frolic candy to the interface may indeed sell a few eMacs, but what has Apple gained? No, they need to set Aqua to a default look and feel that will please the passerby, but allow preference and theme control for the poweruser if he needs it.
And while we are on the subject, the look of the interface does not inspire the buyer to fork out $800 at the Apple Store. It is what Macintosh can do easy that PCs do complicated that sells the unit. That and word-of-mouth are the best advertising.

mclbruce states: "My mistake! I keep getting, and ignoring, all of these emails from apple trying to get me to go to WWDC"

Ah, that explains it ... you really had me curious as to what you had insight into :).

I hope they've got at least one surprise in store sometime between now and year-end: the real 20th Anniversary Macintosh!

-rob.

Schneb, some of us heard this at Macfixit forums from so-called pro-users until we just got burned out on it. A question I've been left with is why someone who is a "power user" doesn't just use 3rd party shareware to tweak the interface the way they want? That's what we did in every iteration of the Mac OS before OS X, which, imo, offers much more configuration overall than we had before.

The original iMac had no predecessor, therefore no word of mouth. It could use very few peripheral devices. It actually took about six months worth of firmware upgrades and OS upgrades before the iMac could be considered as good as previous Macs, much less Windows computers. And yet it sold well.

Style and good publicity, combined with an attractive price, are what saved Apple, not endorsement by power users or performance. I don't think that has been forgotten in Cupertino.

I'll add a fifth area to the (safe-mode) prognostication:

At last years conference the iSight was introduced. Probably some other neat gizmo at that level and price point, and software to go with it. Maybe from the iPod division. ;)



Works for me. The term "power user" seems to have as many definitions as the term "the Truth." About one and a half for each of us.

I'm personally a pretty big fan of having customizability or extensability built into the OS, rather than it being a Dirty Hack (TM). As such, I'd rather have Apple fix their interface than get third-party apps.

Alternatively, I could settle for Apple providing hooks into the interface so that third parties could tweak it without having to do dirty hacks (and anecdotally, I think they have done this, at least a lot more than Windows does. However, it would still be nice if it could be official from Apple (or at least semi-official, like how Power Toys is for Windows)

Agreed. That would be better. But I guess I'm still baffled that people don't find the customization already available for OS X to be an improvement over what we had for OS 9. You couldn't even open two root-level Finder windows to drag files around, no column-view, no toolbar/sidebar shortcuts and a few other things makes me just nuts when I go back and use OS 9 for awhile (mostly just nostaligic these days).

I don't think Apple is finished with the OS X GUI by any means. So they are keeping their options open by not providing hooks in various places. And again, there's the cost/benefit ratio: how many new Macs would that sell?

I think Apple is more likely to make interface changes that will obviously benefit the new user. Somebody here asked about locking icons in the dock. I know many new users who accidentally take things out of the dock with a slip of the mouse button. They don't even realize what happened until later, when they look for a particular icon in the dock and it's gone. A lock option, or an "are you sure?" option, would be helpful. Another example: putting the Applications folder in the dock seems like an easy thing for Apple to do.

June 28 is 38 days after May 21, by standard decimal accounting. ;)

Just so ya know my attitude, I think postings like this are very fun and thought provoking. The OSX interface is near and dear because I want Apple to kick marketshare b*tt.
Several reasons, try reinstalling the OS, now all the hacks. Another reason, I payed $130 for the OS, now $30 here and $10 there to make it do what would be so easy for Apple to include. Why does Apple allow me control over what my desktop looks like? Why not let the third-party people come up with something for this? At the core of that debate would be quite a few answers regarding customization. My wife loves busy pictures of kids on the desktop. It drives me crazy. Just a simple blue for me. The fact is, her tastes and work environment differ from mine, and that is OK. It is easy enough for her to change herself and we are both having fun. This same thinking can be applied to the look of the interface as well as Dock and Menu customization.
I did not say "endorsement by power users" I said, "word-of-mouth are the best advertising." Just the average person who has had a good Mac experience can convince their friends and family to buy Mac. I influence 3 sets of parents, 1 cousin-in-law and 1 neighbor to go with Macintosh (as well as several friends). Jeff Goldblum did not sell them, they never got near an Apple Store, and they never even SAW the interface. They just walked up and asked my opinion on what to get.

Oh, Phil, by all means OSX is better than OS9. We've gone from a Civic to an Acura here. But some of us still miss our cup-holders. ;)
I don't think any of us want to go back, however, many of the changes Apple is forcing us to get used to (that we work to hack around) is counter-productive. Rather, Apple should provide choice--their way by default with customization.
Simple example-The trash can:
Why pin the trash can to the dock with no ability to modify this behavior? I do not mind this as a default position, but why not make it a utility instead? If it were a utility, I could poof it from the dock, move it to the desktop and put the utility icon in the left menu or the top customized menu. I could also launch it, displaying a menu of all the usual features such as "restore files", "zero-out", "ask before empty" toggle and "limit trash size to". I could even change the "empty" and "full" icons here as well as a small progress bar to show what capacity is being occupied in the can.
This is just one example of doing things BETTER without complicating the OS or confusing new users. This same thinking can be applied in several other areas as well.

... and what would Apple have to do in order for you to tell those people to buy something other than a Mac?

Apple has you right where they want you! ;-)

The point is that interface tweaks won't change how many people you bring in, or how many computers you sell for Apple. You, and I, and most people posting here, are somewhat irrelevant to Apple's marketing department. They've already got us. Seems to me like Apple is doing the right thing in devoting their resources to trying to make young people with a casual interest in Macs into lifers like many at this forum.

I may not like metal windows, I may want to see OS changes made that will benefit me and "my kind," but Apple has other priorities, and rightfully so I think.

They lost that race a long time ago in the gaming department, I'm afraid. Ask any teen what kind of computer they have, they will answer "PC". Ask him why and he will say "I use it for LAN or Internet gaming". It's a sad fact.

I think you meant to say "ask any male teen ...". Gaming is not quite so overwhelming a determinant among the other 50% of teens.

I find many girls like the RPGs. But you are right, a majority are male teens.

Phil: Wow. I keep forgetting that some people actually like those features.


::rereads::

Just how many files and folders do you have at the root level anyhow?


I know I sound like a curmudgeonly geezer, but right offhand I can't think of anything whatsoever that I like better about the OS X Finder. And I have company. The MacOS 9 (8, 7...) Finder rocked. It really did.

Allen,

I read a great deal of the article you pointed to, and though I agree with most of it, I believe that the true power of a Finder or interface is to start as a Spatial environment "out of the box", but allow access to non-Spatial to those who are comfortable with it. The move away from the Spatial-OS9 Finder was to try and lure UNIX and Windows users. For example, I am not very comfortable with the Terminal, however, I am glad it is there for nitty-gritty UNIX types.

I am not pining for the OS9 days, however, I think Apple made a big mistake with OSX. They should have cloned the OS9 interface with UNIX underpinnings and gradually made changes in their new direction. The article did make a good point about "light switches always being in the same place every time you need to operate it."

Schneb

Personally, I think Apple's biggest mistake with OS X was calling it OS X. This immediately implied to people that it was a logical, evolutionary follow on to OS 9, much like OS 9 was to OS 8. This was so far from the truth that it would clearly leave many people disappointed becuase so much had changed.

I'm not sure what they should have called it, but distancing it from OS 9 would've made it more clear to people that it wasn't simply another minor tweak to the MacOS of old, and that it really was what it was: a brand new operating system that just happened to do a great job of running existing Mac applications.

From my seat, there's no doubt that I'm much more productive with the new Finder than I ever was with the old Finder. I can still remember fumbling through open Finder windows, looking for that one window I knew I had opened at some point in time ... now I use a couple of column view windows, Go to Folder, Exposé, and some hot keys for fave folders to make the whole process much much simpler and faster -- and this is coming from someone who spent 12+ hours a day in OS 9, 8, 7, and 6...

To each his own; there's no way Apple could have satisfied 100% of the OS 9 converts and 100% of the new OS X users while trying some innovative new ideas. And really, 10.0 was their only chance to try a wholesale change in the Finder; if they had carried over the OS 9 Finder, they never would have been able to introduce major things such as column views and multiple same-window views (which I *love*) later on without seriously upsetting all of the OS X users.

-rob.

Just what could you do with the OS 7-9 Finder that you can't do with the X Finder? You make your list, then I'll make one of things you can do with the X Finder that you can't do with the old one. Wanna guess who'll have the longer list? ;)

I've been around the block with lots of people on several forums about this one several times, and in the end, I think it comes down to work habits. As Griffman noted, one can certainly be as productive or more in the new Finder; if one preferred working the old way, however, the new will be considered inferior, less intuitive, etc.

That is a good arguement, Rob. And I agree, they should have made the name reflect a new movement from the ground up. Perhaps NeXT1.0? My point was based on the article Allen pointed to, that an interface should be Spatial, that a lighswitch will always be in the same place every time you reach for it, even in the dark. Yes, 80% of OSX improves productivity. But it is a very bad idea to take almost a decades worth of "doing it this way" then suddenly changing it to THAT way (cause it is better in Apple's opinion). Much of what could have carried over from OS9 would not have effected the enhancements and benefits of OSX. Examples:
Keeping the look of the interface (but adding the 128x128 icons)
Keeping the trash can on the desktop (with the ability to move it elsewhere)
Making the Dock a utility rather than intrical to the interface.
Allowing customization to the Apple Menu.
Elimination of the Chooser for the better print menu window.
Default mode as simple Finder, customizable to present OSX features.

Doing it this way would allow a gradual change rather than cold-turkey. It's 20/20 hindsight... but hey, it's the Coat Room--right? ;)

I know some of you who unreservedly love the look and feel of OS X think those of us who preferred the old OS 9ish behaviors do so mostly because it's what we knew and we hate change.

While I do hate arbitrary, unnecessary, and poorly-thought-out change, let me point out something: no one, anywhere you look, is mourning the death of Chooser. Despite the fact that it's what we knew.

Now...the Finder, as they should've done it:

a) The toolbars and the sidebars — offer them but make a setting in SysPrefs to turn the damn things OFF permanently everywhere. Me, when I open a window, I want to see what's IN the window and nothing else.

b) With the exception of column view, to which I'll come in a minute, Finder windows should be specifically of a volume or folder. They should not think they are browsers. They should not go to other places. They are each a place themselves. Unless the end user repositions them, they remember their positions. Until the end user changes their View Option (again, with the exception of column view), each folder retains the View to which it has been set, including (where applicable) the sort order.

c) Column view, being "per the computer" rather than "per the volume or folder", is truly a different function. Whether implemented by selecting it from the View menu or through a different, new command, it should PROVIDE Column View onscreen without modifying the View setting of the folder that was displaying in the Finder window before switching to Column View. As with the Tree View favored by DOS veterans (XTree Gold, Central Point PCTools, etc), Column View has its advantages for dealing with a hierarchy. Fundamentally, though, it is an alternative to the traditional Finder View (within which each folder can be set to Icon View or List View, the latter of which in turn can be sorted this way or that, can display just these or also those or instead these other columns, and can be unexpanded or expanded and subfolders within expanded folders unexpanded or expanded, etc etc etc). Come to think of it, they could've offered a DOSlike Tree View, Mac Finder View, or Column View as top-level choices and then the suboptions would become available once the primary option was chosen. OH, OK, put in a fourth choice, Browser View, for the weirdos that actually like having new windows open in the same window, but that, too, is something entirely apart from the classical Mac Finder View (because the window ignores settings that are per the folder, whereas the Mac Finder View observes them religiously).

d) Finder windows, despite the name, should not be File-finding devices. Going Command-F or selecting Find from the menu should bring up the separate screen we know and love. The Find window should, however, know what the active folder in the Finder IS and should provide the option of searching "within current window" as one of the "where" choices, with or without also searching subfolders thererof.

e) Finder windows should be grabbable not only along the title bar but along the sides and the bottom.

Those are good suggestions, AHunter and Schneb. I think the change to Cmd - N for a new Finder window is a good one, however, as it's consistent with the way Cmd. - N is used in other applications; Cmd-F is usually the Find command for other apps, so using it that way in the Finder is consistent, too.

I'm sure you guys know you can turn off column view, toolbar, sidebar, etc. and have your Finder windows open without all that--even have a new window open as in OS 9 so you can once again have two billion windows open on your computer when you work. :cool: Your beef seems to be primarily that this all wasn't default, which seems a trifle picky to me as it's really a very small inconvenience for "power users" to make those changes, no? I mean, come on! 30 seconds and you're all done.

Still waiting to hear what the OS 9 Finder could do that the OS X Finder cannot. Not much, imo. :p (teasing)

Hey, don't lump me in with wanting to go back to OS9. The only thing I wanted from the old OS is the theme. Actually, I was not very happy with the old navigation and had to compensate with utilities such as NowMenus with its brilliant Boomerang and other various apps.
However, I will tell you that the way OSX remembers your your folder settings is simply aweful. Let's take the beloved Column View. Create a new folder, is it Column View? No, because there is no way to create a "default" view for new folders or new logged in servers.
So, I go to one of 100 of our Windows servers here at work, and what does it give me? Small icon view with icons all over the place. I set it to column view and make sure that I select "use for all windows" is selected. Now open a folder within this server... ICON VIEW!! So I have to open every single flippin' folder and set to Column View!? Then I have to leave hundreds of all those little, irritating DS.Store files? PC folk who are using these servers are complaining to me that my Mac is leaving useless files. They are useless to me as well, here is why... I share this server with other Mac users. The other Mac user likes list view and leaves tons of files open using the triangle. I reset the folder to column view and the other Mac user is peeved at the change.
Why can't I just tell my Mac to give me Column View no matter what I do and stop leaving DS.Store files unless I want a SPECIFIC view such as "Large Icon set at full sized icons with a black background"?
It may seem silly to you that I would complain about such trivial matters, but when you find yourself fighting views with other Mac users and apologizing to Windows users, you tend to get a little defensive.

I so completely agree.
I've tried every way I can imagine to set Column View as a default.

I go to Finder > Preferences > General
and click the << Open new windows in column view >>
but it just DOES NOT WORK.

This seems to me like a bug, since the option
is right there but no amount of clicking and unclicking it
will help.

Well, they did change from decimal to Roman numerals : )


If you really want Spatial, you can use Fink to install GNOME and use Nautilus (let's see you try that with OS9)!

re Gaming Teens and PC versus Macs
 

I've asked many gaming teens why PCs instead of Macs.
Most say << better games >> are available but a few have explained
to me that PCs are << bad >> ( good ) and Macs << tame >> ( bad. )
One even said Macs << are for sissies. >>
Meaning that they can trick a PC to impress their ( knowing ) friends
but Macs, even double-G5s, are sort of << factory default. >>
Compare it to cars: you can trick out a Toyota Celica or used Oldsmobile
while a 2005 Lamborghini Murcielago, though superior in all respects,
will always look to << customizers >> mainstream by comparison.
What is interesting is that in this situation it is the Mac
that comes out as conventional, mainstream and commonplace
while the PC becomes the bad-ass, rebel, non-conformist machine.
If Apple wants to make gains in the hard-core gaming population
they need to turn G5s into possibilities for stylistic mayhem.
( I've no idea how, though perhaps the Unix core is the answer. )

Most of these gaming-happy teens and 20somethings don't buy from a computer company such as Dell, Compaq or Sony. The ones with cash burning in their pocket will get an Alienware, and the other 95% of them go to newegg.com or pricewatch.com to get seperate components and build their own computer ( I know I did :) ) Apple has no mode to compete with that. Besides, Dell and other such companies don't make their money from selling computer units, they make money by servicing them. When you buy a $700 Dell, you get a $300 computer with $400 of technical support.

I know I'd be sucked into the Wintel world had it not been for my Mac Plus when I was 7, never been without a Mac since.

I actually started with a CPM Kaypro way way way back when...

( http://www.maxframe.com/CPM.HTM )

...then used Apple IIe~s and other such things until one day
I saw a Macintosh with BLACK text on a WHITE screen and knew
that finally common sense had entered the computer industry.

You and I are alot alike Hector, with similar history. Except, for me, it was an Apple IIe, then a Hewlett Packard XT, then a Mac +.

As for gaming, I think Apple should come out with a box that will run PC-based games. Basically, a small box with keyboard and mouse, ethernet and output to DVI or VGA with upgradeable video card.

Of all the "kids" I game with, only a few trick out their machines with lights and such. Most like the meters to keep an eye on their clock speeds and heat levels.

For a good time, go over to the online Apple Store and click on the iMac G4 to place an order.

Then guess what it is that will happen in September, probably at the Paris Expo.

Holy smokes! Someone (or more) have probably lost their jobs over that one!

First time I can recall anything like this in my history with Apple products...

-rob.

Gimme more!
 

Well, since the rumor cognoscenti will no doubt take that notice as the iMac G5 announcement, they'll be insisting that something else dramatic must lie in wait for Paris.

Time to go back to the WWDC keynote video and scour for more clues. Hmm..."Yosemite"... Twentieth Anniversary Blue and Whites?!

kinda blows for me, as I was preparing to purchase a 17" imac for the upcoming semester. I've eeked out as much as I can from this old imac, and was looking forward the flat panel.

Here's to hoping something affordable other than an emac in Sept.