The Coming Leopard Letdown
John Gruber has branched out from his usually excellent blog, Daring Fireball and has started writing for Macworld. I say good for him (yes, I’m a little jealous, I always thought my words would be good there!). Although I hope the contract doesn’t include doing nothing but heaping praise on Apple. That would be unfortunate. Here at Apple Matters we always try to balance being fans of Apple but also remaining critical. Sure this means we recently got cut off from Media badge access, but in the long term I think its the best thing for Apple. If Apple’s greatest fans don’t tell Apple what they are doing wrong then who will?
Which lead me to John’s Recent column, The new frontier Mac OS X is a mature technology; the iPhone is anything but. John’s basic thesis is that the iPhone is the new frontier for innovation for Apple and not OS X. If this is true this is a damn shame, and instead of just observing it John should criticize it, instead he says,
...OS X 10.4 is so fundamentally good that future upgrades are likely to be on the scale of small refinements.
and
And the simple truth is that OS X doesn’t need an interface revolution.
This is just pure fanboyism at its best.
Look, I love OS X. And I’m with John that when it first came out it was awful, and that Tiger is currently an excellent operating system. But I don’t just expect refinements from Apple (and I certainly don’t expect to part with $129 for it) I expect innovation. And John’s metaphor of tying it to the car industry is equally egregious. Even car manufactures, every few years or so, completely refresh their designs. Is John saying that OS X is forever going to have minor adjustments and that is ok?
It great that Apple is focussing a lot of innovation energy on the iPhone. I love the iPhone, heck, I even called it perfect! (I guess there is a bit of a fanboy in me too). But to do that at the expense of the operating system would be a shame. I have used the beta of Leopard extensively (and legally I might add) and for the most part it falls within the refinement area. It is faster, smoother, and the OS details are more consistent. It has spaces (which is nothing new), a horribly-rendered title bar image-thingy (which makes me think someone hired a UI designer from Redmond) and some other stuff I can’t remember right now. But what it doesn’t offer is anything really new, and this is a shame.
Perhaps Apple ought to divide up its OS stream in two. One focussing on what John calls the refinements, and the other focussing on innovation. All I know is that if all we can expect from Apple right now is John’s visions of refinements for OS X the company, in the long-term, will be in trouble.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
As we’ve discussed previously, it’s going to be hard for Apple (or any company) to improve OS usability without abandonding the desktop metaphor in the GUI.
OS X isn’t perfect, but I think perhaps Gruber’s overall point has some merit in that there may not be any major improvements going forward. Apple can add polish and fix a few outstanding UI wonkiness, but mostly, those will be small details rather than large innovations.
The iPhone, on the other hand, isn’t tied to that desktop metaphor, so there is room to play with the interface in ways Apple could not do with the Mac.
I hope this isn’t the case and that we will see some interesting Mac OS improvements down the line, but I think it will be hard to come up with anything that will really make a user think, “Wow! This is different…!” without completely changing the UI in a major way (which would probably cause more pissing and moaning than “wow”).
While most of the features highlighted at the two most recent Apple events were somewhat blase, I think there were some interesting developments “under the hood” that aren’t so in your face. I’m a soon to be switcher and some of the new announced features really intrigue me:
1) Time machine
This one sounds like it *could* be a very useful innovation. Having automated back-up software that is functional for average users sounds like it’s a wonderful idea. I’ll have to try it out before passing judgement
2) Core animation
This could be a great tool-kit for developers to build new features and interfaces.
3) Improved Finder
Some of the developments in the Finder seem great, especially the part about searching other computers on your network.
4) Integration with .mac
Steve Jobs announced a cool feature where you can access files on your home computer from anywhere in the world via .mac services. I thought this was a cool idea, but I haven’t heard much about it since.
The other features didn’t really do anything for me, but I got the sense that there was quite a bit of improvement and innovation to the back-end code. My guess is that these improvements will be the foundation for future product development and integration.
That’s just my opinion based on everything that I’ve heard and read. But, we’ll have to see and try it all out once Leopard is finally released.
I agree, Leopard is a major letdown. Especially with all of the mudslinging and over-hyping Jobs did last year. I think John is drinking too much kool-aid ($$).
Hadley I’m sorry you guys lost your Media Access but that’s not Apple’s fault. You guys have tried to swim upstream and the current doesn’t favor focusing on the negative aspects of Apple which are relatively few.
Almost invariably when someone calls Leopard a disappointment or letdown they fail to support their statement with substantive supporting data.
What exactly am I missing in Leopard that is so vital to my computing experience?
I personally would love to see Speech Recognition but that’ll have to wait.
hmurchison,
I couldn’t agree more. ANYONE saying “Leopardi is disappoint” has an agenda of attempting to drum up “news.” First of all, it hasn’t been released. Sure, it’s in beta, but shouldn’t we wait until it’s released before calling it a letdown.
Also, regarding the “Although I hope the contract doesn’t include doing nothing but heaping praise on Apple” comment is out of line. It’s CLEAR from his blog that he is rather balanced regarding his writings. Unlike this blog, he balances the positive with the negative… and has a wonderful way of comparing and contrasting approaches to OS design.
The level of negativity on this blog is hilarious at best. You literally sound like my local TV stations 11 pm news. “Stay tuned to hear how your children may be in danger!!!!” only to have the follow up of “make sure to have them wearing safe fitting backpacks.”
My ideal computing enviroment revolves around efficiency. Adding a little pizazz to the UI is fine but the core functionality has to be there.
What consumers saw during the Leopard WWDC keynote was stuff that consumers could digest easily. Jobs needed to tailor what he demoed and how so that the “take home message” was clear.
The more geeky people are going to want to know that the underlaying stuff has been fixed and for the most part is has.
Networking- the Finder doesn’t choke when volumes are unmounted. The finder doesn’t seem to choke when a lot of small files are copied.
Calendar- Not only are Data Dectors back but they’re infused nicely in mail and iCal data can now be written to from 3rd party apps. To Dos are accessible from 3rd parties. If you’re a Productivity hound this is Heaven.
UI- The GPU now has a dedicated thread for rendering UI. Resolution Independence is included. OpenGL 2.1 is there with enhanced shading support.
The whole OS is Unix 03 compliant and undergoing certification. The Help menu is vastly better the whole OS is 64-bit yet still runs 32-bit apps natively. Quicktime 32-bit has been deprecated for QTkit 64-bit. Quicktime encodes faster and has alpha support.
If you’re letdown or dissapointed it’s because you “choose” to be ..not because Apple’s engineers were sucking their thumbs for 3 years rather than coding.
Leopard has more changed in its underpinnings and SDK, perhaps, than in its UI. I suspect you’re going to see “Leopard-only” software much, much faster with this release than you saw previous version lockout with 10.4, 10.3, or 10.2. And isn’t that really what an “operating system” is supposed to be about, anyway? Enabling better applications?
“1) Time machine
This one sounds like it *could* be a very useful innovation.”
Time Machine is not an innovation. Vista has this functionality built-in, although it is harder to access and less intuitive.
Although I hope the contract doesn’t include doing nothing but heaping praise on Apple.
As if Gruber would need a contract to bind him to nothing but praise for Apple.
I think the problem for Gruber, and for the fanboys in the comments above, is that they lack any creativity or imagination beyond what Apple puts in front of their faces.
Can the overall UI experience be improved? God, I hope so. For one thing, the file management paradigm goes back over 20 years and hasn’t fundamentally changed. Even if Finder didn’t suck huge sweaty donkey balls, which it does, it would still be an antiquated way of accessing files on your computer’s HDD.
While a touch-screen wouldn’t be practical, imagine a Google-like virtual hand that you used to interact with something like the interface on the iPhone, only more suited for a 20” screen. How about two mice? How about a Wii-like controller?
I don’t think anything could replace the keyboard in the near term for ergonomic reasons, but there are many possibilities out there. Innovation does not begin or end with the latest Apple product.
No one said Apple had the market cornered on innovation nor do they deserve your haughty attitude in calling them fanboys. Almost everything is derivative. Whilst Vista may have some features that Apple is adding to Leopard, innovation doesn’t lie solely in the creation of items but also manifests in the improvement of existing items.
No one here stated that Apple is perfect. The premise of the article is “The Coming Leopard Letdown” to which many of us are wondering just what we are supposed to be let down on. Apple’s innovation or lackthereof is not the focal point of this discussion.
Still waiting to read what I’m missing in Leopard that’s going to have me letdown.
Whenever someone cans an Apple OS for lacking real innovation in the front-end, the fans say “Yeah, but the *real* innovation is in the back end and we’re gunna see amazing new software because of it”.
????
Um, Shouldn’t and couldn’t Apple then lead the way with *front-end* innovations to take advantage of those amazing back-end enhancements?
mitchell_pgh saidIt’s CLEAR from his blog that he is rather balanced regarding his writings
Yes, but that’s his blog where he’s got no editorial line to toe except whatever he feels. It’s very easy to set your own editorial line on your own blog.
Hadley, I’m starting to suspect that innovation in OSes is no longer possible. But that may be a view distorted by Apple, Linux and Microsoft not making any significant innovations.
For me, the next big innovation I want to see is something where your file system will work like a knowledge management system.
nor do they deserve your haughty attitude in calling them fanboys.
Au contraire. Certainly you qualify.
Almost everything is derivative.
I notice that is said only when Apple rips someone off. But when Microsoft (or anyone else) does it, they are thieves who steal everything from Apple.
And your definition of innovation is strictly apologist spin doctoring. Innovation, as the dictionary defines it, is introducing some NEW, a new idea, method, or device. Slapping pretty window dressing on someone else’s feature is not innovation. It’s an improvement, sure, but it is not introducing anything new.
Apple’s innovation or lackthereof is not the focal point of this discussion.
Actually, it’s the MAIN focal point of this discussion. To those who want TRULY innovative features, particularly in areas where OS X has been seen as deficient, Leopard is a let down.
booga,
Time Machine is not an innovation??? Oh, because Vista has something that is technically similar, but most users can’t use, it’s not an innovation. If that’s your definition of innovation, Apple has never innovated.
Time Machine could be the common person’s back-up solution. That is pure innovation in the same way the iMac and iPod were innovative.
Beeblebrox,
Apple can’t be too innovative without alienating their user base. OS x 10.0, 10.1 and even 10.2 were rather wild times. Having lived through them, I found it annoying how many things changed. Up until 10.4, apple wouldn’t even guarantee constant APIs from version to version. I for one welcome some change, but fundamental change that would force everyone to relearn basic components of the OS would be horribly foolish.
Apple IS innovating, it’s simply not “out with the old, in with the new” as it once was. I see it more as significant refinements, and I’m happy to pay for them.
Beeb wrote: “Time Machine is not an innovation. Vista has this functionality built-in, although it is harder to access and less intuitive.”
The innovation of Time Machine isn’t the ability to restore files. It’s way in which the restoration process is abstracted and presented to the user.
With Time Machine, you’re not limited to the Finder. Apple is including several applications that allow you search backwards in time for application data right in the application’s UI. You don’t have to deal with dialogs or even have a clue where the files you’re reverting exist on the filesystem. Third-party developers can do the same thing.
And when you do use the Finder, you can actually search backwards in time and even preview the document before you restore it.
This is the innovation.
Last time I checked, the only applications that had access to access to file restoration capabilities in Vista was the Explorer shell. You have to know the location of file are you want to restore and you’re limited to a list of dates to restore from. Previews are not available.