Whilst this topic begins with some focus on pre-release builds of Yosemite (discussion), I expect to revisit after 10.10.x becomes outdated or legacy so I'm posting to the broader OS X area.
----
My argument
From Yosemite, to date, I get the sense that Apple no longer has a single, clear, shared vision for OS X.
There may be multiple visionaries, and each personal vision may be awesome, but the sum of the visions the mash, if you like lacks the coherence and taste to which we have become accustomed from past releases of the operating system.
Thoughts and observations
Mac OS, Mac OS X, OS X all are operating systems for Mac hardware and (beneath the surface) OS X is still Mac OS X:
There's a sense of constancy. Appearances may change but we continue to enjoy, in Mavericks, many of the features that were added either:
For many Mac users, these features are as relevant now as they were years ago. If you benefited from using proxy icons in 1998, you probably continue to benefit in Mavericks. And so on.
Visions
In parallel with the constancy: a sense of using a visionary operating system. The product of the clear vision of one person, or a vision without ownership that is clear and shared.
Vision that is both clear and successful
Apple's 2000 demonstration of single window mode. The implementation was criticised by John Siracusa (discussion) and others, but as a vision it was great enough for Steve Jobs to make it part of his showcase to the world.
Fourteen years later:
None of that strikes me as weird. It's not single window mode by name, but it's single window mode by nature, and it's not detrimental to other modes of working. It's highly complementary.
That's excellent realisation, by Apple, of a great and clear vision.
Vision that is clear but ultimately unsuccessful
The first example that comes to mind: Cocoa and the Death of Yellow Box and Rhapsody
Related
Yosemite is Beautiful
Yosemite looks terrible!
please make appropriate use of those topics, and others.
Suggested guidelines for discussion
In addition to the customary rules, just three guidelines.
Respect for each other here, and for Apple people.
Jobs was famously described as visionary, so it's natural to think of him in this topic, but I should avoid speculation about what Steve Jobs might think now. Speculation about the deceased will touch nerves. R.I.P..
Many other Apple names, past and present, may come to mind. Treat these people as if they are your friends, or maybe your in-laws. If you disagree with what you think a person does, or did: aim to base your argument on the software more than on the person.
Confidentiality
If something about Yosemite is generally available to the public but you're unsure about the legitimacy of that thing becoming available, think twice before discussing that thing.
Relevance
OS X on Mac hardware.
Obviously we have the potential for interaction with different operatings systems on very different hardware. If you discuss iOS here, please don't lose sight of the focus: OS X.
Thanks
----
My argument
From Yosemite, to date, I get the sense that Apple no longer has a single, clear, shared vision for OS X.
There may be multiple visionaries, and each personal vision may be awesome, but the sum of the visions the mash, if you like lacks the coherence and taste to which we have become accustomed from past releases of the operating system.
Thoughts and observations
Mac OS, Mac OS X, OS X all are operating systems for Mac hardware and (beneath the surface) OS X is still Mac OS X:
Code:
sh-3.2$ sw_vers
ProductName: Mac OS X
ProductVersion: 10.9.5
BuildVersion: 13F14There's a sense of constancy. Appearances may change but we continue to enjoy, in Mavericks, many of the features that were added either:
- in the Mac OS era; or
- before Mac OS X became familiarly known as OS X.
For many Mac users, these features are as relevant now as they were years ago. If you benefited from using proxy icons in 1998, you probably continue to benefit in Mavericks. And so on.
Visions
In parallel with the constancy: a sense of using a visionary operating system. The product of the clear vision of one person, or a vision without ownership that is clear and shared.
Vision that is both clear and successful
Apple's 2000 demonstration of single window mode. The implementation was criticised by John Siracusa (discussion) and others, but as a vision it was great enough for Steve Jobs to make it part of his showcase to the world.
Fourteen years later:
None of that strikes me as weird. It's not single window mode by name, but it's single window mode by nature, and it's not detrimental to other modes of working. It's highly complementary.
That's excellent realisation, by Apple, of a great and clear vision.
Vision that is clear but ultimately unsuccessful
The first example that comes to mind: Cocoa and the Death of Yellow Box and Rhapsody
Related
Yosemite is Beautiful
Yosemite looks terrible!
please make appropriate use of those topics, and others.
Suggested guidelines for discussion
In addition to the customary rules, just three guidelines.
Respect for each other here, and for Apple people.
Jobs was famously described as visionary, so it's natural to think of him in this topic, but I should avoid speculation about what Steve Jobs might think now. Speculation about the deceased will touch nerves. R.I.P..
Many other Apple names, past and present, may come to mind. Treat these people as if they are your friends, or maybe your in-laws. If you disagree with what you think a person does, or did: aim to base your argument on the software more than on the person.
Confidentiality
If something about Yosemite is generally available to the public but you're unsure about the legitimacy of that thing becoming available, think twice before discussing that thing.
Relevance
OS X on Mac hardware.
Obviously we have the potential for interaction with different operatings systems on very different hardware. If you discuss iOS here, please don't lose sight of the focus: OS X.
Thanks