You gotta be kidding


Folks let me clue you in,i'm a Mac systems admidnistrator,i have 185 users on G3's and better,they are all graphic artists,at this point i could never concieve to upgrading them to OS X beta or version whatever.

I can't get them to remember how to open the chooser and setup a printer,how in gods name are they going to learn OS X.
from what i can see its a confusing jumble of clustering,Apple needs to wake up and adopt os x more like classic 9,its one thing to change the the standard but make it like it was,it can be done!!

For all you geeks who post on this board and hack one or two machines,wake up,the public does not care,they will not accept os x as it is. it needs to be much classic like.

the only thing i have learned on these boards is to stay far away from os x and you geeks who think you know more than the real information technology world................................

that's pretty funny. prett right on, too.

i am a geek web designer, and am way more into OSX than my coworkers.

they have no interest in X and are actually dreading the day they have to switch.

i hope the final release is more mac-like... or the migration rate is going to be rather slow.
i'd be pretty interested in technocall's objections to os x.

i have been wondering how the sort of users who make up such a core of the mac market -- the graphic artists who use their mac to work and may not know/care to know all the geeky details -- would react to the new os.

so technocall, or others in a similar situation -- what needs to be more "mac like?"
are you asking for a return of the apple menu and disks on the desktop (cosmetic mac-likeness so the migration is easy)?
are you asking for a more comprehensible (less unixish) filesystem?
is the multiple users concept too much?

i know i raged for weeks after getting os x about the lack of the apple menu, and the crappy dock, etc.
but after a bit, i really do feel that the new os is a lot more elegant. sure, functionality is missing here and there, but for such a radical change, i am impressed at its degree of mac-likeness. more than that, however, i am impressed with the ease to which i acclimated to os x (aside from the filesystem, which still on occasion confuses me a bit, what with all the softlinks all which way). i lost percieved control over the interface, what with no control strip or popup folders, but after a few months, i am not convinced i lost any actual control. my workflow hasn't been hindered at all, once i learned to work with os x and not fight it.
i think that doing this will be a lot easier than most people fear, and i am 100% sure that you don't have to be a geek to appreciate this.
(In fact, i think the geek contingent is the most likely to get caught up in trying to "fix" the new os to be more like the old one instead of spending the week it takes to learn a new, and in my opinion, simplified, workflow.)

but that's just my $2*10^2 (for all the geeks out there).

any thoughts?
some ideas things to make it more mac like (barring most dock/gui issues)

1. broader customization (the current MacOS is quite possibly the most configurable OS out there - you can work the way you want)

2. the Unix like filesystem ( A mac user says, "WTF is USR?" )

3. the absolute requirement to have multiple users (How about an option to install only a superuser account)

4. the whole tar / gzip / sit / bin / hqx thing. (one or two file compression schems is okay, but this is crazy.)

5. things like the clock are not apps to most mac users and launching them / quitting them is strange

6. having file suffixes that the user doesn't usually see is not mac like at all. (.app, etc.)

Folks let me clue you in, Im a student graphic artist. Ive been a student in this field since 96, this be my fourth year. Never used a mac b4 then. Love them now and as for not being able to setup a printer in chooser, that was easy to learn. As he said THEY ARE STUDENTS are they not there to learn, if they are not learning then maybe you are not doing your job.
What if they have to LEARN to use a new interface. I have had osx pb less than a week. There is still alot for me to learn. I dont like a few things but thats because it is different it doesnt mean you should freak about it. Change is bound to happen, and this new system will be such an advantage to graphic artists and multimedia users/students ie. we always get problems with memory allocation cant change it cos we dont have access priviledges. Have to get a tutor to change it. Which means logging out etc. no more time wasting for us on this front and no more can you increase the memory partiion please mister network supervisor. The protected memory and memory allocation on demand are worth the hassle alone!

I need to make a few adjustments but there is plenty of software already availible to make it resemble os9 a little more closely. for example I have found a program that lets you display your volumes and trash on the desktop, and others to display time on the menubar etc.

I am no geek in fact Im probably the last you would call a geek. I have found this new os very interesting. The new GUI is alot more attractive although after a few days I was already turning off animations, bit gimmicky.
Give the students a little bit of credit
I didnt find it difficult I dont think others will either.
Its a step forward dont keep looking back.

Look forward to seeing the apps I use developed

On a different note...

Will the whole app software need to modified or can you keep the plugins etc. and just remake the app file??
Being alot is standard files???
Dont know much about unix yet! so not sure what is required I expect not but just curious

$200.... I think you meant $2*10^-2 or quite possibly $2/10^2.

Ouch. Thanks. Guess i'm just a careless geek.

Also, I think that the benefits of multiple user accounts aren't being really well publicized by apple.
Sure, letting multiple PEOPLE use the computer is good, but the real power here is how the system is protected from the apps. The idea of unpriviledged users like "nobody," or special users for special classes of background apps means that poorly coded apps can't destroy your filesystem. The idea that a user doesn't always have superuser priviledges is AMAZING, if only for the reason (among many others) that a truly malicious virus can't do much more than wipe the ~/ directories, if that. (Bad enough, but it is so much worse now).

Promoting the idea of the users logging in as superuser all of the time just destroys all of this built in security the system has. Now, I know this, and most people on these forums seem to know this, but why isn't apple palying up this aspect of multiuser systems? I think that unless people are educated, a lot of OS X 1.0 users will always log in as root for some silly reason, and then we'll start seeing OS X viruses and other bad news that we wouldn't have otherwise.
1. broader customization (the current MacOS is quite possibly the most configurable OS out there - you can work the way you want)
Customization will come. In fact, with the ability to change some values in the defaults of misc. applications, there is already some customization, Desktop as well as the Dock are included in the list of apps that are customizable.

2. the Unix like filesystem ( A mac user says, "WTF is USR?")
Correct me if I am wrong, but I recall the USR directory to be hidden by default. If these users are so fragile as to be afraid or put off by OS X, do you think they would actually take the time to go to the Terminal and set the correct property to show all files? I don't think so. I think Apple is doing what it needs to make the novice feel at home while giving the power user the ability to do what he/she wants. I think it is coming together nicely.

3. the absolute requirement to have multiple users (How about an option to install only a superuser account)
Well, you really would not want to have a superuser account only (ie. root) however you can set up OS X to automatically log you in as the user you defined while going through the setup. Is that not good enough? I mean it would act just like OS 9 withouth Multiple Users activated. Sounds pretty Mac-like to me.

4. the whole tar / gzip / sit / bin / hqx thing. (one or two file compression schems is okay, but this is crazy.)
For the mainstream commercial applications, and shareware for the most part, you will see Installer Packages. Stuffit (not necessarily the best choice) will handle unstuffing most all things you might need to unstuff. For power users, again, ones who want to port apps, or want to share some code, etc. I am sure will still use form of tar/gzip. I say the more options the better.

5. things like the clock are not apps to most mac users and launching them / quitting them is strange
I agree with this statement. I think Apple with incorporate these items into the OS by release. If not, there will be clock apps, etc. that will be applications, hidden from the dock, and set to auto start upon login. Effectively giving the appearance of being part of the OS. In fact, I believe you can do this already with some 3rd party apps.

6. having file suffixes that the user doesn't usually see is not mac like at all. (.app, etc.)
Well, the .app suffix is hidden from the user by default if I remember correctly. I believe you will have a global options to hide all extensions. While this is a good thing, I do think there is a need for file extensions. Especially when you find yourself in mixed environments. Not to mention, you use .jpg, .tif(f), .gif, ,.mp3, .mov, etc. already and people have not moaned and groaned about that too much... So if you can hide all the extensions eventualy, and the .app is hidden already, why are people still complaining.

Okay, sorry about this post, but I just wanted to give some of my views on OS X. Yes, it is missing functionality here and there. I might also be a bit disappointed if those missing pieces were not there by final, which I hope is still released in the 1st quarter of 2001. Apple needs to get this OS out. Regardless if mainstream developers are ready. They need to get Carbon solid and set in stone so developers can finish porting...

And as far as people feeling the the current Mac users may be hesitatant to migrate, I think you will find that OS X brings a whole new base of users that are just as, if not more so, fanatics about their OS. The power of X will bring new vocal users about its capabilites, and it may also leave some intimidated Mac users behind. In the end, I think the customer base of X will far exceed the base of OS 9 (or any previous version).
who cares about teaching the operating system,it's all about the bottom line,i don't know what graphics art house you work for,but our's cares about two things,productivity and money$$$$$$$

as i said earlier in the post ,i can't get the artisits to choose the printer properly in the chooser,as well as 100 other things that should be required of a graphic artist,fortunately a artist is a artist and not a technician.

osx is good for me a tech head,but it must be modified to be more mac like,or apple will miss its numbers like they did this quarter.

By the way,what brain surgeon designed the cube,have you tried opening this thing,rubik would have been proud!!!

PLEASE do tell us what it is precisely you see as stumbling blocks for people to learn OS X. I think everyone on this thread is interested in what it is that makes it a "a confusing jumble of clustering" anyway?

As I posted earlier, I find that the new os has a remarkably short learning curve. (By the way, I think it's great that you mention that explaining how to select printer in the chooser is a time consuming process for you now. If you try to use OS X , you will notice that there is no more chooser in OS X and you select the printer right when you want to print -- now how's that for easier to understand and intuitive? And there are many other examples of these little rough edges in previous os's being sanded down in X.)

But chooser aside, I still can't see what the artists ( or any other true neophytes, who the system seems designed to accomodate) will get confused about. The only thing that I can see as truly confusing is the multiple user filesystem, but
a) we can expect to be cleaned up and optionally totally hidden in the final release
and b) is pretty well hidden already if you just tell people to stash their stuff in the folder that is called "home" and you get to that by clicking on a big button. How hard is that to remember? Seems way easier to remember than how to use the chooser.

So technocall, how 'bout some specifics? I'm not asking you so we can try to demolish your points with geek-fu, but I am really interested in knowing what you think the major hang ups to learning the new OS within a couple of days are, especially for graphic artists, because they make up such an important market for macs.


PS. I am starting to wonder about your tech credibility, though, techoncall. I went over to the campus bookstore to play with a G4 cube and I think I was able to figure out how to open it in fifteen seconds. It would have been less had I looked at the colorful directions that make it painfully obvious. So, pray tell, what was your problem with that one?

[Edited by zpincus on 12-07-2000 at 01:35 PM]
OK techoncall, zpincus asks you to clarify your points, because you must admit the original posting was a bit unclear. He explains carefully that he wants to understand your point of view, not tear it down. At which point, challenged to clearly, rationally outline a reasoned opinion, you use the time honoured argument "get a life".

At this point it becomes fairly obvious that you haven't actually got a point to make, you were merely posting in order to have a venue to rant against the artists you have to deal with.

Do you normally admin an NT network or something? I can see how that might turn you into an embittered troll who is angry when he sees people working creatively to make things of beauty...
scruffy -- thanks. well put.

techoncall -- sorry, i really didn't mean to sound combative, especially about the cube deal. my bad.
if you care to share your specific complaints, i would still be glad to hear them.

(ps. i seem to be on a posting rampage tonight. sorry for all the words on all the threads. i had a lot of time to think while stuck in the seattle airport for upwards of 24h.)
Hey ppl, you all fail to remember one BIG thing: this is Mac OS X *Beta*. And c'mon ppl, this is apple we are talking about, this system will be easy as pie when it finaly comes out (some time is february i think). This beta was reliced months ago, and im sure apple has made many of their major fixes by now. I recomend all of u just sit back and chill.
Oh, and techoncall, apple is not forcing you to upgrade to os x. If it is so much of a burden for you, just dont upgrade!
ITz -- The problem is that it is people like techoncall, who control networks for graphics houses and their ilk, are in no small part going to make or break OS X 1.0.

I also think that it is people like techoncall who will most benefit from OS X. No crashes = less lost work = more $$. Better net admin tools are also a real boon to people managing a network. An easy OS should (after the learning curve) be more intuitive and lead to less "How do I print" type questions.

So that is why I am so interested in his specific comments, and why I truly hope it isn't just the knee-jerk "I don't like aqua" reaction like we've seen so many times before. What people like techoncall think matters, a lot, and I would really like to hear it.

That said, Apple realizes the power of this knee jerk, and I believe Jobs has been quoted as saying that X 1.0 will have features to make it behave (and look? I hope not...) more like OS 9.

I do technical support over the phone, and I deal with people who have never really owned a computer before. You'd be surprised how much they DON"T want to know. All they care is point me to this and that, teach me just this one thing, and ONLY this one thing. techoncall has completely different motives to use the OS. I have no concerns for now... I will trust Apple, and I was impressed with the new style of work flow after I used it a short while.
OK, I have seen this post evolve and I wanted to reply to some points
that were raised unfortunatelly I as beat to some of em :p lol
So here is what I have to say to Technocall.

OS X was easy to learn. All you need to know is there, on the desktop and in the menu!
Apps, home, favorites, preferanmces, internet adn even a stupid music player to entertain you while you work.

You say that you can't get these people to even go to the chooser... well I am amazed that these
people have actually learned to do what they do fo a living since learning the 1,2,3s of an OS is quite simple. Learning the OS is towards THEIR advantage because they become more productive thus making more $$$ as you put it.

The old MacOS is nice, I grant you that, BUT the new on, X, is better, and you can be more productive with it. Why wouldn't people want to learn it ? In my opinion two reasons.

1) Your artists are a bunch of idiots that would not know a good thing if it came from behind at break neck speed and lodged itseld up their @$$es, and they expect everything to be handed down to them by a subserviant admin.


2) They would be interested in learning the new OS, but an admin that feels that has all the power is keeping them back and scaring them with terms suchs as uuuuunniiiiixxxxxx and multiple users.....

Make your and their job easier man. MacOS X is easy, and customizable. And if you are a windoze person lemme ask you this, when MS made the leap from windows 3.11 to windows 9x did you also whine and say "ooohh this is tooo tuff boohoohooo, this ok productivity, this of the $$$$ booohooohooo" ???

Yes i believe Apple needs to embrace OSX and continue to move forward,at the same time it needs to understand the users and the depth of which users get involved.
I have no quarrels with OSX myself an experienced seasoned user.

As an admid let me explore my day with you,we are a mac shop,we have an installed base of 185 G3 to G4 mixed bag,all is running TCPIP,we are served by an NT 2000 dell box,we have 2.5 terabytes.

8.00 AM phone rings,[tech] bob calls,i'm at a users desk-he can't open microsoft exchange email,i reloaded it two times,but i cannot retrieve email.

[My response] open ATM shut off his fonts,[bob] does it and presto email opens up.

8.05 AM phone rings its ted,ted says a user cannot log onto the network,i ask ted who has 4 years experience-what have you done,he replies everthing,ok ted go empty out his appleshare prep in preferences,ted follows my instructions and presto user is connected to the network.

i can go on and on about my day,but the point i'm making here is under OSX there is no remedies,there is no compatabilities,there is no reference of any kind.
now how do i solve problems,bottom line i can't,and if i can't what does the user do?

I personaly won't touch this OS untill some kinda reference has been mandated,i cannot afford to play with my company's time and money.

Personaly i will explore and learn this OS,but don't make assumptions the learning curve is minute,it is major.
Here, techoncall, you have a very good point.

Your previous posts made it seem like you thought your users would have a hard time learning the new OS, but this last one makes it sound like the real problem is the learning curve for you in troubleshooting for it.

I hope that you agree that (even for graphic artists), OS X is an easy interface to learn to use, and use well. Because I agree with you that it is anything but easy to learn to troubleshoot. I would certainly hope that a respectable graphics house wouldn't stake anything on a 1.0 piece of software with skimpy documentation -- Apple is certainly going to have to do a lot to make OS X palatable to serious companies.

Here, I think we have two things in our favor:
1) BSD is rock-solid. All the networking and disk and memory components have been tested and refined for longer than Mac OS has even existed. The CLI admin tools (once you understand them) are fantastic. And since programs don't even have write access to most of the disk, the chances that some necessary file is going to get corrupted (the root of so many OS 9 problems) is really minimized. (In the UNIX world, system problems due to files that got stomped are almost unheard-of.)

2) Never again is something like ATM going to disrupt a mail reader because they are no longer going to be able to touch eachother. The end of extention conflicts and a huge reduction in crashes for any reason should mean a lot to admins. And because user-level customizations are in separate folders, a system reinstall will be totally transparent, if it is necessary.

So techoncall, I totally agree. OS X may well make your job a lot harder -- and I don't envy that position. (But then again, some of that will be mitigated, just because the potential for a user or a program to fark things is so much minimized.) I personally am spending my days figuring out how to break and then fix OS X because when 1.0 does come out, there will be a real lack of good troubleshooters. Neither traditional UNIX people nor traditional Mac people will be able to totally fix OS X -- and this is scary.
Good luck, techoncall, and all othes who may soon have to support OS X.


I think techoncall's only real problem is that he or she doesn't want to learn how to administer OS X. And as far as upgrading to OS X on a network such as the one you are describing, why would you even consider it? OS X is not ready for prime time. Even if it is released tommorow what software will run in it besides in classic.

I myself am taking a graphic arts program right now and yes there are still people in my class looking for the start button on the desktop. I know Mac OS inside and out and consider it an important part of the trade. Would you feel comfortable allowing someone build you a house who was only slightly capable of handling power tools? NO............ TEACH THEM TO USE THE BASIC TOOLS THEY NEED. No one will be there to teach them new software as it is released. They will have to learn it themselves, why would it be different for an OS.

What colour is the sky in YOUR IT world?