…would be something fitting to tell Chris Shiflett. Out of his “Top X Mac OS X Annoyances”, one doesn’t even have to do with Mac OS X (but with the hardware he’s running it on, or, more specifically, the keyboard he’s using), and the rest essentially boils down to “I’m trying out a different OS but can’t be bothered to learn what’s different about it”.
The lesson to learn: if you want the same, use the same and shut up. If you want to try and use something else, spend some serious time with it and then make up an educated choice.
Too bad such authors get to publish on O’Reilly.
(I could go through his list one-by-one and point out mistakes, misunderstandings and conflicting concepts, but why bother? He doesn’t even bother to point out his real “annoyances” beyond “it sucks”.)
Update: As expected, someone did bother to respond; in this case Erik Barzeski (who I’ve lost a lot of respect for a long time ago). Sadly, his response is fairly flawed, especially in his last point, where he claims that Safari is “Not part of the OS.”
He should let Apple know, since it’s featured rather prominently on their Mac OS X page, namely underneath the aptly-titled “Mac OS X Top Features” header on the right side. In fact, the URL http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/safari/ speaks for itself, no? Why would Apple call Safari a feature of OS X when it’s not even part of OS X? (Hint: it is.)
Others' Thoughts
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 12:29 am
Safari isn’t a part of the OS. When you’re criticizing OS functionality, you’re criticizing behaviors, standards, and a way of doing things that affect every app on the system. The “maximize” button being a good example of this: it’s a function of the OS. The Finder is another, as that’s the abstraction for browsing the 1s and 0s on your hard disk (and other media).
Don’t confuse “bundled app” (or “what you get with Mac OS X”) with “part of the OS.” You are, as you were on the post you reference about censorship, simply wrong. And, like then, I’ll leave it to you to determine how and why you’re wrong.
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 12:40 am
Safari, as of 10.3 (it didn’t originally come with 10.2), is as much part of the OS as the Finder is, as Address Book is and as iTunes is.
But it’s not irreplaceable: there’s Path Finder, and soon there’ll be FileRun, not to mention various other less attractive options. The same goes for Safari: there’s obviously lots of other browsers to replace it. But that doesn’t mean it’s not an OS component.
Now if you really want to define “OS” by “the very basics of the GUI”, then you might as well be talking about Aqua, not Mac OS X. The maximize button is part of Aqua. In fact, seven out of his ten so-called “annoyances” are directly related to Aqua. But he didn’t title his post “Top X Aqua Annoyances”, but “Top X Mac OS X Annoyances”, and if you go out and buy a copy of Mac OS X, you get Safari as well. (You don’t, however, get iPhoto, even though you used to with Panther. His ninth point is therefore just as questionable as his sixth, since neither have to do with the OS itself by any stretch of the definition.)
Either way, we’re wasting our time arguing about this, as Chris doesn’t even begin to build up a proper reasoning for why he deems Safari “teh suck”.
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 12:57 am
Safari is a bundled app. It’s not a “part of the OS.” The two – to a software developer (and a court of law, it would seem) – are very different things. Comparing Safari to the Finder is silly. You cannot avoid using the Finder without hacking or modifying files that thet OS relies upon. You can avoid using Safari by, you know, not launching it, trashing it, etc.
“Aqua” and “the OS” are also two very different things, as the Terminal and the scripts, apps, etc. you can run in it are also part of the OS but have nothing to do with Aqua. Aqua, like the Finder and unlike Safari, is part of the OS (though in a different way).
And hey, I’m a bit under the weather today and my wife and kid are at my in-laws’ house. So, I’ve found myself with altogether too much time to pick at nits today.
But now I’ve found a book I’ve been intending to read, so this is likely it for me.
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 1:03 am
But that precisely was my point
The majority of his comments referred to the GUI/Desktop, which is generally put under the “Aqua” umbrella term. One comment referred to what courts seem to call “middleware” (Safari), another to an iLife component, and finally one didn’t fit in at all since it was a hardware issue.
We can argue very long between “part of the OS”, “essential to the OS”, “bundled with the OS”, etc. Apple’s marketing seems to consider Safari a rather integral “part”. Apple’s developers, I’m sure, see it in a much more distinguished manner.
Enjoy the book.
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 1:18 am
o_0
That is the remark of an idiot. Erik, grow the hell up.
Also, this Chris character is a completeand utter moron. As a wise man keeps telling me: “your mistake is to care”. :\
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 1:21 am
Yes, and location consistency is precisely the reason the menubar is always on top. This is absolutely ridiculous, and the man can’t formulate a convincing arguement for his life.
What is up with this? Attack of the Anti-Grubers?
sigh
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 1:25 am
Good job: you posted the very same comment twice.
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 4:26 am
They were slightly different; you delete the more complete one.
The server must have been under load, as there was no response for a significant amount of time after submission, so I went back and submitted again.
Conclusions: WP needs comment editing and management features. ^_^
Comment on February 13th, 2006 at 12:31 pm
Test
Your Own Thoughts
I'd love to hear your input. Just try to stick to a few rules:
Before you comment for the first time (or, after you have deleted cookies), you will have to answer a little challenge to prove that you are not a spammer.
Comments are written in Markdown.