The erosion of the Mac experience

[TEG]

This is an interesting Tweet about what is happening with Mac OS. Would Amiga OS survived, would it have gone the same way?

There is a lot of pent-up angst in the community about the erosion of the Mac experience; a lot of it had been pointed at Catalyst, with the misguided assumption that SwiftUI was here to save the Mac. The reality is that SwiftUI is just another way to disinvest in the platform.

Apple let macOS coast on its momentum for a long time while it was distracted with iOS, and as a result we’ve seen a significant deterioration in up-to-date institutional knowledge, skills, core values in both Apple developer material and the wider dev base. Mac just not priority.

What the future of macOS looks like as Apple’s employee base ages out and that care & attention is lost forever? Fresh new hires, who’ve never known a reason to care about the Mac, trying to rewrite key portions of the OS with unforgiving yearly timelines and shaky foundations.

How do you solve for a developer-base that’s just not that into you? This is what has stymied the past decade of Microsoft’s platform efforts. This is why Macs run iOS apps, why SwiftUI & Catalyst offer zero-effort macOS support. Every carrot Apple can think of, they gotta do it.

https://twitter.com/stroughtonsmith/...80018996944898

[Matt_H]

Mac user here. I agree with this completely. The iOS-ification of OSX is infuriating to me. There’s nothing interesting about Mac anymore. No new interesting system utilities, nothing really pushing the envelope of what a computer can do from a productivity standpoint. It’s just “apps” and automation and hiding more and more of the underlying system from the user. The ironic part is that iOS was originally pitched as being OSX on a phone with the only difference being a touch UI. Instead it became a dumbed-down toy that somehow still managed to be a resource hog. The worst of iOS took over OSX instead of the best of OSX taking over iOS. Now Apple is even bringing that stupid “notch” to their Mac hardware. Ugh. There’s a decent chance my next computer will not be a Mac, but vendor ecosystem lock-in is a powerful force…

I don’t think the same thing would have happened if the Amiga survived. The biggest macro-level problem we have now is fragmentation of the platform - OS3, OS4, MorphOS, AROS, etc. That wouldn’t have happened if Commodore was still around because CATS was so responsive to developer needs, so we’d have unified APIs that met everyone’s use cases. There probably would have been a split when proper memory protection was added to the OS (like Apple’s OS9 to OSX jump), but other than that I think we’d be happily innovating on our AmiBooks and AmiPhones running full AmigaOS and not “aOS”.

Commodore’s developer guidance stressed the importance of supporting command-line, ARexx, and graphical interfaces to applications. I have every reason to believe they would have added touch at some point and/or APIs to automatically scale/adapt the GUI for touchscreens. One program, one code base, multiple deployment targets. Hypothetical “aOS” paradigms never would have taken over because there’d be no such thing. Amiga desktops, laptops, and mobile stuff all would have been developed in tandem using the same OS from the beginning - and users and developers would know that they could run their program on whichever device suited them with all features present. No Commodore-endorsed crippleware like Apple did with iOS v1 to split the platform.

[TEG]

Even if it's obvious now you said it, I never thought before about MacOS not having memory protection too. MacOS was not a multitasks OS so it was less problematic I guess but they have to manage the transition.

Thanks for your overall point of view of the MacOS situation.

[ImmortalA1000]

Originally Posted by TEG

Would Amiga OS survived, would it have gone the same way?

I remember quite clearly that in the final days of Commodore they were talking about an A5000 using esoteric bloody expensive ($ per MIPS) CPU and piece of sh!t Windows NT OS. I think you got that the wrong way round Mr Gould's idiot managers.

Commodore never had a clue what they were doing with Amiga, they never put back the ADSR controls of the prototype Kickstart after Metacomco was drafted in to port Tripos 68000 real-time OS to Amiga in a few months after some problem and they lost Text to Speech in KS/WB 2.0 onward just as the rest of the world was making a big thing about it lol

Windows NT is just as pathetic as Win 3.1, bloatware rubbish. Even talk of Win NT on an Amiga 5000 was a sign it was time for Gould to drop dead whilst landing on Medhi Ali as he fell out of a 40 story window

Commodore would never have lasted much longer than Atari (which were effectively folded in a reverse merger deal with JTS a year later after Commodore filed for Chapter 11).

[rothers]

I dunno, I really like that I can compile an app in Xcode, and it now runs on all apple devices.

I can run iOS apps and games on my mac too.

It's about time they combined all this now they use ARM across all their systems.

I have no issues keeping the desktop looking like it's always looked - just don't use all the new widgets etc. they are optional.

Plus Microsoft are supporting Android apps on their system now too.

Now Swift is coming to Android it's bringing all things closer together.

[Matt_H]

Originally Posted by TEG

Even if it's obvious now you said it, I never thought before about MacOS not having memory protection too. MacOS was not a multitasks OS so it was less problematic I guess but they have to manage the transition.

Thanks for your overall point of view of the MacOS situation.

Well, I didn't mean to refer to memory protection specifically in the OS9-to-OSX transition, just that OSX was a big enough change that broke compatibility with what came before, hence the creation of the Classic sandbox/VM. It's been said that adding memory protection to the Amiga would create a similar break.

Originally Posted by rothers

I dunno, I really like that I can compile an app in Xcode, and it now runs on all apple devices.

I can run iOS apps and games on my mac too.

It's about time they combined all this now they use ARM across all their systems.

I have no issues keeping the desktop looking like it's always looked - just don't use all the new widgets etc. they are optional.

Plus Microsoft are supporting Android apps on their system now too.

Now Swift is coming to Android it's bringing all things closer together.

Honestly, the way I see it, Apple's transition to ARM across its hardware marked the end of the Mac as a distinct platform. Current "Macs" are just iOS devices with a desktop skin. I really wish that it had gone the other way, that iPhones became OSX with a touch skin. It took Apple more than a decade to bring basic desktop features from 1985 (like mouse support, proper multitasking, widgets, etc.) to iOS because they were constantly reinventing the wheel. (Side note: also worth mentioning that piddly little Palm webOS had excellent wireless charging in 2009 and iPhones got it in, what, 2018, 2019?)


There are merits to this unity, of course, like how I envisioned a hypothetical single-codebase/multi-platform AmigaOS, but I think the stuff TEG posted absolutely nails it - young, hotshot engineers who don't know the history of what came before and therefore can't/won't leverage it. And Apple's managers and execs either similarly don't know or don't care because they're trying to become a media services company instead of a high-quality hardware/software vendor. As long as they can get users locked in with subscriptions they're happy.

[jbenam]

I use a Mac at work and it's just a great experience after years of Linux (and I say this as someone who loves Linux) and Windows machines. The M1 is an amazing CPU and a great leap forward for computers. Couldn't expect anything less from Apple.

So yes, the hardware side is amazing, but what about the software side? The truth is, macOS is a very mature OS. It hasn't changed considerably in the last ten years and you know what? That's perfectly fine. Have you seen the horrible trainwreck that is Windows 11? Microsoft just shaking up the entire user experience for no reason. Central taskbar! (yes you can put it in the bottom left side, but after jumping thru hoops) Hid the usual options when left clicking! Let's change every icon and put colour everywhere!

It's just alienating for no real reason except trying to be "hip" and "cool".

So yes, macOS is being "ios-ified" because there isn't much more to do on the desktop side. It just works™ and that's why I use a Mac at work.

If I want to yell at a computer and spend a few hours repairing yet another problem that popped out of nowhere, I always have my Amigas

[AmigaHope]

Originally Posted by ImmortalA1000

and they lost Text to Speech in KS/WB 2.0 onward just as the rest of the world was making a big thing about it lol

Nitpicking, but 2.0 actually had the best TTS engine in AmigaOS, improved over the 1.x one. It wasn't removed until 2.04. It was removed because it was actually a third-party product and continuing to support the newer versions meant renegotiating the license agreements, and the dispute just wasn't worth it.

2.04 had extra licensing fees to consider because of the Compugraphic font license. (One of the reasons they went with Compugraphic was the license had better terms than for Adobe's tech, and Apple wasn't licensing out TrueType yet). The TTS wasn't used by much software so it was an easy cut to make.

Windows NT is just as pathetic as Win 3.1, bloatware rubbish. Even talk of Win NT on an Amiga 5000 was a sign it was time for Gould to drop dead whilst landing on Medhi Ali as he fell out of a 40 story window

Dave Cutler actually did a pretty good job with the NT kernel. He knew what he was doing. It was far, far better than the 95/98 kernel, and in a completely different league than the garbage glorified graphical shell that was Windows 3.x. It wasn't as hyper-efficient as some other stuff like QNX, but it was good. The bloat comes from the rest of the crap that Microsoft threw into Windows in general (and the compatibility layer for the 95/98 ABI/API)

Amiga exec is an incredible kernel, given the limitations it was written under, but Carl Sassenrath had to make a lot of compromises due to the lack of an MMU. He tried leave room for concepts like memory protection, virtual addressing, and shared memory allocation for performance, but developers (including at Commodore) promptly ignored the guidelines.

[desiv]

Originally Posted by AmigaHope

Dave Cutler actually did a pretty good job with the NT kernel. He knew what he was doing. It was far, far better than the 95/98 kernel, and in a completely different league than the garbage glorified graphical shell that was Windows 3.x. .

Yeah, I agree. NT was a decent OS. Yes, it wasn't as streamlined as the AmigaOS, but there are valid discussion points on both sides of that.

And my guess is Commodore would have gone that way. We've heard Dave Haynie say that they didn't avoid standards, but that they avoided bad standards, and the they probably would have gone PCI.
So, with a much more standard hardware platform, it really gets harder to justify not using a more standard (in the industry) OS.
And I think there is enough similarity between Intuition development and the Windows API that I could see at least professional apps being moved over fairly easily if that had happened.
But I think that would have meant a significant break in compatibility for games.
And the question would have been, is that still an Amiga?
I'd say no...
But I think the Mac stopped being what I think of as a Mac after System 7.. ;-) (OK, yeah... when pushed, I agree System 8 and 9 probably count.. ;-)

[aeberbach]

iOS-ification indeed. Seems like every OS X release imposes more and more controls over what you are and are not allowed to do.

Try being a developer on Apple platforms. Increasingly it is a two-tiered environment. Inside the big companies you get to write actual code that runs on actual hardware, creating the "kits" and libraries that developers are allowed to use. Outside them you can only use the APIs provided. If you try something different there's a good chance your app isn't going to be approved.

There are two things that keep me using a Mac. First, you can't develop for iOS anywhere else. Second, every time I switch over to Windows (multiple times per day since I need to use various Windows-only apps) I am reminded of how much worse it is.

[stevelord]

Have to say I'm loving Sorbet Leopard on my G4. Not as quick as MorphOS but close to that sweet spot for peak OSX before everything started going downhill.

[gimbal]

Originally Posted by aeberbach

Try being a developer on Apple platforms.

It is reverse Yoda. You'll never do. There is only try.

[AmigaHope]

Originally Posted by desiv

But I think that would have meant a significant break in compatibility for games.
And the question would have been, is that still an Amiga?
I'd say no...
But I think the Mac stopped being what I think of as a Mac after System 7.. ;-) (OK, yeah... when pushed, I agree System 8 and 9 probably count.. ;-)

If they'd been allowed to have proper design from the beginning, and encouraged developers to be on board, there wouldn't be the incompatibilities. There wasn't anything stopping you from having a custom driver to do things with the chipset, that would allow future versions of the OS to redirect the banging through an emulation layer. Proper abstraction is possible even for low level stuff. The problem was that developers were too used to the old 8-bit design without a proper mechanism to make things compatible.

For instance, you ask a library to let you bang hardware, and then it gives you the addresses to be able to do it, and permissions to hit it. The kernel then gives you a realtime process to take over the CPU if you need to, but keeps it in user mode so that you can break out to the OS if you need to. This would also let you have the library cleanly feed the entire game to an emulation layer instead on a future system fast enough to do it.

Also I'm sorry but classic MacOS was an absolutely garbage system. Single-tasking hacked to be cooperative multitasking. It encouraged the upper 8-bit hacks on address registers that the Amiga discouraged (though some programs still used it, notable AmigaBASIC). But even worse, the upper 8-bit hack was BUILT INTO THE KERNEL on MacOS. Classic MacOS was even worse than the garbage that was Windows 3.x.

[jbenam]

Originally Posted by stevelord

Have to say I'm loving Sorbet Leopard on my G4. Not as quick as MorphOS but close to that sweet spot for peak OSX before everything started going downhill.

Interesting, thanks. One of these days I should finally power on that G4 Mini I was gifted some years ago...

[desiv]

Originally Posted by AmigaHope

Also I'm sorry but classic MacOS was an absolutely garbage system. Single-tasking hacked to be cooperative multitasking..

I don't disagree with that. ;-) Never said it was good. ;-)
My roommate had a Fat Mac (512k) with only the one floppy.
It was horrid to use... ;-)
That said, I still like playing Continuum and some of the other original BW games from time to time...
The only thing I used it for non-gaming wise back then was Mac Pascal for class.
Maybe that's another reason I don't consider newer MacOSes as the original Mac OS. As they got better, they didn't feel like Mac OS to me anymore. ;-)

[fxgogo]

I have a love-hate relationship with Apple.

Their products are good but they are a controlling company.

They have made the leap into the future with the M1 but I really don’t like the non-upgradable system.

But my biggest issue with them is the cost. They do not have a mid or low tier set of machines.

[TEG]

Originally Posted by desiv

Maybe that's another reason I don't consider newer MacOSes as the original Mac OS. As they got better, they didn't feel like Mac OS to me anymore. ;-)

This is the paradox. More we advance in time, less OS (and machines) are differentiated. Less diversity.
In a sense it's logical, standardization to what is efficient. In another hand, if we look at mother nature creation, there's a lot of diversity and... it's definitively working.

For me, an essential question today is: are we still able to think out of the box and create a new enchanting experience like the Amiga one was?

[rothers]

Originally Posted by fxgogo

I have a love-hate relationship with Apple.

Their products are good but they are a controlling company.

They have made the leap into the future with the M1 but I really don’t like the non-upgradable system.

But my biggest issue with them is the cost. They do not have a mid or low tier set of machines.

The M1 MacBook Air is not only cheap, it's the best-selling laptop in the world, and I don't think you've been able to buy anything as powerful from anyone else for the price?


What would you want to upgrade on an M1 Max for example? You can and always have been able to upgrade the storage, and you've got USB and Firewire ports for anything else. Yes you have to choose your RAM when buying it but it's because of how the chip functions. I've got the 32GB model and I've only once ever came close to using it all - 64GB is overkill.

[Daedalus]

Originally Posted by rothers

The M1 MacBook Air is not only cheap, it's the best-selling laptop in the world

To be fair, that means nothing in this context because there's no direct competition in MacOS laptops. It may well sell more than any other laptop model, but that's purely because the actual alternative has lots of competition and the market share is split amongst maybe 20 different companies, all making almost the same laptops as each other, and each of whom sell maybe 5 different models, most of which are cheaper than the MacBook Air. And they collectively outsell the MacBook Air by a long way.

FWIW, I'm definitely not anti-Apple, just trying to highlight some of the bias to level out the information. My wife has an M1 MBP and it's a glorious machine that outperforms my similarly-priced work laptop (Dell Latitude 5500) in a number of ways.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by Daedalus

To be fair, that means nothing in this context because there's no direct competition in MacOS laptops. It may well sell more than any other laptop model, but that's purely because the actual alternative has lots of competition and the market share is split amongst maybe 20 different companies, ...

well - that would mean <5% share for each company on average ... but we have to admit that MacBooks with 10-15% are exceeding this by far.

And as I am typing these words on a M1 equipped laptop I must confess: it is still the best computer after my A3000.
(having to deal with Lenovo at work all the time confirms my opinion ...)

Alright: MacOS is deteriorating - but so are all the others....