El Capitan: Does this mark the death of OS X as a serious OS?

[cube]

deleted

 

[KALLT]

App Nap is not an energy saving feature and never meant to be one; there is no link whatsoever between App Napp and energy at all. App Nap is one of the many features that were meant to improve resource management without requiring any action or input from either the user or the programmer. It allows the OS to better manage the available resources. What it does is free up resources by putting (running) apps you haven't used for a while into a lower state or even close it. This is one of the features that came from iOS which is run on devices with very low resources.

That is an overly pedantic way of looking at this. App Nap reduces the number of concurrent active processes with the goal of saving energy. That is how they explained it in the keynote and that is how they explain it on their website. Processes that don’t need to do anything actively for the user are throttled or even suspended, like tabs in Safari or windows that are hidden from view. There are two sides to this coin and neither is wrong.

App suspension is something that Apple introduced earlier, if I remember correctly. App Nap was introduced only in Mavericks, whereas Resume and related technologies were introduced in Lion. That was also the time when they offered the option to hide the status lights on the Dock. You could leave applications that are capable of displaying multiple primary windows open in the Dock, but they would continue to run in the background if they still had open windows. That is where App Nap came in.

Mac App Store, LauncPad, Gestures etc. Basically I couldn't care less about most of things Apple borrowed from iOS. I see no good reason to combine them to desktop operating system.

I can’t believe that someone actually thinks this. The multi-touch gestures are incredibly useful and have increased my productivity significantly. Apple absolutely nailed the touchpad when they introduced the unibody MacBooks. Together with Resume and Autosave, they are the best additions to OS X since years. The Mac App Store was a sensible addition and although I agree that there are ample ways to improve it, I do think that this is something OS X needed at the time. For my open-source needs there is always Homebrew.

 

[dyn]

That is an overly pedantic way of looking at this. App Nap reduces the number of concurrent active processes with the goal of saving energy. That is how they explained it in the keynote and that is how they explain it on their website.

Would you give the explanation I gave to a user or would you simply say it saves energy?
Remember that both the keynote and the information on their website is aimed at the average user, even if that keynote is held on a developer conference. It's the marketing department that is mostly behind the keynote and website stuff, not the devs.

In reality it is about being more efficient with resources which ultimately leads to both a faster machine as well as a machine that saves energy (or better put: is more energy efficient).

There are two sides to this coin and neither is wrong.

Which was somewhat my point also. It depends if you look at it from a system/engineering point of view or from a user point of view.

App suspension is something that Apple introduced earlier, if I remember correctly. App Nap was introduced only in Mavericks, whereas Resume and related technologies were introduced in Lion. App Nap

There have been many things that have been partially implemented in previous OS X versions and improved/expanded upon in later versions. That's how Apple works: they have a vision they are working towards by taking small steps. They really started doing this since 10.6. Each OS X release has seen some improvement/expansion in this area (some rather minor, some rather big).

 

[KALLT]

Would you give the explanation I gave to a user or would you simply say it saves energy?
[…]

In reality it is about being more efficient with resources which ultimately leads to both a faster machine as well as a machine that saves energy (or better put: is more energy efficient).

That is your own narrative. Apple’s is energy saving, which makes your statement (“App Nap is not an energy saving feature and never meant to be one; there is no link whatsoever between App Napp and energy at all.”) patently wrong. You are free to argue that energy saving cannot exist without efficiency gains on the software side, but you can’t say that it’s not about energy saving. I don’t understand why you would even say that, when we all clearly agree on what it technically does.

 

[deviant]

That is your own narrative. Apple’s is energy saving, which makes your statement (“App Nap is not an energy saving feature and never meant to be one; there is no link whatsoever between App Napp and energy at all.”) patently wrong. You are free to argue that energy saving cannot exist without efficiency gains on the software side, but you can’t say that it’s not about energy saving. I don’t understand why you would even say that, when we all clearly agree on what it technically does.

It's about energy saving on laptops. On Desktops it's all about gaining more performance while other apps sleep and don't eat cycles. There, I solved it for you two.

 

[dyn]

I don’t understand why you would even say that, when we all clearly agree on what it technically does.

Never knew that calling each other names and claiming the other ones definition is incorrect is considered "clearly agreeing on what it technically does". I posted to point it out to you guys.

You are free to argue that energy saving cannot exist without efficiency gains on the software side, but you can’t say that it’s not about energy saving.

The way Apple puts it is purely marketing and from a technical point of patently wrong but anyone in the IT industry knows you can't give ordinary users the technical point of view. They'd never understand. "It saves energy" is something we all understand so we tell 'm exactly that. From a technical point of view it is all about being more efficient with resources and that gives you better performance and saves more energy. No matter how you look at it, someone always gets it right. Pointing at someone and telling them they're wrong is rather silly. That was my entire point.

Now, can we move on from all the silly bickering?

@deviant well at least someone is using his brain and not falling for the marketing terminology

@leman: you are not understanding it because you haven't read my post. I urge you to read posts before replying to them... This isn't about App Nap doing one or the other, this is about you guys bickering over something rather silly.

 

[leman]

I don't understand why you are even arguing about it. IMO, KALLT is right on this one. App Nap is intended as a power-saving technique (sure, it saves resources in oder to save power, duh). The argument for this is very trivial: you will not have your active apps run any faster (measurably or have any more resources in their disposal. It is not a performance-enhancing technology. The only thing it does is prevent background apps from doing pointless work.

P.S. I am a programmer (among other things)

 

[Steve121178]

The dumbing down of OS X has finally gone too far. I actually can't use this for real work. Combine that with the inability to adjust that bad joke known as translucency to prevent the obvious visual problems it causes some users and I'd have to say the degradation of the OS continues.

I think OS X is fine for casual use (surfing, messing around with photos & other media stuff) and OS X can be used by anyone who uses Microsoft Office for a living, but OS X is tailored for the consumer.

Windows 10 blows OS X out of the water. Microsoft have released an OS that looks like it's from 2015. OS X still looks, works & functions like it's still 2005. Each iteration of OS X over the last 4/5 years has just bolted more and more stuff onto it's creaking foundations. Microsoft were brave and got a lot wrong with Windows 8 but you could see the direction they were going in. Windows 10 is the result of some forward thinking and learning from mistakes. It's brilliant. OS X is merely adequate.

 

[cube]

deleted

 

[Ebenezum]

With all due respect, gestures is one of the best thing that ever happened to desktop operating systems. It (and things like the new pressure sensitive touch) adds a truly useful dimension to computer interaction, unlike nonsense such as touch screens and the like. I don't even want to remember how it was to read PDFs before gestures. Also don't understand what's bad about App Store. Its a very convenient and user-friendly way to purchase and install software. Not to mention a secure one. Certainly beats using dozens of web stores or physical media. It doesn't have an uninstaller because uninstalling applications on OS X is as simple as deleting a file in Finder

This article points out worst problems, while its written in 2011 most of it is still relevant: http://lifehacker.com/5726764/why-the-mac-app-store-sucks

I give up on App Store years ago because 1. Its simply too expensive to purchase new versions of software without discount (which isn't possible in App Store) 2. Most of the software I need isn't in the App Store because its artificial limitations (SuperDuper is one example) 3. There is no way to test software first, I am not going to purchase something without testing it! 4. Search is useless.

In surface App Store is a good idea, in practice it needs serious improvements before I consider using it again.

Most cases deleting only application itself leaves most of the files intact, usually its not a problem but some software creates large amount of support files which add up in time.

 

[Jennism]

I'm still discovering handy little things that even the "average user" could appreciate (like holding the option key while dragging to copy or holding command to move it across volumes).

These are not readily apparent and most users won't know to google it. I leaned dozens of neat tricks browsing this forum, but how many Mac users actually browse here?

This same functionality exists on Windows too. Or at least it did back when I had Win XP, before converting to Mac. It doesn't work exactly the same as the buttons are differently named, but mostly. A lot of shortcuts are similar too. Such as Copy and Paste, just use Command on Mac instead.

It wasn't a difficult switch. I discovered it a bit different or tricky to modify the visual system or other things, which I insist on doing as I get bored of the same folder icons and such. Overall, yeah it's a bit more of a challenge to modify the system in advanced ways compared what I used to know with Windows. It also prevents you from screwing up your system easier. As you must research and learn before making system changes. It's better to be educated then just changing things up without knowing what you are actually doing.

Another thing is that my iMac computer has outlasted 2 of my moms laptops. I've been trying to get her to switch for a while. Windows requires way too much personal maintenance; needs anti-virus and malware software and so much more. Now after her last laptop died she is considering a mac. As her two dead laptops cost about the same as my still working smoothly iMac.

I've learned a lot these past years about my Mac. I'm only recently learning the interesting Automator. It has the ability to do so much. Its been around a while and doesn't get much current attention as all the new and updated features. It was just one of those apps I was ignorant of for so long.

Keep learning about your system. Its fun. I've been a mac user for 4 years now and I absolutely love it. Still have more to learn to make my system 'mine.' Not only that, I can prevent my kids from screwing it up constantly like they did my old Windows machine.

 

[nefan65]

I think OS X is fine for casual use (surfing, messing around with photos & other media stuff) and OS X can be used by anyone who uses Microsoft Office for a living, but OS X is tailored for the consumer.

Windows 10 blows OS X out of the water. Microsoft have released an OS that looks like it's from 2015. OS X still looks, works & functions like it's still 2005. Each iteration of OS X over the last 4/5 years has just bolted more and more stuff onto it's creaking foundations. Microsoft were brave and got a lot wrong with Windows 8 but you could see the direction they were going in. Windows 10 is the result of some forward thinking and learning from mistakes. It's brilliant. OS X is merely adequate.

Completely subjective statements/comments.

 

[Traverse]

Another thing is that my iMac computer has outlasted 2 of my moms laptops. I've been trying to get her to switch for a while. Windows requires way too much personal maintenance; needs anti-virus and malware software and so much more. Now after her last laptop died she is considering a mac. As her two dead laptops cost about the same as my still working smoothly iMac.

I've learned a lot these past years about my Mac. I'm only recently learning the interesting Automator.

One thing that annoys me with Windows is that every time I boot it up it has ANOTHER update and needs to restart. I mean, I'm glad Microsoft pays so much attention, and the argument could be made that Apple is too slow, but my goodness that gets old.

I was using a Mac for about a year before I starting using automator. I've created custom applications that I can laugh via Spotlight to quit all apps, open apps that I resize using Moom, combine PDFs, advanced renaming.

 

[BradHatter]

App Nap is not an energy saving feature and never meant to be one; there is no link whatsoever between App Napp and energy at all. App Nap is one of the many features that were meant to improve resource management without requiring any action or input from either the user or the programmer. It allows the OS to better manage the available resources. What it does is free up resources by putting (running) apps you haven't used for a while into a lower state or even close it. This is one of the features that came from iOS which is run on devices with very low resources.

In some cases App Nap has a negative effect. When running simulations you want to do this in the background while you do something else. Unfortunately due to the simulation being in the background it may get less resources appointed to it which means the simulation will take longer. That's why some apps don't use App Nap and why you can disable it (select the app in /Applications, Get Info, "prevent App Nap").

Or in other words: you are no better than the person you are accusing. Both of you have some homework to do!


I wouldn't want it to work like a computer or any other sort of device. What I want is an OS that allows for an efficient workflow suited for that device. In some ways the gestures do just that because I can now do a bit more with the mouse. When you use a tablet from Wacom the added gestures make things a lot easier and quicker to do. You can now easily switch between pen, scroll and zoom modes. Still, you can use the keyboard for these things as well so if you are only typing (or are typing for the most part) then this makes navigating things easier. There is a very good reason why a lot of modern advanced text editors (Atom, Brackets, Visual Studio Code, Sublime Text, etc.) use the very same mode we've come to known from the old and famous advanced text editors vi/ViM and Emacs.

Btw, most of the iOS features can be disabled so it's not that much of a problem either.

I got my info about App Nap from Apple:

http://www.apple.com/ca/osx/advanced-technologies/

See the "App Nap" section.

The problem with App Nap isn't App Nap itself, it's people's unawareness of it and what it can do to a running application that's not configured.

 

[Jennism]

One thing that annoys me with Windows is that every time I boot it up it has ANOTHER update and needs to restart. I mean, I'm glad Microsoft pays so much attention, and the argument could be made that Apple is too slow, but my goodness that gets old.

Oh I forgot about that! I hated it too! It was constant and not just for Windows, but when you updated or installed ANY program for the matter. Mac updates require restarts too, but they are far in between. And I don't think I've ever needed to restart the Mac for installing a new app, aside from system app updates like iTunes or something. Oh the things I've chosen to forget as things are so much easier. But I still remember the dreaded defrag that took HOURS. I'd heard that its better now, but just don't care anymore. Beyond over it.

Only thing I've run into recently that is annoying is that I've been looking for at home work from my computer as I'm now recently a stay at home mom. Lots of at home customer service jobs that require only Windows, such as LiveOps. So annoying. I'd rather not have to install Windows on my machine and severely compromise its security. Still looking for at home computer jobs where I can still use my Mac. You'd think that these companies would realize that Mac systems are highly popular these days. We don't live in a solely Windows world anymore.

 

[fisherking]

I think OS X is fine for casual use (surfing, messing around with photos & other media stuff) and OS X can be used by anyone who uses Microsoft Office for a living, but OS X is tailored for the consumer.

Windows 10 blows OS X out of the water. Microsoft have released an OS that looks like it's from 2015. OS X still looks, works & functions like it's still 2005. Each iteration of OS X over the last 4/5 years has just bolted more and more stuff onto it's creaking foundations. Microsoft were brave and got a lot wrong with Windows 8 but you could see the direction they were going in. Windows 10 is the result of some forward thinking and learning from mistakes. It's brilliant. OS X is merely adequate.

and what about people who work in final cut, logic X (i do); photoshop on the mac? illustrator? i know lots of 'pros' who do 'pro' work on their macs. it's an old, and as always, pointless argument (the 'mac vs pc' thing). work is work, and if you're getting your work done, the platform is not important.

 

[darkrabbit]

I think OS X is fine for casual use (surfing, messing around with photos & other media stuff) and OS X can be used by anyone who uses Microsoft Office for a living, but OS X is tailored for the consumer.

Windows 10 blows OS X out of the water. Microsoft have released an OS that looks like it's from 2015. OS X still looks, works & functions like it's still 2005. Each iteration of OS X over the last 4/5 years has just bolted more and more stuff onto it's creaking foundations. Microsoft were brave and got a lot wrong with Windows 8 but you could see the direction they were going in. Windows 10 is the result of some forward thinking and learning from mistakes. It's brilliant. OS X is merely adequate.

Exactly true. It's not even close. It's the little things. Finder is just the worst file manager ever, OSX still crashes due to software issues (which no modern OS that allocates memory and abstracts hardware properly should), starting programs is MUCH slower, video is choppy sometimes, connecting to networked shares is an arduous exercise, even connecting a projector is hit and miss... the list goes on.

I have Windows 10 running on a Lenovo T440s right beside me that has half the hardware of this MBP and performance / stability wise it just wastes OSX. And I don't have to buy file managers or anything for it because Explorer actually works well. Their own browser doesn't cause a kernel panic either. I just recovered from one a few hours ago on OSX (Yosemite). I expect another in the next day or so.

OSX is probably good for certain niche functionality like video or photo editing, and casual users like you said, but you're right it's a consumer OS. For work / corporate use that doesn't involve graphic design, OSX is beyond useless. VMware Fusion with Windows 10 helps a lot though.

It sucks too, because Apple makes the best hardware. The best by FAR. If they could only get the OS right... but I think Apple has their heads too far up their own ass to make some real changes.

 

[petvas]

I am not sure I can follow you here, but for me OS X is much better than Windows. I am saying that as someone that has been working in the IT industry as a Microsoft specialist since 1993..
Each OS has its own pros and contras, so there will never be a global, universal truth. For you Windows is much better, but for me OS X is much better.
OS X has still a Unix kernel and power users can still use the command line. Of course Apple is trying to make things easier for consumers, and sometimes the line between that and making pro users happy is lost. If you have a look at the changes in OS X the last three years, we have gotten power features and a lot of optimizations in the background.
I agree on the Finder though, I prefer Windows Explorer as a file manager in general, but this is not a reason for me to go back to Windows. I just prefer the way OS X works and looks. I love that apps cannot make the OS run slower, and I love the trackpad gestures, the deep integration of iCloud into the OS and many many other things.
OS X is not perfect and it will never be, as it is being made by humans..

 

[bax2003]

My recent experience with DP4 and DP5:
Mac Pro (Late 2013) GPU (Driver) Issues

 

[dyn]

The problem with App Nap isn't App Nap itself, it's people's unawareness of it and what it can do to a running application that's not configured.

Exactly. It can have a negative effect on performance but you can easily prevent this by disabling App Nap for that particular app. Too bad many people don't know this as well as how to do it (retrieve properties of app and tick the "prevent App Nap" box).

OSX is probably good for certain niche functionality like video or photo editing, and casual users like you said, but you're right it's a consumer OS. For work / corporate use that doesn't involve graphic design, OSX is beyond useless. VMware Fusion with Windows 10 helps a lot though.

Yet there are many businesses that have build their business around OS X. Not to mention the scientific world that uses Linux and OS X extensively. Windows is very out of place in that world. You want to do some number crunching, statistics, graphics, automation and so on then you can't get around OS X and Linux. Windows doesn't even come into play here. Yes it now has Powershell but take a look at the scripts...my goodness, never have I seen that lengthy commands and parameters that go with it. What on earth were they thinking?!

Both Windows, OS X and Linux have their uses and place

 

[petvas]

Windows Powershell is very powerful and is really great. Windows admins didn't really have a good scripting environment for many many years..

 

[deviant]

I don't understand why you are even arguing about it. IMO, KALLT is right on this one. App Nap is intended as a power-saving technique (sure, it saves resources in oder to save power, duh). The argument for this is very trivial: you will not have your active apps run any faster (measurably or have any more resources in their disposal. It is not a performance-enhancing technology. The only thing it does is prevent background apps from doing pointless work.

P.S. I am a programmer (among other things)

from Apple
" App Nap conserves valuable battery life by slowing the app down"
Why do we even have it on desktops then? Don't tell me to save money on electricity bill because that is just laughable.

 

[leman]

from Apple
" App Nap conserves valuable battery life by slowing the app down"
Why do we even have it on desktops then? Don't tell me to save money on electricity bill because that is just laughable.

Because its a part of the OS. Of course it makes much less sence on desktop! a lot of optimizations in OS X are for laptops which is not surprising given that most Macs out there have batteries.

 

[Steve121178]

Each OS has its own pros and contras, so there will never be a global, universal truth. For you Windows is much better, but for me OS X is much better.
OS X has still a Unix kernel and power users can still use the command line.

Umm, Windows Server Core? PowerShell?? If you worked as a Microsoft Specialist then by default you would have been running commands all day long.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Windows 10 blows OS X out of the water. Microsoft have released an OS that looks like it's from 2015. OS X still looks, works & functions like it's still 2005. Each iteration of OS X over the last 4/5 years has just bolted more and more stuff onto it's creaking foundations. Microsoft were brave and got a lot wrong with Windows 8 but you could see the direction they were going in. Windows 10 is the result of some forward thinking and learning from mistakes. It's brilliant. OS X is merely adequate.

I will take the cleaner look of OS X over the hot looking mess that is Windows 10. Brillant? Far from it.