I don't wan't OSX to be like iOS.

[r0k]

Wait, why would you need new hardware? I just installed Lion on my late '08 MacBook and I'm planning to do the same with Mountain Lion. Granted, I got a RAM upgrade after installing Lion, but that was necessary since Snow Leopard and probably just a sign of me using my Mac differently than I did my PC, with lots of open apps at once.

As for the dozens of pages of not-automatically-ordered apps and the sandboxing, I'm pretty sure that's not how it'll work - you can still keep your old ways of accessing apps, no need for using Launchpad, and the shared file system isn't going anywhere either.

I agree that I don't have to use Launchpad. That's not an issue for me. I'm safely ignoring it now on Lion.

I upgraded 3 Mac minis to 2 GB of RAM in order to install Lion. These upgrades were relatively modest cost but I really should be able to get a few years' use without breaking out the checkbook again. This time I can't "upgrade" I must replace the machines and the old ones will have diminished value just like the pre-intel Macs began to have diminished value when Snow Leopard came out. In my case, I foolishly invested in SSD drives for the minis I upgraded and now I'll probably never recover the extra money I spent as those computers are rendered undesirable because they won't support Mountain Lion. I also upgraded my Macbook with a hybrid SSD and 4GB of RAM. I didn't have to in order to run Lion but I'd like to enjoy more than a year of ability to run the latest OS after spending over a hundred bucks per machine on upgrades whether they were necessary to run Lion (in the case of my older Intel minis) or not (in the case of my Macbook).

Apple practically has a license to print money these days so having two waves of "hardware bullying" only one year apart sounds almost Microsoft-like. I'd like to see an analysis of the issue that requires the GMA3100 chipset to be excluded from being able to run Mountain Lion. A small voice suggests to me this is more about pushing hardware sales than performance.

 

[DeckMan]

I'd like to see an analysis of the issue that requires the GMA3100 chipset to be excluded from being able to run Mountain Lion.

Oh okay, I just found out about that. I don't get that either. I hope there's some reason for it and it's not just to get people to buy new Macs.
That being said, since my MacBook is the oldest one that supports Mountain Lion, I'm afraid I likely won't be able to install OS X 10.9 Ocelot (or OS XI Velociraptor) on it..

 

[maflynn]

I agree that I don't have to use Launchpad. That's not an issue for me. I'm safely ignoring it now on Lion.

If managed, I think LaunchePad can be a useful tool. The problem is that apple does not give us the tools to manage it. I found some scripts to delete all the apps in launchpad and I only added a handful of apps I frequently use. These apps didn't make it into the dock but I use them enough that its helpful to have them in Launchpad.

I'm having disk issues that is preventing me from install ML on my computer as I'm in the middle of doing some backups right now, so I cannot comment on how Mountain Lion handles LaunchPad.

 

[Chris230291]

I dont mind the features, but i hate how they're making them look alike. I preferred Snow Leopard and how it looked.

You might be able to ignore features like launchpad, but i dont want that pointless ******** clogging up my computers. It looks tacky as **** (i really hate the folders) and is useless. :/

Apple need to leave iOS on iPhones and go back to making good stuff. The only reason im on lion is for compatibility, i pirated it anyways (**** you apple )

 

[r0k]

If managed, I think LaunchePad can be a useful tool. The problem is that apple does not give us the tools to manage it. I found some scripts to delete all the apps in launchpad and I only added a handful of apps I frequently use. These apps didn't make it into the dock but I use them enough that its helpful to have them in Launchpad.

I'm having disk issues that is preventing me from install ML on my computer as I'm in the middle of doing some backups right now, so I cannot comment on how Mountain Lion handles LaunchPad.

I wouldn't mind one bit if we could use finder to manage Launchpad. Moving apps into folders /Applications would make them show up in folders in launchpad. Moving apps into a folder called /Applications/hide would cause them to be omitted from Launchpad but you could still run them from Finder or Spotlight.

I think adding a layer of "meta data" (that is created and stored "somewhere" when you drag things around in Launchpad) when you already have a file system to manage apps is beginning to diverge from common sense. It seems that Apple is losing sight of the power of the Unix OS that sits underneath OSX and is relying too heavily on proprietary metadata rather than taking advantage of the filesystem as it exists today. One huge annoyance for me is the creation of .ds_store files. I really should be able to shut this off not only on network drives but on local folders as well. Piling layers upon layers of meta data and band aid dot files (like the ones that contain a tiny time machine backup for versions every file you touch) will ultimately slow down the OS. First with .ds_store, then with LaunchPad and now with .versions files Apple seems to be making war on the Unix filesystem and end users are the ones that stand to lose the battle if this goes unchecked.

 

[miraclehobo]

I just want to hear what others think cause this has been gnawing at me. I'm not really enjoying the idea that OSX is being converted to be more like iOS. I like the iOS system, but I think OSX should be one thing and iOS should be another and not copies, which is what it seems like their doing with Mountain Lion. I want to go on my computer and feel like I'm on a computer, not a big iPad.

Wow if something like this "gnaws" at you, think you need to get a better life man. Get some real concerns and stop whining.

 

[grrrz]

Yep don't like where it is going either, with gatekeeper and everything.
Don't like Iphone/Ipad and apple's closed policy around it,
don't want my mac to become a game boy.
Too bad linux is still not a good alternative for my usage.
Still have snow leopard with very new macbook pro.
To be fair the option to choose different applications sources exists also in ubuntu (the repository system was the first "apps" system), you have to manually allow "other sources" for applications in the ui (can do anything in terminal anyway). same for android.

 

[r0k]

Yep don't like where it is going either, with gatekeeper and everything.
Don't like Iphone/Ipad and apple's closed policy around it,
don't want my mac to become a game boy.
Too bad linux is still not a good alternative for my usage.
Still have snow leopard with very new macbook pro.
To be fair the option to choose different applications sources exists also in ubuntu (the repository system was the first "apps" system), you have to manually allow "other sources" for applications in the ui (can do anything in terminal anyway). same for android.

I stopped using Ubuntu because I stopped using my Acer Netbook when I got my iPad. If I can't put ML on my old Macs and if I can't get good money for them if I sell them, perhaps I'll wind up loading Ubuntu on them one of these days.

Edit: I just noticed an article on MR front page saying that Apple sold more iOS devices in 2011 than they sold Macs in 30 years. Apple sold 156 million iOS devices in 2011 while they only sold 122 million Macs in 30 years. So while I might not be happy about OSX looking more and more like iOS, I can't blame Apple for following the money right now.

 

[holden57]

First with .ds_store, then with LaunchPad and now with .versions files Apple seems to be making war on the Unix filesystem and end users are the ones that stand to lose the battle if this goes unchecked.

Can you explain what you mean by this? This is an honest question too.

 

[motorazr]

i have yet to see anything thats bad thats being put into OS X from iOS. in fact i've really enjoyed Lion so far and can't wait for Mountain Lion.

I suppose nothing "bad" has come, minus a lack of some preferences here and there, or the ability to use "save as" quickly... but the app launch panel is more or less useless ... its just something pretty to look at. Why not just spotlight the name of your app in a second? Or open the applications folder? Or have an applications stack in the dock..?

Also, the scroll bars being gone from normal visibility is annoying on occasion when you need to grab them (as in, when a program has control of the mouse scrolling behavior on the web and you need to click and drag past a point ... good luck. you'll need to use the arrows to scroll and then you have a limited time to grab the bar. Or when you're on a HUGE page... do you really want to keep hitting space and risk missing something? Or how about scroll with inertia over and over ... it's easier to just grab and scroll at your pace, sometimes..

 

[maflynn]

Yep don't like where it is going either, with gatekeeper and everything.

I think the writing was on the wall, the instant apple announced the Mac Application store. They could not very well lock down the OS on day one, but now over time, they're making it quite obvious that if you want an app, it really needs to be coming from the MAS.

 

[dugbug]

I can't complain about ML but lets be fair and step back to look at some legit gripes about lion and the 'new apple' os x stuff that sort of built up this iOS reaction:

• A strange out of place address book.
• Launchpad. Why. God why.
• airport utility. All the useful signal charts are gone and we get a strange stark big picture of the earth and a line, and then your router. Really. This is taking the worst of the windows 7 networking dialog and making it your primary interface.
• Inverted scrolling (er. "natural" scrolling). Surprisingly I prefer it on trackpads now, but its jarring going back to a pc. Apple has balls man

Those have spurred countless blog articles about their out of place feel on a mac.

But then lion brought these and they greatly outweigh the iOS-ification:

• File versions. Freaking amazing. Beautifully done, and the reason we upgraded (I just wish Xcode integrated with file versioning).
• Finder merge vs copy
• Mission Control and full screen apps. Anyone still miss spaces?

Im not seeing where ML has demoted anything Mac-ish Lion didn't already chip away at. The additions seem nice and lion as a serious platform has been wonderful. I think once we see it in a household working hand in hand with the owner's iPad we will get the direction apple is headed.

Just get rid of launchpad lol.

 

[boilingpoint]

(Mountain) Lion is not for Mac but for possibly future iPad running it. Think about dropping Mac from its name.

If you are a Mac user, SL is the best OS for your Mac.

Apple should make future OSX to 1) support both mobile(like in * Lion) and desktop(like in * Leopard) mode, and 2) switch its operation mode between modes as user wants.

 

[rprebel]

Screw this, I'm going back to System 7.

 

[PlaceofDis]

i really don't understand the hate for launchpad. if you don't like it you don't have to use it, but i find having it set to a hot corner or gesture makes it incredibly easy to use. i hated navigating though the finder and a stack was a pain too. things feel more organized to me now.

 

[dugbug]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

i really don't understand the hate for launchpad. if you don't like it you don't have to use it, but i find having it set to a hot corner or gesture makes it incredibly easy to use. i hated navigating though the finder and a stack was a pain too. things feel more organized to me now.

As a favorites container launched by gesture that's good. But organizing by the whole wiggly icon and dragging from page to page is odd don't you think?

 

[stewacide]

Really starting to worry that ML will go too far in terms of automatic no-opt-out hand holding - versions, restore states, forced app store, etc. - and force me to give up on OSX (which I've used happily since the beginning) in order to remain productive and keep my hair. Linux increasingly seems like the best option for anyone who knows how a computer works and doesn't need the OS second-guessing everything they do.

 

[rorschach]

Really starting to worry that ML will go too far in terms of automatic no-opt-out hand holding - versions, restore states, forced app store, etc. - and force me to give up on OSX (which I've used happily since the beginning) in order to remain productive and keep my hair. Linux increasingly seems like the best option for anyone who knows how a computer works and doesn't need the OS second-guessing everything they do.

ML is actually a step away from a "forced App Store" model by giving users more control over the apps that are allowed to run.

 

[dugbug]

Really starting to worry that ML will go too far in terms of automatic no-opt-out hand holding - versions, restore states, forced app store, etc. - and force me to give up on OSX (which I've used happily since the beginning) in order to remain productive and keep my hair. Linux increasingly seems like the best option for anyone who knows how a computer works and doesn't need the OS second-guessing everything they do.

Linux!??? God thats like eating sand

There have been a few good articles on Gatekeeper, which I think is one of your main concerns (and a curiosity of mine). Ill point you to a good one:
http://www.macworld.com/article/165408/2012/02/mountain_lion_hands_on_with_gatekeeper.html

To the end user Its nothing more than a one-time dialog the first time you run an app almost identical to the 'you sure? this was downloaded from the internet!' one we have now. Far from a forced app store

 

[heimbachae]

i know what OS 10.9 will be called

 

[brdeveloper]

If Apple does it right, iOSX on Macs will look like iOS and work like OSX.

On the other hand, iOSX on tablets and phones will look like iOS and work like a jailed OSX without all the BSD support tools and not allowing installation of non-signed apps.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Really starting to worry that ML will go too far in terms of automatic no-opt-out hand holding - versions, restore states, forced app store, etc. - and force me to give up on OSX (which I've used happily since the beginning) in order to remain productive and keep my hair. Linux increasingly seems like the best option for anyone who knows how a computer works and doesn't need the OS second-guessing everything they do.

I'd contend that you don't know how your computer works and that your desire to manage everything is born from the same desire that manager have to micromanage their underlings. At some point you have to trust the computer to do what it's told and move on to other areas that you can be productive in.

Part of what we bring as intelligent being is the ability to know when the tool in our hand is "better" than what we bring.

Honestly if Linux was a great OS it would be dominant.

 

[Lonectzn]

I really don't like it.

Not because of the things they've added, but because of the things they keep ignoring.

Apple seem to be showing no interest in making OS X a productive operating system on screens 15 inches and above. They have some great features for smaller screens - I would even say they have the best operating system for resolutions 1440x900 and smaller.

However, on large resolutions OS X falls behind. It doesn't scale well, and does nothing to support multitasking, in fact most of the recent enhancements have been to support single task workflows on small screens. There's something comical about seeing launchpad on a 27 inch imac stretch itself across the screen with huge icons, or the ridiculous amount of wasted space in safari full screen mode.

In this regard, Windows 7 is far better. For screens 1920x1080 and above it is light years ahead of OS X, especially when considered for productivity features and multitasking. Windows and Linux get a lot more airtime on my 27 inch iMac, just because how bad OS X is at that resolution.

It's just disappointing to me that Apple aren't showing an interest in catching up.

 

[KnightWRX]

I really don't like it.

Not because of the things they've added, but because of the things they keep ignoring.

Apple seem to be showing no interest in making OS X a productive operating system on screens 15 inches and above. They have some great features for smaller screens - I would even say they have the best operating system for resolutions 1440x900 and smaller.

However, on large resolutions OS X falls behind. It doesn't scale well, and does nothing to support multitasking, in fact most of the recent enhancements have been to support single task workflows on small screens. There's something comical about seeing launchpad on a 27 inch imac stretch itself across the screen with huge icons, or the ridiculous amount of wasted space in safari full screen mode.

In this regard, Windows 7 is far better. For screens 1920x1080 and above it is light years ahead of OS X, especially when considered for productivity features and multitasking. Windows and Linux get a lot more airtime on my 27 inch iMac, just because how bad OS X is at that resolution.

It's just disappointing to me that Apple aren't showing an interest in catching up.

Uh ? OS X works great on my 2048x1156 monitor. I can multi-task just fine on it, in fact, with that resolution, it's easy to have windows sitting next to each other. Not to mention using my MBA's internal screen as a 2nd monitor, I can display even more stuff all at the same time, organize my workflow by desktops (Xcode and documentation on desktop 2, browser and media on desktop 1, graphic and design tools on desktop 3) and switching between them is easy with the new gestures, or good old CMD->arrow.

 

[waynep]

I really don't like it.

Not because of the things they've added, but because of the things they keep ignoring.

Apple seem to be showing no interest in making OS X a productive operating system on screens 15 inches and above. They have some great features for smaller screens - I would even say they have the best operating system for resolutions 1440x900 and smaller.

However, on large resolutions OS X falls behind. It doesn't scale well, and does nothing to support multitasking, in fact most of the recent enhancements have been to support single task workflows on small screens. There's something comical about seeing launchpad on a 27 inch imac stretch itself across the screen with huge icons, or the ridiculous amount of wasted space in safari full screen mode.

In this regard, Windows 7 is far better. For screens 1920x1080 and above it is light years ahead of OS X, especially when considered for productivity features and multitasking. Windows and Linux get a lot more airtime on my 27 inch iMac, just because how bad OS X is at that resolution.

It's just disappointing to me that Apple aren't showing an interest in catching up.

You gotta be joking? I have a 17" MBP at 1920x1200. It's great on that size screen. I can have side by side windows. Yes some apps are not made to be full screen with that much resolution. Web sites are not optimized for a 1920 pixel wide window . . They are made for half that so yes, Safari will have white space around the web page. It's the web page design, not that safari does not scale . . . Launchpad? Yea the icons are bigger than a iPad . . so what? Launchpad icon size is not an indication of scaling well . . that's just nit picking about little things that are not that important.

It's about working and getting my tasks done. I put Safari on the left, Mail on the right and everything else is sitting hidden behind those two unless I am actively working on something else.