> I am not suggesting Apple has fallen behind Windows or Android. Changing a setting on Windows 11 can often involve a journey through three or four different interface designs, artifacts of half-implemented changes dating back to the last century. Whenever I find myself stuck outside of Appleland, I am eager to return “home,” flaws and all.
Hard agree with this. I sometimes have to boot up a windows laptop to play Minecraft with the kiddo, and it never stops reminding me how little I know about Windows now, how counter-intuitive everything is, how everything feels designed for a user whose mind I cannot comprehend.
I was fully braced for Windows 11 being awful when I installed it recently but that hasn't been my experience at all. If anything it's just a slightly more polished Windows 10.
Probably helps that I installed the IoT LTSC version, but still, apart from the task bar being stupidly in the middle (thankfully there's an option to move it to the left), I've had zero issues.
I even added a network printer and it found it quickly, and added it quickly and successfully, which is a feat I don't think I've seen happen on any OS ever.
The context menu is a clear improvement on the old one (which you can still get to with one click).
Except for when the placement of the icon strip with the trashcan symbol changes to the bottom of the context menu because of the location of the context menu on the screen. Bonkers. No idea why the UI committee would’ve okayed that one.
As someone who stopped using windows about 7 years ago, and only recently used it last weekend, my eyes probably glossed over the fact that some buttons were laid out
horizontally.
Also, every time you run something in Windows (whether it's part of the OS or an App) it can be a trip down memory lane, UI-wise. Oooh, this dialog is 2015 vintage! This dialog is styled like Windows 8! This one is from the XP era! Ohh, and that rarified dialog has controls that have not been changed since Windows 95!
If you want a super bad audio-related journey, try fixing external speakers connected to a Linux box. It's abysmal, and 99% of it can only be done via the CLI. Nothing wrong with that... but for something so normal I expected more ease-of-use.
I disagree with that. As an occasional user of MacOS, the new Settings app is quite bewildering. There are just as many dials as in Windows and sometimes requires a trip to ChatGPT.
And for reasons I don't understand, why is the window itself not resizable?
I'm a Windows fan (I actually really like 11) so I'm a bit biased, but I just dove back into macOS since 2014 and the settings app is truly terrible. The built in search barely works and the layout is so damn confusing. God forbid I install some remote desktop software, now I have to go to accessibility settings 5 simes and approve some permission that is strategically buried for only what I can tell as a way to thwart "normies" from enabling something via obfuscation.
It would be fine if the settings available were actually useful or at least could bring me to some tool that does it better. I get no meaningful report of what's eating my batter and why every time I open my MacBook it's dead. And if I want to change the actual resolution of my display I'm given just a list of scaling options pretending to be resolutions. Oh, want to set a specific resolution or refresh rate? You have to do some stupid kinger king foo of option control something _before_ you click on this dialog. I get the criticism about the Windows settings app and legacy power tools (I think this has largely been solved anyway), at least they exist and allow me some iota of control over my computer
It is resizable vertically but not horizontally as it doesn't make sense to resize the window horizontally considering the content of settings details panel (the right part of the settings window), you would end up with a lot of empty space if you were able to resize it horizontally.
You could say the same thing about the Windows Settings app, but it resizes in every way and it's very much size adaptable. In other words, UI components resize or become visible/invisible depending on the width.
Search feels to me like a good compromise between memorizing terminal commands (including the correct set of parameters to do what you want) and navigating through a UI to find what you're looking for.
Search is fine as a one-off thing, but if you repeatedly have to use search to find some common setting, that's a clear UX fail.
To be fair, it's hard to say whether the Settings app is more broken in Windows or macOS these days. I think I'd have to give the crown to macOS here on account of search itself being more broken.
Why is it a UI fail? Honestly search as the default way of going to settings is my favorite development in modern OS design, I no longer need to memorize 3-6 deep menu trees to find a trivial setting.
For example:
I prefer keeping my hands on the keyboard, and typing cmd+space followed by mouse is so much faster than finding the right pixels to click through in menu trees when I want to adjust my mouse sensitivity.
I didn't say that search itself is a UX fail. It's not; it's great!
The UI fail is if search is required to find the setting every time you need it, because categorization and/or navigation is broken otherwise.
As to keeping your hands on the keyboard, that's an argument for having proper keyboard support in any UI, complete with hotkeys and shortcuts. The big difference between these and search is that the former is (if properly done), consistent and predictable. So e.g. when the app adds new things in the future, your existing key sequences will still do the same thing they did before.
To take your specific examples, if I do Cmd+Space, "mouse", Enter on my system, it will bring up LinearMouse, not system mouse settings.
Disagree with this. I use the search for everything. It’s just so much quicker than even a well designed UI.
On my iphone, I have one page of apps, everything else in the app drawer, and use the search all the time. It often gets what I want in one or two chars.
then Mac fails as hard as windows. there’s a reason search exists in the settings app on both MacOS and iOS. and there are plenty of settings that require “default write …” or editing some plist file or worse
I admit I honestly have no idea where the system settings are located as I haven't pressed the start button in ages, but the same applies to MacOS as I would use spotlight there as well.
Using search as a UI means you can only find things that you know exist, but there are plenty of important settings that I've only discovered by actually navigating through the UI.
The point of this comment thread is that important Windows settings are scattered throughout many different interfaces beyond just the Settings app, and you can never be sure where to find what you're looking for, which results in a poor user experience. Off the top of my head, you have the Settings app, Control Panel, Device Manager, System Configuration, and Network and Sharing Center.
I recently discovered that I can change audio settings on a mac by using the opt+volume shortcut and it takes me directly to the sound panel. Now if I could only make it stay on the built-in microphone instead of always switching to the worse sounding airpods one.
> You can access most settings by Windows + "yourquery".
The search doesn't even work all the time. Sometimes it won't do fuzzy search, sometimes typing "bluetooth settings" will do a Bing search, some other time it will open a PDF, and so on.
It's fine if you stay away from the consumer releases. Windows 11 LTSC (based on 24H2) feels like windows 7. Most of the stuff you had to futz with powertoys and GPOs back then. That hasn't changed. I quite like it. It has been utterly boring compared to my recent Apple experiences.
I... think so? Whichever one works with Microsoft Realms, which is the $2/month solution I settled on after somewhat-getting a self hosted server to run for a little bit on my desktop.
I figured that I make a six-figure salary as a software developer, I can afford $2/month so that I don't have to fucking become a sysadmin for a game server my child depends on.
There are two editions, Java and Bedrock. Java is the original, available on PC and Mac, and supports programming-like technical play and mods. Bedrock is Microsoft’s reimplementation, available on all devices except Mac, and supports emotes and microtransactions. Other than that they’re largely the same game, and buying either gives you both versions. Realms supports both, but a server is one or the other, not both. There are also other managed hosting providers for Minecraft (both versions), but Realms is probably easier and cheaper for you. Java version has performance problems, but mostly because Microsoft’s code is inefficient, there are a few mods (also written in Java) that everybody uses to fix performance without affecting gameplay.
Hey, if we're already complaining about Microsoft products, can someone explain why the Bedrock and Java versions of Minecraft have not been made cross-compatible in the TEN YEARS since the Mojang acquisition?
(... speaking as another dad just trying to play with my kid.)
I’d imagine mostly due to a lack of incentive on microsoft’s part. Like minecraft is literally the biggest video game to ever exist with, making 2 entirely separate code bases work while keeping all the features the same and preserving compatibility with over a decades worth of mods just so the mostly separate java and bedrock communities can play with each other is just not worth the risk. So many people play minecraft in so many different ways means that making even minor changes in gameplay can be huge sources of controversy, let alone major infrastructure changes.
They still exist separately today because the modding scene is completely different for them. Minecraft Java is the original and has a huge modding community based on decompiling and patching the game. Those mods are all incompatible with Bedrock because Bedrock is a separate reimplementation of the game for performance or whatever.
What does cross compatible mean in this context? They are two different games written in two different languages. I mean, they look like they are the same game, but they are not. Making one compatible with the other is a Herculean task. If not impossible.
I'm talking about network compatibility, so that a Bedrock client can join a Java server and vice versa. It's clearly somewhat possible because GeyserMC[1] exists. It's just ridiculous that it's a third-party addon.
Every article about some issue with Apple MUST also include an anecdote about how you couldn't use Windows one time and how it's still worse than Mac.
It's the rule lest someone think you made a bad decision and you're regretting it. Even though it's an OS targeted for your grandmother, you must not let them see weakness.
At this point it's a joke. Either critique Apple or admit you can't without also bringing up some other OS. It's weird.
Hard agree with this. I sometimes have to boot up a windows laptop to play Minecraft with the kiddo, and it never stops reminding me how little I know about Windows now, how counter-intuitive everything is, how everything feels designed for a user whose mind I cannot comprehend.