Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Many are baffled that OS X is so popular among developers. Likewise, many OS X users don't understand why someone would deal with Linux on a laptop. Those who do this are committing the typical mind fallacy[1]. Not everyone has the same preferences. One might as well be confused that some people like vanilla more than chocolate.

I think many commenters in this thread could benefit from taking a step back and remembering just how unimportant this arguing is. Just use what you like and don't put-down others for using what they like.

1. http://lesswrong.com/lw/dr/generalizing_from_one_example/



Many are baffled that OS X is so popular among developers. . . I think many commenters in this thread could benefit from taking a step back and remembering just how unimportant this arguing is.

If you're someone who has taken an interest in making Linux a popular choice as a desktop OS, this subject is critically important. It's only natural to assume that one could learn a lot about what it takes to make a Unix-based operating system popular among desktop users by observing the example of the only Unix-based operating system to have become popular on the desktop market. Figuring out how it is that OS X is able to attract developers despite its (presumably) inferior developer experience is a closely related question.


Thanks for saying that. It's remarkable that so many writers will declare a subjective preference as if it were an objective fact ("$SOME_UI is so ugly!").

Although I also agree with "remembering just how unimportant this arguing is", I'll illustrate by providing a counterexample to the Fine Article's idea that OSX is "an aesthetically pleasing OS". My idea of an esthetically pleasing UI is one with text labels instead of icons, relatively direct access to all information and controls, and a lot less of the shiny accents, animations, forced mousing, and other decorative, annoying or obstructive junk.

I'd also like a laptop with the keyboard in front and the trackpad behind, but apparently I'm a freak or something.


> I'd also like a laptop with the keyboard in front and the trackpad behind, but apparently I'm a freak or something.

Like the Acer Aspire R7?

http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/31/4380132/acer-aspire-r7-rev...


Never thought about having they keyboard and trackpad switch places, but it surely sounds great in theory. (Well, only for those of us keyboard-centric users, anyway.)


I mentioned this somewhere else in this thread, but before touchpads, most laptops had either a nub (like the kind that Thinkpads still have today) or no mouse at all, and the keyboard was almost always on the lower edge. It really was great for typing.

http://oldcomputers.net/pics/ibm-thinkpad-750c.jpg

I wonder how feasible it would be to gut one of these things and update its internals (big fat battery and a small ARM SBC, maybe).


The keyboard resembles mechanical keys in my mind. A bit too thick of a machine, but otherwise looks more usable than what we have today.


FWIW, I agree with you on UI aesthetics. And I like the ThinkPad's TrackPoint better than trackpads.


I think a lot of it isn't actually genuine bewilderment. I've met developers who don't understand the point of a GUI when command line is "so much faster."


People that still use a PDP-11 I imagine.


when I was a kid I couldn't understand how people liked chocolate ice-cream. I was always amazed by my sister's tendency for chocolate. To me the taste was awful, while vanilla was awesome.

Genes... :-)




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: