They re-write many apps every few years as part of their major design changes. These re-writes inevitably introduce lots of little bugs in uncommon workflows, and they often jettison whole features like AppleScript integration that cause real problems with users. They then spend a couple of years fixing the worst of these bugs, and things die down. Until the next UI-driven re-write.
I will admit they change and depreciate APIs like crazy, but do you have any examples of features or AppleScript being jettisoned that were not fixed? The issue that stands out to me was the once in 17 year 2019 cut-off for 32 bit apps with a lacking Quicktime X and Final Cut X, but even then the plan then was to get everything back up to snuff quickly.
I read a Gruber article recently that when Messages went Catalyst he had no issues with his AppleScript at all.
Because there are so many bugs that it makes me wonder if Apple Execs ever use their own software.
For example, on MacOS, you can set an app to be on all spaces. But on reboot, despite that setting, it will stick to a single space, until you relaunch the app. It has been this way for 4-5 major OS versions.
Well, if you're asking if apple execs use that setting, the answer is probably that they don't.
I think the issue is that there are SO many piled up little features everywhere that SOMEone is using that keeping everything working while making any changes at all is very difficult.
I am a fan of more wood behind fewer swings. Don't add something like spaces unless you think you've got something so good that you are confident that it will be the common path.
It's all been downhill since snow leopard IMO. Maybe I've just become cynical and jaded over the years, but I don't remember the last time I was excited for a new OS feature. Meanwhile the UX gets worse and worse with every new release. e.g. Tahoes janky corners, the dumbed down System Preferences app, random bugs that apple hasn't fixed for years, etc
When was the last time you used the clusterf* that is iTunes on windows?
Or more generically answer the question: how can I get an arbitrary audio file into my iTunes music? (hint: good luck)
Music 'synced' with iTunes but not appearing on my other devices? There must be some kind of arbitrary difference between 'synced with iTunes' and 'synced with iCloud'. I guarantee this is some kind of (barely) maintained legacy syncing to keep the iTunes workflow alive specifically so Apple can avoid giving users a modern 'import to my cloud library' feature.
Ssh server doesn't make sense for an iPhone. How would that even work? It wouldn't be able to do anything or be a worse experience than something properly designed for the user rather than trying to force a 50 year old computing model onto a phone.
You say this matter of factly and yet I've seen countless people talk about using termux more than a desktop shell.
Maybe iPhone is different but most phones you can connect a keyboard to, making the shell pretty usable. Not my cup of tea but I have tried it. I'm still holding out on the dream that a good Linux phone might exist one day.
In the grand scheme of things very little people use Termux on Android out of the billions of people who use Android. Additionally Termux's design is not aligned with Android's app model which has caused many headaches for them. Trying to force a terminal to exist on a phone is possible but it is being forced and is not a natural product that would exist if one was trying to design the best user experience.
I’ve heard this but it doesn’t make much sense to me. People see the shit software, and they think “Apple software is shit.” I don’t think they think “This software is only shit because I’m on Windows, I better switch to Mac and run (basically) the same software there.”
The first thing I thought when I read the abstract of the underlying paper was that this sounds like "model collapse" at the society level.
I don't feel super confident that we'll "soon" find ourselves in a world where there is no variance left in thought (would that be the net effect of total model/epistemic collapse?), though if you do accept that there could be any loss of variance due to AI, perhaps it's not unreasonable to consider how much and how quickly could this happen?
All this is by way of saying, I don't think it's wrong to ask these kinds of questions and think deeply about the consequences of societal shifts like this.
Just because someone lets the electrician (LinkedIn) into their home (browser) doesn't mean they can do whatever the hell they want that isn't expressly prohibited. If the electrician wants to rifle through my desk drawers, they should ask for permission, and I will politely tell them to leave.
To this day, I wonder if Google knew that they couldn't be the ones to unleash AI unto the world. They clearly had the wherewithal and expertise to do it (Vaswani et al, 2017), but were under so much antitrust pressure at the time that it seemed inconceivable that they could be the ones to introduce such a polarizing technology to the world. What kind of firestorm would have rained down on them if they were the first.
Or, you might think, if Google had the technology, and they knew how to turn it into a trillion-dollar product, it's beyond ridiculous to think they would just hand the win over to someone else.
I think they just saw it as slop, they were working to make it more reliable and accurate. Releasing it first would tarnish their name, it just wasn't ready. OpenAI had no name to tarnish, so people were more willing to deal with the subpar experience as they refine it.
reply