> But the while time they are paying for the privilege of the wall garden
Again this could use further extrapolation, in vacuum I think we can agree a walled garden is worse for developers than an open platform (for users I'd say that balance is a lot less clear, but if I try to make that argument some folks completely lose it). But we don't live in a vacuum, so I'd say most developers who build for Apple platforms do so because they prefer the toolchain, and that trumps the value of an open platform for them. I used to develop for Apple platforms, and I still think the toolchain is better than anything else I've ever used, and it's not close (I like the debugger integration, the memory tools, and Instruments).
I mean "I don't like X because Y", if you just say categorically "I don't like anything they've done" it just makes you sound like your opinion is really an internal bias against the company, if you support it with evidence and examples, it makes your opinion sound considered.
If someone hands me an iPhone or Mac and asks me to try to do things I feel frustration.
Just rambling here: the navigation paradigms, where the settings are, the animations, cursors, the way the mouse accelerates, the keyboard shortcuts, the icons on windows, maximizing windows, the dock, navigating with Finder creates invisible files directories, the "drag to install" nonsense is one of the dumbest UX paradigms ever (I'm not being facetious).
I hope my random ramblings about things I don't assuages your feeling that I'm being inconsiderate. I'm sure there are people who love everything above and who think its perfect.
> If someone hands me an iPhone or Mac and asks me to try to do things I feel frustration.
Wouldn't this be true if you put anyone in front of an unfamiliar OS?
> Just rambling here: the navigation paradigms, where the settings are, the animations, cursors, the way the mouse accelerates, the keyboard shortcuts, the icons on windows, maximizing windows, the dock, navigating with Finder creates invisible files directories, the "drag to install" nonsense is one of the dumbest UX paradigms ever (I'm not being facetious).
I summarize most of these as "I don't like the feel of it" which is a straightforward matter of opinion, but that's a different statement then what we started with "I don't agree that they write good or intuitive (easiest to use) software, but that's just me." A statement like this would would also mean showing how another platform does it and demonstrating why that's better or more intuitive. But I guess if you had just said "I don't find their software good or intuitive", I wouldn't have bothered asking these questions. But then, per my first comment, I think if you out anyone in front of an unfamiliar OS and asked them to use it, it would literally take years of use before they'd have an opinion that's not biased based on their prior experience. This is why I don't comment much on how Linux or Windows do things, I just don't have the expertise to say whether their approach is better or worse.
One exception is keyboard bindings, because a lot of keyboard bindings come to macOS from Windows especially in the form of cross platform applications, and I've formed the opinion that Windows bindings are worse because of the over reliance on F-keys, which are too far from the homerow and not mmemonic. (This is an example of of what I mean about giving an example, and then a reason I think it's worse).
For the record I appreciate your responses, I'm being super pedantic here and you're putting up with it. I feel like, especially when it comes to Apple on HN, which makes people blood boil, it's so hard to figure what people are even talking about when they make their statements. I really think the model of supporting statements with reasoning makes the statements so much ire useful to read.
> Wouldn't this be true if you put anyone in front of an unfamiliar OS?
Not in the same way, but only since Apple is very popular, so it happens often (and Apple fans like to claim things like "the devices are far superior to competitors" which irks me a little, haha).
Sometimes Apple paradigms are just a little bit different than what I know well, which makes it even harder for me since the similarity can make me operate on autopilot, but my autopilot then steers me wrong. When things are drastically different its just a matter of learning (and probably forgetting, since I don't use Apple quite often enough) the new thing, which I usually find pretty unintuitive.
> I summarize most of these as "I don't like the feel of it"
I'd summarize all of them as "I don't like the feel of it".
> "I don't like the feel of it" which is a straightforward matter of opinion, but that's a different statement then what we started with "I don't agree that they write good or intuitive (easiest to use) software, but that's just me."
I really thought "I don't agree [...] but that's just me" would communicate that it's my straightforward matter of opinion.
> if you had just said "I don't find their software good or intuitive", I wouldn't have bothered asking these questions
You are just rephrasing what I said: "I don't agree that they write good or intuitive (easiest to use) software, but that's just me." is saying the same thing as "I don't find their software good or intuitive". Maybe I should work on my online communication skills.
> I really think the model of supporting statements with reasoning makes the statements so much ire useful to read.
I appreciate this.
On "polarizing" issues (to the HN crowd) like Apple, Rust, Blockchain, etc. I've discovered that supporting statements don't usually accomplish much, other than to bait commenters that want to defend a counterpoint without listening (I probably shouldn't have commented in the first place)
> You are just rephrasing what I said: "I don't agree that they write good or intuitive (easiest to use) software, but that's just me." is saying the same thing as "I don't find their software good or intuitive". Maybe I should work on my online communication skills.
Yeah I'm probably being too pedantic here, but to me "they don't write good or unintuitive software" means they should design their software differently (presuming you assume Apple values these things which I think they do), whereas "I don't find their software good or intuitive" means that you personally found their software difficult to use.
For example, I have over 10000 commits in my dotfiles, like I'm not a typical user, so for me whether I personally find their software good or intuitive isn't something I'd factor in to whether the software is good or intuitive for most users, because I personally am such an outlier from a typical user (which I also assume you, and most HN readers really, also are).
Saying statements like this without provide evidence or examples is pointless. E.G., have you read this article, do you disagree with it? https://daringfireball.net/2004/04/spray_on_usability
> But the while time they are paying for the privilege of the wall garden
Again this could use further extrapolation, in vacuum I think we can agree a walled garden is worse for developers than an open platform (for users I'd say that balance is a lot less clear, but if I try to make that argument some folks completely lose it). But we don't live in a vacuum, so I'd say most developers who build for Apple platforms do so because they prefer the toolchain, and that trumps the value of an open platform for them. I used to develop for Apple platforms, and I still think the toolchain is better than anything else I've ever used, and it's not close (I like the debugger integration, the memory tools, and Instruments).