So there's been a bit of a debate on tba and the Web in general on what people think about the Mac Platform. I think it's time I had a bit of a weigh-in, since I consider myself to be neither a normal computer user, nor a partial member of either side of the Mac vs. PC debate. My two cents worth is as follows: I will probably never buy a Mac. Nor will I ever buy a copy of Windows (but that's an entirely different matter). I think it's worth hearing my side of the story, because I, as a UNIX user, have an entirely different side to the story.

(tba and RSS feed readers will have to click the link to follow on (sorry!))



Let me begin by saying that I use a Mac regularly, at both the school I go to, and at the University where I have one class. I enjoy using the Mac - so don't take that I don't like the Mac, because I do - it's just that it doesn't suit me. Which leads me into the following question: Why will I never buy a Mac? I am a UNIX user, that's why. Now. If I were to leave it at that, the Mac Fanboys would be screaming that I have my head stuck in the '90s. But I don't. Granted. Mac OS X has a UNIX-based Kernel, and good support for a UNIX-like Userland. More on that later - I've just put that in there so that people will read the rest of this.

I expect the following things of a UNIX system for my general use on the Desktop:

1. The GUI Must be usable, but not restrictive (Mac OS X almost does the job well here, but not quite.)
2. There must be a consistent method for
i) User interface
ii) configuration/administration
3. The GUI must be be a secondary interface.

Now. I will put it to all of you that all three of those requirements are not covered by Windows, so I'll leave that one out of this debate. However, to the uninitated to my method of thinking, Mac does not fit these requirements either, but it requires a lot of explaining. So here goes.

1: The GUI Must be usable:
Mac OS X has the best graphical user interface on the market. Hands-down. Full-stop. Etc. Etc. Etc. Navigating the GUI is easy, for the most part intuitive, and is good to look at. Casual (primarily Mouse-using) users will love it. Now, let's look at it from my perspective. I use a Keyboard for about 70% of my general interaction with the computer - I will use Alt-Tab, I will use the keyboard shortcuts to navigate the menus, and I will fix my errors in typing using the arrow Keys. I am, however, not a fantastic typist, and although I can navigate a keyboard without looking at my fingers, I also tend to make a lot of mistakes. Sometimes, I won't notice it until I'm half-way through the line. This is where the Mac's GUI starts to restrict me. I Love the "Home" and "End" keys, which allow me to go to the beginning and ends of lines. This just doesn't happen in Safari. I either have to use the arrow keys, which are slow and inaccurate, or use the mouse, which is unproductive (by my definition of productivity). This is just one example of how the GUI restricts my use of the system. Granted, the Mouse is the primary way of most people using the system. But it isn't mine. And for as long as OS X restricts on my productivity, I won't use it as a primary system.

2i: There must be a consistent method for User Interface:
As I said before, if you want to use Macs with a UNIX user-space, you're quite welcome to. If I want to use an X app under Mac OS, I can use the terminal to launch it, like I would on my Debian System, and that's great. But if all I wanted to do was use UNIX-based applications, I'd buy myself a cheap PC box, thank you very much. No-one buys a Mac to run UNIX apps only. They buy it for Photoshop, Pro Tools - both of which are Mac OS native apps, and as such, cannot be properly launched via the UNIX terminal. I could, theoretically make my UNIX apps into dock shortcuts, and consistently use the GUI, but then this falls into the area of restriction again. (btw, I assume you can actually make your programs launch from the terminal, but they don't appear as UNIX-like commands. Use a proper UNIX, and you'll know what I mean). Just to make things clear, I don't like being restricted to the GUI, I also don't like being restricted to the Terminal. Mac fulfils one of those goals, but not the other, and really that's not good enough.

2ii: There must be a consistent method of configuration/administration:
OS X certainly beats out the Windows Control panel. But it really doesn't do it properly. Let me give you a real-life example of how the Mac doesn't cater for all circumstances. When I wanted to connect a Mac Laptop to the 802.1x System at School, I went to the Network Control panel, found the 802l.1x option in the Control Panel, and looked through it. Only one option was available for it, and it wasn't the one I needed. I had to launch a separate program to get the laptop to authenticate. Now... I wouldn't have had a problem with it if the system didn't lead me down the wrong track for finding the option I needed: Because the System was inconsistent, I wasted time trying to find the option I was looking for. Now, to relate that to a UNIX system, yes, I once again needed a separate program to authenticate (UNIX uses separate programs for practically everything), but there was a consistent method for connecting to all different Authentication methods. Once I learned one, I knew how to configure them all. As I just demonstrated, that would have been impossible on a Mac.

Yes, editing text files to configure a program may seem foreign to many people - it was like that for me a while ago, but now I do it all the time, I can configure any program, because there is consistency. Even GUI-based programs use a similar method for configuration - they don't block my options. Yes, UNIX has a steep learning curve, but once you get over that curve, it works for 100% of cases. On Mac, you have a short learning curve, but it only covers 60%-70% of the options, and once you go over that, you're learning again, and that's a waste of time in my opinion.

This is one of the major shortcomings of OS X in my classification of it as a true UNIX. There is a UNIX-like kernel (devices represented as files etc), and a UNIX-like user-space (terminal, POSIX tools etc). However, the configuration layer is Mac. There is no way to configure it like a UNIX system, you must configure it through a GUI, and invariably, GUIs are inconsistent. No ifs, ands or buts about it. Because of this, I can't call OS X a UNIX, and because I can't configure it as easily I can with a UNIX system, I won't use it.

3: The GUI must be able to run secondarily to the Terminal
I think I've covered this one before. I like to be able to launch my GUI apps from the terminal, in a consistent fashion. It just doesn't happen on Mac. You have to launch your GUI apps from the GUI, and your X apps from the Terminal. This is not how a UNIX behaves - a UNIX will take whatever interface method you like, and allow you to use everything in your computer via it. This happens on my true UNIX, but not on Mac OS X.

So, as I think you can see, Mac OS X has its shortcomings. I will still continue to use it when I need to, but there is no way that Apple can make their system both Mac-like and a proper UNIX at the same time, and since I demand a proper UNIX, I'll never demand a Mac.

n.b: For those who need further persuasion as to what a proper UNIX consists of, may I recommend Mike Gancarz's excellent book Linux and the UNIX Philiosophy. It explains it all very well.

Trackback URL for this post: