Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'This way lies madness!' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
This way lies madness!
Authored by: Han Solo on Sep 26, '02 08:45:18PM

Nonsense.

As several people noted above, this only changes what is "seen" at the human interface level. It has no effect on the operating system level. The logic is the same as customizing an icon.

The deeper issue is whether this is "a good thing."(TM) For those people who used the Macintosh prior to OS X, the ease of personalization of the interface was a key attraction of the Mac. You didn't need to conform to some (seemingly) arcane computer standards -- the computer conformed to your standards! (Or lack of standards, which was equally fine.)

Why so many "old Mac-hands" are dissatisfied with Mac OS X at the interface level (regardless of how much they might like other attributes) is that much of the pre-Mac OS X personalization is not available -- or even possible -- in Mac OS X. There are pros and cons to this change, but that's not the point. Rather, with this particular hint all the advantages of the system-level file organization are retained, but those who *choose* to do so can regain a little of what made the Mac great for them. How this could possibly be misconstrued as "madness" is beyond me. Mac OS X allows those who want a bare-bones, straight-forward, Un*x-inspired interface to have one, and those who prefer the "guts" of the computer to be (more or less) hidden away can be satisfied (mostly) as well.

And the terminal isn't going anywhere: Apple's market position depends too much on the ability to use OS X as any other Unix. However, just as no one is forced to rename their folders, no one is forced to use the terminal. (This should be ever more true as OS X matures. Although the terminal sure makes life easier at times.) The best of both worlds for all sorts of users, no?



[ Reply to This | # ]