Do you agree with this video? "macOS Sucks"

Here is a summary.

Classic Mac OS had the following (with timestamps):
  • HyperCard (24:00)
  • AppleScript (26:06)
  • AppleTalk (29:10)
  • 486 PC on a Card (30:16)
  • Appearance Manager (31:39)
  • Extensions & Control Panels (33:06)
  • ResEdit (35:28)
  • "System Folder" on any drive (37:58)
  • *he has more points as well in the other parts of the video*
Basically, he is saying that modern macOS has basically none of the above mentioned features.
 
OK.

Hypercard and Applescript were cool. They fell to the wayside because scripting outside real scripting languages became unpopular, and you can't do it on mobile devices (why not, would love to?).

A PC on a Nubus card is not needed anymore. Rosetta 2 does a stunning job.

I can't really comment on the other ones.
 
I'm not going to watch an hour and a half video of Macs from the last four decades. I've always hated Macs until Apple started designing their own silicon. I think macOS is great at most things except for playing games. When the first version of macOS X came out, the UI was so far above and beyond Windows XP that I was quite enamored with it for a while, despite its limitations. It was just so pretty to look at. My family got my brother a Bondi Blue iMac for college, but he flunked out at the time, so we maxed out the RAM on it to meet the minimum requirements of the macOS X beta back in 2000. There are things that Mac has always done better than Windows and vice versa. There's still nothing even remotely like Time Machine after all these years on Windows, for example.
 
Anyone could easily do a "Why Windows Sucks" as well, or "Why Linux Distro's suck". They all have their pro's and con's and issues. To me it is about the right tool for the right job. The thing is many, pending on when you got into computers, you either started with Apple devices in school, or windows, or had windows forced on you in the work place and for used to it.

Then it stuck so people do not want to switch an OS and re-learn how to use a tool.
 
MrGuvernment said:
Anyone could easily do a "Why Windows Sucks" as well, or "Why Linux Distro's suck". They all have their pro's and con's and issues. To me it is about the right tool for the right job. The thing is many, pending on when you got into computers, you either started with Apple devices in school, or windows, or had windows forced on you in the work place and for used to it.

Then it stuck so people do not want to switch an OS and re-learn how to use a tool.
Click to expand...

Well, the video in the OP is different. It compares an older version of the same platform (well, kinda) to the newer version and how much functionality was dropped.

The fact that I don't rate any of that functionality as particularly important doesn't change the fact that the author has a valid viewpoint.

This is, BTW, a reason why I try to use open source software. It can't easily be taken away by a vendor. I am sure hypercard would still be alive if macOS was open source, or just hypercard for that matter.
 
Seem a bit long because it seem to go all over the place (clicking in place it talks about the laptop upgradability and a lot of non MacOs stuff).

Seem to be from a lifelong Mac, so I imagine nice history piece and will make sense for life long Mac user that loved them, but I do not think many will trade all of them for having bash working.

What that is very unMac like, becoming just an other "regular" Unix with the full unix compatible bash terminal, will be what many find awesome. Seem more of a MacOS is not quirky and different than the rest anymore than sucking.
 
Last edited:
Quiz said:
Here is a summary.

Classic Mac OS had the following (with timestamps):
  • AppleScript (26:06)
  • Appearance Manager (31:39)
Basically, he is saying that modern macOS has basically none of the above mentioned features.
Click to expand...
AppleScript is still in macOS to my knowledge. At least I wrote something with it like 10 years ago.

I skipped to the 'Appearance Manager' section and the author is mixing up Apple's Appearance Manager and the third-party Kaleidoscope but doesn't mention the latter at all. Only Kaleidoscope had thousands of schemes and I literally used one of the Kaleidoscope schemes he showed which was claimed to be an Appearance Manager theme.

I do at least similarly lament the dramatic decline of OS level customization on Mac over the years, though for a while even on X, up to like Snow Leopard, there were third-party themes (including ironically a port of one of the Kaleidoscope schemes he shows).

Idk, I suppose they want to impress upon the viewer that classic Mac OS was cool (and it was) but seeing as two things are incorrect already I don't feel like watching anything more.
 
MacOS doesn't suck. In fact, I've been using a Windows 11 machine for the past couple of weeks and, while it has its advantages, it also drives me up the wall on occasion with windows that don't stay put, certain workflow annoyances, that sort of thing. I could easily switch, but I'd rather have a Mac.
 
Bryan Lunduke, which I'm guessing is a "new name" to many posting here. So, he's (perhaps not) famous for his _____ Sucks vids, well, maybe there's not that many.

Anyway, nothing to see here. I didn't watch it.

Given that Microsoft established an unbreakable monopoly on the PC world, creating and protecting something completely outside of that context was smart on Apple's part. Of course, when you own "everything" from A-Z like Apple does for its ecosystem, that's a monopoly by definition, but there's so much of this outside of Apple, that this sort of practice can never get flagged as "monopoly".
 
cjcox said:
Anyway, nothing to see here. I didn't watch it.
Click to expand...

He makes a lot of good points. I've been using Macs since the 80s, and I was even approached by a publisher to write a book on Hackintoshes; deal fell through, never found out why.

Basically the video is about the fact that the company has done a 180 on their roots, and it's hard to find fault in any of it.
 
AppleScript is still in the latest macOS version. I have made several work-related droplets for my coworkers who aren’t as familiar with the command line so my droplets are basically self-contained bash script calls where I embed the needed applications in the droplet and it calls up the dependent application when files are dropped on it (ffprobe/ffmpeg).

I personally stopped using AppleScript for my own workflow after I became familiar enough with basic Python, which I can pretty much use unchanged on Amazon EC2 ARM instances.
 
cjcox said:
Bryan Lunduke, which I'm guessing is a "new name" to many posting here.
Click to expand...
Oh, is that the guy in the video? Had only read his poor criticism about Archive.org which had some fact-free claims.
 
I won't touch Apple hardware, until they allow all of their silicon to natively support more than one external display. Right now, only the "pro" versions allow more than one. And you can also buy a Macbook "Pro", with a non-pro chip.
 
chameleoneel said:
I won't touch Apple hardware, until they allow all of their silicon to natively support more than one external display. Right now, only the "pro" versions allow more than one. And you can also buy a Macbook "Pro", with a non-pro chip.
Click to expand...
This is a pretty stupid opinion. If you need multiple external displays buy the pro chip versus the base. As it stands the pro chip is $2k and the base MacBook Pro is $1600. So it’s $400 more and you get the thing you want, way more performance, and 10gb more of memory for that $400. Even if the base m3 supported more than one external display it’s still gimped because of having 8gb of RAM.
 
Mchart said:
This is a pretty stupid opinion. If you need multiple external displays buy the pro chip versus the base. As it stands the pro chip is $2k and the base MacBook Pro is $1600. So it’s $400 more and you get the thing you want, way more performance, and 10gb more of memory for that $400. Even if the base m3 supported more than one external display it’s still gimped because of having 8gb of RAM.
Click to expand...
$400 to simply connect 2 monitors. No thanks. Especially not in a product called "Pro" MacBook.

It would be acceptable if it were a clearly simplified product and well communicated that it only supports one display. But you have to dig through a spec sheet for the silicon, to see the limitation.
 
Mchart said:
This is a pretty stupid opinion. If you need multiple external displays buy the pro chip versus the base. As it stands the pro chip is $2k and the base MacBook Pro is $1600. So it’s $400 more and you get the thing you want, way more performance, and 10gb more of memory for that $400. Even if the base m3 supported more than one external display it’s still gimped because of having 8gb of RAM.
Click to expand...
No, your comment is a ridiculous take on a stupid situation. Please don't defend Apple's asinine decisions. What he said is a valid argument that demonstrates how massively stupid Apple is. It was discovered recently that Apple was actually intentionally limiting more than one external monitor with the base M3 MacBook Pro via software. It wasn't a hardware limitation: https://www.zdnet.com/article/this-...ay-to-dual-monitors-just-like-m3-macbook-air/

This is inexcusable BS from Apple.

I currently have an M1 Air and needed dual monitors and ended up going with the 49" OLED G9. It's annoying that this was the workaround, but on the plus side, I've fallen in love with this monitor.
 
chameleoneel said:
$400 to simply connect 2 monitors. No thanks. Especially not in a product called "Pro" MacBook.

It would be acceptable if it were a clearly simplified product and well communicated that it only supports one display. But you have to dig through a spec sheet for the silicon, to see the limitation.
Click to expand...
It seems silly to me anyone would buy a MacBook Pro and not get at least the pro chip. At that point you should just buy the Air if you want the base chip.
 
Shoganai said:
No, your comment is a ridiculous take on a stupid situation. Please don't defend Apple's asinine decisions. What he said is a valid argument that demonstrates how massively stupid Apple is. It was discovered recently that Apple was actually intentionally limiting more than one external monitor with the base M3 MacBook Pro via software. It wasn't a hardware limitation: https://www.zdnet.com/article/this-...ay-to-dual-monitors-just-like-m3-macbook-air/

This is inexcusable BS from Apple.

I currently have an M1 Air and needed dual monitors and ended up going with the 49" OLED G9. It's annoying that this was the workaround, but on the plus side, I've fallen in love with this monitor.
Click to expand...
What decision? The base chip doesn't have the support, so you should have bought the one that did. What type of person buys a laptop without looking at the specs? Besides, you bought an Air as it is, what did you think?
 
Mchart said:
What decision? The base chip doesn't have the support, so you should have bought the one that did. What type of person buys a laptop without looking at the specs? Besides, you bought an Air as it is, what did you think?
Click to expand...
You just kind of say whatever you want without reading anything, huh? I said the base M3 MacBook Pro supports dual monitors. It was restricted via software, not hardware. Apple chose to restrict it to one monitor. When the M3 Air was announced with dual monitor support, they then stated the base would be receiving dual monitor support via a software update, meaning they intentionally gimped the M3 for no reason, which is garbage.

I bought the Air being fully aware that it only supports one monitor. Late last year, I got into coding and was looking for workarounds for dual monitors and there were some sketchy "solutions" that didn't work very well for me, so I ended up going with the super ultrawide, which solved my problem.
 
Shoganai said:
You just kind of say whatever you want without reading anything, huh? I said the base M3 MacBook Pro supports dual monitors. It was restricted via software, not hardware. Apple chose to restrict it to one monitor. When the M3 Air was announced with dual monitor support, they then stated the base would be receiving dual monitor support via a software update, meaning they intentionally gimped the M3 for no reason, which is garbage.

I bought the Air being fully aware that it only supports one monitor. Late last year, I got into coding and was looking for workarounds for dual monitors and there were some sketchy "solutions" that didn't work very well for me, so I ended up going with the super ultrawide, which solved my problem.
Click to expand...
It's gaining it via an update, but it's not what you think it is. It only works if you close the lid. So it's fundamentally still gimped, and if you need the support you need to get the pro chip, and I still can't fathom why anyone would buy the MacBook Pro without the base level Pro chip.
 
Mchart said:
It seems silly to me anyone would buy a MacBook Pro and not get at least the pro chip. At that point you should just buy the Air if you want the base chip.
Click to expand...
I don't agree.

And also, its silly that Apple is restricting any laptop from more than one external display. I mean seriously stupid.

Mchart said:
What decision? The base chip doesn't have the support, so you should have bought the one that did. What type of person buys a laptop without looking at the specs?
Click to expand...
Generally speaking, there is practically zero reason to not expect a Macbook Pro to support more than one external monitor. Let alone any laptop, as I said above.

I only found out about this, becuase I work in IT and someone I support got an M3 Macbook Pro from their department. (At the time this happened, the only way to see this limitation was to look at a spec sheet for an M3/ non-pro chip. Since then, Apple has updated their store page to pretty clearly state the limitation, albeit at the very bottom of the page. Under the product listings).

And since then, I have talked about it in various places of the internet, and a few current owners of M3 Macbook Pro's had their hearts sink a little bit. As they were not aware of the limitation.


I'm glad it will supposedly be fixed via software. Hopefully that happens very soon.
 
Mchart said:
It's gaining it via an update, but it's not what you think it is. It only works if you close the lid. So it's fundamentally still gimped, and if you need the support you need to get the pro chip, and I still can't fathom why anyone would buy the MacBook Pro without the base level Pro chip.
Click to expand...
Before it only worked with one external monitor with the lid closed. Why do you keep saying silly things? As chameleoneel said, there's zero reason, for any laptop of this price range, to not support more than one monitor in 2024. Laptops that are one-fourth the price of the base MacBook Pro can do it. Base Intel MacBooks pre-M chip era can do it. It's insanity.
 
Shoganai said:
Before it only worked with one external monitor with the lid closed. Why do you keep saying silly things? As chameleoneel said, there's zero reason, for any laptop of this price range, to not support more than one monitor in 2024. Laptops that are one-fourth the price of the base MacBook Pro can do it. Base Intel MacBooks pre-M chip era can do it. It's insanity.
Click to expand...
Never claimed otherwise, so I’m not sure at this point what you’re going on about. Is it insanity? Seems like a hard limitation of the m3 chip in that it can only drive two displays, period. The bad choice Apple made was putting the lower-end chip as an option on the pro. They should have just left the MacBook Pro with the base option being the m3 pro.
 
Mchart said:
Never claimed otherwise, so I’m not sure at this point what you’re going on about. Is it insanity? Seems like a hard limitation of the m3 chip in that it can only drive two displays, period. The bad choice Apple made was putting the lower-end chip as an option on the pro. They should have just left the MacBook Pro with the base option being the m3 pro.
Click to expand...
Are you having some kind of mental malfunction? I said that Apple originally spec'd the base M3 as only supporting one external display. We then found out it supports two and Apple was intentionally limiting it via software. That was my point. Everything else you're talking about is coming out of your arse. Your weird commitment to telling people they should just spend more money is odd.
 
Window shading is probably one of the only features I wish we still had since apple still refuses to give us good window management tools. Classic Mac OS had a lot of extra junk to make it useable because it was garbage so there's not really any need for it now. I do miss themes and customization in windows too but the vast majority of people couldn't care less which is why it's no longer there.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top