"More Flame Bait," or why Charles Stross uses Macs | Hacker News Reader

"More Flame Bait," or why Charles Stross uses Macs

antipope.org

I agree that Apple's attention detail in design is excellent. I would say, however, that they tend to fail miserably in terms of ergonomics. A few examples:

[1]All Apple mice. The latest, Magic Mouse, is like instant carpal tunnel.

[2]All Apple displays. They tilt, but you can't adjust the height...seems absurd to me.

[3]The unibody Macbooks. Sharp edges are extremely uncomfortable for wrists (odd for a company so committed to rounded corners).

Apple often sacrifices ergonomics in favor of aesthetics. That said, most consumers probably don't use the devices enough to notice the ergonomic shortcomings.

Agree on [1] -- remember the hockey puck mouse on the old iMacs? Steve Jobs actually said it was "the most wonderful mouse" when he unveiled it at Macworld (see http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/01/01/steve-jobs-greate...)

On [2], the old "half-dome" iMacs let you adjust the height and even swivel the display horizontally almost 90 degrees in either direction. I owned one, and really liked how the display could be adjusted to point almost anywhere -- it was great for letting the kids look at the screen.

One problem with the more recent iMacs is it's very easy to pull out the power cord from the back of the monitor if you swivel vertically when the cord is taut.

In terms of iPhone ergonomics, I am curious how Apple will update the body in the next generation. There is a lot of room for improvement, IMHO.

yeah, the hockey puck mouse was just pitiful. The head-scratcher for me with the new mouse is the gesture of 2-finger swiping (laterally) while your other three fingers are (presumably) stationary on the mouse. It makes my hand ache just thinking about it.

loved the fully articulating arm on the old iMac--one of the sacrifices they've made in their quest for aesthetic minimalism (which I appreciate, mind you, it just sucks that you can't move the display easily anymore).

one of the sacrifices they've made in their quest for aesthetic minimalism

I don't imagine it was solely aesthetic. The articulating arm required a huge amount of dead weight in the base to support ever-larger screens. The 20" iMac G4 weighed about the same as the current 27" iMac.

Standard VESA mounts are available for iMacs and Apple displays. Bolt one on (slightly easier said than done on an iMac, but the cinema displays are fine) and attach to an arm of your choice, and the problem is solved.

http://www.computingplus.co.uk/monitor-arm-range.htm

You're right, but most of them are ugly, complex, and cumbersome to install (not to mention, expensive). Might as well have a PC at that point. I suppose sound ergonomics and simplicity often conflict, given the inherent complexity of the human body.

I use one attached to a proper adjustable desk. It just looks like an iMac floating in the air, and you can push and pull it whereever you want it to go.

Of course, look at it from behind and it's obvious it's not Apple, but it's pretty minimal.

They sent an installer. I'm sure it's possible to do it DIY, but it's not quite as simple as normal flatpack.

The cost of using a computer too much is fancy furniture and slightly less beautiful equipment. :-(

Swivel, tilt and rotate would be a great feature to add to the new e-ips imacs.

> Sharp edges are extremely uncomfortable for wrists

If your wrist is hitting the corner you’re doing something very wrong w/r/t ergonomic laptop use. Your hands should be floating above the keyboard, and your arms straight out from there.

"most PC vendors wouldn't know good industrial design if you hit them over the head with it"

I've often wondered about this, surely the PC market is large enough that someone could come in with exceptionally well-designed machines, pre-built, running Windows, that had the "it just works" nature of a Mac. Is Windows really so broken as to prevent that?

I guess I'm thinking something like Alienware used to be only more focussed on overall usability rather than gaming oomph.

They could, yes, but it undermines the fundamental basis on which the consumer PC industry is based: cheap, throw-away computers. Well-designed machines require precision and machining that adds to the cost of the computer, and with companies such as Dell, HP, Lenovo, and such operating on such thin margin, high-volume selling, any additional cost adds up quickly.

There is a massive difference in the build quality between a typical Apple product and a typical HP or Dell product. There's an attention to detail that appears to only exist at the higher price point. For those that build their own boxes, you have likely found that a quality case is worth the price differential — and this is only one piece.

This seems more likely to incite a flamewar than a useful discussion.

Or it could incite a discussion on the relative merits of Apple's industrial design approach, how accurate Stross's assessment is, and what should or shouldn't carry over to the industry at-large.

I realize OS wankery is pretty much standard amongst techies, and that anticipating it is far from unwarranted, but there's always the chance that a discussion might actually pan out alright.

It seems to have inspired a smattering of fair discussion here at least. To be fair, he did warn readers in the very title, so it isn't necessarily supposed to be an excellent, discussion provoking piece.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com