Comment by Lewisham | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Lewisham | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

My feeling is that this is very much like the "Classic" support that Mac OS X had for a few iterations. Yes, you can run Classic apps, but you don't really want to.

Apple themselves only just recently got iTunes from out of their Carbon compatibility layer, so calling Microsoft out for not getting a 10+ million line code base wrapped in a new UI in time for Windows 8 is pretty rich. That said, getting some form of Office Reader or something into the new UI would be nice.

I am so, so, so glad that Microsoft has double-downed on Metro. Many other companies would have walked away, given the sales and the guffaws from their competitors. It honestly makes me respect them a whole lot.

I also like the idea of the multifunctional machine, that can be the workhorse during the day and the bedroom tablet at night. I would not be surprised if we see something similar from Apple next year, but it depends on how far the iOS and Mac OS X codebases/kernels have drifted.

+1 for the support on Metro. I think the design and interaction is great (and more importantly some nicely original thinking).

One of the things that really impressed me with the demo video was the access to the file system from touch apps (and the use of open app resources as an extension of it). One of the things that I feel has been pretty detrimental to iOS is the removal of any direct access to the file system, meaning that apps can't share access to a file but have to have their own copies.

I wasn't too thrilled to see traditional Windows apps sitting next door though. Yes it's taken Apple some time to get rid of some of their legacy support, but this looks like MS is unwilling to really try and move forward. Despite the backlash they would no doubt suffer for it, at some point soon they really need to put their foot down and say "No, you cannot run 1990s software on this operating system".

But see that's the thing... touch is not "forward". Touch is an alternate method of PC interaction which is good for day to day tasks but definitely not good for everything. This is exactly what I find impressive about this new concept, that it can function in a mode for "keyboard/mouse' (which is not going away for the foreseeable future), and it can function as a slick touch UI device. I can finger browse, flip pages in my e-book, buzz off a quick email, flip through songs, etc... but I can also work in a business mode with all the programs where keyboard/mouse is the proper UI choice. And I can do it on one device and share apps and files.

Also MS's decision to maintain legacy support is their biggest asset. If MS suddenly cut off a huge portion of their past compatibility, and hence established application base, then there is a MUCH bigger risk people will jump ship to Linux or Mac since they need to change up their apps anyhow. Familiarity breeds loyalty, even if sometimes begrudgingly.

They key is will the performance be reasonable on "mobile" hardware. The performance of portable hardware is advancing at a rapid pace but I'm not quite sure it's ready yet (even in a year from now) to run a desktop/touch merged Windows code base. That is where MS is taking a big gamble to me.

I wasn't so much suggesting that touch was the future, as suggesting that nowhere was the future if they keep lugging about compatibility for the last 6 or 7 (major) versions of the OS, all the while looking at radically changing the way things work. This is the approach that brought us Windows 3.1 and 95.

Don't forget, Win 3.1 and 95 were a HUGE commercial success.

Windows 3.1 and 95 were _fantastic_ in their day. You might not be old enough to remember DOS programs...

I remember DOS programs just fine. In fact, thanks to today's technology, I don't even need to be old enough to remember them, I'm still living with some of them ;) [slight exaggeration sure, but not excessively so IMO]

My point wasn't so much the advances that 3.1 and 95 were or weren't, it's that each had fairly impressive improvements in the UI, but were still veneers bolted on to the last OS. I can appreciate them wanting legacy support since their cash cow is the business sector, but in doing so they limit their scope for advancement.

if touch is not "forward" then at least the mouse is definitely "backward". the ideal PARC machine would have been keyboard + touch, not keyboard + mouse. "touch" is interaction with something approaching the real world as it's been known since hunter-gatherer times. the "mouse" is just an artifice to make up for technology that didn't exist in the '70's/early-'80's.

the only thing missing for business apps on iPad form factor is quick text entry. we should drop the mouse. for precise detailed work one could use a stylus. touch is the ideal.

The problem with touch is that's a coarse-resolution input. You can be much, more precise with a mouse and hence have denser UIs. For "pro" apps this is a must.

Again, as I said, for fine-grained work one can use a stylus.

Sure, but as a UI designer you have to privilege one input device. You can't design the same interface for touch and a stylus/mouse.

I'd like to see you aim in an FPS with touch.

Or use a 30 inch vertical monitor.

Or use a 30 inch monitor at all without tired arms at the end of the day.

> Apple themselves only just recently got iTunes from out of their Carbon compatibility layer

iTunes is still a Carbon application, but in fairness, it mostly has to due with retaining Windows compatibility, and Carbon maps more easily to Win32 than Cocoa would.

Safari is most definitely a Cocoa app, and Apple has a Windows compatibility shim for it.

NeXT used to have a Windows compatability layer - it was rumoured to be included in Mac OSX (yellowbox). I'd bet Apple maintained it alongside Cocoa (just like they kept the x86 port alive). itunes being carbon is probably just down to the size of the rewrite.

I suspect they're on the tail end of a big rewrite, and it could even be that they're announcing a cocoa-based itunes next week. It's been pretty quiet around itunes for a while now, and it's a product that needs a lot of love to bring it back up to apple's standards.

I get the impression that iTunes is the one division in Apple that's truly like a different 'business unit' and doesn't sit in the same ship as the rest of Apple, who are all on board and sail together in the same direction when focusing on 'the next thing'.

iTunes 10 was the worst thing Apple have launched recently (IMO). I hope they fix it soon, but I'm not holding my breath.

It's a shame, because iTunes 3 and 4, when it was just Mac-only music management (with a couple of devices supported), were amongst my favourite bits of software ever.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com