Hacker News Reader

Comment by _s | Hacker News Reader

Not just their software, the hardware is beginning to be get pretty unwieldily complicated.

From an OS / software perspective:

Have a "core" macOS that has none of the apps / integrations are baked in at an OS level.

You install the things you want, how you want - eg iMessage, Mail, and then iCloud if you want to sync it, and Photos etc.

Have a slim, fast, stable OS that I can just turn on and get going with.

From the hardware perspective, I made this comment a little while ago but what I want to be able to choose is:

- Device: Watch, iPhone, iPad, MacBook, iMac, Mac

- Size: Mini, "Normal / Default" (Air), Max

- Processing Power: "Normal / Default", Pro, Ultra

- And maybe storage.

That way I can go and buy a MacBook Pro (13"?), or a MacBook Max Pro (15"), or a MacBook Mini (11"), or a normal iPad Mini Ultra, or an iMac Mini (21"?), or a Watch Pro, or a Mac Max Ultra etc.

Device + Size + Power.

It's kinda there, but not quite.

View on HN

I agree. It seems ridiculous that an app like Messages is considered so much part of the OS given what it does. I don’t use it, I don’t care about it, but it seems like it could be a regular app that updates independently of the OS, along with Maps, Notes, and so on. So many macOS “upgrades” nowadays seem to be Apple tinkering with such apps rather than the actual OS experience.

I did said similar thing weeks ago regarding all shenanigans with W11: every software should include two paths of installation/OOBE: default "express" where vendor shoves you "the experience" and customized "expert" where you select features YOU want. And either way allows you to change system afterwards. We had that in Windows years ago but then it was removed; some Linux distributions do offer package selection beyond the default set.

There's no need for a separated core version - just give back control to the user. But honestly, I don't know what would need to happen so we could get it - it feels like it's a lost cause against corporations. There's of course Apple-EU situation where you can remove applications, set defaults, install additional app stores but this is still limited to that market and happen way too late and too slow.

Why do you want to destroy computing for everybody else just to make a very small group of hackers pleased? Can't you be satisfied with Linux or Windows or BSD? Let normal people have at least one platform that is usable for them.

How is letting users to disable bloat a bad feature?

For example, can you remove Chess from MacOS? Nope! Why? What I found on Reddit, it seems because it's integral part of MacOS somehow and I am a bad person for even asking, somehow.

Chess is 11Mb, you must be desperate for space if you want to remove that.

Bloat adds up.

Each part alone might not be large but together it starts to become an annoyance.

Also bloat is not just about disk space but also cognitive load and clean interface.

"iMessage, Mail, and then iCloud if you want to sync it, and Photos"

Those are not bloat, those are core features of a computer for 99% of users who are not developers.

There already exists a platform which is unusable for normal people and great for developers, it's called Linux.

There already exists a platform which is great for corporate and hell for normal people, it's called Windows.

So why aren't we allowed to keep the only computing platform which is good for normal users?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com