Re:What's the problem with old but excellent Mac apps?
by flenserboy on Saturday March 05, 2022 @08:19PM
(#30573970)
Other than a couple professional apps, the actual Mac apps I use on the regular are Ulysses, the Affinity suite, nice, little tools like Soulver, and built-ins like Pages. I very much miss the old days of software, not just Mac software — paying for software that was purpose-built, tested, and often, it seemed, liked by its creators was much easier, even at 80s & 90s prices, than dropping $3-$100 on what today is a crapshoot that will likely move out from under your feet with an update six months from now.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:What's the problem with old but excellent Mac apps?
by lupire on Saturday March 05, 2022 @08:32PM
(#30574066)
But the software back then couldn't do 1% of what software does today. It's a tradeoff.
You can run that old software in an emulato if that's all you want. And abandonware is free.
Re:What's the problem with old but excellent Mac apps?
by flenserboy on Saturday March 05, 2022 @09:09PM
(#30574332)
Perhaps, though I doubt it. Modern software may have more features and functions, accumulated over time, but what it so often lacks is a good way to encourage discoverability (and can make it much worse — e.g., the Office Ribbon) while making things work better through internal consistency (though that internal consistency was often at the expense of being applicable application-to-application). It's funny how much paid software is so much worse than FOSS options when it comes to actually using it — the FOSS stuff may not look as nice, but it does the job, gives more and better options, and has something resembling documentation. Old software is much closer to FOSS tools than modern paid software in spirit, and much has been lost in the quest for paid-but-cheap.