One thing I’ve hated about Apple for a long time is the lack of legacy support combined with the quick, not-free upgrade cycle. Apple has a habit of upgrading their OS every one or two years, and charges over $100 for the new version. While charging for a “point” release is absurd, you might get away with not upgrading for a while, but soon no new Apple software will run on the just-replaced version of their OS.
It’s that time again, and PC World has a few gripes with some of Apple’s new features. I tend to ignore these things, but the reviewer’s issues with a new feature called “Stacks” caught my eye. For those of you who don’t know, Stacks are just like “Drawers (circa 1998)” in Gnome. Still don’t get it? It’s just like putting Quck Launch folders in a toolbar in Windows.
Of course, Apple couldn’t have been that far behind Microsoft in something so obvious, could they? No, they couldn’t. I’ve had my application, documents, and desktop folders in my Apple’s Dock since the first day I got my MacBook (click to open, right-click to expand). So why Stacks? Well, this wouldn’t be the first time Apple (or MS) threw in a new feature that was nothing more than a slightly polished version of what users were doing on their own.
The issue I have with Stacks, and with other attempts by OS makers to integrate features their users created, is that the implementation is often worse than the method it replaces. Stacks can only display 62 items within any one stack. The pre-stacks way displays a scrolling list of (essentially) unlimited length. Further, nested folders in Stacks don’t expand, but do using the old method.
So, in a couple of months, when my Mac-head friends ask me what I think of Stacks, I’ll tell them the same thing I did when Apple released the KHTML-based Safari: “It’s not bad, I’ve been using it for years.”