When Jobs came back to Apple in the latter 1990's "Design" slowly came to have an outsized role. I was one half of the engineering team that owned Preview (the application) when Steve Lemay became a seemingly regular presence in the hallway. As the new "Aqua" UI elements arrived in the OS like the "drawer" and toolbar, Steve and his boss (forgetting his name right now—Greg Somebody?) were often making calls about our UI implementation.
The bigger argument I remember with Steve revolved around the drawer UI element. With regard to PDF's, (the half of Preview that I worked on, another engineer handled images), the drawer was to display thumbnails for each page. If the PDF had a TOC (table of contents) the drawer is where we would display that as well.
So when you opened a PDF in Preview, the PDF content of course would appear in the large window—thumbnails, TOC (later search) would be relegated to a vertical strip of drawer real estate alongside the window—the user could open/close the drawer if they liked to focus perhaps on the content.
Steve Lemay insisted the drawer live on the right side of the window [1]. This was inexplicable to me. I saw the layout of Preview as hierarchical: the left side of the content driving the right side. You click a thumbnail on the left (in the drawer) the window content on the right changes to reflect the thumbnail clicked on.
Steve said, no, drawer on the right.
"Why? Why the hell would we do that?"
Steve was quick: "The Preview app is about the content. The content is king."
I admit that I still disagreed with him after the exchange, but I had a new respect for him as a designer because he was able to articulate a rationale for his decision. I suppose I was prejudiced to expect hand-waving from designers.
(Coda: some years later after I had left the Preview team, an engineer still on the app let me know that the thumbnails, etc, were at last moving to the left side of the app. The "drawer" as as a UI element had by this time gone away: resizable split-views were the replacement.)
(Addendum: Steve also invented the early Safari URL text field that also doubled as a progress bar. Instant hate from me when I saw it: it was as if the text of the URL you entered was being selected as the page loaded. So I'm old-school and Steve had some new ideas…)
[1] Localization was such that in countries where right-to-left was dominant, the drawer would of course follow suit.
Any competent designer gets really good at justifying their decisions. Everyone has an opinion about design and thinks that their taste is correct.
I’m glad I don’t have to deal with that on the software side.
I had a new respect for him as a designer because he was able to articulate a rationale for his decision.
Tim Cook and the other c-suite Apple execs have bad taste.
If they had better taste, they never would have approved text layout that automatically applies inconsistent kerning to squish long menu items into narrow spaces. It's a tasteless idea that sounds great when put into words.
Flat UI probably sounded brilliant as a spoken sales pitch: "We'll make the GUI honest, direct, elegant: the clarity of highway signage". In practice, the Scott Forstall era was both easier to understand, and prettier.
'Liquid Glass' probably sounded fantastic when put into words. Unfortunately, there are some implementations of a 'lickable' GUI that are tasteless.
Hope springs eternal for some people. I personally gave up on Apple shortly after SJ died.
Seems like this is exactly what is going wrong with design at Apple?
But even though I'm hopeful, I'm definitely not holding my breath for a quick turnaround and big mea culpa from Apple. I bought a new laptop last fall specifically to avoid using Liquid Glass for as long as possible.
Makes some sense to me if, as I suspect, people tend to place their windows aligned to the left of the screen. If that’s the case, opening the drawer to the left of its container (the window) would require not sliding the drawer out, but sliding the window to the right to make room for the drawer.
I think that that’s a reason the drawer analogy doesn’t really make sense. Another is that the question “what do you store in a drawer?” certainly isn’t “page thumbnails and table of contents”. “Rarely used tools” or “spare paper” are better answers.
You're right about that. (You should be a designer, ha ha.)
I think the "solution" was that the drawer was open by default when a new document opened. Therefore the window was placed in a way that already allowed for the drawer width.
The main problem I see is the mouse pointer has reason to be on the proximity of the left side: the Apple menu is there, the most important dock elements (on a bottom dock) are there - or the whole dock for a left-placed dock), the menubar File, Edit, etc, and the most common icons for icon bar operations are there.
And if 'content is king', navigating the content (TOC, search, thumbnail) should also be king, not just the current viewing page.
But I wasn't an early user of MacOS, I don't know when this Column layout was first introduced.
> The Preview app is about the content. The content is king.
If "left-hand" is king I wonder if they would have reversed the drawer's position for localization in countries with RTL languages.
1989. See the screenshot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXTSTEP
Instead of the drawer on the side, NeXTSTEP had the Shelf on top: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelf_(computing)
I believe AppKit did so.
Personally, I think in a way you both ended up right. Content is king. But with the iPad (my favorite PDF viewer) as an important part of the Preview landscape now, I view the right side as where content should live.
> I admit that I still disagreed with him after the exchange, but I had a new respect for him as a designer because he was able to articulate a rationale for his decision.
That's a soundbite masking as a rationale that is really only "because I said so". He may have been right, there may have been more to it than this but if that's the extent? As another poster said, this kind of reflexive thought is part of Apple's current design challenges.
I don't share the optimism. I mean, he was there when Liquid Glass was designed and presumably in a good position if he became an executive leader now. Sure, Alan Dye may be the face, but Liquid Glass was made by a very large department. And it is not like Apple's design rot started with liquid glass, this recent post shows that it is regression after regression after regression (which is also my impression after having used Macs since 2007):
https://pxlnv.com/blog/window-chrome-of-our-discontent/
It is sad that Apple is still extremely good at hardware (I have the iPhone 17 Pro and the design is stellar), but software has become worse and worse over the years. They can only get away with it because almost all of the rest of the industry is even worse (macOS is still a glass of ice water if you are in the hellscape that is Windows).
That position could be as the guy who argued against it, but didn't have the power to call the shots, which is especially likely "if he became an executive leader now" due to the backlash.
They just make the UX worse in tons of subtle and not so subtle ways. Less differentiation between controls, more wasted space, UI widgets that become unreadable based on what content scrolls under them, more samey (thus harder to find) icons, and 1000s of such paper cuts.
And the board is ultimately the culpable party here. The executives are just useful idiots. The board has clearly lost whatever direction they ever had of why the company they're running has value—and they can't just hire Steve Jobs back anymore.
It does not hurt that Android and iOS are both kind of the same OS now. Yes, I get that there are a million differences between the two, but now that we're at almost two straight decades of the platforms copying features from one another, the difference is academic for most people.
I've held off upgrading past Sequoia because of it, or wanting to buy M4/M5 Macs.
I've tried and absolutely love the iPhone 17 Pro hardware, but the camera app is an unusable monstrosity.
Asus rog 128gb sends like a really good deal at this point
Out of curiosity, why?
Of course, the argument about how much of that is "convincing you that you what what they do" is left to the reader - but marketing hype can only take you so far.
I have a macbook and a Samsung. The products I buy are here to do a job for me and that's it. If another brand does a better job then I'll switch to that with no qualms.
It’s like caring about Bell Labs if it still existed, or Kodak at its peak. Sure, they were part of big monopolistic companies, but the other side of that is a unique entity with a resume of accomplishments that make them worthy of national pride.
In my original comment I did acknowledge the problematic aspects of giant companies like Apple or AT&T in my examples, but I can still see how one might separate that from real legitimate innovation and positive impact and be willing to celebrate that.
I’ve talked to a lot of space enthusiasts that have similar mixed feelings about SpaceX. It’s hard to root against a company that is so innovative in a field of your interest just because the owner is an asshole.
Further examples, I’m sure a lot of aviation geeks feel the same about Boeing. All the scandal, corruption, and military aspects of the company shouldn’t completely erase the awe-inspiring experience of being on a 747 or a 787 jet.
I'd love to be proven wrong. But to me it feels regressive. I guess the only positive spin on it I can think of is that this is designed for kids in schools.
I do all of my development on cloud servers. I just want a cheap laptop with a good battery life and, crucially, a keyboard and track pad that aren't complete trash.
I'd strongly prefer to have Linux over Mac - but this seems like the best option (and I kind of hate Apple tbh).
I don't think a better product exists at this price point, though I haven't tried it yet.
At the time of our writing, it is a new product and was announced about a week ago, to be released on March 11. By Thursday of last week, Costco had essentially sold out of preorders for both models. (I think a few of the pink color remain.)
So I think there is incredible demand — especially when memory prices are skyrocketing, everyone stores most of their data in the cloud, most LLM inference is also on remote machines, and the chip can handle most if not all typical office and web tasks (pretty much anything except running local models and demanding video editing).
I'm interested in one myself for law work on the couch, and I'm eager to read the first reviews.
If you’re looking to a corporation to save you from corporate lock-in I’m not sure what to say.
It'll blow the doors off everything else in that price range, in a machine that feels like a macbook, which retain value better than anything else.
Personally I'm still waiting for a return of the 12" MacBook or 11" MacBook Air with an M-series chip in it. The current MacBook Air model just doesn't have the same feeling of super portable grab-ability that my old 11" MacBook Air had. Unfortunately, the age of the netbook is long past and hardly any manufacturer makes laptops with screens less than 13" unless you go all the way down to some kind of weird handheld thing without a keyboard. I liked how the 11" MacBook Air had just enough width and depth for the keyboard and a usable trackpad and no more.
It's extremely close in physical size, just with a 2" bigger display.
https://everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook-air/specs/macbook...
The second reason is of course kids. Yes I thought multiple times if I should get my kids some kind of computer. But the issue is that I don’t want a Chromebook or a windows device under my care. Used would be the way to go here but I love the fact that there is finally a good value entry level machine that also looks fun.
The 11" MacBook Air was 11.8" x 7.56" the neo is 11.71" x 8.12".
MacBook Air: 1.08 kg (2.38 lbs)
MacBook Neo: 1.23 kg (2.70 lbs)It really is too bad they never upgraded that 1366x768 LCD in the 11" MacBooks otherwise I think they could be great linux devices today.
Would be interesting to see these specs in a mini body with 16gb ram but I have a feeling there isn’t really a market for that.
what do we need more memory for on our machines. Video files are already at a resolutions where any increase barely matters. Audio or any other multimedia as well. You won't be gaming on a macbook so that goes out of the window, and a lot of games actually work fine with 8GB. You can edit video or music with that much RAM.
Only thing that needs more ram is running Facebook, which is more of a problem with the sad state of webdev, not the MacBook.
These days code is nothing, content = memory.
I edit for a living and 8gb is not sufficient at all unless you’re always doing proxies, doing reduced resolution playback, and not running any major effects. Playback starts dropping frames at the drop of a hat. Every video editor should have at least 16gb of ram - it’s been that way for years.
If you rarely edit you can get away with it. If you do it with any regularity you end up working around the constraints and taking significantly longer to do your work and deal with slideshow playback.
People aren’t generally running ChatGPT locally.
People also tend to just leave a lot of tabs open all the time. Even when they are paused I just see people’s computers slow to a crawl because of this constantly.
I agree it should be enough and it even often is, but unless we’re going to get everybody to change their habits and get websites to be more efficient with tam usage (like how at work every single HubSpot tab I have uses 300-400MB which is ridiculous) 8 will become an issue, especially on macOS and windows. The way things are going it’s going to become a real problem in 5 years, which is relevant when we’re talking about ewaste. I just don’t see an 8gb mac neo lasting 8-10 years.
This has been my experience. I understand why other people disagree with me, but this is just what I’ve witnessed around me.
People have been begging for MacOS on the iPad... and here it is, but in different clothing. The Neo is just a test bed before committing MacOS to the iPad.
That Macbook Neo wallpaper [1] does not give me confidence.
[1] https://9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2026/03/MacBo...
But the Touch Bar, butterfly keyboard and Face ID have been so laughably bad that I wonder what the hell was going on. Or was I the only one who hated them.
Face ID in particular is probably one of the most annoying things about the iPhone. Constantly misses.
Unfortunately it was a cool thing that died a slow death when nobody made meaningful use of it. At that point it made sense to axe it.
At this point I'm wondering if program managers at Apple even use it, but then what else would they use?
My biggest complaint is actually the positioning of the USB-C ports. The USB2 port should have been the one in the corner where most people will connect a charger, and the one in front should have been USB3 where most people would be plugging anything else. For the current layout, it seems like they’re counting on the buyer to get a dock of some kind… but this is meant to be budget?
> The MacBook Neo is a new kind of product for Apple
It's just a laptop with a dumbed down CPU. It is not a NEW KIND of product. Apple already sells laptop with different CPUs..
The closest they ever came to something similar was the far too expensive 12" MacBook, and the far-too-compromised PowerBook Duo (IMHO).
The Neo is their only attempt to date at making the least expensive possible Mac notebook.
This is a laptop being sold at half the price of the cheapest laptop Apple has ever sold save for some oddities like the eMate.
Apple has never threatened the “I just need a working cheap laptop for $500” market in this way before.
It’s a budget laptop. They didn’t have a budget laptop prior.
The 599 price point is just there to justify recycling the A18 chip (8GB limit is due to the chip). It will pivot and the price will climb back up (699, 799 probably) after a cycle or two.
There is no ‘new’ Apple.
Could someone explain what the OP means here?
The idea that the Mac community has lost its artistic sense and enjoys it says a lot. Maybe I'm making too much of this derivative work, and Apple's own material isn't like it?
Time moves on, I suppose.
Federighi answers only to Cook and God (not sure about God though), and he and his minions have been happily implementing every single bullshit under the sun, and praising it on stage. They spent probably millions of man-hours on Liquid Glass. And shipped it in the state it is in.
For the new Apple to "begin to emerge" you need more than meaningless web page updates. You need a leadership that cares. When is the last time you've seen any of Apple's senior leadership care?
> But Mr. Cook is also preparing several other internal candidates to be his potential successor, two of the people said. They could include Craig Federighi, Apple’s head of software; Eddy Cue, its head of services; Greg Joswiak, its head of worldwide marketing; and Deirdre O’Brien, its head of retail and human resources.
Personally I wouldn't like to see any of these. Especially services needs to calm the fuck down and stop giving into the temptation to milk their captive audience; that's absolutely not what Apple is supposed to stand for.
