PDA

View Full Version : Aqua To See Leopard Refresh?




Pages : [1] 2

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 07:01 AM
If the rumor is correct then Apple will replace Aqua with Illuminous and hopefully unite the visual styles again in Leopard.

Apple Gazette has received a tip from an apple insider that the Mac OS Aqua User Interface will be replaced with a new UI named Illuminous.

The source goes on to say that we will see a demonstration of Illuminous at Macworld 2007.

The gensis for this rumor started earlier this year when Apple posted a position on Monster.com seeking a senior visual interface designer “to conceive, design and develop future enhancements to Aqua, the dynamic user interface for Mac OS X”.

This is the first time a name for the supposed Aqua replacement has been given.

What will Illuminous look like?

That’s anybody’s guess at this point, but we might be seeing some hints of what Illuminous holds in the recent release of iTunes.

We will keep you posted as more information becomes available.

Link (http://www.applegazette.com/mac/rumor-aqua-to-be-replaced-with-illuminous/)

The first signs of this may even be included in the latest build: (http://www.macshrine.com/2006/12/09/exclusive-leopard-9a326-seeded/)

Apple yesterday seeded a new version of Leopard (build 9A326) to internal Apple employees. This latest build is reported to have fixed bugs from the last build (9A303) such as Quicktime crashing, printing problems and issues with .Mac such as iDisk synching. Apple continues to gloss over the interface, refining it even more and there is an overly presence of black gloss.



MrSmith
Dec 11, 2006, 07:11 AM
Black Gloss sounds very stylish, but any black theme I've tried on ShapeShifter is unreadable in some respect. Not that Apple's theme would have that problem, of course, but other than buttons and scroll bars I can't imagine black being practical. But maybe they are the only things that will be black and everything else will remain silver/grayish.

clevin
Dec 11, 2006, 07:50 AM
but we might be seeing some hints of what Illuminous holds in the recent release of iTunes.
oh my.

amnesiak
Dec 11, 2006, 08:06 AM
i dono..if it does have all the black gloss..then vista has it in their taskbar and that doesnt look too good..

Scarlet Fever
Dec 11, 2006, 08:17 AM
at the risk of inadvertently downloading a trojan, I wanna see some pics! :D

neven
Dec 11, 2006, 08:58 AM
Hm. Of course, this is exciting news and I have faith in Apple's UI design team, but the "shiny black" look we've seen some small examples of (e.g. Leopard's Time Machine/Spotlight previews, Time Machine itself) didn't impress me. Too -- dare I say it -- Vista-y.

I, for one, was glad to see the UI go a little flatter, a little more subtle, a little less obviously glossy and highlight-y with the "unified" look. I like the "deep" 3D effects in some apps, but I'd like the basic OS X interface to stay easy on the eyes.

Markleshark
Dec 11, 2006, 09:21 AM
i dono..if it does have all the black gloss..then vista has it in their taskbar and that doesnt look too good..

I thought that as well... hmmm... lets hope not.

However, I likes me some of iTunes 7, so lets go with that.

benthewraith
Dec 11, 2006, 09:22 AM
oh my.

No more jelly beans! :D:D:D

Sdashiki
Dec 11, 2006, 09:24 AM
id rather that OSX had Shapeshifter like editing capabilities built in.

Even crappy windows 3.1 had that, though there wasnt a single use for it besides adding to the horror.

Id like to be able to create my own stuff and edit the look of OSX, with the "consent" from Apple in that its not a 3rd party add on.

Frisco
Dec 11, 2006, 09:27 AM
I like this rumor! Can we get it moved to the Front page. Beats iPhone rumors anyday!

MrSmith
Dec 11, 2006, 09:34 AM
id rather that OSX had Shapeshifter like editing capabilities built in.

Even crappy windows 3.1 had that, though there wasnt a single use for it besides adding to the horror.
I just had a flashback to the 'hotdog' theme :eek:

Swarmlord
Dec 11, 2006, 09:41 AM
Figures. I was just getting used to Aqua and they decide to change it.

aLoC
Dec 11, 2006, 09:45 AM
No more jelly beans! :D:D:D

I don't like the Aqua sliders, but the iTunes 7 one is no better.

In both cases too prominent. It's just a scroller, a background thing, and yet dominates the gui.

shecky
Dec 11, 2006, 09:45 AM
i just want it all to look like Final Cut Pro and i would be pleased as punch.

MrSmith
Dec 11, 2006, 09:48 AM
I don't like the Aqua sliders, but the iTunes 7 one is no better.

In both cases too prominent. It's just a scroller, a background thing, and yet dominates the gui.
A mm or two wider would also be nice.

Rojo
Dec 11, 2006, 09:58 AM
i just want it all to look like Final Cut Pro and i would be pleased as punch.

Yeah, that'd be sweet.
I'm a little worried about the black gloss thing. I noticed it right away in the Time Machine previews. I'd hate to see this as a uniform element throughout everything.
Ah well -- it'll still look better than Vista.

twoodcc
Dec 11, 2006, 10:04 AM
at the risk of inadvertently downloading a trojan, I wanna see some pics! :D

i wanna see some pics also!:)

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 10:11 AM
Look at the Leopard preview, everthing is pretty dark. Look at the bars at the bottom, Time Machine or the general background for the icons of the previews.

Black all over the place. I sure hope it doesn't become too dark and I'd like to say I have faith in Apple but after the recent mess I am not too sure.

MacVault
Dec 11, 2006, 10:12 AM
I don't like the Aqua sliders, but the iTunes 7 one is no better.

In both cases too prominent. It's just a scroller, a background thing, and yet dominates the gui.

Yes! You read my mind!

MacVault
Dec 11, 2006, 10:13 AM
A mm or two wider would also be nice.

I agreeeeee!

fugeelama
Dec 11, 2006, 10:16 AM
http://carlos.fugeelama.com/files/71602.this+thread+is+completely+useless%20without+images!!!.jpg

Aniej
Dec 11, 2006, 10:17 AM
If the rumor is correct then Apple will replace Aqua with Illuminous and hopefully unite the visual styles again in Leopard.



Link (http://www.applegazette.com/mac/rumor-aqua-to-be-replaced-with-illuminous/)

The first signs of this may even be included in the latest build: (http://www.macshrine.com/2006/12/09/exclusive-leopard-9a326-seeded/)
Maybe I missed it when I went to these two links, but are there screenshots posted of this somewhere? I am not sure why I missed it, but it might have something to do with 4 hours of sleep each night for a week.:rolleyes:

clevin
Dec 11, 2006, 10:35 AM
Look at the Leopard preview, everthing is pretty dark. Look at the bars at the bottom, Time Machine or the general background for the icons of the previews.

Black all over the place. I sure hope it doesn't become too dark and I'd like to say I have faith in Apple but after the recent mess I am not too sure.
good point, make me wonder if apple trying to cove up their cheap LCD's uneven brightness problem..:p

Am3822
Dec 11, 2006, 10:46 AM
Well, let me echo the previous posters and hope that it won't look like the vista shiny black (I know it's not covered with gold or anything, but the word that comes to me is 'bling').

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 11:14 AM
Maybe I missed it when I went to these two links, but are there screenshots posted of this somewhere? I am not sure why I missed it, but it might have something to do with 4 hours of sleep each night for a week.:rolleyes:

No, no pics but as I said look at the Leopard preview page or iTunes. This might give us ideas. I agree though pics would be nice but as of yet there are none of the new 10.5 build.


good point, make me wonder if apple trying to cove up their cheap LCD's uneven brightness problem..:p

Hehe, that'd be one way. :D


Well, let me echo the previous posters and hope that it won't look like the vista shiny black (I know it's not covered with gold or anything, but the word that comes to me is 'bling').

The first thought that came to my mind when I saw the Vista toolbar was 'cheap'. It looks like cheap plastic. I'm not a real fan of iTunes' colors either but I have faith in Apple, or Steve for that matter, that in a new OS revision they actually get their act together and provide a gorgeous UI.

spicyapple
Dec 11, 2006, 11:52 AM
Most of Apple's pro apps use a darker UI, which I find more pleasing and less strenuous on the eye.

I've tried UNO and ShapeShifter to apply a darker theme to the general OS, and largely have been pleased with my hacks to change the Aqua interface a little darker so it isn't as lickable. Aqua is so 2000. pfft :p

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l311/_spicyapple_/shapeshifter.png

Illuminous (name and concept) sounds like a worthy successor to Aqua from what I've read, so far. It's time for a UI change anyway, so I'm giving this rumour a 7/10.

Shadow
Dec 11, 2006, 11:53 AM
http://carlos.fugeelama.com/files/71602.this+thread+is+completely+useless%20without+images!!!.jpg

Totally. I want screenshots!

neven
Dec 11, 2006, 12:10 PM
One element I really don't like on the Leopard page is the black lozenge navigation bar on the bottom:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/timemachine.html

It just looks cheesy in a "Winamp skin" way.

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 12:16 PM
Most of Apple's pro apps use a darker UI, which I find more pleasing and less strenuous on the eye.

I've tried UNO and ShapeShifter to apply a darker theme to the general OS, and largely have been pleased with my hacks to change the Aqua interface a little darker so it isn't as lickable. Aqua is so 2000. pfft :p

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l311/_spicyapple_/shapeshifter.png

Illuminous (name and concept) sounds like a worthy successor to Aqua from what I've read, so far. It's time for a UI change anyway, so I'm giving this rumour a 7/10.

Now this looks pretty nice. Combine that with the darker look of the pro apps and the dark scroll bars seen on the Leopard preview page and it really would be a sweet GUI change.

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 12:19 PM
One element I really don't like on the Leopard page is the black lozenge navigation bar on the bottom:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/timemachine.html

It just looks cheesy in a "Winamp skin" way.

I actually think that the tackiest thing is the background. Looks like some of the first sci-fi movies ever made.

MacVault
Dec 11, 2006, 12:25 PM
Now this looks pretty nice. Combine that with the darker look of the pro apps and the dark scroll bars seen on the Leopard preview page and it really would be a sweet GUI change.

I don't really like the look of it. Looks toy-ish. The buttons on the window are too small and too far apart. Also, nitice how the rounded window corner butts up against the menu bar and doesn't totally fill the screen as would a window in Window XP. Apple needs to fix these things with the Leopard release.

Rojo
Dec 11, 2006, 12:28 PM
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l311/_spicyapple_/shapeshifter.png

Black glossy buttons didn't look cool, but THIS does. Nice job, spicyapple!

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 12:29 PM
I don't really like the look of it. Looks toy-ish. The buttons on the window are too small and too far apart. Also, nitice how the rounded window corner butts up against the menu bar and doesn't totally fill the screen as would a window in Window XP. Apple needs to fix these things with the Leopard release.

I was actually talking about the menu not the buttons. I am not too fond of them either. As for the window corner, isn't this the way it is right now?

MacVault
Dec 11, 2006, 12:33 PM
...As for the window corner, isn't this the way it is right now?

Yes, and I don't like the way it is right now either.

neven
Dec 11, 2006, 12:51 PM
Just a question - what does everyone mean by "black scrollbars in Leopard preview"?

Project
Dec 11, 2006, 12:52 PM
Its funny - there are elements of iTunes 7 I dont like (the scrollbars, uppercase fonts in the sidebar etc), but has anybody tried to go back to iTunes 6? Wow. It looks a hot mess compared to the smooth, refined look of 7. Even just the buttons. Check out Play Forward and Back compared to the old kind. The glossy old buttons look childish.

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 12:53 PM
Just a question - what does everyone mean by "black scrollbars in Leopard preview"?

Look at the bottom of the Apple.com Leopard preview page.

MacRumors
Dec 11, 2006, 12:57 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Relatively unknown Apple Gazette is claiming that Apple will be replacing Aqua with a new user interface (http://www.applegazette.com/mac/rumor-aqua-to-be-replaced-with-illuminous/) supposedly dubbed "Illuminous," which will be previewed at MacWorld 2007. Recent developer builds have yet to display a vastly new user interface, however Steve Jobs did mention when he previewed the OS at this past year's WWDC that several of Leopard's features were going to be kept "Top Secret".

While we don't know much about Apple Gazette's accuracy, LoopRumors has made mention of a "streamlined theme (http://www.looprumors.com/Pages/leopardinfo09142005.html)" which would include additional UI enhancements (http://www.looprumors.com/Pages/leopardinfo08302005.html) (transparency, animated icons, etc). LoopRumors has had a mixed rumor record in the past, but has recently had claims of a iChat AV (videoconferencing) version of the iPhone (http://www.looprumors.com/index.php?ichat-enabled-iphone) corroborated by AppleInsider (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061205152617.shtml) (note: we're not so sure the unit will see the light of day anytime soon, as AppleInsider's source had mentioned that a working prototype was not seen).

In February of this year, Monster.com had advertised a job posting with Apple's Mac OS X User Interface Group (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060212164115.shtml) seeking a senior visual interface designer "to conceive, design and develop future enhancements to Aqua."

neven
Dec 11, 2006, 12:58 PM
Thought so. I wouldn't call that a scrollbar, though; it's more of a Page turner/navigation element.

I hope scrollbars don't all look like that in Leopard - yeesh...

arn
Dec 11, 2006, 12:59 PM
I would classify AppleGazette relability in the same category as anonymous forum post... which means very little credibilitiy.

arn

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 01:03 PM
I would classify AppleGazette relability in the same category as anonymous forum post... which means very little credibilitiy.

arn

I guess we will know in January :)

MacVault
Dec 11, 2006, 01:09 PM
...In February of this year, Monster.com had advertised a job posting with Apple's Mac OS X User Interface Group (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060212164115.shtml) seeking a senior visual interface designer "to conceive, design and develop future enhancements to Aqua."

I hope Apple has more than one interface designer to "conceive, design and develop future enhancements to Aqua." We want it done right this time!

GeeYouEye
Dec 11, 2006, 01:12 PM
Most of Apple's pro apps use a darker UI, which I find more pleasing and less strenuous on the eye.

I've tried UNO and ShapeShifter to apply a darker theme to the general OS, and largely have been pleased with my hacks to change the Aqua interface a little darker so it isn't as lickable. Aqua is so 2000. pfft :p

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l311/_spicyapple_/shapeshifter.png

Illuminous (name and concept) sounds like a worthy successor to Aqua from what I've read, so far. It's time for a UI change anyway, so I'm giving this rumour a 7/10.

I like this a lot, except for the tiny C/M/R buttons in Safari. I suspect though if anything changes about Aqua, that the last thing they would change is the menu bar. Why? Because in the history of the Mac OS (excluding the Public Beta of OS X), the menu bar has only significantly changed 3 times: once to add icons on the right side, once to add a Help menu, and once to add the Application menu. Through all that time, the most significant color change was to make selection a slightly different color, and you could change it back to black or dark gray very easily. There's something to be said for consistency; Apple's not going to throw away 26+ years of a white menubar with black text on a whim.

sandau
Dec 11, 2006, 01:15 PM
i think the 'time machine' application shows a bit of what leopard's interface will have. note the 3d buttons at the bottom of the application, how they give a new dimension rather than simply flat like we're used to. I think we'll see more of this 3d space (not the literal picture like time machine has) but real use of depth in Leopard. I think that's the key, more 3D depth and a change to the current flat metaphor we are used to.

that would blow away Vista, which currently is barely up to Tiger standards.

imagine a finder that had a folder view with a 3d (with depth) view of the folder tree on the right or left side, the current folder viewable in the current tab.... there are more options with added dimensions.

storage
Dec 11, 2006, 01:20 PM
*hopes for a black UI*.

But let the user choose if he or she wants to use it. Personally I think black UI's are much nicer on the eyes than white/gray/beige ones.

stoid
Dec 11, 2006, 01:20 PM
Time Machine is probably one of the fugliest interface examples from Apple in a LONG while. If all of Leopard resembles that programmer-gone-designer-"hey look at all my cool drop shadows on thin text and 3d" non-sense, it will be the first 10.x update that I DON'T pre-order.

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 01:23 PM
Time Machine is probably one of the fugliest interface examples from Apple in a LONG while. If all of Leopard resembles that programmer-gone-designer-"hey look at all my cool drop shadows on thin text and 3d" non-sense, it will be the first 10.x update that I DON'T pre-order.

Somebody has the positive attitude down. :D :p

Thanatoast
Dec 11, 2006, 01:25 PM
Hmm. 3D interface + Wiimote = Fricking Genius!!!

dollystereo
Dec 11, 2006, 01:25 PM
Please No Glass Blurry Effect!

stoid
Dec 11, 2006, 01:27 PM
Somebody has the positive attitude down. :D :p

Indeed, show me some screenshots, or hell for now I'll even take the word of an ADC Select member that has installed the new seed to confirm the new interface. Until this is verified in ANY way, I'll be a bit skeptical. I just saw some shots of Vista's black aqua, and it was a bit ugly, I hope that Apple does much better if they go to a black UI. We do need a refresh, brushed metal is getting old.

flopticalcube
Dec 11, 2006, 01:32 PM
All the way back to NeXTstep! 2 bits + alpha is all you need. :D

kddpop
Dec 11, 2006, 01:32 PM
im not necessarily a hater of aqua but i do like a more clean, flat look. heck, as long as it is unified accross the board, i'll be happy.

~kyle

Stridder44
Dec 11, 2006, 01:34 PM
http://carlos.fugeelama.com/files/71602.this+thread+is+completely+useless%20without+images!!!.jpg

I effing love you. Mr HA HA guy always makes my day!

But really, Im nothing but excite about this new UI. Black glossy sounds awesome, and I've always actually liked the new Vista "Aero" look. I can't wait!


In any case, I think I can speak for all of us when I say "thank God I can't wait to be out of bubbleland aka Aqua".

Macula
Dec 11, 2006, 01:45 PM
I guarantee that a black-intensive UI would drastically diminish productivity for psychological reasons above all.

Apple is not Toshiba or IBM. Let Steve Ballmer's personal computer be black!

Cheer up, guys! It's all this fuss about black anyway? Feeling down lately?

YoNeX
Dec 11, 2006, 01:50 PM
Apple - Alt - Ctrl - 8 = New UI :p

nagromme
Dec 11, 2006, 01:51 PM
I think the black gloss simply refers to the revised Spaces UI (initially purple) and the image-preview popup thing in Finder--both NEW additions, not old things changing to black gloss. And not everyday UI windows. There are are already black elements in OS X, like parts of iPhoto, so continuing to use black in certain cases is not a huge change. My guess: the black rumor has been blown out of proportion.

But I DO think SOME overall UI changes are likely--that would explain the following conflict:

* Apple has been telling developers for many months to make their apps res-independent--a feature that has been in Tiger since the beginning, but disabled unless you manually activate it via the developer tools (Quartz Debug). Res independence in OS X's future is no secret and never has been--it just didn't get much attention for a long while. (And it's no Vista-killer anyway: Vista has it too, more or less.)

* And yet... the latest versions of iTunes (a sign of skins to come?) and Leopard are still packed with bitmaps that are too small to scale well. As though Apple is ignoring its own public plans. Why? Maybe it's not worth making the OLD look scalable, when a new look is coming! (I know there are a few signs of res-independence in Leopard builds--and in Tiger too--but still mostly low-res bitmaps.)

I don't so much care if the look changes a bit, just so long as we gain a little more consistency. ONE kind of aqua-white (unify all toolbars, with ONE style of button), and ONE kind of metal (non-textured like iTunes is fine by me--I can used to the matte scrollbars as long as they're consistent).

And I expect we WILL get that consistency: why prepare a zillion slightly different themes for res-independence? That's a LOT of work. Better to prepare two or three. And it's very like Apple to use a change in appearance as part of its marketing plans, and thus keep it secret.

This could also explain why I've never heard of any developer actually responding to Apple's long-ago call to res-independence: maybe devs have gotten a sense from Apple that the UI for Leopard is still not finalized enough to be worth comitting time to?

Here's Apple's page on res-independence, publically available--and copyrighted 2004:
http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html

(To date I have noticed just a FEW res-independent things in Tiger: like the More Info button in Finder's column view. I expected the new iTunes would have res-independence, but I activated that in Tiger and there is none--not even fonts. Yet!)

dontmatter
Dec 11, 2006, 01:55 PM
hmm, would make sense as a secret feature. It would be stupid to leave out a highly technical feature from developer builds and have a much worse final product, but a look doesn't have any risk of bugs. Also, makes sense with the timing of vista- vista finally catches up (surpasses) OS X in appearances (begin flaming me now), and so apple goes for secret, released at same time as vista, move to more flashy.

Annoying thing is, I think apple is copying vista b/c they're afraid of looking behind, or worse, going too far and being glossy and unusable, to look a step ahead. (this is exactly what microsoft does, and why stuff looks so crappy- because they're looking at the competition, not their own product). Simple, clean, subtly appealing or even boldy appealing, but only bold due to stark simplicity- these are what looks and works best in the long run. I hope that is where apple is going. Glossy black is only good in limited settings.

p0intblank
Dec 11, 2006, 01:57 PM
I would hate to see "Aqua" go. :( If they do change the UI theme, at least make it a choice for the user. Black glossy could be nice, but I don't want anything too close to Vista's look.

Only time will tell.

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 01:59 PM
I think the black gloss simply refers to the revised Spaces UI (initially purple) and the image-preview popup thing in Finder--both NEW additions, not old things changing to black gloss. And not everyday UI windows. There are are already black elements in OS X, like parts of iPhoto, so continuing to use black in certain cases is not a huge change. My guess: the black rumor has been blown out of proportion.

But I DO think SOME overall UI changes are likely--that would explain the following conflict:

* Apple has been telling developers for many months to make their apps res-independent--a feature that has been in Tiger since the beginning, but disabled unless you manually activate it via the developer tools (Quartz Debug). Res independence in OS X's future is no secret and never has been--it just didn't get much attention for a long while. (And it's no Vista-killer anyway: Vista has it too, more or less.)

* And yet... the latest versions of iTunes (a sign of skins to come?) and Leopard are still packed with bitmaps that are too small to scale well. As though Apple is ignoring its own public plans. Why? Maybe it's not worth making the OLD look scalable, when a new look is coming! (I know there are a few signs of res-independence in Leopard builds--and in Tiger too--but still mostly low-res bitmaps.)

I don't so much care if the look changes a bit, just so long as we gain a little more consistency. ONE kind of aqua-white (unify all toolbars, with ONE style of button), and ONE kind of metal (non-textured like iTunes is fine by me--I can used to the matte scrollbars as long as they're consistent).

And I expect we WILL get that consistency: why prepare a zillion slightly different themes for res-independence? That's a LOT of work. Better to prepare two or three. And it's very like Apple to use a change in appearance as part of its marketing plans, and thus keep it secret.

This could also explain why I've never heard of any developer actually responding to Apple's long-ago call to res-independence: maybe devs have gotten a sense from Apple that the UI for Leopard is still not finalized enough to be worth comitting time to?

Here's Apple's page on res-independence, publically available--and copyrighted 2004:
http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html

(To date I have noticed just a FEW res-independent things in Tiger: like the More Info button in Finder's column view. I expected the new iTunes would have res-independence, but I activated that in Tiger and there is none--not even fonts. Yet!)

Another speculation on the topic: Link (http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits.ars/2006/11/20/6038)

notjustjay
Dec 11, 2006, 02:05 PM
What, no brown? :D

Peace
Dec 11, 2006, 02:12 PM
The black GUI is transparent and can be changed.

ziwi
Dec 11, 2006, 02:15 PM
Everything is coming full circle. Black and White is now en-vogue...maybe we should want a CRT with the green type like the old mainframe days...oops ;)

Diatribe
Dec 11, 2006, 02:16 PM
The black GUI is transparent and can be changed.

Which one are you talking about?

stoid
Dec 11, 2006, 02:18 PM
The black GUI is transparent and can be changed.

Are you saying this because you have used the new Leopard seed?

Do you mean something like the image that spicyapple posted?

Peace
Dec 11, 2006, 02:20 PM
Which one are you talking about?

Whatever Aqua is transforming into :)

Just a guess mind you!

fixyourthinking
Dec 11, 2006, 02:26 PM
... I wouldn't bank on anything the Apple Gazette says is accurate ... while they did an interesting piece recently on Apple Prototypes ... almost none of the devices they had in the story were actual Apple prototypes ... it was obvious they didn't do any homework for the story.

Here is the story in question (where almost zero of the facts were correct):

http://www.applegazette.com/mac/httpwwwapplegazettecomwp-adminpostphpactioneditpost272/

Object-X
Dec 11, 2006, 02:33 PM
I don't think comparing OS X to Vista really has any relevance. Vista's Areo is not all that great. Areo is Microsoft's attempt to be innovative, but it just doesn't work. I think the glass effect could be really cool, but Vista aint it.

OS X has some interesting GUI themes, and Aqua is only one of them. FrontRow has it's own interface, Quicktime has another, iPhoto's full screen mode is yet another. Notice in each of these different themes, the glass translucency is much nicer than Microsoft's Areo; so, Apple is already using it, just not in a standard way. I don't expect that to change either.

What interests me is how extensible OS X seems to be. FrontRow, Leopard's Spaces & Time Machine, Quicktime, iPhoto, Dashboard, ect. All these are new GUI elements that have been added based on a particular application's need. They add new "layers" to the OSs GUI. I expect to see more of this innovative approach in the future. Rather than having one basic interface (Vis-à-vis Windows) for all applications, Apple has been innovating on a per applicaiton basis.

That leaves the Finder and other standard applications. I could invinsion a new type of GUI for Spotlight and the Finder, other applications might also change and have their own unique interface. I guess the basic idea I'm trying to convey, is that the modern operating system interface seems to be changing and Apple is paving the way. As far as Leopard is concerned, I think iTunes 7 is the most likely canidate for accross the board changes to Aqua. I would expect Apple to do away with the metal and striped themes and use a more unified approach. But in the future, don't be surprised if each application has it's own unique interface depending on it's requirements.

New underlying technolgies like Core Image and Core Animation will move this forward in exciting new ways. In fact, don't be surprised to see more Core Animation in the new Leopard interface; Time Machine was just to whet your appetite.

joeshell383
Dec 11, 2006, 02:33 PM
Apple - Alt - Ctrl - 8 = New UI :p

That is so cool!

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 02:35 PM
I'm a big fan of aqua, but I think this would be really cool. However, I don't think this was what Jobs was referring to when he said top secret features. That's not really a feature, is it?

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 02:36 PM
OS X has some interesting GUI themes, and Aqua is only one of them. FrontRow has it's own interface, Quicktime has another

you're right about front row, but I disagree about Quicktime. QT needs a GUI update

patseguin
Dec 11, 2006, 02:36 PM
Let the fake screenshots begin! ;)

Seriously though, I am relatively excited about this prospect. It's just what OS X needs to stay ahead of Vista (which it already is IMO).

Object-X
Dec 11, 2006, 02:50 PM
you're right about front row, but I disagree about Quicktime. QT needs a GUI update

Just to clarify: I am talking about the full screen mode. Notice how the translucency effect is used to enhance the interface. I assume you are talking about the metal theme when quicktime is not in full screen mode. I agree with you there.

idea_hamster
Dec 11, 2006, 02:53 PM
I don't mind the idea of a new UI, but, honestly -- must we pick a name that isn't a word?

"Luminous"? Fine.
"Illuminate"? OK.
but
"Illuminous" is like "irregardless" -- not a word!

I may be a wet blanket, but this would get under my skin the same way that "Think Different" did.
Poor english != hip.

That said, I'd love a general extension of the dark/translucent look of the dashboards to the whole package.

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 02:59 PM
Just to clarify: I am talking about the full screen mode. Notice how the translucency effect is used to enhance the interface. I assume you are talking about the metal theme when quicktime is not in full screen mode. I agree with you there.

ah... yes that was what I was referring to. In that case, you're right.

coorspate
Dec 11, 2006, 03:04 PM
Apple - Alt - Ctrl - 8 = New UI :p

you just made me scare the ***** out of myself!:eek:

rotflmao!:D

MarkCollette
Dec 11, 2006, 03:15 PM
I don't mind the idea of a new UI, but, honestly -- must we pick a name that isn't a word?

"Luminous"? Fine.
"Illuminate"? OK.
but
"Illuminous" is like "irregardless" -- not a word!

I may be a wet blanket, but this would get under my skin the same way that "Think Different" did.
Poor english != hip.

It's harder to trademark real words.

deputy_doofy
Dec 11, 2006, 03:21 PM
...
I may be a wet blanket, but this would get under my skin the same way that "Think Different" did.
....

I used to think the same thing - "Think Different" is such poor english. It should obviously be "Think Differently." However, someone once brought something to my attention that I never thought before.

Imagine a designer coming in to your home to give you an idea how your place should be. The designer holds his hands out, "framing" your wall and says, "Think Red." He's not telling you to think redly - not HOW to think, but what to think. "Think (of the wall being) Red."

That said, the Apple slogan might have meant "Think Different", as in you should think of something different... something other than the PC.

Yes, a lot of thought put into something that may have been poor English, but it does work when you look at it from that angle (and English is very good at giving things different meanins based on how you meant it).

neven
Dec 11, 2006, 03:25 PM
I don't mind the idea of a new UI, but, honestly -- must we pick a name that isn't a word?

Misspelled, made-up, and "wacky" names have the advantages of being easier to trademark, standing out in searches, and distinguishing the product from the word itself. They have the disadvantages of sometimes being hard to remember and spell, and of ticking off grammar Nazis. Advantages win :)

I may be a wet blanket, but this would get under my skin the same way that "Think Different" did.
Poor english != hip.

"Think different" is not wrong. It's just not saying what you think it's saying. It doesn't mean "think differently," but "Think of things that are different." Like "Think politics" or "Think spicy." It's a contraction, and possibly a confusing one, but catchphrases are built on precisely that. "Think differently" would have been very clumsy. I'm guessing you don't correct people when they say "so long", "long time no see", or "damn good."

Grammar Nazi out :)

bleachthru
Dec 11, 2006, 03:36 PM
I just hope that iTunes 7 is not a preview of what to expect in this rumored UI, as I think it is extremely ugly, and very "un" apple in terms of UI aestetics. Well I guess I will have to hold my breath and see what happens...

TheBobcat
Dec 11, 2006, 03:42 PM
I seriously doubt Apple would make huge changes like White on Black menus and the like without a way to toggle it on and off. I think a little more customization would be cool, though. Not like the Windows 98 Desktop themes though.....*shudders. :eek:

Heres to getting a UI overhaul. Woo!

JGowan
Dec 11, 2006, 03:50 PM
Look at the Leopard preview, everthing is pretty dark. Look at the bars at the bottom, Time Machine or the general background for the icons of the previews.

Black all over the place. I sure hope it doesn't become too dark and I'd like to say I have faith in Apple but after the recent mess I am not too sure.True... I totally agree. I've been waiting for a different look for some time now from Apple and thought I'd have to wait for OS 11 to get one but it seems that MS has forced their hand. Considering how AQUA Vista has turned out to be with the glassy look, etc., it's obvious that Apple wants to separate itself from that look now and go with something darker, sleeker and hopefully, a lot cooler

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 03:52 PM
for people who are speculating as to it's looks, here's the obvious answer:

http://images.tribe.net/tribe/upload/photo/a7d/32e/a7d32e0b-2619-421b-96c5-d2c754b4c724

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 03:56 PM
I used to think the same thing - "Think Different" is such poor english. It should obviously be "Think Differently." However, someone once brought something to my attention that I never thought before.


but saying "Think Different" is thinking differently.

rsanuri
Dec 11, 2006, 03:58 PM
At least we are not seeing "BROWN" as the color for Leopard, that would be very funny...


Rsanuri

APPLENEWBIE
Dec 11, 2006, 04:05 PM
"You just made me scare the ***** out of myself!":eek:

ME TOO... YOU COULD AT LEAST WARN A GUY....SHEEESHHH...

spyderracer393
Dec 11, 2006, 04:10 PM
i just want it all to look like Final Cut Pro and i would be pleased as punch.

agreed!! I love the pro app themes such as final cut pro/express, logic pro/express, aperture, as well as the rest...so much easier on the eyes than the regular big aqua...

BillyShears
Dec 11, 2006, 04:10 PM
Doesn't a UI change seem like a rather large change to keep from developers?

I guess there could be enough time from January to whenever Leopard is released for developers to "catch up" and test the new UI but it seems questionable.

I mean ideally there should be no change necessary, but I can see some things breaking.


Also the current metaphors being used (Dashboard, Front Row, iPhoto slideshow, Time Machine) seem to take place outside of the window manager. I'm not sure how to explain what I mean exactly, but that look is good precisely because it doesn't fit in with the UI.

Front Row, for example, is designed for you to use away from your computer. Therefore, it would be impractical to use the same UI as the rest of the OS.

Similarly, Dashboard widgets aren't supposed to be apps -- they're "mini apps." (See Dashboard UI guidelines. It is explicitly stated that widgets are not supposed to look "Aqua.")

Time Machine is a harder case to make, but it seems "outside" the OS in the sense that it "transcends" time. I mean, using the metaphor they are, your current files are in folders on your hard drive. So where are the old versions? "Back in time." There's no place for them in the UI as-is. (They could have made a complex "folder" system, organized by date somehow, but somehow I think that would be less intuitive.)

iTunes' "Coverflow" UI is the same (though again this may be a bit of stretch). You are supposed to be manipulating physical albums -- there's no metaphor for this in Aqua UI guidelines. It's a new way of interacting, so it needs a new UI.

So what I'm getting at is these "glossy black" UIs are currently used for non-standard UI. (As far as I'm aware. There could be other apps I don't know about that use, especially pro apps.) I like that idea. It's still consistent. I'm not sure it would be a good idea to introduce glossy black into the overall UI, because you would lose the difference between the two UIs.

Still, I look forward to seeing what Apple comes up with.

JGowan
Dec 11, 2006, 04:21 PM
Thought I'd throw a little parchment on this biz-nitch for all those who might like it...

inkswamp
Dec 11, 2006, 04:26 PM
That is so cool!

I agree. I've been using Apple+option+control+8 over the last year. I've found that sometimes my eyes get strained looking at the computer screen for 8+ hours at work, and the background white seems annoyingly intense. Just hitting that key combo immediately brings some relief to my strained eyes toward the end of my shift. It's fun to do it in front of other Mac users at work to see their reaction.

BTW, I don't advise trying it with games. I managed to invoke a kernal panic trying to launch Quake 3 with the screen inverted.

lorien
Dec 11, 2006, 04:30 PM
Apple - Alt - Ctrl - 8 = New UI :p

Wow man! :cool:

bit density
Dec 11, 2006, 04:47 PM
As much as I think the Apple UI is better than nearly anything out there... I can't stand to stay in aqua for more than a couple of months. It is just too, too...

Shapeshifter helps alleviate that, and now that it is fully on Intel, I again love my mac. I wish that out of the millions that there were more than a handful that had the talent and time to take on the chrome of OSX and that there would be more choices for me. But there are enough to keep me from killing my computer.

jmbear
Dec 11, 2006, 04:52 PM
http://carlos.fugeelama.com/files/71602.this+thread+is+completely+useless%20without+images!!!.jpg

I loled

phytonix
Dec 11, 2006, 04:55 PM
Wow man! :cool:

Coool. I did not know that.

SiliconAddict
Dec 11, 2006, 04:57 PM
A new UI would be welcome. OS X's UI is, IMHO, getting a tad on the stale side. And black is the new white so why not. :P

geerlingguy
Dec 11, 2006, 05:04 PM
Coool. I did not know that.

Here's another spiffy thing to do:

1. Hold down control
2. Scroll up and down with your mouse (or trackpad).

If you ever wanted to watch a video fullscreen off a website or in QuickTime (without the pro version), here's a quick, easy and free way to do it! (I think this requires 10.4.8, though.

Lepton
Dec 11, 2006, 05:08 PM
I've been sure that a new UI look was in the offing. Leopard builds have done zero to the Finder, zero to the interface. That's because, IMO, they are going to drop in a new Finder and new interface.

Gloss black does seem like a likely candidate. Look at Front Row, iTunes, Leopard pages on the Apple site, and so on. And I'm guessing they want to unify the interface they use for the Pro stuff such as Final Cut. Darker, glossier.

But I wouldn't be surprised if the Appearance was changeable. Look at the Appearance popup in System Preferences, you've got Blue and Graphite in there. I can see it having Black (Glossy) White (Blue/Aqua) and Gray (flat like Pro apps). So people can stick with Aqua if they hate black, go to Black if they like it, and have Gray if they want the UI in the background for people who work with color etc. -Mike from www.myallo.com (http://www.myallo.com/)

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 05:09 PM
Here's another spiffy thing to do:

1. Hold down control
2. Scroll up and down with your mouse (or trackpad).

If you ever wanted to watch a video fullscreen off a website or in QuickTime (without the pro version), here's a quick, easy and free way to do it! (I think this requires 10.4.8, though.

love that little thing. it's things like that and apple alt control 8 that make osx so great. (although, in all fairness, pc does have shift alt printscreen.)

killmoms
Dec 11, 2006, 05:13 PM
love that little thing. it's things like that and apple alt control 8 that make osx so great. (although, in all fairness, pc does have shift alt printscreen.)

Shift+Alt+Printscreen? What does that do? I remember printscreen and alt+printscreen, but not with shift thrown in.

dagger01
Dec 11, 2006, 05:14 PM
I don't buy an ounce of this rumor. Sure, Apple is going to be adding some cool new features to Leopard's Aqua implementation, but I just don't see them scrapping the whole thing for a dot release of the OS. My guess, some moron saw Vista running fullscreen on someone's MacBook and thought it was the Mac OS.

Doesn't make sense to replace the UI in a dot release of the OS. Come on folks, something that major will be for Mac OS XI (11, or whatever it ends up as). Of course, there was speculation that Leopard may become OS XI, but the jury was still out the last I knew.

Or, I may be wrong and Apple will change their UI the same time that Microsoft does, but that seems a bit odd.

TheAnswer
Dec 11, 2006, 05:18 PM
Gloss black does seem like a likely candidate. Look at Front Row, iTunes, Leopard pages on the Apple site, and so on. And I'm guessing they want to unify the interface they use for the Pro stuff such as Final Cut. Darker, glossier.

I think Apple could do it tastefully, they just have to have moderation, not all black, nor all aqua, nor all white or brushed or whatever.

I think some things look good how they are now (aqua or graphite scrollbars and menu, iTunes sidebar, grey transparency as implemented in iPhoto, iTunes)...some things, not too hot (brushed interfaces, iTunes flat scroll bars).

There is no reason they can't combine this all together in some great looking package, they just need to make it consistent across their apps (or at least have a reasoned and consistent method for inconsistences (i.e. Mail, iCal, Address Book look slightly different from iLife apps, look slightly different from Finder due to functional reasons for differences, not some haphazard mixture).

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 05:18 PM
Shift+Alt+Printscreen? What does that do? I remember printscreen and alt+printscreen, but not with shift thrown in.

it puts it into some vision-disability mode with inverted colors. I only know that because in my programming class, when the teacher tells us to turn off our monitors while he teachers we do that (otherwise he sees the glow on our faces and knows we're coding.)

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 05:20 PM
I think Apple could do it tastefully, they just have to have moderation, not all black, nor all aqua, nor all white or brushed or whatever.

I think some things look good how they are now (aqua or graphite scrollbars and menu, iTunes sidebar, grey transparency as implemented in iPhoto, iTunes)...some things, not too hot (brushed interfaces, iTunes flat scroll bars).

There is no reason they can't combine this all together in some great looking package, they just need to make it consistent across their apps (or at least have a reasoned and consistent method for inconsistences (i.e. Mail, iCal, Address Book look slightly different from iLife apps, look slightly different from Finder due to functional reasons for differences, not some haphazard mixture).

like I said, look at coverflow. its on itunes, the itunes music store... now it would seem its on leopard.

mmzplanet
Dec 11, 2006, 05:27 PM
If this is introduced... I think it you will be able to choose from Light (current UI) or Dark (Black maybe?). It'd be an neat idea seeing we have MacBooks in a black or white. Maybe they will add Black iMacs one day too. Not sure I'd Like that.

But again who knows.... it could be nothing.

BillyShears
Dec 11, 2006, 05:32 PM
As a follow-up to my previous post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3140963&postcount=87), I should add I think the name "Illuminous" may refer to the new UI, but it goes alongside Aqua.

It will probably be used for non-standard things: buying from iTunes Store, Front Row, Dashboard, Coverflow, Time Machine, etc.

So "Illuminous" would be for developers, so they can standardize on this new look. (They would also need to publish and follow their guidelines.)

I think Aqua will be updated, hopefully getting rid of the brushed metal confusion, unifying the Aqua UI.

SiliconAddict
Dec 11, 2006, 05:36 PM
The new UI could be called Illuminati :p

lorductape
Dec 11, 2006, 05:39 PM
Genius.
we thought so :)


The new UI could be called Illuminati :p lol

kddpop
Dec 11, 2006, 05:41 PM
If this is introduced... I think it you will be able to choose from Light (current UI) or Dark (Black maybe?). It'd be an neat idea seeing we have MacBooks in a black or white. Maybe they will add Black iMacs one day too. Not sure I'd Like that.

But again who knows.... it could be nothing.

i like this idea of a couple of choices from which to choose.

~kyle

zioxide
Dec 11, 2006, 05:45 PM
Most of Apple's pro apps use a darker UI, which I find more pleasing and less strenuous on the eye.

I've tried UNO and ShapeShifter to apply a darker theme to the general OS, and largely have been pleased with my hacks to change the Aqua interface a little darker so it isn't as lickable. Aqua is so 2000. pfft :p

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l311/_spicyapple_/shapeshifter.png

Illuminous (name and concept) sounds like a worthy successor to Aqua from what I've read, so far. It's time for a UI change anyway, so I'm giving this rumour a 7/10.

Is there any way that I can get a link to that shapeshifter theme?

Also, I'm glad Apple is finally updating the Aqua GUI. It's starting to get boring. Whatever Apple does with it, I'm sure it will look awesome.

BillyShears
Dec 11, 2006, 05:47 PM
I highly doubt there will be a choice in UI. That does not seem to be the direction Apple has gone with OS X/iPod so far.

Also, if this rumour is true, this would likely be a whole new theme, and not just a colour change. (Why would a "black" option alongside "blue" and "graphite" be called "Illuminous"?) So I don't see it as the same as graphite/blue at all from what we know.

spicyapple
Dec 11, 2006, 06:02 PM
Is there any way that I can get a link to that shapeshifter theme?
I don't have the exact link, but the theme is called 7 pro (se7en pro, 2nd edition) by H8LesS. The theme can be downloaded from within the Shapeshifter preference pane in System Preferences.

The page where I might have downloaded the theme from: http://www.macthemes.net/reviews/themes.php?page=2

direzz
Dec 11, 2006, 06:03 PM
what the eff is aqua?!

Stridder44
Dec 11, 2006, 06:22 PM
what the eff is aqua?!


Aqua is the name given for the current UI of OS X. You know, the bubbleland you live in now?

The new UI could be called Illuminati :p


ROFL!!1

puuukeey
Dec 11, 2006, 06:24 PM
apple, form is important as long as it follows function

INNOVATE.

give us 3d UIs. give us physics. give us ZUIs. give us touch screens. stop burdening us with windows full of icons and scroll bars where we have to poke at our computers like monkeys in a science experiment.

iMeowbot
Dec 11, 2006, 06:38 PM
I think Apple could do it tastefully,
Or, they could attempt something like this (http://www.albenfaris.com/ourwork/themes.shtml) again *shudder*.

codo
Dec 11, 2006, 06:50 PM
Or, they could attempt something like this (http://www.albenfaris.com/ourwork/themes.shtml) again *shudder*.

I hope that was covered by AppleCare... barfing on your computer.

VIIGemina
Dec 11, 2006, 06:51 PM
Or, they could attempt something like this (http://www.albenfaris.com/ourwork/themes.shtml) again *shudder*.

I wish they would. The Copland themes were very cool. They weren't just collections of static images to be replaced. The UI elements had behaviors driven by code. Sort of like the pulsing default button in Aqua.

--Sebastian

Marble
Dec 11, 2006, 07:08 PM
I like the idea of moving into a user interface based on shadows, light, luminance, those things that "Luminous" implies. It would be a brilliant (pun) change of dimension from differently shaped/colored buttons. The search field in the system preferences is already sort of like this.

dashiel
Dec 11, 2006, 07:15 PM
I don't buy an ounce of this rumor. Sure, Apple is going to be adding some cool new features to Leopard's Aqua implementation, but I just don't see them scrapping the whole thing for a dot release of the OS. My guess, some moron saw Vista running fullscreen on someone's MacBook and thought it was the Mac OS.

Doesn't make sense to replace the UI in a dot release of the OS. Come on folks, something that major will be for Mac OS XI (11, or whatever it ends up as). Of course, there was speculation that Leopard may become OS XI, but the jury was still out the last I knew.

Or, I may be wrong and Apple will change their UI the same time that Microsoft does, but that seems a bit odd.

god. apple's decision to make major os updates as dot-releases has to be one of their worst marketing moves ever. so many people spread FUD about this, even from with the mac community it's not even funny.

10.1 was the only true dot release in X's history. 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 are the equivalent of 7, 8, 8.5 and 9. they are major releases.

as for not introducing massive UI shifts, apple did so with system 6, system 7 and OS 8.

==

personally i think that a GUI change has been in the cards for a long time at apple HQ. i see 10.0 - 10.4 as being the same thing as system 1-6. apple continually upgraded the system, features and capabilities adding new UI conventions here and there. the system 7 came along and cleaned it all up, no more multifinder, unified and spruced up UI, etc...

interestingly enough system 7 appeared a little less than 7 and a half years after system 1, 10.5 would be six years later, 7/8 if you count the public beta.

MrCrowbar
Dec 11, 2006, 07:26 PM
apple, form is important as long as it follows function

INNOVATE.

give us 3d UIs. give us physics. give us ZUIs. give us touch screens. stop burdening us with windows full of icons and scroll bars where we have to poke at our computers like monkeys in a science experiment.

It's funny cuz it's true. Keyboards and mouses have been around for quite a while now...

eXan
Dec 11, 2006, 07:35 PM
If Apple indeed changes the Aqua to that black gloss, that would be awful.

It looks ugly and dark in the GUI, and it's used in Vista! :eek: Apple copying Vista? :confused: :eek:

patseguin
Dec 11, 2006, 07:38 PM
Did it occur to anyone that maybe these UI changes are not coming until OS 11?

ChrisA
Dec 11, 2006, 07:45 PM
It's funny cuz it's true. Keyboards and mouses have been around for quite a while now...

You are right. Got first mouse in the early 80's and they weren't new then. If you can think of the next big UI idea, the one that will replace windows and a mouse you will be rich.

Toch screens are slow if they are large, to much arm motion. Voice is slow too.

I think you could do great things if the display were a pair of 3D goggles and a camera that would read hand/finger movements.

What I really want is the secretary who can "find Bob and get him on the phone for me" and knows which "Bob" I mean and who might know where he is. and then I say "I need to go to Huston again Tuesday for an afternoon meeting" and the computer knows how to take it from there.... Maybe we will have this in 50 years.

But then when they made the film "2001", in the 60's they thought we'd have "Hal" by 2001. Now I'm saying "50 years". Maybe.

eXan
Dec 11, 2006, 07:59 PM
Did it occur to anyone that maybe these UI changes are not coming until OS 11?

This seems logical, but who knows? Its Apple ;)

AidenShaw
Dec 11, 2006, 08:13 PM
It looks ugly and dark in the GUI, and it's used in Vista! :eek: Apple copying Vista? :confused: :eek:
...has had its photocopiers running too, it seems....

stcanard
Dec 11, 2006, 08:19 PM
This seems logical, but who knows? Its Apple ;)

There's never going to be an OSXI, there's too much marketing invested in the name "OSX".

I've already started referring to OSX version 4, OSX version 5, etc. My guess is Apple will either go that way or just move away from version numbers (like MS did years ago) and keep pushing the naming. Version numbers have been deemed too confusing for the average person (yes, there is a tinge of sarcasm in that statement -- everyone, Microsoft, Intel, etc are moving away from numbers because its too hard to hide what you're doing).

What I am doing is taking a very long winded way to say there are very good odds that Jaguar _was_ OS 11 and Leopard is going to be OS 12.

Clive At Five
Dec 11, 2006, 08:20 PM
Did it occur to anyone that maybe these UI changes are not coming until OS 11?

No one said these changes would be monumental. The claims of Apple switching to a "black" or even "darker" UI are unwarranted. One might deduce that from a name like "Illuminous" that were would be a shift towards light, or glowing.

Plus, you never know. Just as system 7.5 was a SIGNIFICANT upgrade from system 7, 10.5 might also be a major turning point in the life of OS X. However, just like 7.5, there might not be a complete rebuild of the OS until "OS 11." The point is, we don't really know how Apple is regarding Leopard. Is it just another OS X? Is it monumental enough to make changes to the UI?

My guess is that there is added heat due to a coinciding Windows release (and one that is so intently bent on "catching up to OS X"), Apple will do everything they can to put the current OS X behind them.

And when you think about OS X, it has truly been a work in progress. From the barely usable puma to a finally working Jaguar to a mature Panther and a refined Tiger, Apple should finally be at a point where they're ready to take everything they've learned and release a truly polished and exquisite OS.

-Clive

pepp5
Dec 11, 2006, 08:25 PM
What I really want is the secretary who can "find Bob and get him on the phone for me" and knows which "Bob" I mean and who might know where he is. and then I say "I need to go to Huston again Tuesday for an afternoon meeting" and the computer knows how to take it from there.... Maybe we will have this in 50 years.

Can you say .... Newton? I knew that you could. It's been done, since early 90s. It was the Newton Assistance feature, see second paragraph here: http://www.msu.edu/~luckie/gallery/mp100.htm

Raidersmojo
Dec 11, 2006, 08:53 PM
I like the OS X name it has such a sexy feel to it...calling it OS 11 sounds kinda plan

I hope they have more of a catchy name!

CJD2112
Dec 11, 2006, 09:04 PM
I've heard from various sources that the big secret is not just Leopard's incorporation of the soon to be released iPhone and iTV but that Apple plans on ditching the 10.X all together for Mac OS 11 along with a new scheme (i.e. no longer panther/tiger, etc.). As Apple wants to fully capitalize on the release of the Intel processors, they want the next OS to be a completely fresh start. The finder has been rewritten to incorporate many various improvements. There is also talk Apple may incorporate torrents into the system. The initial release of videos in iTunes wasn't primarily to watch movies on a small iPod or even the rumored widescreen 6th generation iPod, but to test market the overall response and sales of movies in iTunes. Assuming they sold above and beyond expectations, Apple plans on releasing widescreen and possible hi-def movies through the assistance of torrents to facilitate download speeds as 1-3 gb and even 30-40 gb movies would take forever as it currently stands. As per the UI alterations, I don't know from any sources if that is valid, although I wouldn't be surprised. Apple will most definitely want to release this as the next big OS, and changes in graphical interface are always on that check list. Just some food for thought. Discuss lol ;)

Chundles
Dec 11, 2006, 09:11 PM
I've heard from various sources that the big secret is not just Leopard's incorporation of the soon to be released iPhone and iTV but that Apple plans on ditching the 10.X all together for Mac OS 11 along with a new scheme (i.e. no longer panther/tiger, etc.). As Apple wants to fully capitalize on the release of the Intel processors, they want the next OS to be a completely fresh start. I also have know that the finder has been totally rewritten to incorporate many various improvements. Also, there is talk Apple may incorporate torrents into the system. The release of videos in iTunes wasn't primarily to watch movies on a small iPod or even the rumored widescreen 6th generation iPod, but to test market the overall sales and response of movies in iTunes in general. Assuming they sold above and beyond specs, Apple plans on releasing widescreen and possible hi-def movies through the assistance of torrents to facilitate download speeds as 1-3 gb and even 30-40 gb movies would take forever as it currently stands. As per the UI alterations, I don't know from any sources if that is valid, although I wouldn't be surprised. Apple will most definitely want to release this as the next big OS, and changes in graphical interface are always on that check list. Just some food for thought. Discuss lol ;)

Yeah, except they're still supporting PPC processors in this release.

I think OS 11 will be the first Intel-only operating system from Apple and it's a fair way off yet. X (remember it's "ten" not "ex") is just a number but that number has certain connotations and one of them is it's ability to run on PPC processors. I reckon in about 6 or 7 years (three 10.x releases) we'll see Apple take the next monumental leap forward in it's OS - the last couple of the 10.x releases probably won't support the G4 (remember, the G4 isn't that old - you could still buy brand new G4-based computers just a few months ago and the G5 wasn't completely replaced until August so both processors should rightly have some legs left in them support-wise, at least another three years based on AppleCare commitments) and will be G5-only but they will still be Universal.

OS 11 will be the first of the Intel-only Apple OS range, what they call it is another matter altogether.

mattster16
Dec 11, 2006, 09:19 PM
Most of Apple's pro apps use a darker UI, which I find more pleasing and less strenuous on the eye.


I sort of like that look as well. It is well known in graphic/web design though, that white text on a dark background stands out more with higher contrast but is actually quite harsh on the eye and hard to read for extended lenths of time.

So it is kind of a tradeoff, hopefully Apple will be able to strike a good balance.

CJD2112
Dec 11, 2006, 09:20 PM
Yeah, except they're still supporting PPC processors in this release.

I think OS 11 will be the first Intel-only operating system from Apple and it's a fair way off yet. X (remember it's "ten" not "ex") is just a number but that number has certain connotations and one of them is it's ability to run on PPC processors. I reckon in about 6 or 7 years (three 10.x releases) we'll see Apple take the next monumental leap forward in it's OS - the last couple of the 10.x releases probably won't support the G4 (remember, the G4 isn't that old - you could still buy brand new G4-based computers just a few months ago and the G5 wasn't completely replaced until August so both processors should rightly have some legs left in them support-wise, at least another three years based on AppleCare commitments) and will be G5-only but they will still be Universal.

OS 11 will be the first of the Intel-only Apple OS range, what they call it is another matter altogether.

Keep in mind, Apple had a department compiling an Intel OS version for years under wraps. There's no reason why that same department wouldn't be working on the next OS as well. Apple wouldn't be releasing an Intel only OS until years from now. Think of how many graphic designers, professionals, etc. who use Power PC's systems to date, many of them still haven't made the switch to Intel processors as many design software companies such as Adobe will not be releasing Universal Binary versions till mid to late 2007. If Apple wants to keep their Power PC customers happy, including the ones that dropped big $$$ for Power Mac G5's right before the Intel systems were released, they will not be releasing Intel only version for at least 2-3 years. I am 99.9% certain this next OS will be OS 11, with both Power PC and Intel versions. Apple has placed much of its manpower in the new OS alongside the minor tweaks in the past few years to Tiger. Time will tell though. Let's place some bets, might be fun LOL ;)...

TheBobcat
Dec 11, 2006, 09:27 PM
OSX has always been processor independent, I don't see why it would start to be with 10.5. There's still plenty of room for improvement on OSX, plus back in the beginning Steve said this was their base for the next 20 years.

I doubt Apple originally wanted to ditch Aqua after 10.4, however, they might due to Windows ripping it off so blatantly. Apple doesn't want to look like Windows, and can't keep bitching forever about how Redmond has started their photocopiers. I wouldn't be surprised if over the next couple releases Apple really tones down Aqua and brings in something else. It might not be this rumor of Illumnious, but its definitely plausible. Vista will look like yesterdays news, OSX will be setting the bar with UI, and all will be right with the universe. Then with whatever comes after Vista, MS can start ripping off the next thing.

Hobofuzz
Dec 11, 2006, 09:36 PM
Can you say .... Newton? I knew that you could. It's been done, since early 90s. It was the Newton Assistance feature, see second paragraph here: http://www.msu.edu/~luckie/gallery/mp100.htm
Assist works INCREDIBLY well too. I love it. Just tell the Newton to "remember tomorrow", and it'll set up a To-Do for tomorrow. Tell it to "Schedule friday" and it'll add a meeting to friday. Tell it to "Call -insert name here-" and it'll search for the name specified in the Names database and ask you which one to call. Tell it to "Find Me" and it'll bring up the Find program, put "me" into it, then display your info.
Apple could easily implement the Assist functionality into Mac OS X. I wouldn't be surprised if there was already a 3rd-party program that does this, actually.

areyouwishing
Dec 11, 2006, 10:13 PM
Illuminous? Are you sure they didn't call it FTFF (http://joechip.net/brian/2006/11/27/ftff-means-fix-the-****ing-finder/)?

maxrobertson
Dec 11, 2006, 10:25 PM
I actually think that the tackiest thing is the background. Looks like some of the first sci-fi movies ever made.

really? I think it looks really cool.

justflie
Dec 11, 2006, 11:22 PM
There is also talk Apple may incorporate torrents into the system. The initial release of videos in iTunes wasn't primarily to watch movies on a small iPod or even the rumored widescreen 6th generation iPod, but to test market the overall response and sales of movies in iTunes. Assuming they sold above and beyond expectations, Apple plans on releasing widescreen and possible hi-def movies through the assistance of torrents to facilitate download speeds as 1-3 gb and even 30-40 gb movies would take forever as it currently stands.

Hmm...very interesting. I hadn't thought of torrents as a solution to that problem!!! Not a bad idea though.

Spagolli94
Dec 11, 2006, 11:49 PM
I just hope that iTunes 7 is not a preview of what to expect in this rumored UI, as I think it is extremely ugly, and very "un" apple in terms of UI aestetics. Well I guess I will have to hold my breath and see what happens...

I agree. iTunes 7 looks like a gloomy/rainy day compared to most aqua apps.

rhpixelfreak
Dec 12, 2006, 12:11 AM
I'm excited about this news but a little scared also.
I think mac os' GUI was at its best in panther and it has gone all over the place with a lot of wrong choices (mostly iTunes)

Coincidentally, I went into the macheist site (advertised here in macrumors) and saw details about the Disco CD burning app.
"everything encompassed in a stylish, custom window that might offer an early peek at where Apple may take OS X's UI"

The app looks great http://discoapp.com/
if they make mac os look like this I'll be relieved and happy (so long as it's unified, maybe nothing is more important than this)

iMacZealot
Dec 12, 2006, 12:14 AM
There are a few things I'd like to see done in Aqua:

1) Get rid of pinstriping (like what they did in Tiger) and replace it with what they've done in Tiger.
2) Get rid of brushed metal (like what I've seen in the Leopard demos). iChat looks a lot better this way!
3) I'd like it if these shiny inserts where pinstriping and brushed metal once were to be darker like what I've seen in UNO. (Great download, btw)
4) The ability to customise the aqua colors instead of Aqua Blue and Graphite for scrollers, buttons, etc. I think it'd be cool if we could change it to purple, green, etc.

If it shifts to "glossy black" like some of the new iPhoto, I won't be happy. I don't think black looks good. Black text on dark looks better than white text on black.

sbrhwkp3
Dec 12, 2006, 12:24 AM
http://carlos.fugeelama.com/files/71602.this+thread+is+completely+useless%20without+images!!!.jpg

hahaha that's too funny!

Am3822
Dec 12, 2006, 12:55 AM
Hmm. That shapeshifter theme has an elegant 'no-nonsense' look about it. If Apple strives for simplicity and elegance, such a UI scheme would not be a bad idea, at least as a built-in option.

Kid Cobalt
Dec 12, 2006, 01:34 AM
Everyone should chill out. Sascha Hohne is now working for apple.

http://www.rad-e8.com

We all know the guy makes stella icons and it seems apple knows this to.
He was working on an Illuminated set of Minium icons for ages but they never saw the light (pardon the pun) of day.

Everythings gonna be alllllllll right.

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 01:44 AM
I actually think that the tackiest thing is the background. Looks like some of the first sci-fi movies ever made.

It does like look a matte background for a Star Trek episode, but I like the sense of space and time it gives. I like the image.

barnaby
Dec 12, 2006, 01:54 AM
I don't buy an ounce of this rumor. Sure, Apple is going to be adding some cool new features to Leopard's Aqua implementation, but I just don't see them scrapping the whole thing for a dot release of the OS. My guess, some moron saw Vista running fullscreen on someone's MacBook and thought it was the Mac OS.

Doesn't make sense to replace the UI in a dot release of the OS. Come on folks, something that major will be for Mac OS XI (11, or whatever it ends up as). Of course, there was speculation that Leopard may become OS XI, but the jury was still out the last I knew.

Or, I may be wrong and Apple will change their UI the same time that Microsoft does, but that seems a bit odd.

Apple is trying to take the role of the innovator, not the copier. Overhauling the UI just because Microsoft did seems a little insecure. Other hardware manufacturers change their hardware appearance with each generation. Apple is much slower in this regard. Why? because it's recognizable.

Let's not forget that while aqua runs fine on a sub-ghz G4, aero has rather heavy resource requirements. Eye candy is fine, but not at the cost of functionality.

I think we'll see a few cleanups. Hopefully we'll see much less brushed aluminum. I think we'll see a new finder. I think we'll see core animation in a few spots (as if that isn't change enough for the UI). And I think we'll see a LOT of changes to make it easier to implement UIs (new Interface Builder).

shabbasuraj
Dec 12, 2006, 01:58 AM
10 bux.. whatever the new GUI is Windows will copy it.

iMacZealot
Dec 12, 2006, 02:00 AM
I don't mind the aluminum as long as they choose good hues. I'm not very happy with what they did with iTunes 7, but I'd be happy if they went in the direction of UNO.

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 02:01 AM
Apple is probably paying a great deal of attention to Vista and Aero.

They're looking at it and going "well, now we know what not to do." :D

Apple has certaintly been working on Aqua for the last few years, look at the differences in the iLife apps, Final Cut, and Aperture. There's some tinkering going on that has nothing to do with Aero or Longwait.

wyrmintheapple
Dec 12, 2006, 02:08 AM
from their site:

“Apple continues to gloss over the interface, refining it even more and there is an overly presence of black gloss.”

An overly presence?? Thats not even english.

I could maybe see a black theme for the menubar and menus, with all the aluminium stuff left as-is. Like another theme, like the rest of the black/white thing apple has going on. I dont think it'll be a radical redesign though.

like this....
http://static.flickr.com/124/319761056_9b037fcb52_b.jpg

Supa_Fly
Dec 12, 2006, 02:52 AM
You are right. Got first mouse in the early 80's and they weren't new then. If you can think of the next big UI idea, the one that will replace windows and a mouse you will be rich.

Toch screens are slow if they are large, to much arm motion. Voice is slow too.

I think you could do great things if the display were a pair of 3D goggles and a camera that would read hand/finger movements.

What I really want is the secretary who can "find Bob and get him on the phone for me" and knows which "Bob" I mean and who might know where he is. and then I say "I need to go to Huston again Tuesday for an afternoon meeting" and the computer knows how to take it from there.... Maybe we will have this in 50 years.

But then when they made the film "2001", in the 60's they thought we'd have "Hal" by 2001. Now I'm saying "50 years". Maybe.

I venture that even for the physically disabled (unless those born or have become 75% or more blind) that human Iris & eye focus direction detection is the new interface for any new age UI. Think of the apache helicopter Eye reticle, now emagine without that that an imbedded screen camera like iSight can detect you focusing on an object/element > and even blinking twice or 1 eye blinking is selecting or right clicking for contextual menu respectively or how about a quick & slight circular focused sight of that object with the eye. Your eye doesnt move to circle your vision around this letter "I" does it? Unless you've got it on 50 type on a 30" Apple LCD Cinema.

Its very fast if implemented correctly and the ability to focus on background images through an opaque foreground object (I think opaque is the word I'm looking for = see through), can be done. Your iris does the focus.

BONUS Mac OS II A New Resurgence will be able to let you know when a new prescription or new visit to the optometrist is needed ;)

Hobofuzz
Dec 12, 2006, 02:56 AM
I'm excited about this news but a little scared also.
I think mac os' GUI was at its best in panther and it has gone all over the place with a lot of wrong choices (mostly iTunes)

Coincidentally, I went into the macheist site (advertised here in macrumors) and saw details about the Disco CD burning app.
"everything encompassed in a stylish, custom window that might offer an early peek at where Apple may take OS X's UI"

The app looks great http://discoapp.com/
if they make mac os look like this I'll be relieved and happy (so long as it's unified, maybe nothing is more important than this)

Disco is crap. Just use it for a few minutes and you'll absolutely HATE its UI. It uses transparency where transparency is not needed (Think 10.0 transparent title bars, except it's the whole freakin' app minus the title bar this time)

I hope to God/Buddha/Satan/Vishnu/Jeebu/Etc. Apple doesn't go that route.

benbow
Dec 12, 2006, 03:30 AM
Lately I have been running virtual Windows XP on an auxillary 23" monitor next to my new iMac. I was fiddling with Windows appearance and finally discovered an all black background to go behind "classic motif" windows. Suddenly, the XP visual experience did not look so dorky.

I thought I could find a similar almost glossy black background for the iMac but no such luck. I'd have to create a all-black image and import it to get the same effect. I'm for ditching all the obnoxious hot color patterns or stale scene backgrounds plus the goofy screen savers and adopting this "depths of empty space" motif. Maybe the Vista and Leopard GUI designers are heading in this direction.

shrimpdesign
Dec 12, 2006, 04:02 AM
For those of you who want a black GUI before Apple does or doesn't make one ...

http://www.macthemesforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=16777342

Superdrive
Dec 12, 2006, 04:46 AM
from their site:

“Apple continues to gloss over the interface, refining it even more and there is an overly presence of black gloss.”

An overly presence?? Thats not even english.

I could maybe see a black theme for the menubar and menus, with all the aluminium stuff left as-is. Like another theme, like the rest of the black/white thing apple has going on. I dont think it'll be a radical redesign though.

like this....
snip
That looks about right, but I would imagine a complementary desktop in the blues or greens. I'm up for options when it comes to this next UI. Just in case one sucks, give us that "classic" look.

Diatribe
Dec 12, 2006, 04:52 AM
for people who are speculating as to it's looks, here's the obvious answer:

http://images.tribe.net/tribe/upload/photo/a7d/32e/a7d32e0b-2619-421b-96c5-d2c754b4c724

Wooh, how did you get CoverFlow to be in a separate window?

grahamtearne
Dec 12, 2006, 04:56 AM
Wooh, how did you get CoverFlow to be in a separate window?

before itunes 7 coverflow was a seperate app. this was bought by apple and implemted into itunes 7.

http://www.steelskies.com/coverflow/

Diatribe
Dec 12, 2006, 04:58 AM
It does like look a matte background for a Star Trek episode, but I like the sense of space and time it gives. I like the image.

I'd would have loved the animation of the millennium falcon from star wars when they go into hyperspace... :D

Diatribe
Dec 12, 2006, 05:00 AM
before itunes 7 coverflow was a seperate app. this was bought by apple and implemted into itunes 7.

http://www.steelskies.com/coverflow/

Now that you say that, it really looks like the old coverflow. On first glance I thought it to be the iTunes one and I'd really like that in a separate window.
Or at least in FrontRow. Please Apple put coverflow in FrontRow.

Evangelion
Dec 12, 2006, 05:07 AM
First thing I was reminded of when I read "black glossy look" was the fullscreen-UI in iPhoto and in various Apple pro-apps, not Vista.

reflex
Dec 12, 2006, 05:11 AM
I wouldn't mind a few more options for the UI than blue and graphite. And I have to say I like the black in Vista.

slackpacker
Dec 12, 2006, 05:19 AM
Disco is crap. Just use it for a few minutes and you'll absolutely HATE its UI. It uses transparency where transparency is not needed (Think 10.0 transparent title bars, except it's the whole freakin' app minus the title bar this time)

I hope to God/Buddha/Satan/Vishnu/Jeebu/Etc. Apple doesn't go that route.

Like everything you can turn it off. Disco works pretty good... I don't know why you are being so harsh? Its still beta ya know.

Evangelion
Dec 12, 2006, 05:23 AM
"Illuminous" is like "irregardless" -- not a word!

Yes it is! it means "Without lack of regard"!

:p

Evangelion
Dec 12, 2006, 05:35 AM
god. apple's decision to make major os updates as dot-releases has to be one of their worst marketing moves ever. so many people spread FUD about this, even from with the mac community it's not even funny.

10.1 was the only true dot release in X's history. 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 are the equivalent of 7, 8, 8.5 and 9. they are major releases.

I see no problems with Apple's policy regarding updates. They seem to be consistent with other major projects. 10.x all retained the same look and feel (with some tweaks to the UI), bundled apps were updated to new versions, and new features were introduced. They also retained binary-compatibility. Take a look at different versions of OS X. While there are differences between versions, they are all clearly very closely related to each other. That makes it sensible to call all of them "OS X". I see no reason why Apple should have released OS11, OS12, OS13 and so forth, as opposed to 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4. If anything, this helps Apple to build a solid brand for the OS.

cwedl
Dec 12, 2006, 05:35 AM
Regardless of any interface change, I'm looking forward to the release, Macworld 2007 and anything else Apple releases, whilst I Have become more rational about what I buy I always like what Apple brings out.

sparksinspace
Dec 12, 2006, 05:45 AM
[attn, possible flame bait]
all this glossy aqua illuminous aero stuff is just at the surface.... what about giving us something useful - like the option to have the Menu Bar attached to its application window? I find it anoying having to move the mouse across acres of other windows and desktop to go to the menu bar. it was appropriate in Lisa and original Mac days with their tiny screens but not when large screens are the norm. why not allow the user to choose?
[flame bait off]

SpaceJello
Dec 12, 2006, 05:58 AM
Am I the only one that doesn't like Aqua as much? The big chunky traffic light buttons, the lovely grey pinstrips, the bad looking brush metal, the schizophrenic dock icons (i wish they matches more. Have you seen the new time machine icon? it looks absolutely out of place)...etc

The worst I must say is the Spaces icon. Its ugly.

The times I install new OSX, I quickly install shapeshifter right after to rid the brushmetal. Even the unified look is getting boring. I do love how final cut/pro apps look. I seriously wish apple would move towards that look for the whole UI experience. When ever I use final cut, and switch to finder at the same time I feel like I am going back to kindergarden with bright bulky shapes.

With that said, I would love a black or a dark grey version of aqua and by that I don't just mean having the buttons change color or a glossy vista black. If you look at the leopard previews on safari's dashboard ability, its a totally different icon from the rest. It is a black button (a bit too glossy I say) but nonetheless, beauitful. I am sure at the end either that button is going to be like other safari buttons or the whole safari will change to fit that button.

SpaceJello
Dec 12, 2006, 06:00 AM
[attn, possible flame bait]
all this glossy aqua illuminous aero stuff is just at the surface.... what about giving us something useful - like the option to have the Menu Bar attached to its application window? I find it anoying having to move the mouse across acres of other windows and desktop to go to the menu bar. it was appropriate in Lisa and original Mac days with their tiny screens but not when large screens are the norm. why not allow the user to choose?
[flame bait off]

Have you ever opened photoshop when you have a lot windows or other things already opened? It's horrendous trying to find your palettes, tools and files because each of them is a different window.

iMeowbot
Dec 12, 2006, 06:17 AM
The app looks great http://discoapp.com/
if they make mac os look like this I'll be relieved and happy (so long as it's unified, maybe nothing is more important than this)
Yep. Every time I find myself at the shell using some überdorky sed command I wish I could have forgotten 20 years ago to rename a batch of files because the Finder isn't smart enough, I mutter to myself "gosh, this would all be so much better if the windows only emitted smoke."
Like everything you can turn it off. Disco works pretty good... I don't know why you are being so harsh? Its still beta ya know.
I'm not sure that use of the word "beta" is a legitimate excuse when it's accompanied by:
63920

Nym
Dec 12, 2006, 06:58 AM
You're all ungrateful :D IMO Apple has given us the best GUI so far and everyone just disses Aqua. I love it, I installed shapeshifter and there's not a single theme that I saw (and applied) that actually looks as good, solid and coherent as the Default OSX Aqua. The only Hack I installed was UNO, and that was all I wanted, I didn't like the brushed metal at all..

I think we're all used to the best, so it's easy to say bad things about it, take for example some posts above, a user complaining about OSX icons (especially the Time Machine one) and you can see what I'm talking about, turn on a PC and look at the Windoze Icons (even in Vista) they're nowhere as crystal clear as Mac OSX ones, why are we complaining after all? Is there any doubt that OSX Aqua beats any other mainstream GUI available?
I guess Apple could improve the GUI in Leopard, but a black one? geez, that is the opposite of what they want to do IMO. Clear, Clean, Smooth, doesn't decribe black to me...
And whatsup with having the title bars on top of every window? that would look awful, it's one of the things that make me look to my Mac and think, "I'm glad there's an alternative to Windows".
Anyway, I trust Apple's designers, whatever they come up with will be top notch, and we all should know that by now, have a little faith and use UNO while Leopard isn't here :)

FWIW - I LOVEEEE MY BUBBLE/GEL/CANDY GUI! WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE TURDS INSTEAD? :D
Sorry....Just got a little nervous for you all flaming the Aqua GUI, have some respect for the poor baby, he loves you all!

Panu
Dec 12, 2006, 07:08 AM
I have a Dell and an iMac across from each other in the same room. I'm running Tiger on the iMac, and the final version of Vista Ultimate on the Dell (I was a beta tester). The graphics card on the Dell lets me see the Aero interface. Next to XP's Playskool interface, Tiger looked professional, but next to Vista's photographic interface, I think most people would rightly or wrongly find it a tad cartoonish.

Before you fling that tomato, let me tell you I have already gotten a blue screen in Vista when I tried to install--not use--a driver that turned out to be incompatible.

I have been hoping that Apple would tweak the Aqua interface. I'm sure that whatever they do will be better and more professional looking that what Microsoft has come up with. I'm sure they already have Vista. It shouldn't be hard for them to outdo it.

So no fear. Leopard's interface, assuming it changes, will be better than Vista.

fraggle
Dec 12, 2006, 07:09 AM
I would hate to see "Aqua" go. :( If they do change the UI theme, at least make it a choice for the user.

Historically Apple is not very good at giving users choice. Normally they (=Steve) decide what is best for the user...

Mainyehc
Dec 12, 2006, 07:31 AM
[attn, possible flame bait]
all this glossy aqua illuminous aero stuff is just at the surface.... what about giving us something useful - like the option to have the Menu Bar attached to its application window? I find it anoying having to move the mouse across acres of other windows and desktop to go to the menu bar. it was appropriate in Lisa and original Mac days with their tiny screens but not when large screens are the norm. why not allow the user to choose?
[flame bait off]

Not to flame you, but if you want to have menu bars attached to windows, why don't you stick up with Windows instead? :rolleyes:

Apple has had the menu bar at the top, detached from the app window, since the Lisa and the Mac System 1, for two reasons: to save screen space, and to take advantage of Fitt's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitt%27s_law)... Unless you work with a 60'' screen or something along those lines, you'll still be better off with Fitt's Law for the menu bar... Windows only takes advantage of it on the Start button, and on the close button and the app icon menu on maximized windows...

kalisphoenix
Dec 12, 2006, 08:04 AM
Am I the only one that doesn't like Aqua as much? The big chunky traffic light buttons, the lovely grey pinstrips, the bad looking brush metal, the schizophrenic dock icons (i wish they matches more. Have you seen the new time machine icon? it looks absolutely out of place)...etc

"big chunky traffic light buttons"? They're considerably smaller than the mouse cursor.

Maybe it's just me, but I spend way more time looking at text entry fields than I do looking at scrollbars and comparing dock icons. I spend more time bitching about iTunes 7's seeming inability to properly order album tracks than complaining about the new scrollbars, and I certainly spend more time wishing Front Row would play VIDEO_TS folders than I do staring at the traffic light buttons.

Apple needs to renew their attack on goals like stability, power, and versatility. Apple's really good at making something 90% great and then leaving off the last 10%, even though it's no more difficult to implement (and, in certain cases *cough* Front Row *cough* they actually explicitly remove functionality the apps already have).

aLoC
Dec 12, 2006, 08:21 AM
Has the music on the Time Machine video changed? I swear it was different when it first came out...

lorductape
Dec 12, 2006, 08:22 AM
Wooh, how did you get CoverFlow to be in a separate window?

no idea. picture from google. cool though, I'll see if I can figure it out

AvSRoCkCO1067
Dec 12, 2006, 08:25 AM
Not to flame you, but if you want to have menu bars attached to windows, why don't you stick up with Windows instead? :rolleyes:

Apple has had the menu bar at the top, detached from the app window, since the Lisa and the Mac System 1, for two reasons: to save screen space, and to take advantage of Fitt's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitt%27s_law)... Unless you work with a 60'' screen or something along those lines, you'll still be better off with Fitt's Law for the menu bar... Windows only takes advantage of it on the Start button, and on the close button and the app icon menu on maximized windows...

At first, I preferred the menus on top of the window as well. Now, I could never go back - I love the menubar!!!

aLoC
Dec 12, 2006, 08:28 AM
no idea. picture from google. cool though, I'll see if I can figure it out

Double clicking any playlist opens it in a new window.

MacVault
Dec 12, 2006, 08:30 AM
[attn, possible flame bait]
all this glossy aqua illuminous aero stuff is just at the surface.... what about giving us something useful - like the option to have the Menu Bar attached to its application window? I find it anoying having to move the mouse across acres of other windows and desktop to go to the menu bar. it was appropriate in Lisa and original Mac days with their tiny screens but not when large screens are the norm. why not allow the user to choose?
[flame bait off]

YES! You've got my vote! The more I use OS X the more I dislike the menu bar. I much prefer how Windows has the "task bar" at the bottom of the screen and then menus are on their respective windows. I wish Apple would do this. The current OS X menu bar is too OS 9-ish.

panamajack
Dec 12, 2006, 08:40 AM
It appears as though the power of a single thread has shut down the site ...

It's a topic for another thread I realize, but folks here on the forums (as well as MR writers) constantly grade sites "reliability" (usually negative), I'd like to know what readers top 5 rumour mill sites are ?

MacVault
Dec 12, 2006, 08:50 AM
Am I the only one that doesn't like Aqua as much? The big chunky traffic light buttons, the lovely grey pinstrips, the bad looking brush metal, the schizophrenic dock icons (i wish they matches more. Have you seen the new time machine icon? it looks absolutely out of place)...etc... [snip]

No - You're not the only one who doesn't like Aqua. I very much dislike it... the buttons, the the rounded bubbly scroll bars, the pinstripes, brushed metal, etc. The Dock I just don't like at all. The more I use XP/Vista the worse I feel about the OS X GUI. Apple needs to fix all this with Leopard. Refine and polish the UI, etc. Apple really needs to work on the way users interact with networking, shares, etc. OS X's networking really sucks. Windows is way ahead in all of these areas.

Panu
Dec 12, 2006, 08:59 AM
Apple has had the menu bar at the top, detached from the app window, since the Lisa and the Mac System 1, for two reasons: to save screen space, and to take advantage of Fitt's Law

I follow the reasoning behind having the application menu always at the top, but now that monitors are getting to be the size of football fields, that puts the menu too far away. Since the menu and the application window are in different places, if you are looking at the window, you aren't looking at the menu, and you might not notice that it changed--especially when you accidentally switch to a hidden application.

For example, I have unblocked pop-up windows in Safari by mistake when I wanted to empty the Trash in Mail with Command+K.

I can see disadvantages to having the menu bar in the application window, because that means that an application must have at least one window open at all times.

I'm not entirely happy with either approach. Being a user, I can point out the problem. Not being a user-interface designer, I can't come up with a solution.

Nym
Dec 12, 2006, 09:05 AM
No - You're not the only one who doesn't like Aqua. I very much dislike it... the buttons, the the rounded bubbly scroll bars, the pinstripes, brushed metal, etc. The Dock I just don't like at all. The more I use XP/Vista the worse I feel about the OS X GUI. Windows is way ahead in all of these areas.

Windows ahead of OSX in terms of GUI? WHOA, that's a first :D
I can never understand some people.. do you prefer the Windows All Programs infinite list compared to the dock? or the Program Files mess compared to the Applications folder? I just don't understand :o...

AidenShaw
Dec 12, 2006, 09:12 AM
...I have already gotten a blue screen in Vista when I tried to install--not use--a driver that turned out to be incompatible...
It actually makes a lot of sense for an incompatible driver to cause a crash during installation - that's when the driver's code is loaded into memory, connected to the kernel routines and data, and its initialization and startup code is executed.

If it's written for an older kernel, there is a lot going on that can go wrong if the driver's APIs and data don't match the system.

I've also had one Vista bluescreen installing a bad driver. The dialog went something like:

[Vista] This driver does not appear to be compatibile, continue or cancel?

[Aiden] Continue

[Vista] This driver really looks strange, are you sure that you want to continue?

[Aiden] Yes

[Vista] This driver is infested with maggots, and smells of week-old carrion. Are you really, really sure that you want to continue?

[Aiden] Yes

[Vista] BSOD

AidenShaw
Dec 12, 2006, 09:14 AM
do you prefer the Windows All Programs infinite list compared to the dock?...
Check Vista, it's changed a lot for the better in this area....

MacVault
Dec 12, 2006, 09:15 AM
Windows ahead of OSX in terms of GUI? WHOA, that's a first :D
I can never understand some people.. do you prefer the Windows All Programs infinite list compared to the dock? or the Program Files mess compared to the Applications folder? I just don't understand :o...

Yes! WAY YES! The Program Files menu is way better than having to open a finder window to open an application/program, and the dock is just intrusive and breaks the whole "smoothness" of the Desktop.

I wish Apple would take on the enterprise market but I think the OS X UI is one thing that needs to first be fixed in order to work for the enterprise mkt. The current OS X UI does not lend itself well to an enterprise/integrated/feature rich world where UI conventions need to be more consistent, intuitive, etc. This is where Windows XP/Vista excels. Take browsing for networks for example in OS X, or setting up file sharing, printers, etc. The OS X UI for these things is HORRIBLE-designed, inconsistent, etc.

Rychiar
Dec 12, 2006, 09:17 AM
i wish they'd make everything black including window backdrops, god that would be soooo much easier on the eyes especially on the bright as hell new imacs:eek:

AppliedVisual
Dec 12, 2006, 09:31 AM
i wish they'd make everything black including window backdrops, god that would be soooo much easier on the eyes especially on the bright as hell new imacs:eek:

I don't know about all black... But going dark like the pro apps or other applications I use regularly (Luxology's Modo), would be great. It would also be nice if Apple could allow a lot more user customization in terms of light/dark and color.

fixyourthinking
Dec 12, 2006, 09:41 AM
It appears as though the power of a single thread has shut down the site ...

It's a topic for another thread I realize, but folks here on the forums (as well as MR writers) constantly grade sites "reliability" (usually negative), I'd like to know what readers top 5 rumour mill sites are ?

Aren't there only about 5 anyway (that matter)

Macrumors is FAR above the rest ... the other sites are filled with weirdos and busy bodies

kalisphoenix
Dec 12, 2006, 09:54 AM
Yes! WAY YES! The Program Files menu is way better than having to open a finder window to open an application/program, and the dock is just intrusive and breaks the whole "smoothness" of the Desktop.

I wish Apple would take on the enterprise market but I think the OS X UI is one thing that needs to first be fixed in order to work for the enterprise mkt. The current OS X UI does not lend itself well to an enterprise/integrated/feature rich world where UI conventions need to be more consistent, intuitive, etc. This is where Windows XP/Vista excels. Take browsing for networks for example in OS X, or setting up file sharing, printers, etc. The OS X UI for these things is HORRIBLE-designed, inconsistent, etc.

What would you suggest?

guzhogi
Dec 12, 2006, 09:55 AM
I remember in Mac OS 8.5, Apple actually included a feature where you could've changed the appearance of everything, like Kaleidoscope & shape shifter. Apple should really bring that back.

As for the menubar vs. having menus in the windows like Windows, Apple should let people decide for themselves where they want it.

For the Program Files list, you can just add the Applications folder to the dock and it'll work the same way. Plus, you can set the dock to hide itself when not in use. Just put your mouse over the separator between the application icons & the trash, right or control-click it and select turn hiding on. That'll save some screen real estate.

If you guys really like the Windows GUI that much better, why use Macs? Windows (and everything else MS) is already the enterprise standard, unfortunately. Personally, I prefer Macs, but only b/c I'm more used to them. I kinda like the look of Mac programs. Very clean. I feel that w/ Windows programs, everything is so messed up and in so many different area while Mac programs have everything in the same folder. No extra files all over the place except for a few programs.

One feature from Windows I would like is a program uninstaller. I know a lot of programs put "installer receipts" in the System/Receipts folder. These mainly keep track of what the permissions of the installed software should be. Apple could add what was installed where in them to make deinstalling easier.

Panu
Dec 12, 2006, 10:08 AM
That makes it sensible to call all of them "OS X." I see no reason why Apple should have released OS11, OS12, OS13 and so forth, as opposed to 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4. If anything, this helps Apple to build a solid brand for the OS.

In OS X 10, the Arabic numerals for ten are redundant after the Roman numeral ten. (OS ten ten?) The duplicate ten pushes the release numbers down so that the major versions look like dot releases.

It would be more in line with general practice to remove the 10. The first release of Panther would then be OS X 3.0, and the current release of Tiger would be OS X 4.8

Then it would look more like what it really is.

(I've said it II or III times: I don't like mixing Roman numerals with computer technology. The II just seem to clash. I don't see anyone making a LXIV-bit processor.)

dongmin
Dec 12, 2006, 10:27 AM
"Illuminous" is like "irregardless" -- not a word!A dead giveaway that this rumor is TOTAL BS. Apple is different, not illiterate.

Hobofuzz
Dec 12, 2006, 10:34 AM
YES! You've got my vote! The more I use OS X the more I dislike the menu bar. I much prefer how Windows has the "task bar" at the bottom of the screen and then menus are on their respective windows. I wish Apple would do this. The current OS X menu bar is too OS 9-ish.

Then why don't you go use Windows?

inkswamp
Dec 12, 2006, 10:35 AM
I just don't see them scrapping the whole thing for a dot release of the OS. [...] Doesn't make sense to replace the UI in a dot release of the OS.

You're joking, right?

inkswamp
Dec 12, 2006, 10:38 AM
A dead giveaway that this rumor is TOTAL BS. Apple is different, not illiterate.

Ever play that old game where one person whispers something to someone and that person in turn whispers it to the next person and so on? By the time you've finished passing it around the whole room, you'll find that the original message is no longer the same--sometimes not even remotely close. Things get changed as they pass from person-to-person, inevitably. I'm betting if this rumor is real that this "illuminous" is a mishearing/mispronunciation along the way that has been passed along.

And remember: Apple is, in fact, misusing the term exposé. The concept is to expose all windows, but that's not what exposé means.

Lepton
Dec 12, 2006, 10:40 AM
Assist works INCREDIBLY well too. I love it. Just tell the Newton to "remember tomorrow", and it'll set up a To-Do for tomorrow. Tell it to "Schedule friday" and it'll add a meeting to friday. Tell it to "Call -insert name here-" and it'll search for the name specified in the Names database and ask you which one to call. Tell it to "Find Me" and it'll bring up the Find program, put "me" into it, then display your info.
Apple could easily implement the Assist functionality into Mac OS X. I wouldn't be surprised if there was already a 3rd-party program that does this, actually.Newton Intelligence was amazing and great, the Newton database system was great, the writing and drawing stuff was great, the Newton OS was great, the development system was great! The handwriting recognition was very good at the end and the current Ink is better. You could put a modern version of it on a phone right now and it would be like Manna from Heaven.

The only thing wrong with Newton at the end was its form factor was too big and that became no problem years and years ago. They said they didn't want to support two OS's then, and there were big internal political problems, but that's way under the bridge now and they could take on a phone OS easily, if they are taking on a phone. I loved that Newton, loved developing for it. My detailed take on what Apple's high end handheld device will do is here. (http://tinyurl.com/y8rdcr)-Mike from myallo.com (http://www.myallo.com)

MacVault
Dec 12, 2006, 10:40 AM
Then why don't you go use Windows?

I'm not going to stop using OS X but I think I will start to use Windows for the strengths it does have.

boxlight
Dec 12, 2006, 10:42 AM
Here's another spiffy thing to do:

1. Hold down control
2. Scroll up and down with your mouse (or trackpad).

If you ever wanted to watch a video fullscreen off a website or in QuickTime (without the pro version), here's a quick, easy and free way to do it! (I think this requires 10.4.8, though.

Nice -- but how do I make the mouse cursor vanish?

thewhitehart
Dec 12, 2006, 10:48 AM
http://swg.stratics.com/content/lore/personas/images/yoda.gif

Leopard OS X, illuminous it will be!

(Is it just me, or is he wearing Ellen Feiss' sweater in this picture?)

Nym
Dec 12, 2006, 10:54 AM
Yes! WAY YES! The Program Files menu is way better than having to open a finder window to open an application/program, and the dock is just intrusive and breaks the whole "smoothness" of the Desktop.

I wish Apple would take on the enterprise market but I think the OS X UI is one thing that needs to first be fixed in order to work for the enterprise mkt. The current OS X UI does not lend itself well to an enterprise/integrated/feature rich world where UI conventions need to be more consistent, intuitive, etc. This is where Windows XP/Vista excels. Take browsing for networks for example in OS X, or setting up file sharing, printers, etc. The OS X UI for these things is HORRIBLE-designed, inconsistent, etc.

Like any Windows expert (which seem to like the problem solving OS) here's the solution, kill the dock process and run you're applications from the applications folder... IMO the dock is a Mac trademark, and I've never found it intrusive...
You find OSX non-intuitive? How? You open the finder and there it is, Home folder, Music, Movies, Documents, Applications.. what's the problem??
In college we had 3 computer labs, one with Mac's and the other 2 with PC's, every network connection functioned properly, printers and whatever, I guess that is up to the guy who sets up the network...

Please use Windows, anyone who has such a grudge against Mac's shouldn't even use them, there are alternatives you know?

inkswamp
Dec 12, 2006, 10:55 AM
I'm not going to stop using OS X but I think I will start to use Windows for the strengths it does have.

Are you a troll? I've just scanned through this thread and saw nothing but negative and generally troll-like comments from you. If not, my apologies, but if you hate OS X so much, why are you on a Mac and why are you here?

Secondly, you griped about the OS X not having a Windows program menu. You're wrong. Go to the system preferences window and click on "appearance" and set the recent items for application to 50. Your recent apps (up to 50) will appear in the Apple menu. That is close to the Windows program menu (in fact, it's slightly better because it will only show the most recent 50 programs used instead of forcing you to slog through tons of apps that never get used or dig down several folders deep.) Likewise, right-clicking on the applications folder in the dock is a very close analog to the Windows menu.

I suspect that, whoever you are, you don't know this because you probably don't use OS X that much as it is. I've noticed that there seem to be a lot of pro-Windows trolls on MacRumors lately and I'm a little tired of the subtle OS X bashing.

You know what's strange? You gripe about the menu bar in OS X but you appear to love the Windows Start menu which is basically the same. Odd, that you praise something on Windows but gripe about the same in OS X.

You should go troll somewhere else.

thewhitehart
Dec 12, 2006, 11:02 AM
Yes! WAY YES! The Program Files menu is way better than having to open a finder window to open an application/program, and the dock is just intrusive and breaks the whole "smoothness" of the Desktop.

You probably did, but have you tried dragging the Applications folder to the right side of the Dock? You can then hold down on it and it will bring up the contents of the folder, providing a Windows-esque way of navigating through your programs.

MacVault
Dec 12, 2006, 11:07 AM
Are you a troll? I've just scanned through this thread and saw nothing from you but negative and generally troll-like comments from you. If not, my apologies, but if you hate OS X so much, why are you on a Mac and why are you here?

Secondly, you griped about the OS X not having a Windows program menu. You're wrong. Go to the system preferences window and click on "appearance" and set the recent items for application to 50. That is close to the Windows program menu (in fact, it's slightly better because it will only show the most recent 50 programs used instead of forcing you to slog through tons of apps that never get used or dig down several folders deep.) Likewise, right-clicking on the applications folder in the dock is a very close analog to the Windows menu.

I suspect that, whoever you are, you don't know this because you probably don't use OS X that much as it is. I've noticed that there seem to be a lot of pro-Windows trolls on MacRumors lately and I'm a little tired of the subtle OS X bashing.

You know what's strange? You gripe about the menu bar in OS X but you appear to love the Windows Start menu which is basically the same. Odd, that you love something on Windows but not on OS X.

You should go troll somewhere else.

Ha! I'm not a troll AT ALL! I've had 15 to 20 Macs over the last 15 years. I currently have two iBooks running OS X Tiger. I have 0 PCs. But, I've been network administrator for a credit union over the last 2 years which has forced me to use Windows technologies, such as XP, etc. I'm NOT saying Windows is perfect. And I'm NOT saying OS X is totaly crap. I just see a lot of UI refinements, features, etc. in Windows that I think should have been blown away by OS X a long time ago. But I still see inconsistencies, etc. in OS X that need to be fixed. I AM NOT A TROLL. I AM NOT A TROLL. I AM NOT A TROLL.

I have a genuine heart-felt concern for OS X. Why? Because I love it. And sending "feedback" to Apple seems like talking to a wall. At least here I get someone's feedback. It might not be Steve Jobs' response, but at least it's something ;)

dale.albiston
Dec 12, 2006, 11:13 AM
at present I'm stuck with windows so go easy on me... (my mac upgrade is taking long than i wished).

menus at the top of the screen?

this may sound daft but does osx have keyboard shortcuts to the menus?

e.g press [alt] then use the cursor keys or highlights. windows has done this for ages I' sort of assume osx did too. if it *does* than wher eis the problem, i used to love the menu locations on my atari (top of screen) and wish windows had an option to do likewise.

as for the whole GUI, i don't *care* what it looks like as long as it doesn't get in the way of actually using the machine.

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 11:14 AM
Yes! WAY YES! The Program Files menu is way better than having to open a finder window to open an application/program, and the dock is just intrusive and breaks the whole "smoothness" of the Desktop.

I wish Apple would take on the enterprise market but I think the OS X UI is one thing that needs to first be fixed in order to work for the enterprise mkt. The current OS X UI does not lend itself well to an enterprise/integrated/feature rich world where UI conventions need to be more consistent, intuitive, etc. This is where Windows XP/Vista excels. Take browsing for networks for example in OS X, or setting up file sharing, printers, etc. The OS X UI for these things is HORRIBLE-designed, inconsistent, etc.

First, the 'Enterprise' market is horribly overrated in my opinion. When I'm at home I don't need tools to deploy network services to a hundred machines, I need my machine to easily connect to my ad hoc network and work so easily and intuitively that my wife can use it. Furthermore, OSX Server is far easier to deal with in this regard and includes many of the tools necessary for Enterprise with an easy UI.
Furthermore, having used Windows I don't find any consistency in it's UI conventions among any variation of the system, so I really don't know what you mean by this. They're different OS's and each is going to do things in their own way, requiring OSX to look like Windows is IMHO the wrong way to go.

Also, IMHO the Dock is a nice way of dealing with your applications and is, for many users, much easier to learn and understand.

Ha! I'm not a troll ... I have a genuine heart-felt concern for OS X. Why? Because I love it. And sending "feedback" to Apple seems like talking to a wall. At least here I get someone's feedback. It might not be Steve Jobs' response, but at least it's something ;)

Yep, not a troll. I disagree with you about what you wrote earlier, but your complaints about the UI are not trolling.

Clive At Five
Dec 12, 2006, 11:14 AM
You probably did, but have you tried dragging the Applications folder to the right side of the Dock? You can then hold down on it and it will bring up the contents of the folder, providing a Windows-esque way of navigating through your programs.

You are exactly right. (Right clicking works too for those with a MM or other multi-button mouse.) The dock is much more flexible than people give it credit for. I not only have apps I use most often, but the folders containing groups of apps I use. That way I can keep my dock concise yet still have all my programs a click or two away.

-Clive

iMeowbot
Dec 12, 2006, 11:18 AM
this may sound daft but does osx have keyboard shortcuts to the menus?
Yeah, but not in the same way they work on Windows. There is Command-O to do file->Open, and so on, and so on. There is also a facility in the system preferences to assign custom keystrokes to menu items. There is also an option to turn on full keyboard menu navigation (Ctrl-F2 will do about the same thing as pressing the Alt key in Windows - the arrow keys then work, but it's not the series of letter things that Windows has).

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 11:39 AM
...this may sound daft but does osx have keyboard shortcuts to the menus?

OSX has lots of keyboard shortcuts. Take at look at this (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=75459).

My personal faves (aside from cntrl-X, V, C, P, W) are cntrl-space for Spotlight, F8, F9, F10, F11 for Expose and cntrl-[ for back on Safari. Also, cntrl-tab to cycle through applications.

...as for the whole GUI, i don't *care* what it looks like as long as it doesn't get in the way of actually using the machine.

That's actually the point of a GUI, to make things easier for you to organize and deal with your data and applications.

Balli
Dec 12, 2006, 11:55 AM
http://static.flickr.com/124/319761056_9b037fcb52_b.jpg

That looks amazingly sexy on my white iMac!

andr3s
Dec 12, 2006, 12:02 PM
I don't mind the idea of a new UI, but, honestly -- must we pick a name that isn't a word?

"Luminous"? Fine.
"Illuminate"? OK.
but
"Illuminous" is like "irregardless" -- not a word!

I may be a wet blanket, but this would get under my skin the same way that "Think Different" did.
Poor english != hip.

That said, I'd love a general extension of the dark/translucent look of the dashboards to the whole package.

maybe is iLluminous

Evangelion
Dec 12, 2006, 12:04 PM
You know what's strange? You gripe about the menu bar in OS X but you appear to love the Windows Start menu which is basically the same. Odd, that you praise something on Windows but gripe about the same in OS X.

Um, they are not even remotely similar. Not in any shape or form. One is a menubar at the top of the screen, the other is a button in the bottom-corner of the screen. I would say that the Start-button is most similar to the Apple-menu in OS X, but even then, the similarities are quite vague.

What are the differences between the two?

- In OS X, the menubar is used to control the apps. In Windows, the menubar is inside each Window. The start-menu is NOT used to control the apps.

- Start-menu is used to launch applications and configure the system. In OS X, you use the dock, Finder and the Apple-menu to achieve the same functionality.

The Menubar and the Start-menu are two totally different things that are meant for completely different tasks.

Evangelion
Dec 12, 2006, 12:09 PM
In OS X 10, the Arabic numerals for ten are redundant after the Roman numeral ten. (OS ten ten?) The duplicate ten pushes the release numbers down so that the major versions look like dot releases.

Who calls it "OS X 10"? I have never seen anyone do that. Only case is when someone is specifying the version, and in those case, I read it as (for example) "OS ex 10.4", not "OS ten 10.4"

(I've said it II or III times: I don't like mixing Roman numerals with computer technology. The II just seem to clash. I don't see anyone making a LXIV-bit processor.)

"OS X" looks cooler than "OS 10". As to your dislike for Roman numerals... Well, that is your personal issue :).

inkswamp
Dec 12, 2006, 12:22 PM
Ha! I'm not a troll AT ALL! I've had 15 to 20 Macs over the last 15 years.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but some of your comments seem geared to getting a reaction and you sort of contradict yourself.

As far as comparing the Windows UI to OS X, let's look at the long-term perspective (since you're a long-time Mac user.) Think back to the early 90s when the typical user might have 100-500 files on their computer and maybe 5-10 apps they use. Also, they might need 2-3 windows open at a given time and maybe 2-3 apps running simultaneously. Simpler time and simpler interface, and back then, the Mac and Windows interfaces worked fine. But nowadays, users typically have files on their machines that number in the 100s of thousands and may have 50-100 apps that they need access to; they need quick access to all kinds of different places and may have 20 apps running all at the same time.

The old UI concepts don't work for that very well. Apple has struck out pretty boldly looking for some solutions to this. Along the way, they will stumble a little bit or anger users as they shed old UI concepts that no longer make sense.

Let's look at the program list in the Windows Start menu you mentioned. The hierarchical menu approach worked beautifully in the 90s when you had a handful of apps you needed, but nowadays it's becomes unwieldy and nearly useless. Apple abandoned it; Windows didn't. A lot of users were (are) angry about that not because it's a better UI feature, but because that's what they're used to. OS X offers you a few alternatives to that approach that work (IMO) much better now with 100+ apps on a typical machine.

1. You can use the "recent applications" menu. (Similar to Start menu but not as awkward.)

2. You can use the applications-folder-in-dock approach. (Again, similar but not exact.)

3. Use control+shift+A to go directly to the applications folder. (Some say this is awkward, but to me this is quicker and much cleaner than navigating through Windows' overloaded program menus, and if you have the window set to column view, it's very much like the old hierarchical menu system but without being as difficult to navigate, i.e., you can use the keyboard to get through it unlike a menu.)

4. Use control+shift+U to go directly the utilities folder. (Same as above, but I'm mentioning this to make the point that Apple provides a quick keyboard shortcut for getting to both locations for applications.)

5. Hit Apple+spacebar to invoke Spotlight and start typing the application's name; select it when it appears. (This is my personal favorite.)\

6. Place the application icon in the dock, sidebar or window tool bar. (Obvious ones, but needs to be mentioned to be complete.)

All of these approaches are new ways of doing things, built on new UI features. Meanwhile, what does Windows do to access programs? Still basically what Windows 95 did, but prettier: start menu, shortcuts on the desktop (ick... desktop clutter is another problem that can't be managed well nowadays and should be avoided), or tiny little toolbars that don't scale well and steal space from an already-crowded taskbar. None of those work well nowadays, especially for power users.

You may be more comfortable with Windows and its older approach, but it adheres to concepts that are really showing their age. Apple's current UI may be imperfect, but as time goes by, Windows and its Start menu is going to look more and more awkward and outdated. It already does, as far as I'm concerned.

mainstreetmark
Dec 12, 2006, 12:47 PM
Yes! WAY YES! The Program Files menu is way better than having to open a finder window to open an application/program, and the dock is just intrusive and breaks the whole "smoothness" of the Desktop.


So, stick your Applications folder down in the dock and right-click on it. Or any folder with some aliases of the apps you're really interested in.

Clive At Five
Dec 12, 2006, 12:55 PM
Windows XP, Vista UIs vs. OS X UI: Food for thought.

I've been in an interesting situation wherein I have not had my mac at my disposal for several months. Instead, I have been using my PC laptop loaded with both XP and Vista RC1.

First I'd like to say as someone who has been using Windows since 3.1.1, take my word that Vista is a gigantic improvement over XP. While I agree that MS's claims of Vista's grandure aren't justified, there's no denying that Vista is a noteworthy upgrade (rather than an 8-month downgrade until SP1 surfaces).

Now about the UIs: I honestly cannot figure out why people are calling Vista's skin ugly! Maybe this is just an effect of using XP for months, but Vista is gorgeous compared to XP, and in some aspects, even compared to OS X... granted, that's when all the windows are closed and I am only looking at the desktop with an opened start menu. Still, that's what people will see in the store and that's what MS is going to use to pacify Windows Lemmings. I say that because to a lot of people, OS X is something they saw once that looked cool but didn't seem like a relevant option given how they used computers (of course they don't know that they're usually wrong). Now there will be a version of Windows that looks and feels like that other cool thing... which is exactly what they want. Average users aren't analytic about their computer purchases like we are. We know Macs are better because we've studied the options... but MS knows most people won't study. And to those people, Windows Vista is going to be a very alluring option... and will keep them from using those brain cells.

Okay, so that's a little off-topic. Oh well. You can chew on it for a while.

Back on-topic: I agree that Aqua is beginning to look a little dated... not nearly as much as XP's "Playskool" colors, but dated, nonetheless. Given Vista's pending launch, it is my opinion that Apple should strive to take the interface to the next level... while remaining in familiar ball-park. If Apple can "see" MS's Aero and "raise" them Aqua 2.0/"Illuminous" and keep people looking at OS X and saying, "hey, what's that cool other thing?" the hard-to-win average users will begin to trickle over.

As for black, leave that to Vista. It looks nice, but Apple should set itself aside from it as to avoid Windows/OS X confusion among the computer illiterate. I think a UI should incorporate light, bright (yet easy to look at) features. It would be great to incorporate CoreAnimation into the UI for some slick, non-distracting movements. The stoplight bubbles are old and the small orbs are hard to click. The scroll bar is decent, but the slider jumps out too much. I would dig flatter, smoother "glass" pieces... something simple enough to ignore, but with a texture so gorgeous you feel as though you could touch it. Maybe these are all impossible to accomplish, but it is my wish, nonetheless.

Maybe I should try making a Shapeshifter skin ;)

Wow, this is a long-ass post.

-Clive

SiliconAddict
Dec 12, 2006, 01:21 PM
So, stick your Applications folder down in the dock and right-click on it. Or any folder with some aliases of the apps you're really interested in.

So much for out of the box ease of use. :rolleyes: The minute you have to do this for your average user ease of use goes out the window...so to speak.

Like it or not MS has features that apple should have. The “add or remove programs” dialog box that really does remove all the entries that X, Y, or Z program installed. Unlike OS X where even if you delete the program it still leaves crap behind scattered through your system library or your profile's library.
Or the system rollback feature that can be a godsend in Windows when a patch goes bad, which we all know never happens in OS X.

Apple needs to get off their high horse and pick up some of the more user friendly, and useful features that Windows has. Yah I said it. User friendly. Somewhere out there I think I just killed a zealot.
Apple bit the bullet with fast user switching. Now they need a way of easily listing all your apps. Or group your apps into categories or something. And please don't tell me Spotlight is the "killer app" for such a feature. Many apps's names don't have a thing to do with their function. As an example off the top of my head Onyx. For the first few weeks to months I had to go digging through my app folder to figure out what was the name of that app that did sys maintenance. Thankfully you can add comments into the file to make it show up when you type maintenance but its more work then it should be.
Don’t get me wrong. I think OS X is great but there are some key features, or lack thereof, that screams “left in the 90’s.”

Peace
Dec 12, 2006, 01:30 PM
So much for out of the box ease of use. :rolleyes: The minute you have to do this for your average user ease of use goes out the window...so to speak.

Like it or not MS has features that apple should have. The “add or remove programs” dialog box that really does remove all the entries that X, Y, or Z program installed. Unlike OS X where even if you delete the program it still leaves crap behind scattered through your system library or your profile's library.
Or the system rollback feature that can be a godsend in Windows when a patch goes bad, which we all know never happens in OS X.

Apple needs to get off their high horse and pick up some of the more user friendly, and useful features that Windows has. Yah I said it. User friendly. Somewhere out there I think I just killed a zealot.
Apple bit the bullet with fast user switching. Now they need a way of easily listing all your apps. Or group your apps into categories or something. And please don't tell me Spotlight is the "killer app" for such a feature. Many apps's names don't have a thing to do with their function. As an example off the top of my head Onyx. For the first few weeks to months I had to go digging through my app folder to figure out what was the name of that app that did sys maintenance. Thankfully you can add comments into the file to make it show up when you type maintenance but its more work then it should be.
Don’t get me wrong. I think OS X is great but there are some key features, or lack thereof, that screams “left in the 90’s.”


Go to add/remove programs in XP and remove a program.Reboot then look at your registry and see how much junk that "add/remove programs" left behind..

Apple may not have an add/remove function but MS Windows registry is VERY screwed up.

I'd rather do a spotlight search for anything left behind and remove it than go into the Windows registry ANY day.

SiliconAddict
Dec 12, 2006, 01:36 PM
First I'd like to say as someone who has been using Windows since 3.1.1, take my word that Vista is a gigantic improvement over XP. While I agree that MS's claims of Vista's grandure aren't justified, there's no denying that Vista is a noteworthy upgrade (rather than an 8-month downgrade until SP1 surfaces).

Hey Clive. What do you think of the networking in Vista? My head blew up when I started digging into it and I do IT as a profession. While Vista may very well be Microsoft's OS X when it comes to upgrading; the UI makes me wish each copy shipped with Dramamine. Egh....is my monitor rocking back and forth or is that just me?

Go to add/remove programs in XP and remove a program.Reboot then look at your registry and see how much junk that "add/remove programs" left behind..

Apple may not have an add/remove function but MS Windows registry is VERY screwed up.

I'd rather do a spotlight search for anything left behind and remove it than go into the Windows registry ANY day.

It depends on the application and the programmer. When you remove a program that was built under a recient version of MSI it WILL remove just about everything if not everything. Its all dependent on how well the programmer did his or her job. I didn't say MS has a great setup but its a heck of a lot more complete then Apple's drop it into the garbage solution.

PS- Spotlight doesn't index your library without a 3rd party hacking tool.

SiliconAddict
Dec 12, 2006, 01:41 PM
[deleted]

stcanard
Dec 12, 2006, 01:42 PM
Go to add/remove programs in XP and remove a program.Reboot then look at your registry and see how much junk that "add/remove programs" left behind..

Worse than that, I find the vast majority of programs leave directories and files as well.

That "Add/Remove" programs looks nice, but is actually less effective than the OSX meme of dragging the App to the trash.

afornander
Dec 12, 2006, 01:43 PM
i thing we should just wait and see what apple does... they have done a good job so far...
all i can say is, thay have to stick with one look, and stop throwing us cirvballs. theirs the mail app, itunes 7, metal, Garageband, ext... just pick one, or give us the option to set any one of them as system defalt.;)

also, an apple made GUI skin designer would be nice, thats the one thing i really liked in windows 95-2k, and now microsoft is really geting back into it by allowing people to set, glass color, transparency %, ext...

come on throw us a bone apple!:eek:

Clive At Five
Dec 12, 2006, 01:44 PM
Hey Clive. What do you think of the networking in Vista? My head blew up when I started digging into it and I do IT as a profession. While Vista may very well be Microsoft's OS X when it comes to upgrading; the UI makes me wish each copy shipped with Dramamine. Egh....is my monitor rocking back and forth or is that just me?

lol.

I have (so far) only used Vista on my own laptop. I've connected to wireless networks, which was simple enough, but nothing more complex than that. I guess I will find out once I set up a home network...

...or maybe I won't have to if I convince my fiancee to swtich to the Mac for good. I'll have to show her parallelis (sp?). That'll give her something to chew on.

-Clive

Clive At Five
Dec 12, 2006, 01:49 PM
...the mail app, itunes 7, metal, Garageband, ext...

Damn! Yes! I forgot about the GarageBand UI!!! Bring on the wood panels!!! Make my OS look like a 1986 Station Wagon!!!

Hells yeah!

-Clive

(For clarification, that was all sarcasm.)

MrFirework
Dec 12, 2006, 01:51 PM
[deleted]

oops!

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 01:55 PM
...Like it or not MS has features that apple should have. The “add or remove programs” dialog box that really does remove all the entries that X, Y, or Z program installed. Unlike OS X where even if you delete the program it still leaves crap behind scattered through your system library or your profile's library.... Now they need a way of easily listing all your apps. Or group your apps into categories or something.

Are you serious? First, the Windows Add/Remove Programs system doesn't work for many programs, it either won't really remove the program or leaves so much garbage in the registry that Windows can become unstable. That's user friendly? For the most part the drag-n-drop interface on OSX works and that's much easier that using Add/Remove even if the success rate for each was equal.

Second, Applications exist in the Applications folder, but you can put stuff into other folders inside of this main folder. For example, where's the Aiport Administration application? It's under applications/utilities. And you can bury all the MS Office stuff into one folder and all the Adobe stuff into another folder. Accept that OSX is different from Windows, but the conventions make sense and are useful, just not if you want it to be *exactly* like Windows.

Panu
Dec 12, 2006, 01:56 PM
It actually makes a lot of sense for an incompatible driver to cause a crash [in Vista] during installation - that's when the driver's code is loaded into memory, connected to the kernel routines and data, and its initialization and startup code is executed.

If it's written for an older kernel, there is a lot going on that can go wrong if the driver's APIs and data don't match the system.

I've also had one Vista bluescreen installing a bad driver.

I think an OS ought to be able to protect itself from stuff like that. It ought to at least be a design goal.

Much Ado
Dec 12, 2006, 02:06 PM
Reading this thread has rekindled my interest in Unsanity's 'Shapeshifter' but does anyone have any horror stories about the app or warnings before i go and trash up OS X?

I'd like to play around with my interface, but will my Mac be slower/buggier/less responsive etc. ?

MA.

Diatribe
Dec 12, 2006, 02:07 PM
Actually, Windows DOES have features that are missing in OS X. And whether one of them works perfectly isn't really the issue.

- restore feature from trash
- deinstall feature (would be sufficient if the trash would ask you whether you wanted to trash the .plist, app support folder, etc. too when you drag an .app in there)
- easy way to share folders/files
- reencoding of large audio files to a smaller bitrate when exporting to an mp3 player

etc.

There are enough things OS X could do better. Sometimes Windows is ahead, when some programmer has a lucky day and isn't hindered by policy. ;)

CJD2112
Dec 12, 2006, 02:09 PM
Ok, after reading the last few posts I had to chime in. Now, I'm not a programmer or an expert. I have used PC's back when the MS-DOS prompt was the GUI. Then Windows 3.1, 95, 98, 2000, XP. I used to custom build desktop machines, and I thought they were da bomb lol. My last PC was a custom built lian-li aluminum tower with an AMD P4 3.2 processor, 256 MB nVidia, 8 GB RAM, blah blah blah. Back then, it was top of the line. When the HD Aluminum Displays came out, I bought a 23" monitor, and still use it to this day. While living in NYC I enrolled in grad school at Columbia and as a lot of our research requires SPSS running on Mac systems, I bought a Power Book G4 in 2004. LOVED IT. For the year I had it, not one problem. NOT ONE. Everything worked right out of the box. Airport detected all wireless networks without having to go into Windows XP and tweaking the system. Bluetooth, no problem. Didn't crash once. Still hasn't. In all my years working on Windows systems, it was such a foreign concept to me. No device manager issues, no blue screens or freezing, losing work. So, I bought a Power Mac G5 in December last year. LOVED IT. Finally, I traded up to a Mac Pro 2.66 with 2 gig RAM, and currently have Vista running on a slave drive. All the comments about Windows and Macs are comparing apples to oranges - no comparison. The comment made eariler about having limited access to programs and subsequently dragging an application to the dock takes away from the "out of the box" simplicity". Are you kidding??? Seriously? If it is such an issue for you to click and drag an application to the dock, then you have got to be the laziest and most negative person I have ever met lol. Why do you think professional photographers and designers primarily use Mac's (with the exception of architects as AutoCad is Windows)? Cause it's elegant, simple, powerful and reliable. Last month I brought my Mac Pro and display back to NYC as a photographer friend of mine was commissioned for a shoot and wanted an extra maching. Aperture is a fantastic program and the machine handled huge amounts of RAW data with no problem. Vista was extremely slow and difficult to install, and not just on my machine but on a friends PC as well. It looks like a tweaked version of XP with a transparent glazed effect. All the same components are there, the control panel, start bar, etc. As I'm running Vista in 64-bit mode I had to search for audio drivers, video drivers and I had to rewrite iSight drivers to get the camera to function but with no sound. Disappointingly, Vista crashed numerous times yet unlike previous versions Vista sometimes doesn't give you any warning or info, it just reboots. Further, Windows doesn't allow the transfer of user information when upgrading to another Mac system as smoothly, if at all, as Mac Tiger. Just connect a fire wire cable and walk away. Uninstalling programs? Drag to trash. Done. No extraneous files or registry issues. Camera's, phones, PDA's - all connect seamlessly. Nice. Graphics far outweigh anything I have ever seen in the industry. I compared Vista running on my system to Mac OS running on a Power Mac G5, Vista looked like a five year old hand drew it. I'm sorry, but nothing compares to the Mac OS. Nothing.

Carl Spackler
Dec 12, 2006, 02:12 PM
Are you serious? First, the Windows Add/Remove Programs system doesn't work for many programs, it either won't really remove the program or leaves so much garbage in the registry that Windows can become unstable. That's user friendly? For the most part the drag-n-drop interface on OSX works and that's much easier that using Add/Remove even if the success rate for each was equal.

Second, Applications exist in the Applications folder, but you can put stuff into other folders inside of this main folder. For example, where's the Aiport Administration application? It's under applications/utilities. And you can bury all the MS Office stuff into one folder and all the Adobe stuff into another folder. Accept that OSX is different from Windows, but the conventions make sense and are useful, just not if you want it to be *exactly* like Windows.

I think some sort of Apple coded application removal tool that does the job correctly would be welcome. It might just be a glorified search, like AppZapper appears to be, but it would beat digging through the drive to find your pref files, which may or may not be labeled intuitively. I don't think anyone is saying, "hey, I want a half-baked Add/Remove Programs feature like in Windows." While we aren't plagued by the registry, all the files related to an app are not located in the Applications folder.

inkswamp
Dec 12, 2006, 02:13 PM
Go to add/remove programs in XP and remove a program.Reboot then look at your registry and see how much junk that "add/remove programs" left behind..

Apple may not have an add/remove function but MS Windows registry is VERY screwed up.

I'd rather do a spotlight search for anything left behind and remove it than go into the Windows registry ANY day.

I never use the add/remove program function in Windows. I can't tell you how many times I've been told that a program was successfully removed and then saw that none of the files were even deleted at all--including the exe itself. add/remove does not work even when it "works."

What's idiotic about this issue is that on Macs, an application typically stores support files in one of a few predictable places (/Library/Preferences/, /Library/Application Support/ and/or the corresponding places in your home directory.) Removal of those files does not affect the functioning of the system (unlike trying to remove things from the Windows registry) and leaving them behind takes up a negligible amount of space and likewise does not affect the system. On my iBook right now, those locations combined add up to 40MB--hardly something to lose sleep over.

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 02:15 PM
Actually, Windows DOES have features that are missing in OS X. And whether one of them works perfectly isn't really the issue.

- restore feature from trash
- deinstall feature (would be sufficient if the trash would ask you whether you wanted to trash the .plist, app support folder, etc. too when you drag an .app in there)
- easy way to share folders/files
- reencoding of large audio files to a smaller bitrate when exporting to an mp3 player

etc.

There are enough things OS X could do better.

There are definitely things OS X could do better. A better trash UI would be nice (choosing between secure empty [no recovery] or empty) and a deinstall feature could be part of Time Machine.
I'd also like a much better FTP integration into the Finder, and I like your idea about iTunes re-encoding lossless files to smaller bitrate when syncing to an iPod. These are all good points.

OSX has much room for improvement, I just disagree with the idea that making it more like Windows is such a good idea. Stealing stuff like Fast User Switching and making it 'Mac-like' is fine, but if I see a Start bar in Leopard I'm going to be upset.

iMeowbot
Dec 12, 2006, 02:16 PM
Reading this thread has rekindled my interest in Unsanity's 'Shapeshifter' but does anyone have any horror stories about the app or warnings before i go and trash up OS X?

I'd like to play around with my interface, but will my Mac be slower/buggier/less responsive etc. ?
Shapeshifter is pretty much benign, but the available themes are overall kind of meh. The meh kind of follows what's in store for a would-be theme maker, though: there are zillions of elements that need to be provided, and not many people are going to be dedicated enough to do the whole thing well as a hobby.

Diatribe
Dec 12, 2006, 02:18 PM
There are definitely things OS X could do better. A better trash UI would be nice (choosing between secure empty [no recovery] or empty) and a deinstall feature could be part of Time Machine.
I'd also like a much better FTP integration into the Finder, and I like your idea about iTunes re-encoding lossless files to smaller bitrate when syncing to an iPod. These are all good points.

OSX has much room for improvement, I just disagree with the idea that making it more like Windows is such a good idea. Stealing stuff like Fast User Switching and making it 'Mac-like' is fine, but if I see a Start bar in Leopard I'm going to be upset.

All I am saying is that we shouldn't be afraid to take some clues from Windows. Once in a while they have some good ideas about things. Not often but why pass on good thoughts even if they're from someone completely clueless?

Much Ado
Dec 12, 2006, 02:21 PM
Shapeshifter is pretty much benign, but the available themes are overall kind of meh.

Better than the other way around, I guess.

I'll probrably at least give it a go, so long as it's not going to make my MacBook start oozing green smoke :)

Thanks.

inkswamp
Dec 12, 2006, 02:22 PM
I think some sort of Apple coded application removal tool that does the job correctly would be welcome. It might just be a glorified search, like AppZapper appears to be, but it would beat digging through the drive to find your pref files, which may or may not be labeled intuitively.

Maybe I'm lazy but I've never once removed pref files from my system after trashing an app. Why would you worry about it? Is the effort really worth it to reclaim the 16Kb occupied by the plist file?

I don't see what it hurts just leaving that stuff there. In fact, I've been pleasantly surprised on more than one occasion when I've reinstalled an app that I removed previously only to find that all the preferred settings are still there and ready to go.

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 02:22 PM
All I am saying is that we shouldn't be afraid to take some clues from Windows. Once in a while they have some good ideas about things. Not often but why pass on good thoughts even if they're from someone completely clueless?

I think we agree, actually.

Diatribe
Dec 12, 2006, 02:26 PM
Maybe I'm lazy but I've never once removed pref files from my system after trashing an app. Why would you worry about it? Is the effort really worth it to reclaim the 16Kb occupied by the plist file?

I don't see what it hurts just leaving that stuff there. In fact, I've been pleasantly surprised on more than one occasion when I've reinstalled an app that I removed previously only to find that all the preferred settings are still there and ready to go.

No hurt in leaving the prefs there but sometimes there are things in the app support folder that take up a lot of space. Or stuff in the documents folder or someplace else. In that case it'd be nice to have the trash ask you whether you want to put the rest of the files there too.

Diatribe
Dec 12, 2006, 02:27 PM
I think we agree, actually.

Does that surprise you? :)

Panu
Dec 12, 2006, 02:29 PM
I would like to see three Windows features implemented in OS X:

1. A bundled Remote Desktop feature, with built-in client software, and a client for Windows, that allows one user at a time to operate the computer remotely. It's possible for me to operate my Dell from my Mac, why not the other way around?

2. An easy, consistent, system-wide way to make menu selections without a mouse. Sometimes in the middle of typing, it's more convenient to use the keyboard. Other times it is more convenient to use the mouse.

3. Keyboard shortcuts that perform system functions no matter what application I'm in. For example, Win+E always opens Explorer.

Of course, Apple would do this up right.

thewhitehart
Dec 12, 2006, 02:34 PM
In the long run, I think Apple has one area that it has to beat Microsoft in. If MS wasn't neck deep in security issues, they'd of implemented WinFS into Vista. Apple has to jump the gun with this. The future will have no folders, IMHO.

As for the GUI, why is it so difficult for Apple to offer choices? Why must we settle for one theme or resort to 3rd party measures?

inkswamp
Dec 12, 2006, 02:35 PM
I would like to see three Windows features implemented in OS X:

1. A bundled Remote Desktop feature, with built-in client software, and a client for Windows, that allows one user at a time to operate the computer remotely. It's possible for me to operate my Dell from my Mac, why not the other way around?

2. An easy, consistent, system-wide way to make menu selections without a mouse. Sometimes in the middle of typing, it's more convenient to use the keyboard. Other times it is more convenient to use the mouse.

3. Keyboard shortcuts that perform system functions no matter what application I'm in. For example, Win+E always opens Explorer.

Of course, Apple would do this up right.

1. It's there. Go to System Preferences > Sharing and turn on Apple Remote Desktop. That's just Apple's implementation of VNC. Download any VNC client and you're set.

2. You can turn on full keyboard access in the Universal Access system prefs if that's what you're talking about. If you're talking about the Alt+letter thing in Windows, I totally disagree. There's no way to make that consistent from app to app and so that is useful only to people who spend the time committing all those things to memory. If you need specific shortcuts in an app, OS X allows you to customize those.

3. I disagree with this and it wouldn't make sense on a Mac. On Macs, the Finder is treated like another application (because it is) as opposed to how Windows does it. I can't tell you how many times I've accidentally invoked that @#$%& Start menu by bumping the wrong keys in a given app. If I'm in an application, I really don't want my keystrokes mistakenly going to other applications. It's disruptive to a workflow.

barnaby
Dec 12, 2006, 02:37 PM
Historically Apple is not very good at giving users choice. Normally they (=Steve) decide what is best for the user...

In Linux you get a lot of choice. Obscure command-line options, and configuration files. It's rare to just _use_ a program. You have to customize it. I think part of writing good programs is making it do what 90% of people need with as few choices as necessary.

What differentiates Pro apps is choice. People that need the extra flexability and are willing to spend extra time learning and configuring their software can use those. The minimalism of Apple's core products is exactly what makes them so attractive.

inkhead
Dec 12, 2006, 02:51 PM
To anyone who is a developer with access to the seeds of leopard it is absolutely apparent that the Finder, and Mac OS X as a whole is getting a whole new theme. The signs are everywhere in OS X, from the way they have the vector widgets and buttons setup to xcode tools. A new theme is coming.

inkhead
Dec 12, 2006, 02:53 PM
I think what this user means is something actually on par with Remote Desktop, not VNC. VNC is old school tech, and send every pixel to the remote machine. with Remote Desktop on windows, it's fast enough to be usable because it sends coordinates for cursor and window movements. Apple could have an advantage in this area with their display technology 'aqua' because it's based on PDF which is very compressible.

I would like to see three Windows features implemented in OS X:

1. A bundled Remote Desktop feature, with built-in client software, and a client for Windows, that allows one user at a time to operate the computer remotely. It's possible for me to operate my Dell from my Mac, why not the other way around?

2. An easy, consistent, system-wide way to make menu selections without a mouse. Sometimes in the middle of typing, it's more convenient to use the keyboard. Other times it is more convenient to use the mouse.

3. Keyboard shortcuts that perform system functions no matter what application I'm in. For example, Win+E always opens Explorer.

Of course, Apple would do this up right.

hulugu
Dec 12, 2006, 02:55 PM
In the long run, I think Apple has one area that it has to beat Microsoft in. If MS wasn't neck deep in security issues, they'd of implemented WinFS into Vista. Apple has to jump the gun with this. The future will have no folders, IMHO.

As for the GUI, why is it so difficult for Apple to offer choices? Why must we settle for one theme or resort to 3rd party measures?

Well to design a GUI with 'choices' they have to design multiple versions, test them and insure they work and don't fail under something like Universal options. This costs money and takes time to do, and unless there's a clarion call for such a thing, it's not worth the money or time. This, of course, is ignoring Jobs' affinity for 'whole widgets' which has worked very well for Apple of late.
Personally, I like aqua and I like that it's nearly consistent across multiple Macs. This makes my job of IT support a lot easier.

BillyShears
Dec 12, 2006, 03:00 PM
2. You can turn on full keyboard access in the Universal Access system prefs if that's what you're talking about. If you're talking about the Alt+letter thing in Windows, I totally disagree. There's no way to make that consistent from app to app and so that is useful only to people who spend the time committing all those things to memory. If you need specific shortcuts in an app, OS X allows you to customize those.

There's a way to make it consistent from app to app. Windows does it. They underline the letter that activates the menu. That's consistent, and no memorization is necessary.

barnaby
Dec 12, 2006, 03:07 PM
So much for out of the box ease of use. :rolleyes: The minute you have to do this for your average user ease of use goes out the window...so to speak.

Like it or not MS has features that apple should have. The “add or remove programs” dialog box that really does remove all the entries that X, Y, or Z program installed. Unlike OS X where even if you delete the program it still leaves crap behind scattered through your system library or your profile's library.
Or the system rollback feature that can be a godsend in Windows when a patch goes bad, which we all know never happens in OS X.

...

Don’t get me wrong. I think OS X is great but there are some key features, or lack thereof, that screams “left in the 90’s.”

"Remove program" in Windows removes the program and any required libraries that are not used by other programs (in theory). It does not remove user-made files with the program. Applications are divided on whether configuration files are considered user-made or not.

Dragging an application bundle to the trash can does exactly the same thing. Only it's easier because all the libraries are included in the bundle rather than in an OS-centric location. Apple is more stringent about what libraries should be shared across the entire OS than MS is. As a result, we don't experience DLL-hell.

There is an exception on OS X and that is programs that require to be installed (MS Office, Adobe Creative Suite, etc.). These programs are intrusive and install things in system locations. This is discouraged by Apple guidelines. Most programs that do this are ports. These installed programs offer the same DLL-hell that MS has. Apple at least keeps it to a minimum.

BillyShears
Dec 12, 2006, 03:16 PM
So much for out of the box ease of use. :rolleyes: The minute you have to do this for your average user ease of use goes out the window...so to speak.

Out of the box? What applications are used "out of the box"? They're all probably in the dock. Otherwise, making the trip to the applications folder to drag the application into the dock is simple enough. Or going to the applications folder each time.

For the average user, out of the box, there is no need for the start menu.

I'm using Windows right now. I don't even use the start menu. Initially I put everything in a quick launch bar, but it didn't work properly, so I wound up installing Star Dock. I use that just like a "quick launch" bar.

When I'm using someone else's PC, it's irritating as hell to use the Start menu. It's just too many clicks.

Also, in OS X, you: click "Finder", click "Applications", find your app, and double click it (3 clicks, not counting the double click)

In Windows XP, by default: Click "Start", click "All Programs", click the folder your app is in (usually they are in folders for some reason), click the app. (4 clicks)

Not to mention, making each app "just another file" in the Applications folder is probably easier to use than introducing the "Start" menu which is an added layer of complexity.

I would say OS X is better at launching apps "out of the box."

Clive At Five
Dec 12, 2006, 03:38 PM
Also, in OS X, you: click "Finder", click "Applications", find your app, and double click it (3 clicks, not counting the double click)

In Windows XP, by default: Click "Start", click "All Programs", click the folder your app is in (usually they are in folders for some reason), click the app. (4 clicks)

True, but consider if instead of going to the Apps folder, you drag it to the dock... From there on out, it's always 1 click away. Similarly, one could use the Quicklaunch Toolbar, but like you said, it bugs out too often. Plus it's confusing as hell sitting right next to the system tray. Too many damn icons packed into such a small spot.

-Clive