PDA

View Full Version : Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 9A499 Icons and Screenshots




MacRumors
Aug 14, 2007, 09:25 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

ThinkSecret has published another gallery (http://www.thinksecret.com/archives/leopard9a499-2/) of images from the latest build of Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) with a focus on many of the new Finder icons which are displayed in high resolution screenshots.

They note (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0708leopard9a499.html) that Apple's Leopard icons support higher resolution icons than the 128x128 pixel size limit in previous versions of Mac OS X. Accordingly many of the Finder icons resolutions have been increased.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/14/mac-os-x-10-5-leopard-9a499-icons-and-screenshots/)



P-Worm
Aug 14, 2007, 09:30 AM
Can someone explain to me why we need higher resolution icons? They're ridiculously big is at is already.

P-Worm

PDiPietro
Aug 14, 2007, 09:34 AM
Can someone explain to me why we need higher resolution icons? They're ridiculously big is at is already.

P-Worm

The higher the standard resolution gets for new machines, the smaller those icons are going to seem at a maximum size/magnification.

mcorange
Aug 14, 2007, 09:35 AM
Can someone explain to me why we need higher resolution icons? They're ridiculously big is at is already.

P-Worm

Big screens, higher native res on the already big screens, and also to be cool.

rph105
Aug 14, 2007, 09:35 AM
expose icon is ugly

koobcamuk
Aug 14, 2007, 09:35 AM
Can someone explain to me why we need higher resolution icons? They're ridiculously big is at is already.

P-Worm

agreed. It's not really worth it at all in my opnion... can someone tell me why it would be? Resolution independence?

trevorlsciact
Aug 14, 2007, 09:36 AM
Can someone explain to me why we need higher resolution icons? They're ridiculously big is at is already.

P-Worm

As screen resolutions get better, and screens get larger everything will need to be vector or extremely high resolution.

Koyder
Aug 14, 2007, 09:37 AM
expose icon is ugly
Same for Spaces and Screen Sharing. I hope they're just placeholders.

Eric Lewis
Aug 14, 2007, 09:39 AM
the new iMac is amazing..look at the AL and Glass! wow

boxlight
Aug 14, 2007, 09:43 AM
I hate hate hate those new blue folders. Really hate them. What are they thinking?

gzfelix
Aug 14, 2007, 09:46 AM
Cover Flow definitely needs a set of icons in higher resolution.

trevorlsciact
Aug 14, 2007, 09:47 AM
Cover Flow definitely needs a set of icons in higher resolution.

Yeah--but that is just eye candy.... :apple:

P-Worm
Aug 14, 2007, 09:49 AM
As screen resolutions get better, and screens get larger everything will need to be vector or extremely high resolution.

To be honest, I don't want to sit in front of a 35"-40" monitor to do my computer work.

P-Worm

hob
Aug 14, 2007, 09:50 AM
Icons.

Great.

Look nice.

this waiting is getting painfully slow... WHERE'S OCTOBER WHEN YOU NEED IT?! :p

hob
Aug 14, 2007, 09:52 AM
To be honest, I don't want to sit in front of a 35"-40" monitor to do my computer work.

P-Worm

You don't have to - but now those who do can have super shiny icons :)

trevorlsciact
Aug 14, 2007, 09:53 AM
To be honest, I don't want to sit in front of a 35"-40" monitor to do my computer work.

P-Worm

How many people would want to work in front of a 24" monitor 5 or so years ago. It would seem much too extravagant; but now...

elppa
Aug 14, 2007, 09:54 AM
expose icon is ugly

Couldn't agree more, it's an abomination.

They already have a decent looking icon for exposť in system preferences, just enlarge it to 256x256 and call it a wrap.

FJ218700
Aug 14, 2007, 09:55 AM
I hate hate hate those new blue folders. Really hate them. What are they thinking?

I believe that they can be changed to a tan color, but the overall look is the same.

those aside, the icons look great.


native screen sharing is going to rock.

Wayfarer
Aug 14, 2007, 09:57 AM
"Weh weh weh, make these icons so big?"

"Boo whoo, the blue folders and icons are ugly."

Geez, some of you guys... nit-picking much? :mad:

Shut up and enjoy Leopard when it comes in October. :)

uraniumwilly
Aug 14, 2007, 09:57 AM
Can someone explain to me why we need higher resolution icons?

Need probably has little to do with Apple's mindset. They're moving in a direction, maybe it's 3d.

Eric Lewis
Aug 14, 2007, 10:00 AM
the new imac is great

AdeFowler
Aug 14, 2007, 10:00 AM
iCal icon looks, er... pixelated. (edit: just seen the note above it)

Why do we even need an exposť icon? Just wonderin' ;)

oscarfrancis
Aug 14, 2007, 10:04 AM
Those saying it's overkill to have icons larger than 128x128... I suppose I agree on the actual icon side of things, but Mac OS currently doesn't have a dedicated thumbnails view mode, and right now I only ever use icon mode in Tiger as a thumbnail view at 128x128... I can definitely see myself using icon view in a larger size in Leopard, just to see image previews better.

easymac800g4
Aug 14, 2007, 10:21 AM
i cant remember if they said that 10.5 would be universal or not but i guess the question is answered in the screen sharing photo.

BKKbill
Aug 14, 2007, 10:23 AM
Well, don't you think they just look better. And as been said where is October this is starting to take as long as Christmas. But what the hey enjoy.:p

abrooks
Aug 14, 2007, 10:23 AM
I believe that they can be changed to a tan color, but the overall look is the same.

Untrue, don't spread what you don't know.

alec
Aug 14, 2007, 10:26 AM
I waited around for Apple's product development to stop slaving over the iPhone, and all I got was this lousy OS.

FJ218700
Aug 14, 2007, 10:36 AM
Untrue, don't spread what you don't know.

where did that info (rumor) first originate from then? Was it in an earlier build?

BKKbill
Aug 14, 2007, 10:40 AM
I waited around for Apple's product development to stop slaving over the iPhone, and all I got was this lousy OS.

Tisk tisk sad very sad. Same thing happened to me once when my folks went to Hawaii all I got was a tee shirt so I know your pain.

hatcher146
Aug 14, 2007, 10:43 AM
In my opinion leopard is looking more and more like just more eye candy....sure it has alot of great new "features" and apps. but for the most part its alot of eye candy. not alot of new software. thats just my opinion. it still looks great and all. im still going to buy it.

abrooks
Aug 14, 2007, 10:43 AM
where did that info (rumor) first originate from then? Was it in an earlier build?

There is a thread around, where some guy posted screenshots of Tiger claiming that they were Leopard, he happened to include a custom icon set in the screenshots.

Someone point me towards that thread?

elppa
Aug 14, 2007, 10:47 AM
Untrue.

Really?

abrooks
Aug 14, 2007, 10:48 AM
Really?

They're no where to be found in Leopard.

CaptainScarlet
Aug 14, 2007, 10:59 AM
The extra big and shinny new icons come into play with the GRID or FAN views from folders which are on the dock. Along with the COVER FLOW for finder windows....


And as far as changing the color of the folder to brown, I see no setting to do that............

Compile 'em all
Aug 14, 2007, 11:02 AM
Lookin' sharp :cool:

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/6955/picture22fv5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

BKKbill
Aug 14, 2007, 11:03 AM
Might have to wait for a third party gives you the option of changing folder colors in Leopard. Mind you if this blue stays it will only be a day or two wait.

whooleytoo
Aug 14, 2007, 11:03 AM
Those saying it's overkill to have icons larger than 128x128... I suppose I agree on the actual icon side of things, but Mac OS currently doesn't have a dedicated thumbnails view mode, and right now I only ever use icon mode in Tiger as a thumbnail view at 128x128... I can definitely see myself using icon view in a larger size in Leopard, just to see image previews better.

That's a good point - for applications that use icon previews, this'll help a lot.

elppa
Aug 14, 2007, 11:04 AM
They're no where to be found in Leopard.

Have they not been in some of the builds.

What's you other explanation?

rubberduck007
Aug 14, 2007, 11:04 AM
Really?

wow - tan - cool!!!! screw the blue!

abrooks
Aug 14, 2007, 11:08 AM
Have they not been in some of the builds.

What's you other explanation?

My explanation is that they were created by a third party.

mmzplanet
Aug 14, 2007, 11:12 AM
The larger icon size must be for Cover Flow in the finder. For example if someone were to enter the Applications folder while still in cover flow view.

devman
Aug 14, 2007, 11:17 AM
The larger icon size is for future high-dpi displays (which is the reason for resolution independence).

SirithX
Aug 14, 2007, 11:31 AM
I have to nitpick about the boring blue folders too, I think everything else about the OS is great, but those blue folders are just so generic and not so pleasant to look at, as if they're merely placeholders. If those were the folders we had now, and Leopard made them look like the translucent blue and white folders we've always had, it'd certainly be considered an upgrade as far as eye candy.

seashellz2
Aug 14, 2007, 11:34 AM
My God! A work of art!
I especailly love the new folders icons-they look so much better than those drab shiny globs of-well-just globs
No later than Halloween shall I own a 20-inch iMac, when it comes bundled with 10.5 and any bugs get worked out..

GFLPraxis
Aug 14, 2007, 11:43 AM
Can someone explain to me why we need higher resolution icons? They're ridiculously big is at is already.

P-Worm

Coverflow on large screens is going to show GIGANTIC images.

EDIT: I hate the new folder icons; not because I hate change or anything, but the logos on them are too near the colors of what they sit on. It's easy to distinguish between Applications and Documents and Movies on the current view because Application's A is red, Documents is white, Movies is black, etc; now they're all medium-blue-on-light-blue.

Schtumple
Aug 14, 2007, 11:46 AM
Is it just me, or does all this, UI updating seem to be more hassle than it's worth? I am quite happy with Tigers UI, I'll admit it is getting a bit outdated, but still, they could've just updated the folders and some icons and I'd be happy...

MRIdeal
Aug 14, 2007, 11:52 AM
LOL! Those icons are tarrible!

InLikeALion
Aug 14, 2007, 11:57 AM
Coverflow on large screens is going to show GIGANTIC images.

EDIT: I hate the new folder icons; not because I hate change or anything, but the logos on them are too near the colors of what they sit on. It's easy to distinguish between Applications and Documents and Movies on the current view because Application's A is red, Documents is white, Movies is black, etc; now they're all medium-blue-on-light-blue.

I totally agree. There is not enough contrast, nor specific color distinctions. Just another backward consession that I feel Apple is making in 2007. See also no magnetic apple remote for imac, only glossy screens on imac, the required use of FN key for DESKTOP keyboards, clear menubar, etc.....

nagromme
Aug 14, 2007, 11:58 AM
I don't care what they do with the angle and texture of folder icons. But PLEASE don't lose the useful color cues!

I can tell Public from Applications from Library from anything else at a glance in Tiger. Monochrome folders with half-faded subtle icons lose that benefit. At least use colors for those icons and make them less faded!

(I kind of like that tan though, if real.)

iJawn108
Aug 14, 2007, 12:13 PM
Leopard Icons if you want em (http://jawnx108.deviantart.com/)

:D

motulist
Aug 14, 2007, 12:39 PM
Yeah--but [coverflow] is just eye candy.... :apple:

People need to stop saying that. If the fider's coverflow isn't a feature you'll use, then you don't have to, but I know a lot of people who are going to find coverflow a very useful navigation view that we are going to use frequently.

For instance if you have a bunch of page layout documents with poorly descriptive names and you want to find a particular one, instead of having to open them all up which gets very unwieldy, now you just switch to coverflow and get to see a preview of every document so you can find the one you're looking for almost instantly and open just that file.

No one is probably going to surf through their apps using coverflow, but they still need coverflow sized icon because if you ever happened to navigate through a folder in coverflow view that contained apps, but they showed up as small icons or as scaled up pixilated garbage then it would looks terrible and cause user confusion.

Coverflow is gonna be really useful to a lot of people, so I suggest you don't knock it until you and the general user population have tried it.

motulist
Aug 14, 2007, 12:42 PM
Is it just me, or does all this, UI updating seem to be more hassle than it's worth? I am quite happy with Tigers UI, I'll admit it is getting a bit outdated, but still, they could've just updated the folders and some icons and I'd be happy...

If that's all it'd take to make you happy then you can do that right now for free. Just go download a new icon set from Apple's website, or anywhere else.

cliffjumper68
Aug 14, 2007, 01:03 PM
Yeah--but that is just eye candy.... :apple:

What's wrong with eye candy? I have eyes that appreciate it.

cliffjumper68
Aug 14, 2007, 01:04 PM
People need to stop saying that. If the fider's coverflow isn't a feature you'll use, then you don't have to, but I know a lot of people who are going to find coverflow a very useful navigation view that we are going to use frequently.

For instance if you have a bunch of page layout documents with poorly descriptive names and you want to find a particular one, instead of having to open them all up which gets very unwieldy, now you just switch to coverflow and get to see a preview of every page layout document so you can find it almost instantly and open just that file.

No one is probably going to surf through their apps using coverflow, but they still need coverflow sized icon because if you ever happened to navigate through a folder in coverflow view that contained apps, but they showed up as small icons or as scaled up pixilated garbage then it would looks terrible and cause user confusion.

Coverflow is gonna be really useful to a lot of people, so I suggest you don't knock it until you and the general user population have tried it.
It seems more intuitive to me.

Project
Aug 14, 2007, 01:20 PM
People need to stop saying that. If the fider's coverflow isn't a feature you'll use, then you don't have to, but I know a lot of people who are going to find coverflow a very useful navigation view that we are going to use frequently.

For instance if you have a bunch of page layout documents with poorly descriptive names and you want to find a particular one, instead of having to open them all up which gets very unwieldy, now you just switch to coverflow and get to see a preview of every document so you can find the one you're looking for almost instantly and open just that file.

No one is probably going to surf through their apps using coverflow, but they still need coverflow sized icon because if you ever happened to navigate through a folder in coverflow view that contained apps, but they showed up as small icons or as scaled up pixilated garbage then it would looks terrible and cause user confusion.

Coverflow is gonna be really useful to a lot of people, so I suggest you don't knock it until you and the general user population have tried it.

Preach. Reading MacRumors these days is becoming incredibly tedious with the constant whinging.

minznerjosh
Aug 14, 2007, 03:29 PM
Icons.

Great.

Look nice.

this waiting is getting painfully slow... WHERE'S OCTOBER WHEN YOU NEED IT?! :p

Hey remember when Apple said Leopard was coming in the Spring, and then pushed it back to october? That was a move worthy of... Microsoft... :-(

heisetax
Aug 14, 2007, 03:30 PM
To be honest, I don't want to sit in front of a 35"-40" monitor to do my computer work.

P-Worm


I just wish that my 47" display had a resolution/inch as high as my Apple 30" display. I find that my 23" display seem sonstraining. The 30" one isn't quite big enough at times. With Excel spreadsheet I can reduce image size to 75% or so to view more at a time. But its hard to go far enough to make real gains over the 30" model. I was thinking the opposite of you. Oh, how nice it would be to have twin 37" or so displays with a resolution like on the 23" & 30" models.

Small displays are like blinders. Or maybe we should say more like running Windows & have your one window take up the whole screen by default. But with so many sizes available now, we can gennerally both find what we want or need.

The iMac going to a 20" minimum size indicates that some believe that bigger sells better. But this larger smaller size probably has little to do with what you or me want. It is just that Apple as well as any other computer, hard drive, display or other assessory needs a minimum amount of money from a sale. As displays, hard drives & other items like memory cards, get bigger the smaller goes away. Who here would pay %500 for a 9" LCD display. Or $100 for a 20 MB hard drive.

I just jope that by getting larger, there will be enough smaller models avaiable for you or that you change your thinking & see that a larger screen is like taking blinders off & seeing so much more.

Have a good time with yours. I know that I have a good time with mine.

Bill the TaxMan

dejo
Aug 14, 2007, 03:38 PM
To be honest, I don't want to sit in front of a 35"-40" monitor to do my computer work.
The key here is that even if screens aren't getting larger, the resolutions of them is! A 17" display of today probably has a noticeably higher resolution than a 17" display of 5 years ago. The higher the PPI (pixels per inch) gets, the more important resolution independence gets.

elppa
Aug 14, 2007, 04:24 PM
My explanation is that they were created by a third party.

Ah, that explains a lot. :)



They are good copies though. I like them.

elppa
Aug 14, 2007, 04:29 PM
People need to stop saying that. If the fider's coverflow isn't a feature you'll use, then you don't have to, but I know a lot of people who are going to find coverflow a very useful navigation view that we are going to use frequently.

For instance if you have a bunch of page layout documents with poorly descriptive names and you want to find a particular one, instead of having to open them all up which gets very unwieldy, now you just switch to coverflow and get to see a preview of every document so you can find the one you're looking for almost instantly and open just that file.

No one is probably going to surf through their apps using coverflow, but they still need coverflow sized icon because if you ever happened to navigate through a folder in coverflow view that contained apps, but they showed up as small icons or as scaled up pixilated garbage then it would looks terrible and cause user confusion.

Coverflow is gonna be really useful to a lot of people, so I suggest you don't knock it until you and the general user population have tried it.

And you haven't even mentioned a folder full off images with titles like: (IMG_768).

Even better, just hit space bar and preview full screen.

And before someone says “I always give my images meaningful names”, well good for you, but you may receive a disk of images / movies etc. from someone else with meaningless names.

It's also another thing to show off the graphical capabilities of OS X, like Dock and Exposť which is good for retail staff.

age234
Aug 14, 2007, 04:31 PM
I'm still not happy with the way the Back/Forward arrows in the finder are off center in the buttons...

abrooks
Aug 14, 2007, 05:00 PM
Leopard Icons if you want em (http://jawnx108.deviantart.com/)

:D

Ah ha! It appears we have found our source of the brown coloured icons.

I downloaded this icon set and 75% of the icons included appear to not be included in Leopard, some nice third party attempts though.

offwidafairies
Aug 14, 2007, 05:37 PM
ooo i like the recylced folder look :)

decksnap
Aug 14, 2007, 05:58 PM
Those folder icons are disturbingly non-useful for their intended purpose. Unless you happen to view your folders at huge sizes all the time. Not good.

speakerwizard
Aug 14, 2007, 08:21 PM
"In my opinion leopard is looking more and more like just more eye candy....sure it has alot of great new "features" and apps. but for the most part its alot of eye candy. not alot of new software. thats just my opinion. it still looks great and all. im still going to buy it."

wow, are you kidding, its the absolute opposite, its mainly the rewritten finder, 64bit, core animation and unix complience if anything. the eye candy is for the average consumer that has no idea about the huge reworkings they dont see and need a visual reason to upgrade

ppc_michael
Aug 14, 2007, 09:43 PM
Shouldn't the icons be a vector format like the rest of 10.5's GUI elements? For resolution independence?

shidoshi
Aug 15, 2007, 12:31 AM
Not sure if this is common knowledge (I didn't know it until recently), but the new max icon size is 512x512.

SambaSeaTurtle
Aug 15, 2007, 12:48 AM
One of the reasons I switched from Windows to OSX is because Tiger is pure eye candy. Leopard looks real nice from what I have seen in the screenshots, and going to the 3D look is the future. Windows is UGLY ......PERIOD!
I like the new Expose icon and so far Leopard looks like delicious Godiva choclate :p

For those of you whining about Leapard already....give it a rest. It hasn't even been released in its full package yet. You are only seeing bits and pieces of it. I read somewhere Steve Jobs was saving the top 10 feature of Leopard for October and they are not in these builds.............why? Because pics get leaked and people form an opionion before its even released in its full glory. :cool:

devman
Aug 15, 2007, 01:38 AM
Shouldn't the icons be a vector format like the rest of 10.5's GUI elements? For resolution independence?

Not all the GUI elements are vector - many are tiff (for example). In any case, you are right that vector art or art drawn by quartz 2d is fine (where you can use it) but a lot of niceties can't be done as well with vector. e.g. photorealistic, lighting effects, etc.

BKKbill
Aug 15, 2007, 10:38 AM
What's wrong with eye candy? I have eyes that appreciate it.

mmmmmm eye candy. toffeely.

ppc_michael
Aug 15, 2007, 02:25 PM
Not all the GUI elements are vector - many are tiff (for example).

Really? Oh. :( A vectorized GUI is one of the things I was looking forward to most.

Osarkon
Aug 15, 2007, 02:36 PM
Nice to see that the airport menu is now able to tell the difference between secure and open networks. That's something I've been waiting for.

I'm not that bothered about icons, after all if I find I really don't like them, I can always change them.

Icons don't make or break an OS.

twoodcc
Aug 15, 2007, 04:01 PM
some nice screenshots. good news about the icons

Peace
Aug 15, 2007, 04:32 PM
My explanation is that they were created by a third party.

Your explanation is correct.I have not found those icons anywhere in Leopard.And I look very deep.

mkrishnan
Aug 15, 2007, 04:39 PM
Nice to see that the airport menu is now able to tell the difference between secure and open networks. That's something I've been waiting for.

Tangentially...This is not new, but I had never really noticed it so starkly. Doesn't it look odd in that screenshot that the menubar is so much more transparent than the Airport menu? It seems like they ought to either fade the menubar into opacity like MS Office 04 does with palettes when in use, or else have the menu be more transparent as well...

decksnap
Aug 15, 2007, 05:29 PM
Really? Oh. :( A vectorized GUI is one of the things I was looking forward to most.

Vectors aren't the always the best solution. Certain types of graphics weigh in smaller and take less resources if left as bitmaps. If you had an icon with a detailed photo in it for instance, a vector would probably take more processing power to draw than a tiff.

tribulation
Aug 15, 2007, 06:55 PM
wow - tan - cool!!!! screw the blue!

I'm not reading the last pages of comments. So hell I won't bother to make a Zune joke here. :rolleyes:

tribulation
Aug 15, 2007, 06:58 PM
My God! A work of art!
I especailly love the new folders icons-they look so much better than those drab shiny globs of-well-just globs
No later than Halloween shall I own a 20-inch iMac, when it comes bundled with 10.5 and any bugs get worked out..

I still think they are functionally horrible. When the folder icon fills the entire 24" screen, sure they aren't as bad. But when they are at a usable icon size that you'd see in the Finder, like say 32 px [and that's in icon mode, not even counting list view], how are ANY of those light engraved designs that are supposed to differentiate the folders going to ever be visible or usable? I see no way at all.