PDA

View Full Version : Apple Seeds Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) Build 9A500n




MacRumors
Aug 20, 2007, 07:39 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple has seeded a new version of Mac OS X Leopard (9A500n) to developers today.

The latest update arrived through Mac OS X's built in Software Update and reportedly improves stability and provides general fixes. It is recommended for all users running Mac OS X Leopard 9A499. Previous seeds have introduced visual tweaks (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/14/mac-os-x-10-5-leopard-9a499-icons-and-screenshots/). There have been no reports yet about any visual enhancements in the latest build.

Apple recently requested (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/14/apple-asking-feedback-for-leopard-9a499/) feedback on the previous build (9A499) to all developers. The final consumer release of Mac OS X Leopard is due in October.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/20/apple-seeds-mac-os-x-10-5-leopard-build-9a500n/)



Ryan5505
Aug 20, 2007, 07:43 PM
I can not wait until October :)

knelto
Aug 20, 2007, 07:46 PM
Went over to the InsanelyMac forums and a user there posted that it's much more stable and "WAAAY faster". Woohoo!

Peace
Aug 20, 2007, 07:46 PM
I'm getting this gut feeling you're not going to have to wait till October.

twoodcc
Aug 20, 2007, 07:47 PM
I can not wait until October :)

me two! :)

let's hope this is a sign of it being right on schedule ;)

zioxide
Aug 20, 2007, 07:50 PM
wonder if they fixed that awful menubar

aspro
Aug 20, 2007, 07:53 PM
Man, I wish it could come out sooner and I hope the menubar transparency is controlled by a toggle somewhere in the preferences. Though, maybe it'll grow on me.

gsnixon
Aug 20, 2007, 07:54 PM
do we have any more details about this? Is there a changelog?

BWhaler
Aug 20, 2007, 07:55 PM
I don't mean to be negative, but I suspect 10.5 is not the upgrade Steve was hoping for.

I think the fall of Vista combined with the resource constraints of iPhone, et al., has pushed Apple to do a less ambitious upgrade.

I worry that they are looking for developer feedback at this stage. (not just bug reporting) I worry that the state of development is still far off. Bugs are everywhere.

And this is supposed to be released in late October?

Beyond 10.5, I would love to see some more innovation from Apple. e.g. Where is the ability to use your Mac as a virtual headset for your iPhone. This one little feature could be killer...

Fearless Leader
Aug 20, 2007, 08:00 PM
I'm getting this gut feeling you're not going to have to wait till October.

I'm getting the same gut feeling.

Hattig
Aug 20, 2007, 08:03 PM
Glad to see that things are getting fixed, hope the launch in October goes well. Should be getting a new Mac early next year methinks, after a couple of point releases.

kbmb
Aug 20, 2007, 08:07 PM
I'm getting this gut feeling you're not going to have to wait till October.

I have a feeling that everyone will have to wait until October still. Maybe not till the end....but at this point I don't think Steve wants this release to have ANY major problems. After the delay, I think everyone at Apple would rather have a very stable, fast OS....than a buggy release filled with Vista-like problems.

I think the other poster nailed it.....I think Apple probably has tailored back on the overall feature set to make sure they get a fast and stable release out.

Granted....Leopard it chalk full of new goodies.

Just my thoughts. Trust me....I can't wait, and would love to be wrong!

-Kevin

Wayfarer
Aug 20, 2007, 08:11 PM
One build closer to the final release. :)

But Apple, take as much time as you need to make Leopard fully featured and stable. :apple:

FJ218700
Aug 20, 2007, 08:21 PM
One build closer to the final release. :)

But Apple, take as much time as you need to make Leopard fully featured and stable. :apple:

true, but if Leopard is delayed again, there better be some new hardware instead (with a leopard voucher)

Broken Friday
Aug 20, 2007, 08:24 PM
I find it extremely how members here from what I've only seen bash Vista and call it a failure. I have both a PC and a Mac, both Vista and Tiger, but some of yo talk like cults.

I hope Leopard comes out in October, and I extremely hope that ugly menu bar gets fixed, that transparency looks AWFUL!!!!

But that's the way you compete with your competitor though, right?... you copy off them.

I don't want to hear all that Microsoft copied first crap, copying Microsoft back is twice as worse.

seclusion
Aug 20, 2007, 08:26 PM
Even if they have to wait to release a couple of those "secret" options that no one knows about 6 months from now. I'd be content with what we've seen so far stable! The rest can be added in later. Starting to sound good

simon-says
Aug 20, 2007, 08:28 PM
Anyone know if this shows up in the 9a466 build, or will 9a499 be required? I just reinstalled from WWDC disc and was curious if another install will be needed.

ZachPruckowski
Aug 20, 2007, 08:28 PM
I'm getting this gut feeling you're not going to have to wait till October.

I disagree. It will take 4-6 weeks from going gold to shipping, because of distribution issues (pressing a few million DVDs, packaging, shipping to stores pre-launch, etc.) That means that Leopard would be going gold in mid- to late- September for a late October launch.

Assuming that the "n" designation and the fact that it's only 1 build number higher means that it's the first RC, we'll get another build by next Friday, and the Gold version download to ADC by Sept. 14th. My money is on a launch on October 16th or 23rd.

Peace
Aug 20, 2007, 08:30 PM
Anyone know if this shows up in the 9a466 build, or will 9a499 be required? I just reinstalled from WWDC disc and was curious if another install will be needed.

If you were a developer you could download 9a499.

hanschien
Aug 20, 2007, 08:30 PM
I can not wait until October :)


"...wake me up when september ends"

cohibadad
Aug 20, 2007, 08:31 PM
Anyone know if this shows up in the 9a466 build, or will 9a499 be required? I just reinstalled from WWDC disc and was curious if another install will be needed.

requires 9a499

swingerofbirch
Aug 20, 2007, 08:51 PM
Even if they have to wait to release a couple of those "secret" options that no one knows about 6 months from now. I'd be content with what we've seen so far stable! The rest can be added in later. Starting to sound good

I assumed the secret features were the ones unveiled at WWDC. Do people think Apple is keeping secrets even from the developers until the day of release?

floam
Aug 20, 2007, 08:56 PM
.

Fukui
Aug 20, 2007, 08:56 PM
I can not wait until October :)

31st... :)

and... btw, are any of the ppl posting here so far, even used the leopard betas? It aint IMHO coming out till the very last second they can spare. Even if the API's are frozen, and mostly bug fixed, the OS as a whole has to be stress tested, otherwise expect 10.5.1 to come out the day of launch....

knelto
Aug 20, 2007, 08:57 PM
"...wake me up when september ends"

As much as I dislike Green Day, that's quite a funny correlation...

Wayfarer
Aug 20, 2007, 09:09 PM
Getting iPhone-ey with parts of the UI.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/2853/picture1qt7.th.png (http://img486.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture1qt7.png)
I see nothing wrong with that! Looks very clean. :p

opticalserenity
Aug 20, 2007, 09:14 PM
Thanks for the screen shot, can we get some more?

verniesgarden
Aug 20, 2007, 09:17 PM
Getting iPhone-ey with parts of the UI.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/2853/picture1qt7.th.png (http://img486.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture1qt7.png)

yea apple is all about the iphone... but forgot no brainer features like flash and .mac syncing

all i can say is apple time after time goes all they way up with an awesome design then forgets (or intentionally) to have key features

decksnap
Aug 20, 2007, 09:18 PM
That's one big-assed toggle switch.

DHagan4755
Aug 20, 2007, 09:18 PM
I think that's a bad design. Instead of wasting space with an awkward iPhone-like on/off slider, how about showing some of those "options" so I don't have to make another click? It seems very inconsistent from the whole rest of the Mac OS X interface.

samh004
Aug 20, 2007, 09:22 PM
Went over to the InsanelyMac forums and a user there posted that it's much more stable and "WAAAY faster". Woohoo!

It's always "snappier".

wonder if they fixed that awful menubar

Don't knock it till you've tried it.

Man, I wish it could come out sooner and I hope the menubar transparency is controlled by a toggle somewhere in the preferences. Though, maybe it'll grow on me.

It does, and there are few backgrounds that have problems with a transparent bar over them.

I'm getting this gut feeling you're not going to have to wait till October.

I'm getting the same gut feeling.

Shush you two! :p

Getting iPhone-ey with parts of the UI.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/2853/picture1qt7.th.png (http://img486.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture1qt7.png)
Great way to break your NDA, I hope you haven't left any clues as to your identity.

That's one big-assed toggle switch.

And it doesn't fit quite right, clearly they need to work on it a little more.

I think that's a bad design. Instead of wasting space with an awkward iPhone-like on/off slider, how about showing some of those "options" so I don't have to make another click? It seems very inconsistent from the whole rest of the Mac OS X interface.

I think the rest of the interface will sport this new iPhone-like interface, so we'll be changing the overall look and feel AGAIN.

Fukui
Aug 20, 2007, 09:26 PM
It's always "snappier".
It does, and there are few backgrounds that have problems with a transparent bar over them.


It does? Where? Certainly not on the "Appearance" pane.....?

triskadecaepyon
Aug 20, 2007, 09:31 PM
At least we know something is going on. Seed Updates are ramping up like they should be. However, I think they are going to take as much time in october as they can... so... I guess oct. 25th or 30th.

Anyone know how long before a voucher for leopard isn't possible?

lhawkins
Aug 20, 2007, 09:31 PM
Even if they have to wait to release a couple of those "secret" options that no one knows about 6 months from now. I'd be content with what we've seen so far stable! The rest can be added in later. Starting to sound good

I think they definitely planned for this release to be much, much bigger. Last year when Steve said he was holding back some "secret" features so that others couldn't start copying so fast, he made it seem like there was something worth copying waiting in the wings. At the WWDC he went over the same features he'd already covered months earlier. There was nothing new announced at the WWDC that really seemed worth all the hype. It just didn't seem like Steve's normal style... rehashing things we already know without any new amazing eye candy!

knelto
Aug 20, 2007, 09:32 PM
It's always "snappier".

It does, and there are few backgrounds that have problems with a transparent bar over them.

I had heard that 9a499 was slower than 9a466, which is why I thought the speed boost was good! :cool:

Also, nabbed this screen from someone at InsanelyMac forums. With his background it's kind of difficult to see the time (7:14 I think) but it might also be that it's not a good screenshot.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i116/dimitrib90/SnapzProXScreenSnapz001-1.jpg

It does? Where? Certainly not on the "Appearance" pane.....?
I'm pretty sure the "It does" comment was referring to it growing on you...

kungming2
Aug 20, 2007, 09:35 PM
I had heard that 9a499 was slower than 9a466, which is why I thought the speed boost was good! :cool:

Also, nabbed this screen from someone at InsanelyMac forums. With his background it's kind of difficult to see the time (7:14 I think) but it might also be that it's not a good screenshot.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i116/dimitrib90/SnapzProXScreenSnapz001-1.jpg


I'm pretty sure the "It does" comment was referring to it growing on you...

Hmm... The blue lights are kinda hard to see with all the icons' reflections...

SiliconAddict
Aug 20, 2007, 09:37 PM
I can not wait until October :)

I can. I may buy Leopard out of the gate. I'm sure as heck not installing it. Bug ridden in the only thing the comes to mind at this point.

decksnap
Aug 20, 2007, 09:37 PM
Se when are they going to replace the cheesy blue orbs with the real updated app indicators? Those were funny I guess for a minute. ;)

Fukui
Aug 20, 2007, 09:46 PM
I had heard that 9a499 was slower than 9a466, which is why I thought the speed boost was good! :cool:

Also, nabbed this screen from someone at InsanelyMac forums. With his background it's kind of difficult to see the time (7:14 I think) but it might also be that it's not a good screenshot.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i116/dimitrib90/SnapzProXScreenSnapz001-1.jpg


I'm pretty sure the "It does" comment was referring to it growing on you...
Wonderful............ And, yes, the menu bar is impossible to see with that background, its not a bad screenshot, its totally unusable, and they refuse to fix it...... I don't know WTH is in charge of the UI (actually I do), but they um.... should fix it.

The UI of leopard is not something I wanna look at day in and day out... maybe, if we're luck it'll get some iphone DNA pumped into it (I don't know about that big toggle button though)

Littleodie914
Aug 20, 2007, 09:48 PM
Hmm... The blue lights are kinda hard to see with all the icons' reflections...I don't know, I noticed them pretty easily. I think the blue lights are a nice "OS X-ey" touch, but I'm still not sure about that menu bar. Seems tedious to have to change the opacity every time you switch wallpapers to make it "match." What happens if you have rotating desktops?

Then again, like samh004 said, it's not really fair to knock it before we've tried it. :)

kungming2
Aug 20, 2007, 09:52 PM
What happens if you have rotating desktops?

Well, there's no confirmation on whether Spaces supports multiple desktop pictures, and judging from what Steve showed off at WWDC, it's highly unlikely. But that said, I will buy Leopard right when it comes out.

verniesgarden
Aug 20, 2007, 09:57 PM
I don't know, I noticed them pretty easily. I think the blue lights are a nice "OS X-ey" touch, but I'm still not sure about that menu bar. Seems tedious to have to change the opacity every time you switch wallpapers to make it "match." What happens if you have rotating desktops?

Then again, like samh004 said, it's not really fair to knock it before we've tried it. :)

it automatically adjusts itself

basically it finds the most used color under it and decides between black or light grey text, then blurs and lightens the image below it

Ryan5505
Aug 20, 2007, 09:58 PM
I can. I may buy Leopard out of the gate. I'm sure as heck not installing it. Bug ridden in the only thing the comes to mind at this point.

I dont understand why you would buy it and not install on your mac? Why not just wait a few weeks to buy.

projectle
Aug 20, 2007, 10:03 PM
No, you can set your desktops to change automatically on a schedule from a directory of images or from your iphoto library.

kungming2
Aug 20, 2007, 10:05 PM
No, you can set your desktops to change automatically on a schedule from a directory of images or from your iphoto library.

No, that's not what I meant. I meant that whether each Space could have its own wallpaper/desktop picture. In WWDC this year, all Spaces shared the same picture throughout.

ortuno2k
Aug 20, 2007, 10:09 PM
Nothing secret yet.
meh :cool:

BKKbill
Aug 20, 2007, 10:10 PM
I don't know, I noticed them pretty easily. I think the blue lights are a nice "OS X-ey" touch, but I'm still not sure about that menu bar. Seems tedious to have to change the opacity every time you switch wallpapers to make it "match." What happens if you have rotating desktops?

Then again, like samh004 said, it's not really fair to knock it before we've tried it. :)

Right on I can also see them just fine even with my old eyes. Every day October gets closer.

TuffLuffJimmy
Aug 20, 2007, 10:12 PM
No, that's not what I meant. I meant that whether each Space could have its own wallpaper/desktop picture. In WWDC this year, all Spaces shared the same picture throughout.

I would assume that apple would leave that feature out for the initial release but add it in as an *innovation* later.

but I'm crossing my fingers hoping that they have it in OS X 10.5.0

pcorajr
Aug 20, 2007, 10:20 PM
I had heard that 9a499 was slower than 9a466, which is why I thought the speed boost was good! :cool:

Also, nabbed this screen from someone at InsanelyMac forums. With his background it's kind of difficult to see the time (7:14 I think) but it might also be that it's not a good screenshot.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i116/dimitrib90/SnapzProXScreenSnapz001-1.jpg


I'm pretty sure the "It does" comment was referring to it growing on you...

They need to make a few adjustments if they are going to leave that transparent menu bar. For example make it possible to change the font colo so you can read the menu bar. Or make it to where you can disable or adjust how much transparency is used. I'm gladd to see that apple is working out the bug's and making the OS a lot faster. I'm looking forward to getting this new OS.

juanm
Aug 20, 2007, 10:22 PM
I'd LOVE to be able to set a screensaver as a wallpaper... If some third party app can do it, why don't the implement it within the OS? It's a real eye-catcher!

pengu
Aug 20, 2007, 10:32 PM
I'd LOVE to be able to set a screensaver as a wallpaper... If some third party app can do it, why don't the implement it within the OS? It's a real eye-catcher!

because it can slow a low-spec machine down incredibly. and its too gimmicky for apple.

Sprine
Aug 20, 2007, 10:38 PM
I'd LOVE to be able to set a screensaver as a wallpaper... If some third party app can do it, why don't the implement it within the OS? It's a real eye-catcher!

You can. And without a third-party utility.
Run the following code in terminal:
/System/Library/Frameworks/ScreenSaver.framework/Resources/ScreenSaverEngine.app/Contents/MacOS/ScreenSaverEngine -background

It sets your current selected screensaver (in System Preferences) as your background. Then just save the Terminal session and add it to your dock - and you have instant Screensaver-to-background @ your fingertips!

God^Cent
Aug 20, 2007, 10:42 PM
because it can slow a low-spec machine down incredibly. and its too gimmicky for apple.

But, if Vista has moving desktops in their more expensive vista ultimate then apple including it into their all in one upgrade would be a great selling point.

Again with Apple and Microsoft copying each other, for each others fan base.

/dev/toaster
Aug 20, 2007, 10:43 PM
With the right backgrounds, the new menu bar looks really nice. I used this greenish (pastel green) pattern that looked really sweet with it. At first I was a little iffy on it (and the new dock). However, it VERY quickly grew on me and I love it. For those that hate it, I have high confidence in the community that someone will create a tiger style dock and menu bar shortly after release.

Leopard has quite a number of bugs, but I am sure Apple will have it fixed up before release.

I really can't wait for it to be released :D

aLoC
Aug 20, 2007, 10:53 PM
I heard the 499 could not install on the new iMacs so they won't get much testing of 500n by iMac users since you need to get it through Software Update. C'mon Apple do you want it tested or not.

juanm
Aug 20, 2007, 10:53 PM
You can. And without a third-party utility.
Run the following code in terminal:
/System/Library/Frameworks/ScreenSaver.framework/Resources/ScreenSaverEngine.app/Contents/MacOS/ScreenSaverEngine -background

It sets your current selected screensaver (in System Preferences) as your background. Then just save the Terminal session and add it to your dock - and you have instant Screensaver-to-background @ your fingertips!

Oh, thanks! It must be like movingdesktop, right? THe thing I dislike is when doing exposé, it shows the wallpaper instead...

Renovatio
Aug 20, 2007, 10:55 PM
With the right backgrounds, the new menu bar looks really nice. I used this greenish (pastel green) pattern that looked really sweet with it. At first I was a little iffy on it (and the new dock). However, it VERY quickly grew on me and I love it. For those that hate it, I have high confidence in the community that someone will create a tiger style dock and menu bar shortly after release.

I must echo what you said. When Steve first demoed the new menu bar I absolutely despised it. It just looked like showing off the "candy" of the GUI with no functionality in mind.

However, it grew on me almost instantly after using it. Of course, certain backgrounds look better ... more notably the ones that are actual photographs and not abstract backgrounds/colours. The screenshots really don't do it justice to when you are actually sitting there in front of it using it on a day to day basis.

I know that once us developers start releasing the "Leopard only" applications everyone will start to fully appreciate the power of this new version even though it seems to not have as many "cool new" user-centric features as some may have hoped.

Sprine
Aug 20, 2007, 10:55 PM
Oh, thanks! It must be like movingdesktop, right? THe thing I dislike is when doing exposé, it shows the wallpaper instead...

Nope...this actually displays the screensaver even with Exposé. Thought I haven't tried MovingDesktop - so can't talk about that.

Greetz.

aLoC
Aug 20, 2007, 10:59 PM
The see through menu bar might look snazy but it is confusing for users because it looks like a disabled GUI control. Any anyway who wants to imitate Vista when it is becoming clearer day by day that it is not being embraced by XP users.

FreeState
Aug 20, 2007, 11:05 PM
Any anyway who wants to imitate Vista when it is becoming clearer day by day that it is not being embraced by XP users.

Im fairly certain XP users have other reasons than transparency on some windows for not upgrading to Vista.

aLoC
Aug 20, 2007, 11:07 PM
Im fairly certain XP users have other reasons than transparency on some windows for not upgrading to Vista.

I did not say it was the reason. I think they should consciously try to differentiate themselves from (the increasingly despised) Vista.

irun5k
Aug 20, 2007, 11:08 PM
What is the lead time to get this release to manufacturing?

My guess would be that they'd want to have the final release no later than very early October to get enough media produced and then shipped to all the points of sale.

If Apple works like most software shops, they'll want to do a code freeze sometime prior to shipping, to give time for final QA. Basically, you want to make sure that someone didn't commit code at the last minute that breaks everything.

So I suspect that we'll see development all but wrapping up on this release pretty shortly. I haven't used the beta releases. If there are minor, trivial bugs I think everything is on track. However if there are glitches that require a fair amount of rewrite, I can see things getting delayed.

floam
Aug 20, 2007, 11:10 PM
.

ClaphamChris
Aug 20, 2007, 11:12 PM
Given the most widely discussed feature appears to be the opacity of the menubar, I'm getting the sense that Leopard may not be the paradigm shift in OSs that it was initially promised to be.

Fukui
Aug 20, 2007, 11:13 PM
Given the most widely discussed feature appears to be the opacity of the menubar, I'm getting the sense that Leopard may not be the paradigm shift in OSs that it was initially promised to be.
Its not.

Some of the apps that come out with it though.... maybe. ;)

angelodmhl
Aug 20, 2007, 11:14 PM
because it can slow a low-spec machine down incredibly. and its too gimmicky for apple.

(cough) Transparent menu bar.... (cough)

Broken Friday
Aug 20, 2007, 11:31 PM
That menu bar looks fugly.

eric_n_dfw
Aug 20, 2007, 11:35 PM
(cough) Transparent menu bar.... (cough)

Actually - the GPU should be handling the transparency and reflections, wouldn't it?

juanm
Aug 20, 2007, 11:35 PM
Nope...this actually displays the screensaver even with Exposé. Thought I haven't tried MovingDesktop - so can't talk about that.

Greetz.

Mmmh.. no it doesn't. At least not on my Mac. I'm running a last gen MacBook Pro with OS 10.4.10.
Anyway, my Mac also thinks Safari 3.0 is PowerPC... as did my MacBook.

Wayfarer
Aug 20, 2007, 11:36 PM
Anyone remember hearing a while back at WWDC that Apple will give a final look of Leopard as it nears release? Well this is kinda obvious, as their site always changes to reflect the arrival a new OS. I'm looking forward to seeing Leopard's complete list beyond the "big ten" that have already been previewed. I wonder when they'll announce the release date...

knelto
Aug 20, 2007, 11:38 PM
More from InsanelyMac forum:

Improvements I found in 9A500n:
- Core Image is finally hardware accelerated again
- Removed bug when changing default app to open a file type
- Fixed up Photo Booth's UI
- Opening a stack doesn't lock the dock anymore. The dock will continue to magnify once a stack is open.

nateco
Aug 20, 2007, 11:49 PM
Looks better with different desktops.


http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/2221/picture1yo7.jpg


http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/1048/picture1ph8.jpg

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/4319/picture1jx6.jpg

triskadecaepyon
Aug 20, 2007, 11:52 PM
Hmm. Maybe they'll implement a smart menu bar that uses the black lettering with white borders to make it viewable on any background - light or dark. Or.... make text that takes the most opposing contrast of the background behind it?

massiv
Aug 21, 2007, 12:19 AM
the more i come to terms of what exactly Leopard means the more excited i get. I think it is going to blow people's minds once it is installed. The underlying architecture is what the developers are excited about and the moves Apple has been making lately makes me seriously doubt this is a non-event OS release. I think we are going to be surprised, pleasantly. :)

ryanw
Aug 21, 2007, 12:21 AM
Man, I wish it could come out sooner and I hope the menubar transparency is controlled by a toggle somewhere in the preferences. Though, maybe it'll grow on me.

I would imagine the transparent menubar to be nothing short of annoying. It's pointless. All you can see behind it is the desktop picture. You can't put anything behind it.... I like the solid menu..

ernestc
Aug 21, 2007, 12:24 AM
I don't mean to be negative, but I suspect 10.5 is not the upgrade Steve was hoping for.

I think the fall of Vista combined with the resource constraints of iPhone, et al., has pushed Apple to do a less ambitious upgrade.

I worry that they are looking for developer feedback at this stage. (not just bug reporting) I worry that the state of development is still far off. Bugs are everywhere.

And this is supposed to be released in late October?

Beyond 10.5, I would love to see some more innovation from Apple. e.g. Where is the ability to use your Mac as a virtual headset for your iPhone. This one little feature could be killer...

The above statement sounds like one from somebody who has not used Leopard yet. Once you use it your worries will be subsided.

OK, I am an Apple Select member so have had full legal access to Leopard for a while.

Firstly let me say that those who think apple have scaled back the upgrades in leopard I think you have it wrong. There may be a couple features that have not or will not make it but I think almost everything planed would have made it in.


Many features have not even been talked about on the internet, such as being able to have share points and share a folder as a share point in the Get Info dialog, tick a box your done, or you can add special access privileges for extra non system users for sharing only. Great! These sorts of features are what you will find all over the place as you use the OS.

Also the interface. The translucent menu is fine/great. You won't mind it at all once you start iusing it. At first I was worried about the menu bar and the itunes like finder. But let me tell you, once you have used Leopard there is no way you will want to go back. The finder is excellent. Quick views are great.

The one and only issue I have with leopard is actually the dock. They replaced the black arrow that indicates if an application is open, with an LED which is very hard to see. Nowhere near as clear. Hopefully this is fixed before release.


Over all I can tell you, you will LOVE leopard when it is released. The Finder especially is better than you expect.

anondude
Aug 21, 2007, 12:27 AM
... and it looks like complete crap with other desktops (like this one that ships with OS X)
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/4017/picture1tv6.th.png (http://img362.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture1tv6.png)

ryanw
Aug 21, 2007, 12:34 AM
it automatically adjusts itself

basically it finds the most used color under it and decides between black or light grey text, then blurs and lightens the image below it

damn.. that's a sure lot of hassle for a worthless transparency. PLEASE PLEASE have an option to disable that... otherwise I'm going through and photoshopping all my backgrounds to have a WHITE BAR at the top. what a pain.

I am a HUGE APPLE FAN BOY... But there's gotta be some point where apple offers options. There are lots of apps that hack osx to do themes and other things. Why can't apple just offer those things to users?

ernestc
Aug 21, 2007, 12:37 AM
Wonderful............ And, yes, the menu bar is impossible to see with that background, its not a bad screenshot, its totally unusable, and they refuse to fix it...... I don't know WTH is in charge of the UI (actually I do), but they um.... should fix it.

The UI of leopard is not something I wanna look at day in and day out... maybe, if we're luck it'll get some iphone DNA pumped into it (I don't know about that big toggle button though)

Seriously, all this fuss over a menu bar. And yes it is very usable and actually quite nice once you actually use it.

furcalchick
Aug 21, 2007, 12:43 AM
Looks better with different desktops.


http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/2221/picture1yo7.jpg


http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/1048/picture1ph8.jpg

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/4319/picture1jx6.jpg

not to rain on anyone's parade, but doesn't coverflow on apps remind one of vista's flip 3d? slow, inefficient (at least for me) and just eye candy. this may work for music albums and movies, but not for this. same for the transparent menu bar and dock in a way.

i'll hold off on the new os for a while.

TuffLuffJimmy
Aug 21, 2007, 01:05 AM
not to rain on anyone's parade, but doesn't coverflow on apps remind one of vista's flip 3d? slow, inefficient (at least for me) and just eye candy. this may work for music albums and movies, but not for this. same for the transparent menu bar and dock in a way.

i'll hold off on the new os for a while.

Yeah, it does feel a little like vista, but it should. The new OS's, all of them (linuxes included), are mostly only adding eye candy. The general demographic that Apple, Microsoft, Sun and many others are going after is 'your aunt and your dumb cousins'. They're aren't as many hardcore users out there. And so there aren't many big changes in applications or new applications to be made that would benefit most people. Very few people actually want to sit down and make an epic movie id est iMovie '08. So the only place that Apple can really innovate, and Microsoft already went here with vista, is in eye candy. Where Apple dropped the ball with this release is that none of the 'new' iCandy is really new, we already have transparencies and we already have coverflow. I'm just glad that they didn't add those ubuntu jiggly windows, I thought I really liked those but after fifteen minutes of working with them I was about to throw up.

knelto
Aug 21, 2007, 01:05 AM
not to rain on anyone's parade, but doesn't coverflow on apps remind one of vista's flip 3d? slow, inefficient (at least for me) and just eye candy. this may work for music albums and movies, but not for this. same for the transparent menu bar and dock in a way.

i'll hold off on the new os for a while.

Coverflow is nothing like Flip 3D to me. Flip 3D is basically a more visual Alt+Tab in Windows. With the Coverflow in Finder (and Quickview) you can preview documents, presentations, etc... At first I thought it was just kind of thrown in, but it does seem fairly practical at times.

Also, they're two different things. Flip 3D is a window management tool (kind of like Expose but lamer). Coverflow is an alternative to File view or Column view in the Finder.

Aranince
Aug 21, 2007, 01:08 AM
Looks better with different desktops.


http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/2221/picture1yo7.jpg


http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/1048/picture1ph8.jpg

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/4319/picture1jx6.jpg

Honestly....that is the most beautifle computer desktop I have ever seen. Leopard is looking awesome! I absolutly love the transparent menu bar at the top.

nateco
Aug 21, 2007, 01:09 AM
not to rain on anyone's parade, but doesn't coverflow on apps remind one of vista's flip 3d? slow, inefficient (at least for me) and just eye candy. this may work for music albums and movies, but not for this. same for the transparent menu bar and dock in a way.

i'll hold off on the new os for a while.


If you think that..only use coverflow for what you want..works great for docs....it's not like they took away the other views....I don't get complaints like this.


So..yeah...giving you another option is enough to make you not want to upgrade.....gee whiz, do you piss in your own Corn Flakes every day.


If you haven't used leopard for a while...quit bitching...the new UI elements are fan-freakin-tastic once you use them.The menu bar makes so much sense when you use it for a bit....out of the way and less of a frame for the screen.

TuffLuffJimmy
Aug 21, 2007, 01:16 AM
Honestly....that is the most beautifle computer desktop I have ever seen. Leopard is looking awesome! I absolutly love the transparent menu bar at the top.

I agree, I am looking all over for where I can find that wheat field desktop. The only thing that annoys me, and this is very little, is that when the dock is mounted on the side I feel like the icons should be falling off. This isn't really a complaint but I even tilt my head a little when I look at it. I can't help it I just do.

pengu
Aug 21, 2007, 01:18 AM
gee whiz, do you piss in your own Corn Flakes every day.


best. quote. ever.

TuffLuffJimmy
Aug 21, 2007, 01:19 AM
Looks better with different desktops.


http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/2221/picture1yo7.jpg


http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/1048/picture1ph8.jpg

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/4319/picture1jx6.jpg

could you clarify something for all of us, when you put a folder down into the dock does it act the same way that it does in the current OS? That is --when you right click it does a menu of its contents pop up?

furcalchick
Aug 21, 2007, 01:22 AM
If you think that..only use coverflow for what you want..works great for docs....it's not like they took away the other views....I don't get complaints like this.


So..yeah...giving you another option is enough to make you not want to upgrade.....gee whiz, do you piss in your own Corn Flakes every day.


If you haven't used leopard for a while...quit bitching...the new UI elements are fan-freakin-tastic once you use them.The menu bar makes so much sense when you use it for a bit....out of the way and less of a frame for the screen.

haven't used it yet (in fact, i'm still at 10.4.8) and may not for a very long time :(

and btw, how does it help you preview documents? tell me...

Peace
Aug 21, 2007, 01:37 AM
haven't used it yet (in fact, i'm still at 10.4.8) and may not for a very long time :(

and btw, how does it help you preview documents? tell me...

Using the coverflow view of your documents folder allows you to flip through the documents while seeing a very clear and nice view of each document.When you get to one you want to take a closer look at instead of double clicking on it and having it open in preview.Or whatever app is associated with that document quick look brings the document to the front for you to look at without running the associated app.

Say you have an Excel document in view.you click on the quicklook button and up it pops.No app opens and eats up memory.After looking at the document you simply scroll to a different document.Or if you wish to edit that document,double click it and the native app opens.
A good part of quicklook is PDF and multi page documents.You can scroll through each page in quicklook.

Once you use it it becomes an integral part of the finder experience.I personally couldn't do without it after using it for all these months.

nateco
Aug 21, 2007, 01:37 AM
Ok first things first...the desktops are from desktopography, they have some really great ones there, in just about every resolution you can think of...here's some more.

You can see how the menu bar looks better on some than others...but the main point of it as I see it is...it gets out of your way and lets you see your projects better, focus on what your doing.....it tricks you, kinda like the chin tricks you into thinking you have a bigger monitor...if you know what I mean....it's subconscious I think...and pretty clever on the part of apple, the way it's done....don't doubt that they don't pay attention to the visuals and how the mind perceives them.....anyways..that's what i think, your mileage may vary.

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/5341/picture1uk1.jpg

http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/8351/picture2nc3.jpg

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/4443/picture3nz0.jpg


http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/4580/picture4zp3.jpg

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/3729/picture5ed5.jpg

dejo
Aug 21, 2007, 01:38 AM
and btw, how does it help you preview documents? tell me...
Two words: Quick Look (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/features/quicklook.html)

/dev/toaster
Aug 21, 2007, 01:42 AM
I hate coverflow ... I got caught twice already trying to flick at my screen like I do with my iPhone. After having an iPhone, coverflow makes me sad that my MBP doesn't have multitouch :D

BTW, Those backgrounds look really sweet.

nateco
Aug 21, 2007, 01:48 AM
could you clarify something for all of us, when you put a folder down into the dock does it act the same way that it does in the current OS? That is --when you right click it does a menu of its contents pop up?

No...it brings up a menu to:

arrange by
Remove from dock
Show in Finder
open.

When you left click it opens them as stacks....stacks is worth the price alone...once you use it, you're hooked.It makes finding things so much easier, I rarely go to the finder now...I have apps, downloads and a work folder with aliases, but you could put whatever you like down there...and if you lick on the folder in stacks..it open the contents in another set of stacks...you could put your whole home folder or HD there and navigate through it with ease.


Best way I can explain...coverflow in finder is best for docs....stacks is best for apps.......really...once you guys get this in oct....you will be amazed...it's so intuitive, what you'd expect from apple.

And for the curved stack...if you only have a few items in the stack it opens in the raised curve thingy.....interestingly...if you put the mouse at the top of the stack...close your eyes and drag down with the natural movement of teh hand...you pretty much end up in the folder icon in the dock....it's shocking once you try it a few times.At first I was trying make sense of the leaning tower stack, but it didn't register until I did the "blind hand drag".

With the dock in the side..stacks only does grid view.


Keep in mind I'm using the WWDC build.

TuffLuffJimmy
Aug 21, 2007, 02:10 AM
No...it brings up a menu to:

arrange by
Remove from dock
Show in Finder
open.

When you left click it opens them as stacks....stacks is worth the price alone...once you use it, you're hooked.It makes finding things so much easier, I rarely go to the finder now...I have apps, downloads and a work folder with aliases, but you could put whatever you like down there...and if you lick on the folder in stacks..it open the contents in another set of stacks...you could put your whole home folder or HD there and navigate through it with ease.


Best way I can explain...coverflow in finder is best for docs....stacks is best for apps.......really...once you guys get this in oct....you will be amazed...it's so intuitive, what you'd expect from apple.

And for the curved stack...if you only have a few items in the stack it opens in the raised curve thingy.....interestingly...if you put the mouse at the top of the stack...close your eyes and drag down with the natural movement of teh hand...you pretty much end up in the folder icon in the dock....it's shocking once you try it a few times.At first I was trying make sense of the leaning tower stack, but it didn't register until I did the "blind hand drag".

With the dock in the side..stacks only does grid view.


Keep in mind I'm using the WWDC build.


But can you drill down in stacks? That is to say, when you mouse over the folder within the stack does it show that folders contents? And what if there is a folder in the folder in the stack? do you have to open a finder window to get the contents of the contained folders?
what I meant when I said right click was does it bring up the actual contents of the folder or does it just bring up the options?
Here is an image of what I am describing.


I'm sorry if that is what you already explained and I simply misinterpreted it.

samh004
Aug 21, 2007, 02:37 AM
It does? Where? Certainly not on the "Appearance" pane.....?

I'm pretty sure the "It does" comment was referring to it growing on you...

That is correct, sorry for the misinterpretation.

But, if Vista has moving desktops in their more expensive vista ultimate then apple including it into their all in one upgrade would be a great selling point.

You might buy a new OS because your background picture moves, but most users tend to look beyond that, for things that will actually help you to be more productive. In any case, you can change the picture every 5 seconds if you really feel the urge.

I heard the 499 could not install on the new iMacs so they won't get much testing of 500n by iMac users since you need to get it through Software Update. C'mon Apple do you want it tested or not.

If you were a developer you'd be able to download it off the Apple site instead, thus facilitating the installation on a new iMac.

Someone else took and posted the image. I'm just sharing a URL.

No worries, wasn't trying to report you...

Anyway, my Mac also thinks Safari 3.0 is PowerPC... as did my MacBook.

Get Info on Safari and under General, uncheck Open Using Rosetta. This will o course make shockwave content unplayable on your Mac as the shockwave plug-in is PPC-only right now, thus requiring Rosetta.

Hmm. Maybe they'll implement a smart menu bar that uses the black lettering with white borders to make it viewable on any background - light or dark. Or.... make text that takes the most opposing contrast of the background behind it?

When you click on an item in the menu bar, it's highlighted and easily readable.

But can you drill down in stacks? That is to say, when you mouse over the folder within the stack does it show that folders contents? And what if there is a folder in the folder in the stack? do you have to open a finder window to get the contents of the contained folders?

You can go down through the finder in the stack window, clicking on a folder opens it within the existing window, however last time I tried it I couldn't figure out a way to go back up, without starting all over again.

Perhaps there was a way, or is a way to do that now, but you can go down.

superspiffy
Aug 21, 2007, 02:40 AM
I don't know what some of you are whining about that transparent menu bar. It has to be transparent for the wallpaper to fully show. There's no other way. Would you rather slap a sharp white-grey border on top of your beautiful desktop picture?

bousozoku
Aug 21, 2007, 02:47 AM
I don't know what some of you are whining about that transparent menu bar. It has to be transparent for the wallpaper to fully show. There's no other way. Would you rather slap a sharp white-grey border on top of your beautiful desktop picture?

Either way, it's going to be there and hopefully, it's easy enough to use. I don't have to guess at things with the current menu bar because everything is legible. If it's not legible by default (or adjustable) on Leopard, then it is a problem. They might as well hide the menu bar as they do the Dock.

Another reason for the translucency, though, is something I noticed last week--I have burn in of the menu bar on the LCD of my PowerBook.

samh004
Aug 21, 2007, 02:50 AM
I don't know what some of you are whining about that transparent menu bar. It has to be transparent for the wallpaper to fully show. There's no other way. Would you rather slap a sharp white-grey border on top of your beautiful desktop picture?

That's what happens currently, incase you didn't realise... :rolleyes:

superspiffy
Aug 21, 2007, 02:54 AM
Either way, it's going to be there and hopefully, it's easy enough to use. I don't have to guess at things with the current menu bar because everything is legible. If it's not legible by default (or adjustable) on Leopard, then it is a problem. They might as well hide the menu bar as they do the Dock.

Another reason for the translucency, though, is something I noticed last week--I have burn in of the menu bar on the LCD of my PowerBook.

True. They must find a way to make it legible no matter what the background is. And do you mean that the white border is now permanent on your LCD?

German
Aug 21, 2007, 03:19 AM
Looks better with different desktops.


Where do i find these nice wallpapers? :)

angelodmhl
Aug 21, 2007, 03:30 AM
I don't know what some of you are whining about that transparent menu bar. It has to be transparent for the wallpaper to fully show. There's no other way. Would you rather slap a sharp white-grey border on top of your beautiful desktop picture?

I would not have a problem with them toying aroung with gimmicky features and unnecessary resource suckers like the transparent bar and cover flow in the finder, if they could get more vital stuff working first.

For example, i can't make it a universal setting to display finder windows using spatial navigation. Every new USB stick/external drive etc, is displayed with "browser finder". I have been praying to His Steveness since OS X 10.3 for that tiny little thing.

bousozoku
Aug 21, 2007, 03:36 AM
True. They must find a way to make it legible no matter what the background is. And do you mean that the white border is now permanent on your LCD?

I could see a few things that were permanent. The most easily noticed was the Spotlight icon. I'm not sure at this point how much of the menu bar itself was visible when there isn't anything there. It was certainly shocking to me.

I'd be surprised that it's happening over many systems but it would certainly explain their desire to hide the menu bar.

bj3949
Aug 21, 2007, 04:16 AM
MAKE THE MENU BAR WHITE AGAIN, BUT THIS TIME MAKE IT "HIDEABLE". LIKE YOU CAN HIDE THE DOCK. PROBLEM SOLVED.




I don't know what some of you are whining about that transparent menu bar. It has to be transparent for the wallpaper to fully show. There's no other way. Would you rather slap a sharp white-grey border on top of your beautiful desktop picture?

bj3949
Aug 21, 2007, 04:17 AM
No matter how may times I try, the new Leopard Seed will not install.
It goes through the whole process and restarts etc, but i finally get to the desktop after restart, and click on About This Mac, it still says 9A499.
And, when I click on Software Update, the new seed appears everytime.

offwidafairies
Aug 21, 2007, 05:15 AM
I'm getting the same gut feeling.

man i hope ur right
i feel like a crack addict - im fully HANGING OUT for october

Project
Aug 21, 2007, 05:32 AM
not to rain on anyone's parade, but doesn't coverflow on apps remind one of vista's flip 3d?

No, it looks like CoverFlow, which has been in development since 2004.

bousozoku
Aug 21, 2007, 05:37 AM
No matter how may times I try, the new Leopard Seed will not install.
It goes through the whole process and restarts etc, but i finally get to the desktop after restart, and click on About This Mac, it still says 9A499.
And, when I click on Software Update, the new seed appears everytime.

You should contact ADC. They'll help you with that.

TBi
Aug 21, 2007, 05:53 AM
True. They must find a way to make it legible no matter what the background is. And do you mean that the white border is now permanent on your LCD?

They would have probably used the effect Vista uses around text on the transpartent windows if MS hadn't used it first.

Kaptajn Haddock
Aug 21, 2007, 06:00 AM
I think they definitely planned for this release to be much, much bigger. Last year when Steve said he was holding back some "secret" features so that others couldn't start copying so fast, he made it seem like there was something worth copying waiting in the wings. At the WWDC he went over the same features he'd already covered months earlier. There was nothing new announced at the WWDC that really seemed worth all the hype. It just didn't seem like Steve's normal style... rehashing things we already know without any new amazing eye candy!

I totally agree. I was also extremely dissapointed, and I think it was embarrasing for Steve to show the exact same things as a year before. He promised secret features. Maybe they are secret until launch.

aliquis-
Aug 21, 2007, 06:00 AM
Man, I wish it could come out sooner and I hope the menubar transparency is controlled by a toggle somewhere in the preferences. Though, maybe it'll grow on me.As long as you can change font color on it aswell (which I guess one can, if not that would be very stupid) I think it can be made to look awesome with the right wallpaper. And of course it will be toggable ;/

Kaptajn Haddock
Aug 21, 2007, 06:03 AM
Instead of focusing on all that gimmicky stuff they should try really hard to make 10.5 as bugfree as possible so that we wont already have to download 10.5.1 the same day the OS is released (that happened with 10.4). And they should also use their time on optimizing like hell to get an OS as fast as possible.

saxondale.
Aug 21, 2007, 06:03 AM
I love everything about the look of Leopard apart from one thing. The blue dot under the apps in the dock. I actually think it's been poorly implemented.

xUKHCx
Aug 21, 2007, 06:11 AM
Instead of focusing on all that gimmicky stuff they should try really hard to make 10.5 as bugfree as possible so that we wont already have to download 10.5.1 the same day the OS is released (that happened with 10.4). And they should also use their time on optimizing like hell to get an OS as fast as possible.

Well not entirely true, 10.4.0 was released on 29th April and 10.4.1 was released on 16th May.

I was hoping that stacks worked with the dock on the side but looks like we are left with overflow (i know that it is part of stacks but i'm referring to the different views)

I agree with the person who said that with the dock on the side it looks like the icons should fall off.

I didn't have any trouble with 10.4.0, in fact my tiger troubles only started when I switched to intel. This should be sorted this time around and I will be preordering it. Looking forward to get my latest pet.

macnoid
Aug 21, 2007, 07:06 AM
That's one big-assed toggle switch.

If the purported screenshot is real, you shouldn't think of this as a replacement for a radio button or typical toggle control. This is the re-birth and Aqua update of that kick-a** "Frankenstein switch" from the NextStep days. (Sorry, no screenshot handy, but it's commonly shown in old NextStep screenshots, esp Interface Builder ones).

The idea wasn't to use it as a control to toggle between two common options, this was a control to show the user this one choice effects either a huge number of differences or one very important difference. I think having automated back-up turned on or off fits both the "huge" and "important" definitions where you want to make it clear to the user not to make this choice lightly.

Two hopes here:
1. That this is a standard control and not just a Time Machine concoction.
2. That developers won't use it everywhere but keep it for the really important toggles.

rand()
Aug 21, 2007, 07:25 AM
... paint a white bar on your picture. Sure, not the easiest thing in the world to do, but a fairly easy fix. You could even paint the black rounded corners back in, if you are desperate for '84.

You get creative with it. Build a pattern in there that looks nice. Get flashy. Or, dull it down so you don't notice it unless you need it.

I like how there's lots of complains about never getting customizable options, and then they put in a bar that literally screams "customize me" and then there's the same complains about that.

You don't need a switch to make it "not transparent." You need a paint program to make it whatever color you want. And in fact, your current menu bar is transparent - Apple just plunks a background image behind it. We've all gotten the weird Firefox crash where that bar disappears, and you're left with a strange transparent menu bar, haven't we?

I bet within the first few days of release, there's a web-app for uploading your desired desktop, and it just plunks the current menu bar background on the thing.

macnoid
Aug 21, 2007, 07:31 AM
Instead of focusing on all that gimmicky stuff they should try really hard to make 10.5 as bugfree as possible so that we wont already have to download 10.5.1 the same day the OS is released (that happened with 10.4). And they should also use their time on optimizing like hell to get an OS as fast as possible.

I fully hope and expect that we will have to download at least a Security Update as soon as Leopard is released. It's almost a month between the gold master "freeze" and buying a physical disk in a store. Considering that Apple's been coming out with security updates at the rate of about 1 per month in 2007 for Tiger, I'd be suprised if we didn't see something within the first two weeks (if not the first day) of Leopard's release.

Will we see an actual 10.5.1 on the release date? Possibly. The rate of the driver updates from manufacturers has been increasing, and drivers have a huge effect on stability and performance. It's very likely Vista Service Pack 1 will go into public beta during the "freeze" time so Boot Camp compatability updates may be significant (depending on what issues are kicked-up). Since Apple develops the iPhone in a separate group but with low level integration into the OS, it's also quite possible something about that integration will warrant an update during the 1 month "freeze".

I really wish people would stop seeing updates as a sign of quality or crap. We will see updates, bug fixes, and security fixes to Leopard. If we see updates on the day of Leopard's release, it's just a consequence to having to draw that line in the sand in order to get it out the door. Will the first update be on the day of Leopard's release or after a month? It doesn't matter to me.

patseguin
Aug 21, 2007, 07:38 AM
Anyone finding that Safari freezes just about every time you use it?

Thomas2006
Aug 21, 2007, 07:40 AM
it automatically adjusts itself

basically it finds the most used color under it and decides between black or light grey text, then blurs and lightens the image below it
What does the dock do when it is set to automatically hide? Does it still go up and down or does it act like widgets and slide forward and back with a fading effect or does it do something really lame like having a hinge where it falls forward like a tailgate?

MongoTheGeek
Aug 21, 2007, 07:46 AM
No matter how may times I try, the new Leopard Seed will not install.
It goes through the whole process and restarts etc, but i finally get to the desktop after restart, and click on About This Mac, it still says 9A499.
And, when I click on Software Update, the new seed appears everytime.

It took 3 or 4 times for me. Have you checked out your hard drive for problems?

I like the new software update. It feels very slick.

I've had to file a bug report against the updated mail already

psychofreak
Aug 21, 2007, 07:54 AM
You can see how the menu bar looks better on some than others...but the main point of it as I see it is...it gets out of your way and lets you see your projects better, focus on what your doing.....it tricks you, kinda like the chin tricks you into thinking you have a bigger monitor...if you know what I mean....it's subconscious I think...and pretty clever on the part of apple, the way it's done....don't doubt that they don't pay attention to the visuals and how the mind perceives them.....anyways..that's what i think, your mileage may vary.


MAKE THE MENU BAR WHITE AGAIN, BUT THIS TIME MAKE IT "HIDEABLE". LIKE YOU CAN HIDE THE DOCK. PROBLEM SOLVED.

I use Menufela to make the menubar autohide - its great on my Macbook with limited screen real-estate, but the way it overlaps things is just un-appleish...

rockstarjoe
Aug 21, 2007, 08:08 AM
Thanks everyone for all of the new screenshots. Looks great!

WannaGoMac
Aug 21, 2007, 08:22 AM
distribution issues (pressing a few million DVDs, packaging, shipping to stores pre-launch, etc.)

No issues, bittorent the sucker!

Wayfarer
Aug 21, 2007, 08:23 AM
MAKE THE MENU BAR WHITE AGAIN, BUT THIS TIME MAKE IT "HIDEABLE". LIKE YOU CAN HIDE THE DOCK. PROBLEM SOLVED.

I object! Why would anyone want to "hide" their beloved menubar? I think it'll look kinda awkward and un-Mac OS from the outside.... :(

WannaGoMac
Aug 21, 2007, 08:28 AM
One thing, I don't see under-the-hood changes in Leopard. For example, an under-the-hood change would be supporting addition hard disk formats (such as ZFS on the boot drive etc).

While the changes are cute, I don't see anything a techy type would be impressed with (sort of like Vista, all eye candy and no "real" meat). Seriously, you guys are arguing about silly backgrounds and transparencies....

Feels more like a Service Pack to me :)

thejadedmonkey
Aug 21, 2007, 08:34 AM
I'm pretty sure CoreImage is kind of a pretty big deal ;)
and I'm pretty sure that 10.5 is the refinement that 10.4 never had.

psychofreak
Aug 21, 2007, 08:38 AM
One thing, I don't see under-the-hood changes in Leopard. For example, an under-the-hood change would be supporting addition hard disk formats (such as ZFS on the boot drive etc).


UNIX-03 compliance, multicore optimization of network layers, automatic TCP optimization, and security features such as sandbox options for applications and notifications of an application having been altered since it was installed.

Full 64-bit capability and Core Animation to match Core Audio, Core Video, Core Image, and Core Data. Resolution independence. Leopard has more changes coming to iChat’s framework, iCal’s framework, QuickTime’s framework, and Open GL improvements said to be staggering.

Project
Aug 21, 2007, 08:42 AM
One thing, I don't see under-the-hood changes in Leopard. For example, an under-the-hood change would be supporting addition hard disk formats (such as ZFS on the boot drive etc).

While the changes are cute, I don't see anything a techy type would be impressed with (sort of like Vista, all eye candy and no "real" meat).

Feels more like a Service Pack to me :)

Comments like this baffle me.

Under the hood improvements are immense:

64bit
Core Animation
Objective C 2.0 / Xcode 3
Resolution independence
Partial ZFS support

Main ennd user enhancements
Time Machine
Boot Camp
Quick Look
Spotlight Help (this is wonderful)
Desktop sharing
Spaces
iChat theater/answer machine
Updated iApps
File recovery in Disk Utility


As well as a plethora of new features and improvements that are each small but add up to making Leopard far superior to Tiger (system wide todo and grammar check, boolean spotlight searches, share points, universal access, Front Row, stacks etc, tabbed terminal, parental controls, OpenDocument support, dictionary in Spotlight, etc)


What service pack gives you all of this? Its $130. A bargain and waaay more of an update than Tiger was. People seem to be expecting the second coming of Jesus.

rychencop
Aug 21, 2007, 09:41 AM
One build closer to the final release. :)

But Apple, take as much time as you need to make Leopard fully featured and stable. :apple:


Exactly...take your time Apple. Don't rush out some half done junk...like another OS maker likes to do. ;)

blastfamy
Aug 21, 2007, 11:02 AM
I'd LOVE to be able to set a screensaver as a wallpaper... If some third party app can do it, why don't the implement it within the OS? It's a real eye-catcher!

...and it would tie in nicely to Steve's "...and there is an Ulimate version for $129!..."

Random Ping
Aug 21, 2007, 11:09 AM
Objective C 2.0 / Xcode 3
I think this will make it a lot easier for new programmers to come to the Mac.

Resolution independence
This, while more of a challenge for programmers, will pay dividends in the years to come. This is really about investing in the future. I don't know if Vista has this or not, but if it doesn't, in about 1-2 years the beauty of OS X on very high resolution screens will make Windows look really ugly.

TBi
Aug 21, 2007, 11:15 AM
I don't know if Vista has this or not

It does!

Stella
Aug 21, 2007, 11:27 AM
Can anyone comment on the stability of this version?

bj3949
Aug 21, 2007, 11:34 AM
i am an Apple Select Member too and I disagree. Leopard is boring. It's a huge let down. There is nothing "that" cool to get excited about. Time Machine? Are you kidding? Big f'n deal. Wow, we can backup our **** now. We did that ages ago. Stacks and grids is cool, but it takes you to Finder after one click!!! Boring! New iMovie won't even open! Transparent menu bar is horrible when you have a multi-colored picture with dark colors. Spaces? Who the hell needs this? Not most Mac users. Expose was the coolest thing Apple came up with in years., and there is nothing even close to this in Leopard.

Who agrees?


The above statement sounds like one from somebody who has not used Leopard yet. Once you use it your worries will be subsided.

OK, I am an Apple Select member so have had full legal access to Leopard for a while.

Firstly let me say that those who think apple have scaled back the upgrades in leopard I think you have it wrong. There may be a couple features that have not or will not make it but I think almost everything planed would have made it in.


Many features have not even been talked about on the internet, such as being able to have share points and share a folder as a share point in the Get Info dialog, tick a box your done, or you can add special access privileges for extra non system users for sharing only. Great! These sorts of features are what you will find all over the place as you use the OS.

Also the interface. The translucent menu is fine/great. You won't mind it at all once you start iusing it. At first I was worried about the menu bar and the itunes like finder. But let me tell you, once you have used Leopard there is no way you will want to go back. The finder is excellent. Quick views are great.

The one and only issue I have with leopard is actually the dock. They replaced the black arrow that indicates if an application is open, with an LED which is very hard to see. Nowhere near as clear. Hopefully this is fixed before release.


Over all I can tell you, you will LOVE leopard when it is released. The Finder especially is better than you expect.

bananas
Aug 21, 2007, 11:47 AM
As a Linux user I'm really looking forward to Leopard. Once you get used to spaces (aka. virtual desktops on Linux) you can't live without. Spaces is actually the only thing I miss in Tiger.

I've also been using transparent menubar for 2 years now, and it really grows on you. Sometimes the text in menubar is less readable depending on the background image, but since I know my own desktop it doesn't really matter. And BTW Apple has made the menubar more elegant than the one in my Gnome desktop (gnome menubar doesn't have a shadow). On the other hand, you can set the amount of transparency in the gnome menubar.

superspiffy
Aug 21, 2007, 11:52 AM
MAKE THE MENU BAR WHITE AGAIN, BUT THIS TIME MAKE IT "HIDEABLE". LIKE YOU CAN HIDE THE DOCK. PROBLEM SOLVED.

Unfortunately they can't practically make the menu bar "hideable." You rely on it too much. If they did, it would take one extra step to do everything that you normally could have done with 0 steps. Like looking at the time, checking WiFi connectivity, power status, etc.. Plus it would be quite annoying waiting for the menu to pop up when you want to immediately access File or Edit or any of those buttons. Not to mention that when any window is up and you're not using the menu bar, you'll get an awkward looking waste of space above those windows

dicklacara
Aug 21, 2007, 12:31 PM
not to rain on anyone's parade, but doesn't coverflow on apps remind one of vista's flip 3d? slow, inefficient (at least for me) and just eye candy. this may work for music albums and movies, but not for this. same for the transparent menu bar and dock in a way.

i'll hold off on the new os for a while.

Ahh... that may be true if you are using the Finder on a laptop or desktop with the standard mouse/kb UI...

Where it makes perfect sense is on a tablet or other format with a touch screen, or a remote with some form of scroll/select UI-- say, for AppleTV or Home control devices.

So, Apple has given us an additional option and I bet they give us some places to use it where the UI will shine.

patseguin
Aug 21, 2007, 12:35 PM
Can anyone comment on the stability of this version?

As in the previous build, any time I use Safari I get a beachball cursor and it freezes. I also had WoW freeze on me. I'd like to try more, but not being able to use Safari is pretty major to me.

Broken Friday
Aug 21, 2007, 01:57 PM
How about lets have the Close button quit the application, and lets not have the Close button the same function as the Minimize function. Apple must of been smoking something serious.

MonkeyClaw
Aug 21, 2007, 02:17 PM
How about lets have the Close button quit the application, and lets not have the Close button the same function as the Minimize function. Apple must of been smoking something serious.

How about no? i mean thats one of the basic underpinnings of OS X, the ability to leave an application running without any windows open.

theman
Aug 21, 2007, 02:25 PM
The close button is not the minimize button. It actually closes that window. If you are working on a text file (MS Word) and you have not saved it, lets say, and you minimize a window (yellow button), it goes down to the dock, and you can open it up again (just like windows). But, if you close it, your work is gone. However, Word is still running, just that window is gone. To close it, you have to type Command+Q, or go to the menu bar. It is different from windows, but once you get used to it, it's perfectly fine.

They annoying thing is the green button. I am still not exactly sure what this does. When I have my web browser open I ALWAYS want it to fill the entire screen! That's why I payed to have this larger monitor. But, I always have to resize it, because good old green button thinks it knows how big I want my window. I also set the dock the the smallest size and to hide. That way, I can have a full screen app.

swindmill
Aug 21, 2007, 02:33 PM
They annoying thing is the green button. I am still not exactly sure what this does. When I have my web browser open I ALWAYS want it to fill the entire screen! That's why I payed to have this larger monitor. But, I always have to resize it, because good old green button thinks it knows how big I want my window. I also set the dock the the smallest size and to hide. That way, I can have a full screen app.

The green button sizes the window at the ideal size, based on the website you are viewing, or whatever the ideal size for the window you are working in is. This is central to the window system OS X utilizes. So, in a sense, the green button does know how big you [should] want your window. If you want it filling the screen, you should be able to drag it to that size and then the green button should toggle between that and ideal size. I would disagree that the purpose of a large monitor is run every window as large as possible.

patseguin
Aug 21, 2007, 02:34 PM
How about no?


lol.

seriously though, you're 100% right. I don't think I'd ever want to go back to hitting a button to quit an app.

TuffLuffJimmy
Aug 21, 2007, 02:36 PM
The close button is not the minimize button. It actually closes that window. If you are working on a text file (MS Word) and you have not saved it, lets say, and you minimize a window (yellow button), it goes down to the dock, and you can open it up again (just like windows). But, if you close it, your work is gone. However, Word is still running, just that window is gone. To close it, you have to type Command+Q, or go to the menu bar. It is different from windows, but once you get used to it, it's perfectly fine.

They annoying thing is the green button. I am still not exactly sure what this does. When I have my web browser open I ALWAYS want it to fill the entire screen! That's why I payed to have this larger monitor. But, I always have to resize it, because good old green button thinks it knows how big I want my window. I also set the dock the the smallest size and to hide. That way, I can have a full screen app.

I wouldn't mind if they added another button to quit the app. I hate that whenever I use my dad's computer, or just about everyone else who isn't very mac savvy, they always seem to have about every app running at the same time. A button that quit the app would be nice.
It's counterintuitive to quit the application when you close the window, why would you want the close button to quit the app? wouldn't you just want the 'close window' button to close the window? That's why a quit app button would be nice, But I don't know how they would implement this, I wouldn't want a fourth button in the top of the window I may accidentally hit.

dejo
Aug 21, 2007, 02:40 PM
Expose was the coolest thing Apple came up with in years., and there is nothing even close to this in Leopard.
Leopard comes with Expose! ;)

swindmill
Aug 21, 2007, 02:42 PM
How about lets have the Close button quit the application, and lets not have the Close button the same function as the Minimize function. Apple must of been smoking something serious.

I think most OS X users would be really upset about this change (which would never happen). Being able to have a program run without an open window is a feature that is so obvious, it boggles my mind that all OS's don't have it. I use it constantly for Mail, NetNewsWire, Transmission, and several others. To take it away would mean one less option.

cowm007
Aug 21, 2007, 02:56 PM
All this negative talk about Leopard makes it seem like it's simply a visual upgrade. I can see how this is the case from a user stand-point since all they see is additions like Time Machine and Spaces which could feasibly be added with simple applications. They also see the new dock/menu bar which they categorize as simply eye candy. Of course there is some eye-candy added as well (who doesn't like eye candy, seriously) since they do have to directly compete with Vista's new GUI. At least Apple puts a lot of research into these changes so that it makes sense from a usability stand point. For example, have any of you noticed that with the new transparent menu bar, the desktop actually takes up the whole screen now and is the furthest element from us, like a desktop should be?

But anyway, Leopard has much more value "under the hood" in comparison to all the other OSes out there. The additions not only make OS X better/faster, but developers will now be able to use many new features (Core Animation anyone?) in their programs and make the best apps ever made for a computer. The apps we user right now don't fully utilize these features yet so of course it seems like Leopard brings nothing new to the table. Just wait until it is released and the new versions come out, I think we'll be gladly surprised then.

I guess the problem is that all the people discussing Leopard here are probably not real developers and just want early access to a work-in-progress OS expecting a production level release.

pilky
Aug 21, 2007, 04:00 PM
i am an Apple Select Member too and I disagree. Leopard is boring. It's a huge let down. There is nothing "that" cool to get excited about. Time Machine? Are you kidding? Big f'n deal. Wow, we can backup our **** now. We did that ages ago. Stacks and grids is cool, but it takes you to Finder after one click!!! Boring! New iMovie won't even open! Transparent menu bar is horrible when you have a multi-colored picture with dark colors. Spaces? Who the hell needs this? Not most Mac users. Expose was the coolest thing Apple came up with in years., and there is nothing even close to this in Leopard.

Who agrees?

Are you kidding me? What were you expecting to get from them? Spaces is an amazing addition. It's the best virtual desktop implementation I've seen to date. Spaces + Exposé is a magnitude more powerful than Exposé on it's own. And yes there have been backup solutions out there for ages. How many people on this forum actually used them? I don't, I just zip important stuff when I get round to it. Time Machine is going to save a lot of problems. It's a far better release than Tiger which was rather dull

And as someone with an ADC account I'd assume you are a developer. Given all the new developer stuff how can you say that Leopard is uninspiring. It's probably the most significant upgrade for developers since the developer previews of 10.0. Xcode 3, IB 3, Xray, Obj-C 2.0, 64 bit, official support for Ruby and PyObj-C bridges, iChat Theatre, Calendar Store, Scripting Bridge, Core Animation plus a lot more that's still under NDA and you're still not happy? I ask again, what were you expecting from them?

SirSmokaLot
Aug 21, 2007, 04:24 PM
Features

:apple:Desktop
From the menu bar to the stunning new Dock, the Leopard desktop isn’t just about design. It’s about enjoying the time you spend on your computer and getting more out of it.

Start from the top. The menu bar hovers transparently above your workspace, letting the desktop image — perhaps a favorite from your iPhoto library — take center stage. Dock icons rest on a reflective floor with a bright active application signal. And the look of Leopard extends to all applications: Every window has a consistent design theme, and active applications are even more distinct, casting deeper shadows.

Take a look at your desktop. Is it cluttered with files you downloaded or saved there (somewhat less than) temporarily? You're not alone. Everybody does it. Time to clean house with Stacks — a brand-new feature in Leopard. Create Stacks from anything you want to access quickly from one place: a handful of documents, a group of applications, an entire folder. Files you download in Safari or save from an email are automatically directed to a Stack in the Dock, and when the download is complete, the Stack signals that a new item has arrived. When you want to see the files in a Stack, all you have to do is click — Stacks spring open from the Dock in an elegant arc for a few items, or in an at-a-glance grid for more. Pretty neat.

:apple:Finder
Imagine if browsing the files on your Mac was as easy as browsing music in iTunes. That’s the idea behind the new Finder in Leopard. Now you can access everything on your system from an iTunes-style sidebar and flip through your files using Cover Flow.

Leopard brings new power to your old friend, the sidebar. Now items are grouped into categories: places, devices, shared computers, and searches — just like the Source list in iTunes. So with a single click, you’re on your way to finding what you need.

Bring your files to life with Cover Flow in the Finder. Just as you use Cover Flow to flip through album art in iTunes, now you can use it to flip through your files. Cover Flow displays each file as a large preview of its first page. And you can page through multipage documents or play movies.

Stop looking and start finding with Cover Flow and Spotlight. Click a prebuilt search like “yesterday” or “all images” in the sidebar and Cover Flow displays your search results in the perfect at-a-glance format. Leopard comes with a number of helpful prebuilt searches, but it’s easy to create your own customized searches as well.

With shared computers automatically displayed in the sidebar, it’s far easier to find or access files on any computer in your house, whether Mac or PC. All it takes is a click. But here’s where things get really interesting. By clicking on a connected Mac, you can see and control that computer (if authorized, of course) as if you were sitting in front of it. You can even search all the computers in the house to find what you're looking for.

ver need something on your Mac when you were thousands of miles from home? With Back to My Mac and a .Mac account, you can connect to any of your Macs at home from any Mac on the Internet. Your home computers will appear in the shared section of the sidebar just as they do when you’re in the living room.

From the Finder or the menu bar, Spotlight in Leopard lets you search for more specific sets of things. Use Boolean logic to narrow search results by entering “AND,” “OR,” or “NOT” into a search request. You can also search for exact phrases (using quotation marks), dates, ranges (using greater than [>] and less than [<] symbols), absolute dates, and simple calculations.

:apple:Quick Look
sing Quick Look in Leopard, you can view the contents of a file without even opening it. Flip through multiple-page documents. Watch full-screen video. See entire Keynote presentations. With a single click.

So you’re flipping through files in the Finder. But you’re looking for something specific and you don’t have time to open lots of files to find it. Enter Quick Look. It gives you a sneak peek of entire files — even multiple-page documents and video — without opening them.

uick Look works with nearly every file on your system, including images, text files, PDFs, movies, Keynote presentations, and Microsoft Word and Excel files. Click the Quick Look icon or tap the Space bar to see a file in Quick Look. Then click the arrow icon to see the same file full screen — even video as it plays.

:apple:Time Machine
ore than a mere backup, Time Machine makes an up-to-date copy of everything on your Mac — digital photos, music, movies, TV shows, and documents — so you can go back in time to recover anything.

You can start using Time Machine in seconds. The first time you attach an external drive to your Mac, Time Machine asks if you’d like to use that drive as your backup. Say yes and Time Machine takes care of everything else. Automatically. In the background. You’ll never have to worry about backing up again.

Time Machine keeps an up-to-date copy of everything on your Mac. That includes system files, applications, accounts, preferences, music, photos, movies, and documents. But what makes Time Machine different from other backup applications is that it not only keeps a spare copy of every file, it remembers how your system looked on any given day — so you can revisit your Mac as it appeared in the past.

Enter the Time Machine browser in search of your long-lost files and you see exactly how your computer looked on the dates you’re browsing. Select a specific date, let Time Machine find your most recent changes, or do a Spotlight search to find exactly what you’re looking for. Once you do, click Restore and Time Machine brings it back to the present. Time Machine restores individual files, complete folders, or your entire computer — putting everything back the way it was and where it should be.

With a hard disk connected to your AirPort Extreme Base Station, all the Macs in your house can use Time Machine to back up wirelessly. Simply select your AirPort Disk as the backup disk for each computer and the whole family can enjoy the benefits of Time Machine.

Customize Time Machine by modifying the following behaviors in System Preferences:
Backup disk. Change the drive or volume you’re backing up to. Or back up to a Mac OS X Server computer.
Do not back up. By default, Time Machine backs up your entire system. But you can also select items you’d rather not back up.
Encrypt backup data. Turn on encryption to store your backup securely.
Backup storage time limits. Manage older backups so your backup drive doesn’t fill up.

:apple:Spaces
You do a lot on your Mac. So what happens when projects pile up? Easy. Use Spaces to group your windows and banish clutter completely. Leopard gives you a Space for everything and puts everything in its Space.

Create a Space for work. Create a Space for play. Organize each Space the way you want it just by dragging in windows. Keep all your work projects in one Space and that fun flick you made in iMovie in another. Create a communication Space for iChat and Mail. You can even rearrange your Spaces with drag-and-drop ease — shift a Space and every window in it comes along for the ride.

Moving from Space to Space is easy. Get a bird’s-eye view and select the Space you want or toggle between Spaces using the arrow keys. Even the Dock is down with Spaces: When you click a Dock icon, Leopard whisks you to the Space (or Spaces) where you have that application open.

This product has not been released yet. All features mentioned above are subject to change

:apple:Installation Requirements
Minimum MAC Processor Supported PowerPC G5
Minimum MAC HD Space Required 3 GB
Additional Processor Information PowerPC G3, G4 or G5 processor
Optical Drive Type Required DVD
Packaging
Package Type Retail
Type of Distribution Media DVD
Licensing
License Type Complete Package
Program Pools Systems
Number Of Users 1
Additional Information
Package Contents Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard - Single User

Broken Friday
Aug 21, 2007, 04:29 PM
The concept isn't logical yet. If I am working in Max, or Reason, and I need to run to Safari to get a reference picture set, or some samples, and have just ONE window of safari up, and I'm finished getting whatever, and I close with the close button, I don't want an instance of an open Safari running. If it is one window running, the close button needs t quit the dam application, and not hide it. If I wanted to hide one window, I would minimize it. Now if I had two windows up, closing one window only makes sense, don't minimize the ****ing window. I didn't ask to minimize to dock, I asked for a closing of the window. I think Apple screwed up there.

I think most OS X users would be really upset about this change (which would never happen). Being able to have a program run without an open window is a feature that is so obvious, it boggles my mind that all OS's don't have it. I use it constantly for Mail, NetNewsWire, Transmission, and several others. To take it away would mean one less option.

Peace
Aug 21, 2007, 04:34 PM
As in the previous build, any time I use Safari I get a beachball cursor and it freezes. I also had WoW freeze on me. I'd like to try more, but not being able to use Safari is pretty major to me.

Thats really weird because I have the exact same hardware as you and I have no problems with Safari.

you sure you don't have a pirated version of Leopard?

pengu
Aug 21, 2007, 04:46 PM
If it is one window running, the close button needs t quit the dam application, and not hide it. If I wanted to hide one window, I would minimize it. Now if I had two windows up, closing one window only makes sense, don't minimize the ****ing window. I didn't ask to minimize to dock, I asked for a closing of the window. I think Apple screwed up there.

um no, i think you failed miserably at english. you must have, because you CLEARLY can't comprehend the difference between "close", "hide" and "minimize"

the close button in NO WAY AT ALL minimizes or hides a window. it closes it. if you dont want the application running, go to AppMenu->Quit, or hit Cmd-Q or right-click the dock icon and choose Quit.

The advantage to being able to leave an app running with no active windows far outshines your lack of understanding regarding the concept.

bousozoku
Aug 21, 2007, 04:50 PM
...
This product has not been released yet. All features mentioned above are subject to change

:apple:Installation Requirements
Minimum MAC Processor Supported PowerPC G5
Minimum MAC HD Space Required 3 GB
Additional Processor Information PowerPC G3, G4 or G5 processor
Optical Drive Type Required DVD
Packaging
Package Type Retail
Type of Distribution Media DVD
Licensing
License Type Complete Package
Program Pools Systems
Number Of Users 1
Additional Information
Package Contents Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard - Single User

Why does the networking hardware (MAC) require a processor or hard drive space?

Be more careful when creating fakes! :p

Krevnik
Aug 21, 2007, 04:53 PM
The concept isn't logical yet. If I am working in Max, or Reason, and I need to run to Safari to get a reference picture set, or some samples, and have just ONE window of safari up, and I'm finished getting whatever, and I close with the close button, I don't want an instance of an open Safari running. If it is one window running, the close button needs t quit the dam application, and not hide it. If I wanted to hide one window, I would minimize it. Now if I had two windows up, closing one window only makes sense, don't minimize the ****ing window. I didn't ask to minimize to dock, I asked for a closing of the window. I think Apple screwed up there.

Not to disqualify your opinion or anything. When you close the last window, you didn't minimize the app to the dock, you closed the last window. This is an old behavior from pre-X where windows were windows, apps were apps. Apps had windows, but the two were not one and the same. In MacOS 9 though, you had an application menu to switch between open apps, and that menu got folded into the Dock with X.

In Windows, an app and window are one and the same. You can spawn new windows, but they are always new instances of the app, or a sub-window.

The two concepts are different. In OS X, apps own windows. In Windows, the app is the window. Neither one in inhierantly superior than the other, but they are different. A document-based app like Safari, Word, TextEdit, etc... all feel to /me/ like they work better when the app isn't closed when I close the last document. It makes it faster for me to create a new one without having to relaunch the freaking app just because I closed the last one (like I have to do with notepad and other similar Windows apps). With how virtual memory and everything else works... an app with nothing being displayed, and nothing to do should be pulling 0% CPU, and all its RAM pages will get swapped out to disk if Max or Reason needs the RAM. These days, it doesn't always make sense to be constantly opening and closing apps.

Krevnik
Aug 21, 2007, 04:58 PM
Thats really weird because I have the exact same hardware as you and I have no problems with Safari.

you sure you don't have a pirated version of Leopard?

Don't worry, I have seen the exact same behavior of Safari crashing, and it does depend on how you use Safari. Not sure what pirated copies have to do with Safari crashing.

I haven't seen WoW crash though, then again, I haven't tried on 9A499.

Broken Friday
Aug 21, 2007, 05:48 PM
Wow, you sound like a true fangirl don't you? You say I failed in english, yet you don't have the education to capitalize your leading character in your sentences? Not only that, but how can someone fail "at" english? I never knew "english" was a test or course in which humans had to take.

The close button closes the current window, and hides it from the OS's interface. Then once you go into your dock and click on the same application with the black arrow, the OS summons the same window back into the interface, and you now see it.

Secondly mister sour tart pants, if a user such as my self is working in a heavy environment such as using Maya, or Pro Tools, Photoshop CS3, and need to use Safari for a second, and are finished and is wanting to get back to our previous application, we would like to click the close button, and the application should close if there is one window open. That's common sense, having the application run only uses resource space that could be free.

"AppMenu->Quit, or hit Cmd-Q or right-click the dock icon and choose Quit" This is unnecessary to close one application with one window open. A simple click to the close button should do the trick, now if I had say two windows of Safari open, the close button should work in a single operation, not multiple for both windows.

You must have failed at life. That's what your kids will be telling you. :D


um no, i think you failed miserably at english. you must have, because you CLEARLY can't comprehend the difference between "close", "hide" and "minimize"

the close button in NO WAY AT ALL minimizes or hides a window. it closes it. if you dont want the application running, go to AppMenu->Quit, or hit Cmd-Q or right-click the dock icon and choose Quit.

The advantage to being able to leave an app running with no active windows far outshines your lack of understanding regarding the concept.

janitorC7
Aug 21, 2007, 05:50 PM
Hmm... The blue lights are kinda hard to see with all the icons' reflections...

This guys menu bar transparency died, its showing the skeleton of the shape, but lost the opacity, this is a bug that leopard Dev. users see when they attach their computer to an external monitor without restarting (in some cases, not all)

pengu
Aug 21, 2007, 06:08 PM
I never knew "english" was a test or course in which humans had to take.
woah. hang on. slow down. you were never taught english? never took any english tests? did you go to school, AT ALL?


The close button closes the current window, and hides it from the OS's interface. Then once you go into your dock and click on the same application with the black arrow, the OS summons the same window back into the interface, and you now see it.

uh. no. here is a simple test:
open safari
navigate to a page
close the window
click on the safari icon. holy cow, its NOT THE SAME WINDOW.

Secondly mister sour tart pants, if a user such as my self is working in a heavy environment such as using Maya, or Pro Tools, Photoshop CS3, and need to use Safari for a second, and are finished and is wanting to get back to our previous application, we would like to click the close button, and the application should close if there is one window open. That's common sense, having the application run only uses resource space that could be free.


um no. as has been stated, with the current performance of the VM system in OSX, it is usually more efficient to leave the application loaded in memory.

"AppMenu->Quit, or hit Cmd-Q or right-click the dock icon and choose Quit" This is unnecessary to close one application with one window open. A simple click to the close button should do the trick, now if I had say two windows of Safari open, the close button should work in a single operation, not multiple for both windows.

right, so you want Apple to adopt a ridiculous behaviour where the same button does vastly different things at different times? i think you need to go back to windows.


You must have failed at life. That's what your kids will be telling you. :D
wow you're creative.

decksnap
Aug 21, 2007, 06:19 PM
...a really backwards concept...

That was sad. If you want to quit an app, quit the app. If you want to close a window, close the window.

furcalchick
Aug 21, 2007, 06:55 PM
I think most OS X users would be really upset about this change (which would never happen). Being able to have a program run without an open window is a feature that is so obvious, it boggles my mind that all OS's don't have it. I use it constantly for Mail, NetNewsWire, Transmission, and several others. To take it away would mean one less option.

some programs, like iphoto, close when you click the x button on the window. same for photo booth (and others, just listing the major ones people would be most familiar with).

Karvel
Aug 21, 2007, 10:20 PM
As a not-so-powerful user, I do NOT like the differing behavior between:

Clicking the close button in Calculator/System Preferences/Dictionary and it closing the whole application
OR
Clicking the close button in Safari and it simply closing just the window

It seems that the first behavior only occurs when there is no "potential" for other windows to be opened (like in Dictionary, System Preferences), and that the other behavior occurs when there IS the potential for other window to be open (like multiple windows in Safari, multiple viewers in iTunes etc.). It was HELLA confusing when I first got Mac OS X I can tell ya!

theman
Aug 21, 2007, 10:23 PM
The green button sizes the window at the ideal size, based on the website you are viewing, or whatever the ideal size for the window you are working in is. This is central to the window system OS X utilizes. So, in a sense, the green button does know how big you [should] want your window. If you want it filling the screen, you should be able to drag it to that size and then the green button should toggle between that and ideal size. I would disagree that the purpose of a large monitor is run every window as large as possible.


THIS (http://theappleblog.com/2007/04/09/hey-apple-fix-the-green-button-already/) is what I am talking about with the green button. It is just annoying to me. However, not annoying enough to get me to go back to windoze.

bousozoku
Aug 21, 2007, 10:38 PM
THIS (http://theappleblog.com/2007/04/09/hey-apple-fix-the-green-button-already/) is what I am talking about with the green button. It is just annoying to me. However, not annoying enough to get me to go back to windoze.

There were several things about the zoom button in that rant. What specifically, other than the fact that it isn't the maximize button from Windows, do you not like?

The zoom box from 1984 and the zoom button from 1999 or thereabouts tries to anticipate proper sizing to allow drag and drop operation with the desktop and other applications.

Yes, Finder and other applications occasionally mess up and create windows that end up behind the Dock. Those applications need to be fixed.

aLoC
Aug 21, 2007, 11:33 PM
The MOSX window buttons behavior is just awful.

- The red one you never know if it's going to close the window or quit the app.
- The green one changes the size but that's about all you can say. Whether it goes bigger or smaller or no change is just a lottery.

And the dock:
- When you click an app icon in the dock, what will happen? If there is a minimized window will it deminimize? Not always. Will it open a new blank window if there is none? Not always.
- When a window is minimized can you rely on the thumbnail window updating or do you have to deminimize it to check progress bars etc.
Again depends on the app.

Suggestions:
- Make the green button a simple, predictable maximize button
- Make the menu bar do an animated transition when you switch from app to app (such as ticker text), so that if the app doesn't have any windows it's clearer that you have in fact changed key app. Or maybe there could be a spotlight shining up from under the dock that slides from app to app to show the key (active) app. Or the key app could just have a glow.

Stadsport
Aug 22, 2007, 12:36 AM
So far it seems pretty similar to 9A499. Wifi status bar still "cpu leaks" and hogs 200cpu. I'll try WEP tomorrow at school. A2DP seems a little more solid. Whole OS seems a lot more responsive and solid.

curmi
Aug 22, 2007, 01:27 AM
The MOSX window buttons behavior is just awful.

- The red one you never know if it's going to close the window or quit the app.
- The green one changes the size but that's about all you can say. Whether it goes bigger or smaller or no change is just a lottery.

And the dock:
- When you click an app icon in the dock, what will happen? If there is a minimized window will it deminimize? Not always. Will it open a new blank window if there is none? Not always.
- When a window is minimized can you rely on the thumbnail window updating or do you have to deminimize it to check progress bars etc.
Again depends on the app.

Suggestions:
- Make the green button a simple, predictable maximize button
- Make the menu bar do an animated transition when you switch from app to app (such as ticker text), so that if the app doesn't have any windows it's clearer that you have in fact changed key app. Or maybe there could be a spotlight shining up from under the dock that slides from app to app to show the key (active) app. Or the key app could just have a glow.

aLoC has made some very well considered and sensible suggestions here.

I am a long time Mac user, and I happen to like the Zoom button and the way it works. However, you can't tell what state you are currently in because it always shows "+" no matter what. I agree that this is confusing. "+" suggests getting bigger - but that isn't what it always means.

To be honest, "-" suggests doing the opposite of "+", so it is actually a poor choice of button for minimise. It really should point down to the dock - though that's confusing when your dock isn't at the bottom. :)

Close is also confusing - given that it sometimes quits an application. Yes, it makes sense to those who know what is going on. But to most people it doesn't. And anyone coming from Windows is confused, and almost every Window user is going to just close Windows expecting apps to quit - and they still do it after you tell them that isn't the way it works because they are so used to it.

If an app doesn't have a window, it almost needs to show something when you switch to it - like it greys out the whole screen so you know you are in an app without a window.

None of this is going to change any time soon though. Not in Leopard anyway. If anyone is expecting new or changed features in Leopard at this stage, you are dreaming. We'll be lucky to get those awful blue lights on the dock fixed by October...

Rhuantavan
Aug 22, 2007, 03:29 AM
aLoC has made some very well considered and sensible suggestions here.

I am a long time Mac user, and I happen to like the Zoom button and the way it works. However, you can't tell what state you are currently in because it always shows "+" no matter what. I agree that this is confusing. "+" suggests getting bigger - but that isn't what it always means.

To be honest, "-" suggests doing the opposite of "+", so it is actually a poor choice of button for minimise. It really should point down to the dock - though that's confusing when your dock isn't at the bottom. :)

Close is also confusing - given that it sometimes quits an application. Yes, it makes sense to those who know what is going on. But to most people it doesn't. And anyone coming from Windows is confused, and almost every Window user is going to just close Windows expecting apps to quit - and they still do it after you tell them that isn't the way it works because they are so used to it.

If an app doesn't have a window, it almost needs to show something when you switch to it - like it greys out the whole screen so you know you are in an app without a window.

None of this is going to change any time soon though. Not in Leopard anyway. If anyone is expecting new or changed features in Leopard at this stage, you are dreaming. We'll be lucky to get those awful blue lights on the dock fixed by October...

I completely agree with you here... especially with the close button behaviour. I still don't get what's the criteria that determines if it is ok to close the app or just the window of an app when clicking the X. If you ask me, the close button should always close the window and never the app. To close the app, just use the Cmd-Q combo.

fisha
Aug 22, 2007, 04:15 AM
Close is also confusing - given that it sometimes quits an application. Yes, it makes sense to those who know what is going on. But to most people it doesn't. And anyone coming from Windows is confused, and almost every Window user is going to just close Windows expecting apps to quit - and they still do it after you tell them that isn't the way it works because they are so used to it.

Your right, most windows users would certainly expect the app to quit when the last window of that app is closed. But i guess thats a fundamental difference between the way the UI displays an app in an overall sense.

OSX apps being titled in the menu bar with child windows

Windows have apps titled as a windowed area and within that child windows.

thewhitehart
Aug 22, 2007, 05:43 AM
Why bother discussing whether the red button should close a window or close an app? Did anyone really think this was going to change in Leopard?

The current implementation is not going to change. Ever.

babarr
Aug 22, 2007, 07:49 AM
I am a long time Mac user, and I happen to like the Zoom button and the way it works. However, you can't tell what state you are currently in because it always shows "+" no matter what. I agree that this is confusing. "+" suggests getting bigger - but that isn't what it always means.

To be honest, "-" suggests doing the opposite of "+", so it is actually a poor choice of button for minimise. It really should point down to the dock - though that's confusing when your dock isn't at the bottom. :)


Some months ago, I first got into the Mac world with my MBP. At first I also was confused by this, but once you understand that "+" does not mean "maximize" (size), but "optimize" (or "maximize usability"), it's perfectly ok. It often works better than "maximize", e.g. with windows displaying text such as browser windows, because it's really not comfortable to read those wide lines on the wide display. Safari does this just right (in contrast to e.g. Camino, which instead does a maximize).

In that light, the labelling of "-" does seem adequate indeed, because the opposite of "maximize usability" obviously is "minimize usability", which is arguably best achieved by not displaying anything at all ;)

drayon
Aug 22, 2007, 08:12 AM
Im hearing iChat in the latest Leopard build finally offers "Auto Accept File Transfers" whoo hoo any one else confirm this?

And no it not a security risk any more than downloading a file in Safari. Difference is Safari can Auto Open a downloaded file iChat can't. Even still if ppl are still paranoid create a disc image as iChat's download directory and only allow accept from ppl in your list. Simple.

I also hear "Input Managers" will be banned in Leopard, which means no more Chax which currently provides us features Apple are too lazy to provide.

heisetax
Aug 22, 2007, 09:06 AM
I have a feeling that everyone will have to wait until October still. Maybe not till the end....but at this point I don't think Steve wants this release to have ANY major problems. After the delay, I think everyone at Apple would rather have a very stable, fast OS....than a buggy release filled with Vista-like problems.

I think the other poster nailed it.....I think Apple probably has tailored back on the overall feature set to make sure they get a fast and stable release out.

Granted....Leopard it chalk full of new goodies.

Just my thoughts. Trust me....I can't wait, and would love to be wrong!

-Kevin


This may be why Steve Jobs never did list all of the planned changes. That way if some did not work well enough, they could just be left out.

Bill the TaxMan

Evangelion
Aug 22, 2007, 09:08 AM
Why bother discussing whether the red button should close a window or close an app? Did anyone really think this was going to change in Leopard?

The current implementation is not going to change. Ever.

Then why does the red button close the window in some apps, while in others it closes the entire app? We are not talking about differences between OS X and Windows, we are talking about differences inside OS X.

TBi
Aug 22, 2007, 09:11 AM
Then why does the red button close the window in some apps, while in others it closes the entire app? We are not talking about differences between OS X and Windows, we are talking about differences inside OS X.

This is usually only when the window open is the only window that can be opened by the application. Such as system preferences. If other windows could be opened then the X just closes the open window without closing the app.

I think there are more important things in life to worry about than whether the little X closes the window or app...

MonkeyClaw
Aug 22, 2007, 09:23 AM
I completely agree with you here... especially with the close button behaviour. I still don't get what's the criteria that determines if it is ok to close the app or just the window of an app when clicking the X. If you ask me, the close button should always close the window and never the app. To close the app, just use the Cmd-Q combo.

I think it makes up its mind based on instances of the App. For example you wouldn't have more than one window of iPhoto open so when you close iPhoto using the red x, it automatically closes the App since there is no way to have more than one instance of the app open. Same goes for like Aperture and what not.

bousozoku
Aug 22, 2007, 10:25 AM
Then why does the red button close the window in some apps, while in others it closes the entire app? We are not talking about differences between OS X and Windows, we are talking about differences inside OS X.

We're talking about differences between developers.

The guidelines never say to close the application but some developers do it on the close button. It's not like Windows where the menu bar exists within the main window. When you click the close button on the main window in a Windows application, it has no choice but to shut down the application because it cannot survive without the window.

I think it's silly to emulate that on Mac OS X without an option because it's not typical behaviour. However, there used to be some system add-on that you could load that would monitor closed windows and shut down the application when all of its windows were closed.

cowm007
Aug 22, 2007, 11:01 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing a small change for the green button. The button behaves like a toggle that switches between user-sized and optimum-size versions of the page. Maybe some indication of which mode the app is in would be nice, like a pushed in version of the button. That way, we can predictably tell what the app is going to do when we hit it.

patseguin
Aug 22, 2007, 11:07 AM
Don't worry, I have seen the exact same behavior of Safari crashing, and it does depend on how you use Safari. Not sure what pirated copies have to do with Safari crashing.

I haven't seen WoW crash though, then again, I haven't tried on 9A499.

Yeah, I am definitely not running a pirate copy. I can start Safari and it goes to the home page. If I type ANY address in the address bar and hit enter, I get the beach ball and the app freezes and I have to force quit it. I have the OS on an external LaCie drive although I am not sure if that has anything to do with it. I figured I might reinstall or just wait for the next seed.

Evangelion
Aug 22, 2007, 12:20 PM
We're talking about differences between developers.

Well, even Apple does it. See iPhoto. There really needs to be consistency here. The UI-elements should behave in similar way across different applications. It simply make no sense for the exact same UI-elemt to behave in different ways in different apps, without giving the user any idea what it would do.

I think it's silly to emulate that on Mac OS X without an option because it's not typical behaviour.

Yes it is, which is why it shouldn't do it. Hopefully someone will tell Apple that closing apps from the reb button is not a good idea.

Markus1982
Aug 22, 2007, 12:30 PM
Well, even Apple does it. See iPhoto. There really needs to be consistency here. The UI-elements should behave in similar way across different applications. It simply make no sense for the exact same UI-elemt to behave in different ways in different apps, without giving the user any idea what it would do.It does make sense.

It was already pointed out in this thread which apps close with a click of the red button. And it makes perfect sense there.

The idea is: An application that can never have more than one window (iPhoto, Photobooth, System Preferences) closes when closing the main window.

Whats so hard to understand in this simple concept? Are you a fresh switcher :rolleyes:

Evangelion
Aug 22, 2007, 12:39 PM
Whats so hard to understand in this simple concept? Are you a fresh switcher :rolleyes:

The fact that it needs to be explained means that its too confusing. And no, I'm not a fresh switcher. And do you want to know what you could do with that elitism of yours?

thajeztah
Aug 22, 2007, 02:00 PM
As somebody else pointed out; there's no real need to actually quit applications all the time as the OS X virtual-memory mechanism handles running, but inactive, applications quite well. They won't 'steal' many CPU cycles only some space on your harddisk as inactive applications will be 'suspended' to disk. (and, yes, I agree that it is not allways clear what the behaviour of the 'red' button is.. close or quit?).

I don't think Windows is really different in this in many ocassions. For example;


'Quiting' Internet Explorer will NOT quit the application, it simply keeps running all the time because 'Windows Explorer' is actually ... Internet Explorer. Internet Explorer is running all the time (which explains why IE starts up a whole lot quicker than Firefox)
Recent versions of Adobe Reader (5.5 and above) are also quite fast to start .. simply because they are also running all the time; they are automatically launched when you log in ('Adobe Reader Fast Start')
Outlook ... is it ever really closed? Notifying you that a new email has arrived? (even when I do close Outlook, minutes before, I still get error messages many times telling me that 'the applicaton Outlook is not responding' when I try to log off)
Also have an item called Microsoft Office in your 'startup' directory on Windows?


The difference is really that Windows make it look like you've closed an application, where you actually didn't.


I do think there's room for improvement, for example:

Add a maximize option to the green button, for example holding down the 'shift' key when clicking the green button will maximize instead of zoom
Recognize this? Open iTunes and click the green zoom-button to switch to mini player view... the red..yellow..green buttons are 'rotated' and now vertically, however not in the way you'd expect (rotate your head to the left... green..yellow..red. exactly the opposite as they were horizontally). Many times I've quit iTunes instead of 'zoomed' the window.. :( especially since I use the 'graphite' look.

bousozoku
Aug 22, 2007, 02:58 PM
Well, even Apple does it. See iPhoto. There really needs to be consistency here. The UI-elements should behave in similar way across different applications. It simply make no sense for the exact same UI-elemt to behave in different ways in different apps, without giving the user any idea what it would do.
...


Reading the manual and help text might help but the zoom button is application dependent. It doesn't have to work exactly the same way. Besides, Apple, since NeXT was merged, has been the most inconsistent of Mac OS X developers.

It does make sense.

It was already pointed out in this thread which apps close with a click of the red button. And it makes perfect sense there.

The idea is: An application that can never have more than one window (iPhoto, Photobooth, System Preferences) closes when closing the main window.

Whats so hard to understand in this simple concept? Are you a fresh switcher :rolleyes:

No, it doesn't make sense to close some applications with the close button and not others. It's inconsistent and the guidelines from Apple specifically state not to do that.

notsofatjames
Aug 22, 2007, 03:19 PM
Recognize this? Open iTunes and click the green zoom-button to switch to mini player view... the red..yellow..green buttons are 'rotated' and now vertically, however not in the way you'd expect (rotate your head to the left... green..yellow..red. exactly the opposite as they were horizontally). Many times I've quit iTunes instead of 'zoomed' the window.. :( especially since I use the 'graphite' look.
[/LIST]

OK, now turn your head to the right.... red, yellow, green, just like when they're horizontal.

thajeztah
Aug 22, 2007, 03:31 PM
OK, now turn your head to the right.... red, yellow, green, just like when they're horizontal.

Yup, however, I turn -left- because that's where the edge of the window is. I know, maybe it's just me, but I find that it's much easier to locate the 'red/close' button, because it's on the corner of the window, than it is to click the green button ('locate' the window, activate it to make it active and -see- the colors (otherwise they're grey), then click on the bottom button. IMO toggling back to full-size from the mini-player is the most important of the three (green, yellow, red)?

curmi
Aug 22, 2007, 05:33 PM
The fact that it needs to be explained means that its too confusing. And no, I'm not a fresh switcher. And do you want to know what you could do with that elitism of yours?

Exactly! It is inconsistent between applications and is confusing. Look at all the people here who have said they don't touch the zoom button, after years of being Mac users, because they are never quite sure what it will do. That should be telling us all something. The red and green buttons are both inconsistent and confusing - even to seasoned Mac users.

It is true that Apple will probably never fix this - I mean they claim to have made all their GUIs use a consistent theme for Leopard, but iPhoto/iTunes begs to differ. But we can still discuss the way things should be and hope that one day Apple fixes the problem.

psychofreak
Aug 22, 2007, 05:40 PM
The Trash needs updating:

We need undo-delete for the trash that puts the files back where they were and the ability (à la windows) to only empty the Trash of certain things (e.g. permanently delete one of five items in the trash).

curmi
Aug 22, 2007, 08:33 PM
The Trash needs updating:

We need undo-delete for the trash that puts the files back where they were and the ability (à la windows) to only empty the Trash of certain things (e.g. permanently delete one of five items in the trash).

The Trash needs a Shred option:

http://curmi.com/blog/2006/11/18/improving-mac-os-x-trash-and-shred/

ventro
Aug 22, 2007, 11:16 PM
Those ideas about making it more apparent which app currently has focus is brilliant. That spotlight-in-the-dock idea is great as is that menubar transition idea. Perhaps this super-tight integration of Core Animation is something for 10.6.

MacAerfen
Aug 22, 2007, 11:42 PM
I really can not understand why people have such a hard time with the red button. It is very intuitive if you are not stuck in the windows mindset. Some people who haven't used a computer before who do not get it, are those that are slow to learn computers.

It is not inconsistant. It is just smarter than some users. Take system preferences for example. You can not open multiple windows and more importantly not a different window that does a different thing. There is Zero reason to have system preferences running without a window. Same as iPhoto. The main window is the only window you can use, you can not for example open up 2-3 windows showing different albums or libraries. So again there is no reason to keep the application open when you close the only window possible. Photoshop or Safari on the other hand you can have other windows, you may very well want to have the program open without a document Open. I use Photoshop and Illustrator. I do not want to have to keep a window open to keep the program open. If they changed the red button to work as some people are saying it should, thats how it would be. Closing the last window open would close the program. I also do not want the desktop space waste that is windows which has 2 seperate menu bars all the time. One for the program and one for the document. I like the fact That Mac OS uses the main sytem menubar for all applications, it means I can hide most of the interface for a program and just deal with my document instead of having to have a "frame" For each item i work with. It is much more pleasing to the eye to have my documents hovering over my desktop instead of a gray background shell that traps it just so I have the option of clicking one button to close the program.

I really do wish those that have nothing better to do than nitpick over how "Apple should do this because this is how it works in windows" would just shut up and go back to using Windows and leave Mac OS X alone for those of us that can appreciate a good OS.

thajeztah
Aug 23, 2007, 05:00 AM
...Same as iPhoto. The main window is the only window you can use, you can not for example open up 2-3 windows showing different albums or libraries....
Unfortunately this is no longer true in iPhoto 8; there's a new setting in the preferences 'edit photo in new window', which will open in a new window.

Apple seems to have overlooked this feature, as it still 'quits' the application if you click the close button in the main window (in my case, it -did- cause an error 'the application iPhoto exited unexpectedly'):o

Evangelion
Aug 23, 2007, 08:41 AM
I really can not understand why people have such a hard time with the red button. It is very intuitive if you are not stuck in the windows mindset.

Well, I have been talking about inconsistency inside OS X. I have NOT asked for the red button to work like it does in Windows. What I have complained about is the fact that in some apps it works in certain way, and in other apps it works in different way.

Some people who haven't used a computer before who do not get it, are those that are slow to learn computers.

I have used computers since 1983 or so. And I do "get it". What I don't get is why it behaves differently between different apps. Because some apps have just one window? Well, iTunes has just one window, yet it doesn't quit from the red button. Yet iPhoto does. Where is the logic here? IIRC, Aperture doesn't quit from the red button, even though it too has just one window. Hellooo-o?

It is not inconsistant.

Yes it is. In some cases it works in one way, in other cases it works in different way. Is that "consistant"?

It is just smarter than some users. Take system preferences for example. You can not open multiple windows and more importantly not a different window that does a different thing. There is Zero reason to have system preferences running without a window. Same as iPhoto. The main window is the only window you can use, you can not for example open up 2-3 windows showing different albums or libraries. So again there is no reason to keep the application open when you close the only window possible.

Sure there is. It loads faster if you leave it running in the background. And besides: when user starts an app, how is he to know that could that app have more than one window or not? Why can't you just admit that it's inconsistent?

I really do wish those that have nothing better to do than nitpick over how "Apple should do this because this is how it works in windows" would just shut up and go back to using Windows and leave Mac OS X alone for those of us that can appreciate a good OS.

There has been talk about inconsistency inside OS X. Even you talkde about how it behaves differently in different apps. Where exactly does any of that touch how the button works in Windows? I couldn't care less how it works in Windows, what I do care about how it works in OS X! Why do you keep on bringing up Windows to the discussion? Windows is irrelevant.

nateco
Aug 24, 2007, 12:23 PM
anyone having troubles with itunes crashing in the new build?

is there an easy fix....it worked fine in 466.

MacAerfen
Aug 24, 2007, 05:33 PM
iTunes by default has only one window. But you can in fact have multiple windows. Try clicking double clicking on a playlist, and will wonders never cease, hold your breath now, we get a new window. You may want to check some of those other majorly confusing applications and see if they do, before listing them. As for non Apple products, perhaps there is some inconsistancy, but then, they are made by different companies and can set their own function.

What you see as inconsistant I see as designed with a purpose. Apple does not randomly choose wich of their applications close with the red button. And I thoroughly doubt it is because they do not think these things through.

Congratulations on having used a computer for 24 years, and still being novice enough to post incorrect information about a very simple application as your proof and assuring us that you in fact do not get it.

As for windows, it seems everyone who has mentioned why it is "wrong" behavior seems to use windows as their proof of how it should work. Apple designed it their way. It makes sense the way they did it and no it wasn't a random decision. Had people never used windows, never got used to the way it works there I am sure more people would have less time getting used to how Apple does it.

alea
Aug 25, 2007, 06:17 AM
No matter how may times I try, the new Leopard Seed will not install.
It goes through the whole process and restarts etc, but i finally get to the desktop after restart, and click on About This Mac, it still says 9A499.
And, when I click on Software Update, the new seed appears everytime.

Your download package is corrupted. Go to /Library/Packages/ and delete the folder titled 'Mac OS X Leopard 9A499 Seed Update'. Start up Software Update and you will be able to download again.

Try to take notice of the download process, it does get corrupted from time to time. Once that happens, the installation(update) process will get stalled when you restart you Mac.

Hope this helps!

semicolons
May 9, 2008, 06:20 PM
The red button closes the window. If there is no function an app could perform in a windowless state, it should quit. Just think: Imagine how awful it would be if closing a Safari window completely quitted the application, or if you closed System Preferences and accidentally left it running, performing no function whatsoever?
iTunes mustn't quit on close, as that would stop your music. Same with Mail, etc. How about we just accept that, apart from with iPhoto, Apple really got this right.

And I don't think they did anything wrong with the minimize button at all.

Kilamite
May 9, 2008, 06:21 PM
Did you really have to resurrect such an old post just to say that...?