Apple Tweaks Mac OS X Lion UI In Response to Criticism

[Branskins]

Look at us debating this, I am sure Apple is having a hard time determining what to do too! I have a feeling they like it to, but you are correct that it is confusing when there are only two options.

However, this doesn't mean I think it should go away. It just needs a little more tweaking!

Also, I am glad they are going with the squarish buttons. It's amazing how more modern it feels compared to the rounded buttons!

 

[jrtc27]

Do you mean you like the change, or the reverse of the change?

You only have to look at the second screen shot to see why the slider was potentially confusing…

Image

When there are only two options, the inactive option looks a lot like a depressed button.

Apple's always fiddling with this. You have to wonder why they didn't just stick with the old tabbed interface, which is arguably the most instantly recognisable way of switching window views. I guess there's a bit more flexibility in buttons, in terms of their placement… or maybe they're just trying to think different.

I mean I like the change away from the slider. The slider was confusing (I'm a techie, and I was confused at first when I saw videos and screenshots), and the squarer buttons look better than the old style in Snow Leopard, especially with the two shades of grey - they are much more modern and much subtler.

 

[rtheb]

I like the buttons as well and Apple knows that you still need to design for the LCD (Lowest Common Denominator) purchasing the product.

 

[lotones]

btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?

Because it took them 7 years to get it right.

 

[Yamcha]

I've been using OSX Lion for a day, so far its pretty great, except I don't understand why Apple didn't add an option for a mouse shortcut for Launchpad =/, it would make things so much easier..

 

[jaypunkrawk]

This makes me really happy. I hadn't liked the original look from the beginning. It was pretty, but I was afraid it would confuse me. I much prefer the active "tab" to be depressed.

 

[MorphingDragon]

And what is exactly your point? The specific app is not intended to be a part of the OS interface. It is using a more immersed, recreational interface, which makes it fun to use. (Have a look on the review here to see what I mean: http://www.inews24hs.com/2011/03/15/led-machines-–-led-flashlight-for-iphone-4-review/ ) Users enjoy the animations and sound effects. They are using it for the whole experience, not just for the usability of it.

On the other hand, OS interfaces are belonging to a different category. And although there is a trend to make the native OS apps more immersive (take as an example the new iCal. It uses an interface that tries to emulate a real object, a real leather Calendar), users could have given the option to switch between a more abstract UI style. The main reason of using native OS apps (such as ical, mail, etc) is more task centred rather than experience oriented. The ideal would be not using any interface at all and just have a personal assistant do all the hard work for us accepting voice commands. Hopefully we are not far away from something like that though…

It is interesting to notice that there are two different trends for the interface design criteria of the OS apps. Two different schools. One is the school of immersive interface, such as iCal, garageBand for iPad, iMovie for the iPhone with all the eye candy on the movie selection menu. The other is the minimalistic approach: the new Mail interface, the iPhoto, e.t.c. It is as there are two different interface design teams working in parallel, doing their experiments on UI usability, each following a different direction.

A bit out of topic though!! Lets get back to the slider conversation!!

Was talking about the ad itself, not the UI.

 

[funkypepper]

Can anyone confirm is there a Turkish localization in this build?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Too bad they don't rethink/switch back their changes to Spaces.... UGH.

Because it took them 7 years to get it right.

Does that mean it took Apple 10 years to get OSX right?

 

[aegisdesign]

Maybe in another few releases they'll revert back to making the active state aqua blue to distinguish it from a disabled button.

10.7's UI changes are ridiculous. For decades we've been used to UI elements being in a darker grey to indicate them being inactive or disabled, now Apple want to switch that around?

Back in the 10.4 days I used to use Uno to remove brushed metal and make the UI consistent. In 10.5 and 10.6 there was no need for Uno but I can see it's going to be needed again in 10.7.

Uno (btw) - http://gui.interacto.net/

 

[shurcooL]

Look at us debating this, I am sure Apple is having a hard time determining what to do too! I have a feeling they like it to, but you are correct that it is confusing when there are only two options.

However, this doesn't mean I think it should go away. It just needs a little more tweaking!

I agree with that last sentence!

The idea of sliders is great, because you can grab it and switch between different tabs without having to look at the tab buttons. You can focus on the tab content instead.

 

[Mr.damien]

This suck, it was a really good improvement. Sad to see that Apple is stepping back listening to old people over here that can't change their habits ...

 

[ten-oak-druid]

Are you just kidding?

Oh well I will just answer it just in case.

Vista = version 6

Windows 7 = version 7 No blue screen ever just in case anyone is wondering.

Windows 8 = version 8 When it comes out, 2015?

Actually I have seen a number of explanations on this thread from people who use Windows more than myself. The answer to why it is "7" does not seem to be well known even to Windows users.

Because it took them 7 years to get it right.

LOL. And counting.

Does that mean it took Apple 10 years to get OSX right?

Actually 10 comes after 9.

 

[Broojo02]

Kinda glad about this, the new sliders did look awesome and very iOSy but the slight delay in seeing a switch between two different states with the animation, especially between two areas far away could be a bit annoying and time consuming. We are only talking like 1/2 a second max probably but that is still something compared to the instant response of having a simple button.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Actually I have seen a number of explanations on this thread from people who use Windows more than myself. The answer to why it is "7" does not seem to be well known even to Windows users.

Really its not brain surgery.

Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).

 

[ten-oak-druid]

Really its not brain surgery.

Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).

You need to indicate where you fit in NT, me, 95, 98 and any other versions that might exist. You haven't included all the versions.


Look through the thread. There are other various arguments about how the versions are grouped.

 

[pcharles]

Not Liking Lion Preview

I have been playing with the Lion Preview for a few weeks, on and off, and I am not liking what I see.

I like the minimalist look, to some extent. It feels very clean and Jobsian, but I feel like many of the features I rely on have been changed. For example:

1. The dock lights are gone, so you have no idea what is loaded.
2. The button on the top right of the finder window is gone.
3. iCal is diaper brown and has gained no real functionality
4. The scrolling is now inverted. It works ok on an iPad, but no so intuitive with a mouse
5. The organization of the side bar has changed. I like the drives at the top and now they are at the bottom. Can't see how to change this
6. Not keen on the launcher. It works fine on the iPad, but is a bit strange on the desktop.

These are just a few things that have irked me.

 

[Cougarcat]

I have been playing with the Lion Preview for a few weeks, on and off, and I am not liking what I see.

I like the minimalist look, to some extent. It feels very clean and Jobsian, but I feel like many of the features I rely on have been changed. For example:

1. The dock lights are gone, so you have no idea what is loaded.
2. The button on the top right of the finder window is gone.
3. iCal is diaper brown and has gained no real functionality
4. The scrolling is now inverted. It works ok on an iPad, but no so intuitive with a mouse
5. The organization of the side bar has changed. I like the drives at the top and now they are at the bottom. Can't see how to change this
6. Not keen on the launcher. It works fine on the iPad, but is a bit strange on the desktop.

These are just a few things that have irked me.

You can change 1 and 4 in system preferences.

 

[pcharles]

Because it took them 7 years to get it right.

I assume you are joking because the truth is even worse! The seven has nothing to do with anything much at all. It is not the seventh version of windows, nor have they been working on it seven years.

Maybe it is the age of the developers cat! I wonder if Microsoft Cat is like Shrödinger's Cat. It is both running and crashed at the same time!

 

[ssdeg7]

I preferred the slide tabs than the old ones. I hope we get back to them soon.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Actually 10 comes after 9.

You obviously missed the irony of it all (and yes, OSX is around 10 years old now). Windows was never called "1, 2, 3" etc. so there's more irony for OSX which did takes 10 years to get where it is now (i.e that's how long they've been working on OSX; OS9 has NOTHING to do with the length of time they've spent on the current OS, which has little or nothing to do with OS9 technologically other than the similarity in GUI interface (save the overlap in Carbon libraries). OSX is based on NeXTStep, itself based on Unix. It's not based on Mac Classic OS 1-9. But then my should have clued you in. But then Windows haters rarely get such humor, IMO.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

You obviously missed the irony of it all (and yes, OSX is around 10 years old now). Windows was never called "1, 2, 3" etc. so there's more irony for OSX which did takes 10 years to get where it is now (i.e that's how long they've been working on OSX; OS9 has NOTHING to do with the length of time they've spent on the current OS, which has little or nothing to do with OS9 technologically other than the similarity in GUI interface (save the overlap in Carbon libraries). OSX is based on NeXTStep, itself based on Unix. It's not based on Mac Classic OS 1-9. But then my should have clued you in. But then Windows haters rarely get such humor, IMO.

You're implying that I said something that you are "correcting" me on. Length of time of OS X development? Show me where I mentioned this before proceeding to "correct me".

The thing I mentioned was the progression of names: OS 9 then OS X. I know the two are vastly different. I know OS X is based on unix. But to say the numbering doesn't show a progression is silly. OS X instead of OS 10 indicates a significant change while preserving the numbering.

I was only discussing the name Windows 7. Everyone with an answer believes they know. I don't know so I will not critique the individual answers. But I find it fascinating that between obvious Windows users there is no consensus. I've seen more than one explanation for the "7".

And finally I am not a Windows "hater". I am a hater of people who care to waste my time telling me why using a Mac is "wrong". I will say that since being away from Windows for the most part for some time now, that I am lost on that OS. It used to be that I could go back and forth with ease. But the subtle changes to Windows have made it less intuitive IMO. And being a non-Windows user I think I am a good judge of whether it is intuitive or not when I try it. Microsoft has been making changes to Office for Mac over the years that I find strange. Labeling axis on a graph in excel for instance is less intuitive than it used to be. But recently I had to use excel on a Windows machine and I have to say it was very strange how it has been organized. The changes to Office for Mac OS are nothing compared to the changes I have seen to Office for Windows OS.

 

[andrewbecks]

They still need to revert the faux leather on iCal. That's hideous.

Couldn't agree more!

 

[andrewbecks]

Really its not brain surgery.

Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, I believe that Windows 7 is actually version 6.1.

v1: Windows 1.0
v2: Windows 2.0
v3: Windows 3.x, Windows NT 3.1
v4: Windows 95 (4.0.x), Windows NT 4 (also 4.0.x), Windows 98 (4.1.x), Windows ME (4.9)
v5: Windows 2000 (5.0.x), Windows XP (5.1.x), Windows XP 64-bit (5.2.x)
v6: Windows Vista (6.0.x), Windows 7 (6.1.x)

Don't ask me why--seems a bit illogical to me. Especially since, at some point, they'll likely have a v7.x and it will likely create additional confusion.

Wikipedia has a little more detail on this:
There has been some confusion over naming the product Windows 7, while versioning it as 6.1 to indicate its similar build to Vista and increase compatibility with applications that only check major version numbers, similar to Windows 2000 and Windows XP both having 5.x version numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7

 

[JAT]

You obviously missed the irony of it all (and yes, OSX is around 10 years old now). Windows was never called "1, 2, 3" etc. so there's more irony for OSX which did takes 10 years to get where it is now

??? Actually, those first versions of Windows were the only ones with names based on the version number.

Although, I can't make out what either of you are saying.