Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Leopard Screenshots?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
i think the IE7 title bar is a compelling reason to think it's fake. if you run darwine, which uses wine and runs the original EXE, it shows the same text in the mac title bar as the windows app would. granted, i haven't gotten IE7 to work under darwine, but it would act in a similar fashion, there is no reason for it to change. it would say the title of the HTML page followed by " - Windows Internet Explorer". if you think mac os x would add "Windows Internet Explorer: " before the title of the app to show what app it is, it would then be "Windows Internet Explorer: TITLE OF HTML PAGE - Windows Internet Explorer" because it CAN NOT change the title like that. the app puts the title there, not the OS, and it can not control that.
faisal said:
More reason to believe it's a fake, I'm not going to even bother anymore...
The only thing we know is that Leopard is the next OS and that bootcamp is going to play a big role in it...
I and my brother have Vista dual-booting with OS X and when IE7 is open to the Apple page in question it doesn't show the title the same way the "screenshot" does..
A couple more glitches
The Finder:
1. Someone mentioned that the "pill" button was missing from the Finder window: the Panther and Tiger Finder uses the same interface from iLife '03/'04 and even though there aren't collapsable toolbars on any of the "iApps", the Finder has that button, and it not only collapses the titlebar, but also changes its whole appearance, in a fairly inconsistent way with the rest of the Aqua interface. In Leopard, I'm guessing Apple could make it behave the way it should, by scrapping the "classic" Finder interface altogether, but eliminating the button and the features themselves seems just weird.
2. The shortcuts on the sidebar are too spaced: maybe Apple is changing the way those icons are displayed (by, say, spacing them evenly across the avaliable space), but that just seems incoherent with both the old finder, and the new apps like iLife '06 and Mail. It doesnt "feel right".
3. The "/" on the slash button: it seems to be too dark, at least when compared to the gear icon. Notice how the gear icon is lighter at the top, where the "glossy shine" is, whereas the "/" isn't. Besides, the slash doesn't fit with the Aqua desktop paradigm; I could more easily envision a path field like in Windows Explorer or the address field on Safari, than a useless makeover to the already functional "path" button/menu.
4. The down arrows on the "bookmarks" bar: they are too big, at least when compared with the ones found in Safari. While Apple many times presents inconsistent interfaces, I'm guessing that if the tabs look so much like the ones found in Safari, the rest of the interface should at least be equally consistent.
The desktop switcher pager: It looks fugly. And that circled desktop number on the titlebar doesn't look too good either. All in all, I think that's all too abstract for my (and most Mac users') taste. 'Nuff said.
The Internet Explorer window: while I think the shadows are correct, since it isn't the topmost window, it presents a glitch for that very reason that is a dead giveaway. OS X has a rare interface bug: sometimes, the inactive titlebar of a window becomes pearly white (like the active titlebars in the gorgeous MaxThemes' Milk theme) instead of pinstriped; I only know of two apps that present that bug, and those are IRCle, and... [drumroll please] TextEdit (only when you open the Font or Table panels and select them - see attachment)! Now, TextEdit is possibly the best app to fake titlebars and photochop something into its main document windows. This small detail just reveals some sloppyness from the faker's part
. Besides, notice how the left-hand side of the IE toolbar is conveniently covered by the Finder window... That, allied to the blank desktop picture, as someone already mentioned, makes the job so much easier!
[edit: the plot thickens a little bit (or I thickened it in the first place just to create a conspiracy theory ). It just struck me that actually, when that bug occurs, the title remains in black, instead of turning grey... However (and I don't care that it may seem that I'm obsessed about proving these images are fake), upon closer inspection of the IE 7 toolbar, I just noticed that the title is just too big in size. Look at my screenshot for comparison and notice how on the IE 7 screenshot the title's baseline is too close to the lower end of the titlebar.]
The desktop picture: I just mentioned that it is blank, right? Now look closely at the second picture, the one with the transition that resembles "Goat SE" (like Win98, only uglier - also notice how they funnily hit the black MacBook right in the middle of its screen... Ok, I should shut up now ), and through that... hole thing, you can clearly see the default Tiger desktop picture. Since you can't see its corners, again, that makes it much easier to fake, so the blank desktop wasn't needed.
On a side note: the faker had the Dasboard developer mode activated, as you can see the top-left corner of the Google widget peaking through that "hole", right beneath the Finder window. I don't know why someone would want to have the Google widget floating above all the other windows... But one thing I DO know: I sometimes do that with the "Stickies" widget, and ironically enough, I found all widgets are "sticky" as far as VirtueDesktops and Desktop Manager are concerned. I don't know how they behave with CodeTek Virtual Desktop, but I don't see why should Apple's desktop switcher behave differently (on the first screenshot there's no Google widget, which makes me believe those desktops couldn't possibly coexist).
So, I don't even need to describe the process of faking this, as the ingredients used are thouroghly described here, and those which aren't are preety obvious (iLife apps, Safari and Finder frankensteined together)... Also, where are the full-size images?
The Finder:
1. Someone mentioned that the "pill" button was missing from the Finder window: the Panther and Tiger Finder uses the same interface from iLife '03/'04 and even though there aren't collapsable toolbars on any of the "iApps", the Finder has that button, and it not only collapses the titlebar, but also changes its whole appearance, in a fairly inconsistent way with the rest of the Aqua interface. In Leopard, I'm guessing Apple could make it behave the way it should, by scrapping the "classic" Finder interface altogether, but eliminating the button and the features themselves seems just weird.
2. The shortcuts on the sidebar are too spaced: maybe Apple is changing the way those icons are displayed (by, say, spacing them evenly across the avaliable space), but that just seems incoherent with both the old finder, and the new apps like iLife '06 and Mail. It doesnt "feel right".
3. The "/" on the slash button: it seems to be too dark, at least when compared to the gear icon. Notice how the gear icon is lighter at the top, where the "glossy shine" is, whereas the "/" isn't. Besides, the slash doesn't fit with the Aqua desktop paradigm; I could more easily envision a path field like in Windows Explorer or the address field on Safari, than a useless makeover to the already functional "path" button/menu.
4. The down arrows on the "bookmarks" bar: they are too big, at least when compared with the ones found in Safari. While Apple many times presents inconsistent interfaces, I'm guessing that if the tabs look so much like the ones found in Safari, the rest of the interface should at least be equally consistent.
The desktop switcher pager: It looks fugly. And that circled desktop number on the titlebar doesn't look too good either. All in all, I think that's all too abstract for my (and most Mac users') taste. 'Nuff said.
The Internet Explorer window: while I think the shadows are correct, since it isn't the topmost window, it presents a glitch for that very reason that is a dead giveaway. OS X has a rare interface bug: sometimes, the inactive titlebar of a window becomes pearly white (like the active titlebars in the gorgeous MaxThemes' Milk theme) instead of pinstriped; I only know of two apps that present that bug, and those are IRCle, and... [drumroll please] TextEdit (only when you open the Font or Table panels and select them - see attachment)! Now, TextEdit is possibly the best app to fake titlebars and photochop something into its main document windows. This small detail just reveals some sloppyness from the faker's part
. Besides, notice how the left-hand side of the IE toolbar is conveniently covered by the Finder window... That, allied to the blank desktop picture, as someone already mentioned, makes the job so much easier![edit: the plot thickens a little bit (or I thickened it in the first place just to create a conspiracy theory
). It just struck me that actually, when that bug occurs, the title remains in black, instead of turning grey... However (and I don't care that it may seem that I'm obsessed about proving these images are fake), upon closer inspection of the IE 7 toolbar, I just noticed that the title is just too big in size. Look at my screenshot for comparison and notice how on the IE 7 screenshot the title's baseline is too close to the lower end of the titlebar.]The desktop picture: I just mentioned that it is blank, right? Now look closely at the second picture, the one with the transition that resembles "Goat SE" (like Win98, only uglier
- also notice how they funnily hit the black MacBook right in the middle of its screen... Ok, I should shut up now ), and through that... hole thing, you can clearly see the default Tiger desktop picture. Since you can't see its corners, again, that makes it much easier to fake, so the blank desktop wasn't needed.On a side note: the faker had the Dasboard developer mode activated, as you can see the top-left corner of the Google widget peaking through that "hole", right beneath the Finder window. I don't know why someone would want to have the Google widget floating above all the other windows... But one thing I DO know: I sometimes do that with the "Stickies" widget, and ironically enough, I found all widgets are "sticky" as far as VirtueDesktops and Desktop Manager are concerned. I don't know how they behave with CodeTek Virtual Desktop, but I don't see why should Apple's desktop switcher behave differently (on the first screenshot there's no Google widget, which makes me believe those desktops couldn't possibly coexist).
So, I don't even need to describe the process of faking this, as the ingredients used are thouroghly described here, and those which aren't are preety obvious (iLife apps, Safari and Finder frankensteined together)... Also, where are the full-size images?
Attachments
oldMac said:
Yeah I agree, that definately is something what you would not expect. I would say these are fake as well...
I think the fact the word microsoft never appears is proof in and of itself this is fake. No way microsoft would let apple not mention them anywhere
quigleybc said:
The non-brushed metal texture of the window and the almost square corners... Sure, it was introduced originally in iTunes 5, but was eventually extended to the rest of the iLife suite...
Sorry, my bad. Just thought it was a foregone conclusion about major OS X updates... it just kinda came out.4God said:And?
boncellis said:
1. FTP upload in Finder
2. Yahoo/MSN support in iChat (if only text and file sharing)
3. Spotlight Advanced Search (and/or, but not, etc)
I'll think of more later too, but those are at the top of my list.
David
4God said:All good then.
I think we're all just a little anxious for Leopard.
Thats for damn sure!!Without reading through the 7 previous pages and possibly repeating stuff, I think it's real. Internet Explorer is from a windows emulation/translation thing, which from the looks of it, might be able to run windows apps without booting up all of windows (the text looks like it's windows font generated via windows, so maybe the kernel and then pieces of stuff are activated as they are deemed necessary). The numbers refer to a virtual desktop, which to me seems like a gimmicky feature put in just so that Jobs has something to show people. I never liked it too much. Address book and iCal have been merged (i don't necessarily agree with this, takes away some of the simplicity). And the Finder has been messed with (don't really care how it looks as long as it's faster now). The reason I think this is true is because whatever version this is is probably a beta of some sorts, so the inconsistencies that people are nitpicking about and using as evidence of fake-ness are yet to really be smoothed out. I don't think the menubar should be changed. It's fine as it is.
faisal said:
faisal said:
Its the same ratio as 1680x1050; which makes the "machine" this was running on a 17" MBP or 20"iMac.
Although it does have a lot of good elements, and this thing has been thoroughly dissected here, my "fake" observation is this:
If OSX is running Windows apps the way they are depicted, where is OSX grabbing the icons for in the dock? Windows apps dont have icons with high enough resolution for the apple dock, do they? (I know Vista will support high res icons)
If it was real or fake, we can figure out a date of late may for these screengrabs, based on the apple page displayed in IE.
So are we all just waiting for 'Attack of the Show!' to admit to this?
As said before, no Apple Legal request = fake in my book.
As said before, no Apple Legal request = fake in my book.
- Status