Oh, I quite agree, it's a bit tacky and tasteless, which is why I think Apple could really raise the ante here, by showing how to do it properly.
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.
Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 9A343 Screenshots
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh, I quite agree, it's a bit tacky and tasteless, which is why I think Apple could really raise the ante here, by showing how to do it properly.
So it seems like Leopard is going to be about the same type of upgrade as Tiger was. A few new and improved built in apps? I'm hoping they have something up their sleeve, but I don't think it could be anything too big.
People keep saying that Apple could replace the "UI". As if "UI" were some object you could see or point to. The User Interface is the overall design of an application and includes things like the decision to present the user with a control or not and if so where to place it For example the UI in Final Cut is a set of tracks and a couple viewers and then a whole mess of controls. What I think people here are talking about is what some call "skins" which is just the color and texture of the controls and visible objects. If so then this is trivial to change
I'd be very disappointed if Steve "super secret" stuff was just a change in the "look". I think we have to guess now that those secret features are something that developers don't need to know about so they will not be core features but user level applications perhaps a new finder or a more pervasive use of spotlight or possible user selectable "skins" I'm guessing VOIP telephony integration with iChat and iPhone
Incremental Changes
I agree with you totally. I went to the Leopard Tech Talk and I certainly didn't get the impression that Leopard's UI is going to "dramatically" change. Oh, Core Animation is amazing and will certianly show up in various ways that will improve the overall experiance, but don't expect a complete redesign. I expect a lot of very intelligent incremental improvements that won't impress immediately, but will shine over time as you use the system.
I expect individual applications will get the Core Animation treatment as required by that application. Apple has been pounding the point home that each application needs to have it's own individual interface that makes sense for it.
Think Time Machine. It's the most perfect example of how Core Animation is being used not to just provide eye candy, but to create a UI that is intelligent and intuitive.
I agree with you totally. I went to the Leopard Tech Talk and I certainly didn't get the impression that Leopard's UI is going to "dramatically" change. Oh, Core Animation is amazing and will certianly show up in various ways that will improve the overall experiance, but don't expect a complete redesign. I expect a lot of very intelligent incremental improvements that won't impress immediately, but will shine over time as you use the system.
I expect individual applications will get the Core Animation treatment as required by that application. Apple has been pounding the point home that each application needs to have it's own individual interface that makes sense for it.
Think Time Machine. It's the most perfect example of how Core Animation is being used not to just provide eye candy, but to create a UI that is intelligent and intuitive.
Ever since 10.3, support for certain computers were taken away.
10.3: Needed USB (no more beige G3s)
10.4: Needed Firewire (no more early G3 iMacs)
From what I've heard, for 10.5, G3 support is dropped. In some ways, that's a good thing. I have a bunch of iMac & iBook G3s at work and they run dead slow in Mac OS X. However, where I work, we've been able to run 10.4 on non-firewire iMacs. Slow as hell though.
Something I'd like to know is when they'll drop classic support?
And hopefully Apple will ditch Carbon and go Cocoa all the way. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Carbon basically a carryover from classic so a developer can have 1 codebase for OS X & classic? I remember hearing that somewhere. I feel Cocoa has much more power and use than Carbon. I feel that sometimes, you have to break backwards compatibility to move forward. I work in an elementary school and the special ed department uses software from this organization that uses primarily classic software. It's a pain in the neck running those in classic mode while also running OS X programs.
10.3: Needed USB (no more beige G3s)
10.4: Needed Firewire (no more early G3 iMacs)
From what I've heard, for 10.5, G3 support is dropped. In some ways, that's a good thing. I have a bunch of iMac & iBook G3s at work and they run dead slow in Mac OS X. However, where I work, we've been able to run 10.4 on non-firewire iMacs. Slow as hell though.
Something I'd like to know is when they'll drop classic support?
And hopefully Apple will ditch Carbon and go Cocoa all the way. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Carbon basically a carryover from classic so a developer can have 1 codebase for OS X & classic? I remember hearing that somewhere. I feel Cocoa has much more power and use than Carbon. I feel that sometimes, you have to break backwards compatibility to move forward. I work in an elementary school and the special ed department uses software from this organization that uses primarily classic software. It's a pain in the neck running those in classic mode while also running OS X programs.
I've been using Vista RC2 and I agree, it does look nice. I like the translucence. Kinda like how in some Apple programs like Front Row have the mopped floor look where it reflects what's above it. Very cool! The only reason I'd use Windows is for the games that aren't out for Mac. I do hope Apple upgrades the UI.
Ironically, OS X has pretty much ditched its translucency, which I think is a shame.
There's a reason we haven't seen the iLife apps. I'm sure they are reliant on the new look or have the new look. I'd be happy if they just gave the 10.4 look across the board. I would like the iTunes/iPhoto/iWeb/Mail look across the board. Lose the finder/safari brushed metal already. It was tired the day they showed it. Pin stripes were better than brushed metal.
I don't recall OSX ever having translucency, except for menus, which made them harder to read just like the problems vista has with translucent menus.
If you're talking about mopped floor look then the word you're looking for is reflection. Apple is doing more and more of the reflection look in EVERYTHING. Look at cover flow on the iTunes website and of course in the new iPhone and iTunes itself of course.
Well, at least upgrade the code and make it a part of Cocoa. I think Apple's text to speech technology is still in Carbon and it's terrible. It still sounds very computerish. They really need to upgrade it so it sounds more human. What's kind of scary is some people say the "Fred" voice sounds just like me. Though some people say I sound like Steven Hawking or Barry White. Just imagine what Stephen Hawking would sound like making love.
That's a good look, I agree. Yes, translucent menus weren't great (they still are there, incidentally, if you look hard enough) but it seems a shame that the technology is there, yet is only used for the Dock.
meh.
Here's to hoping there's something compelling underwraps or else there's gonna be lots and lots of folks pitching a fit, and the press will be all over it.
Here's to hoping there's something compelling underwraps or else there's gonna be lots and lots of folks pitching a fit, and the press will be all over it.
Well, at least upgrade the code and make it a part of Cocoa. I think Apple's text to speech technology is still in Carbon and it's terrible. It still sounds very… computerish. They really need to upgrade it so it sounds more human. What's kind of scary is some people say the "Fred" voice sounds just like me. Though some people say I sound like Steven Hawking or Barry White. Just imagine what Stephen Hawking would sound like making love.
Disregarding that the API upon which the text to speech technology has NOTHING to do with its relative quality, they are upgrading it. Or did you miss the whole 5 or minutes devoted to that in the WWDC keynote?
And the panels for controls in Motion/iPhoto/Aperture.
The reason for a lack of translucency is that, honestly, it makes things harder to read. That's my biggest complaint with all the overused translucence in Vista. My other complaint with Vista is all the blurring, which just takes up graphics card resources unnecessarily. My other OTHER complaint with Vista is that it has NO cohesiveness. It's even worse than OS X in that regard.
This is something that is a little overdue, but very welcome.
It was the logical next step after the iLife Media Browser.
Also, back to the appearance of the GUI, I think it is perfectly possible Apple is developing a new version but keeping these builds private.
Think about it, they are probably tinkering with things themselves, so it makes little sense to let the developers see it yet. Otherwise developers would probably end up making incremental revisions to their own apps custom elements just to keep up with the latest build coming from Cupertino.
If they show it to the developers when they are actually finished, then the developers can update their apps to look nice with the finalised version of the GUI.
Of course it is perfectly possible that they are not working on a new look for the GUI (I'm still happy with Aqua), but what really got me thinking was an article which pointed out some of the Aqua elements in the previews didn't have the same "spit and polish" that you would expect, in fact they look more like placeholders for what is to come.
If they're still tinkering with a NEW FREAKING LOOK for their ENTIRE OS a mere 3 - 6 months from release, on an OS that has had builds out to developers as early as 6 months ago, there is something SERIOUSLY wrong at Apple.
Glad to hear that you're still satisfied with Aqua, I am too. I'm just tired people keep pointing out circumstantial evidence while ignoring the flat-out realities of software development.
Yep, I forgot about those. I dunno, there must be a way of using transparency in a useful and attractive way. Or am I (and Microsoft) just flogging a dead horse?
Yup those are my thoughts exactly. I installed Vista on my home computer and the first thing that jumped out at me was how "busy" the interface looked. It was very distracting, and I initially couldn't put my finger on why it bothered me so much. I eventually concluded it was that they didn't combine what individually probably sounded like cool effects in a cohesive manner. I'm talking about the translucency effects, the "glowing" text (which makes text harder to read IMO), the glass shading, all the friggin' buttons in the new Windows Explorer, glowing buttons, etc.
I turned off the translucency effects and chose an off-white color for the borders to minimize the "glowing" text effect (which I couldn't figure out how to turn off), and I think it looks better now. I wish I could turn off the glass shading, which I think looks ugly. I have other gripes about the Vista interface that I won't even get into. Vista reminds me of all those attempts from the Linux guys to make their GUI look pretty, which often end up looking like a Frankenstein combination of special effects and gloss.
I also don't get why some people think Vista looks like Mac OS X as they look nothing like each other, even with all the gloss Microsoft added. I don't think Mac OS X always gets it right (I hate metal shading), but I still think they have the most visually pleasing AND usable GUI of any OS.
If they're still tinkering with a NEW FREAKING LOOK for their ENTIRE OS a mere 3 - 6 months from release, on an OS that has had builds out to developers as early as 6 months ago, there is something SERIOUSLY wrong at Apple.
Glad to hear that you're still satisfied with Aqua, I am too. I'm just tired people keep pointing out circumstantial evidence while ignoring the flat-out realities of software development.
Don't take this the wrong way but in what way are you qualified in software development?
I don't think a new UI is out of the question at all, tinkering with it now is probably a bad sign. However i can see them having a new or im proved UI and not releasing it in the dev builds.
Anyone catch it? Does it use "Illuminous"? I hope it does. It would look sweat!
Excuse my reply, but you already look sweet!