Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Don't take this the wrong way but in what way are you qualified in software development?

Well, I worked in configuration management on a program contracted by the Air Force to CSC for two years. But, you know, whatever. I guess calling out people for qualifications is standard practice on the Internet. :rolleyes:

I have since moved in more creative directions. ;)
 
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.

Do you realise that devs currently have Xcode 3.0 and the new Interface Builder?

Do you really think Apple would shaft all it's developers by doing this in a few weeks:

"Hey guys, SURPRISE!! Here is the new interface for Leopard. Forget about all the stuff you've done with the new dev tools we supplied you with months ago, we were just fooling you."

I just don't get why everyone is expecting a whole new interface, it's never happened between any of the other 10.X releases and this one is no different.

When apple moved to Intel they gave developers months to create universal binaries before the first Intel mac shipped. I'm sure they'd give them time if they were planning major interface changes.

There's just no way at all that Apple would release Leopard and leave developers scrambling just so that their applications looked OK in Leopard.

I personally think we can expect to see what we have seen before, just minor tweaks of standard interface elements.

- Brushed metal texture replaced
- Pinstripe replaced
- Few new icons
- New wallpapers

stuff like that....all the things that would not ruin the look of someone app. (ie, like changing the look of the scrollbars would)

I actually don't mind. OS X still looks great and I'll be happy with a tiddying up and unifying.
 
Do you realise that devs currently have Xcode 3.0 and the new Interface Builder?

Yes i have it

Do you really think Apple would shaft all it's developers by doing this in a few weeks:

I'd hardly call it shafting

When apple moved to Intel they gave developers months to create universal binaries before the first Intel mac shipped. I'm sure they'd give them time if they were planning major interface changes.

I also remember apple making the transition so very easy for devs that a lot of them did not require the months that they were alloted. To be honest i think a UI change is a FAR smaller transition that moving platform!

It's amazing how i can use Windows 95/98 apps in XP and they look fine! The same could be done in Leopard for Legacy Tiger apps until the Devs update their software to fit into the Leopard UI
 
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 used to be a developer for educational software, and OS X was tough (although necessary). From a monetary point of view, we could only justify upgrading certain apps from Classic to OS X. And, of course, schools were in the same boat--they really weren't in a position to pay to upgrade all of the classic apps they had, even if they were available.

But I don't think Carbon is dead, or at least I don't think it should killed off. And not for the sake of Classic. It's the OS X API for C++, which makes it most suitable for cross-platform apps (Mac/Win/*nix). I haven't looked, but I'm pretty sure a lot of significant apps (Just a guess, but everything from Adobe/Macromedia, for example) use Carbon -- not to mention iTunes.

I've heard of some cross-platform developers using a platform specific API for the front end (Cocoa on OS X, .NET on Windows, for example), a platform neutral middle layer (C/C++). But you still need a platform abstraction layer that talks to the host OS, and since your platform neutral layer is C/C++, it is usually best to implement this in C/C++ on top of Carbon.

Errr... Sorry for rattling on :eek: , but I hope Carbon does not go away because it is a very valuable API for anyone doing cross-platform apps.
 
I looked at the screenshots and the menu drop downs, the screensaver menu, etc and they look the same in terms of its appearances to Tiger. Is there something I'm missing (I've heard resolution independence but I don't know what that is either)?
 
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.

Remember an OS is an OPERATING SYSTEM. Its not just a collection of apps. Sure with OS X we've become reliant on all the built in apps and all of them are getting some nice updates. But what the OS provides are APIs. Look how many apps now require 10.4 - why? Because of the APIs. Things like CoreData in 10.4 and CoreAnimation in 10.5. Plus a whole lot more.

If Apple greatly improves the core OS, Appkit, Kernel, and more - then its worth an upgrade as we'll get better core functionality and built in apps. Yes with 10.1 to 10.2 to 10.3 we saw major improvements, but they were needed just to get to a basic level of usability. From now on you'll mainly see major core improvements and APIs that allow the OS's own apps and third party apps to shine more and more.
 
I just don't get why everyone is expecting a whole new interface, it's never happened between any of the other 10.X releases and this one is no different.


This case is a bit different than the other 10.X updates. There is much attention from media, pundits, and consumers alike because both Vista and Leopard are being released a about the same time. A sort of direct competition between the two major OS releases has been built up. Direct comparisons will be made more than ever before. I can picture it now in a CNN bit having a side by side comparison of the two. A show down for consumers so to speak.

Not saying I care about an new interface look or not. Doesn't matter to me.
Just saying this OSX update is a bit different than before. Apple and OS X have reached new heights in media and public attention. More than ever the world will be watching and comparing it to Windows (Vista). And unfortunately they easiest thing for the average person to use to compare to two by what they see(ie eye candy) A lot of people(mostly Windows users of course) WILL be impressed with Vista wether we like it or not.
 
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.

Considering that most of OS X can work just fine with major look changes through UNO or ShapeShifter which are hacks - I'm sure Apple can make some major look changes without having to show developers anything until a few months before release.
 
We know Steve bragged about "Top Secret" features in Leopard which would not be demonstrated @ the WWDC (nor MWSF for that matter...), and I am pretty sure there will be one ore more "tadda!!!" features in Leopard which will probably only be revealed shortly before the GM.

But is a "new skin" really a top secret feature? I wonder what you guys expect from this supposedly "new UI".....
Is a brand new Finder something that must be seeded to developers? I'm sure that a new GUI-skin is not of any importance to them.

But, the users like some refreshments... We have had this Aqua interface since the Mac OS X Client DP 3. I personally would welcome a new interface, like I welcome not just new clothes, but different clothes aswell when I buy new ones... not that one is better than the other, but it feels new and fresh ;)
 
looks like transparent/translucent menu pulldowns may get someone in trouble...

And he was sooo careful with the actual terminal window's identifying info....

and that person might just be called "sam". but who says he used his real name when upgrading? and he has an iBook G4, lucky him :)
 
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.


I'm not gonna lie. Aqua is really starting to look old. It was cool back in the day (like 5-6 years ago), but bubble-land Aqua needs change. I've been using Uno lately just because a change is nice. Vista looks much nicer and more refined, if nothing else it is something different. Aqua is just getting stale. I'm going to be very disappointed if there aren't any UI changes with 10.5.

Could a UI change be considered "top secret"? For a company like Apple, heck yes. Apple is all about aesthetics. We'll see though I guess. Also, I like how some of you are comparing a UI change to the switch to Intel. Do you really need months to get used to it?
 
Erm ... Woo! (Not)

So far I havent read about 1 killer new must have feature that leopard has over Tiger, and certainly not one which is worth the 100 notes Apple is asking for it. Im sticking with Tiger.

Atleast with Vista, they are bringing DX10 to the party which (if you are a gamer) will eventually mean a hell of a lot to you.
 
But I don't think Carbon is dead, or at least I don't think it should killed off. And not for the sake of Classic. It's the OS X API for C++, which makes it most suitable for cross-platform apps (Mac/Win/*nix). I haven't looked, but I'm pretty sure a lot of significant apps (Just a guess, but everything from Adobe/Macromedia, for example) use Carbon -- not to mention iTunes.

Errr... Sorry for rattling on :eek: , but I hope Carbon does not go away because it is a very valuable API for anyone doing cross-platform apps.

I could say apple's stance on this (or what they are working on towards cross-platform compatiblity), but since its under NDA, I can't say anything.

BUT, what I would do is upgrade carbon to be "modernized" and leave it at that. Apple can't keep adding features to both API "sets" and expect to get reasonable time-to-market. Apple has to pick one API set for the future, and I would hope its Cocoa, or something better. Some individual "carbon" frameworks may be just fine and dandy and easy to use, but for the most part, the whole of what is known as carbon is quite old and duplicates a lot of what Cocoa is doing.


P.S I don't think "illuminous" is a whole new UI. What does "Illuminous" mean? It means the ability to show or reveal something not currently easily seen. I think it will probably be some augmentation to Aqua that helps to find parts of the UI... maybe something like the System Preferences app where it "spotlights" the items when searching....
 
In my mind, a "new interface" would be a CRUCIALLY important thing to include in developer previews for developers early on, since so many developers use custom widgets (heck, even APPLE use a ton of custom widgets).
If they use custom widgets, nothing Apple does will affect them. This is precisely why it doesn't matter whether or not developers have access to the new UI widgets, so long as common layouts are generally preserved. Anything using the default set will simply be updated to reflect the new look, just as a properly-styled website will when switching stylesheets.

I think the ZOMG TOP SECRET stuff was related to maybe resolution independence or something (which we know about, but have never been shown publically).
Resolution independence requires all-new widgets. None of those have surfaced yet...so by that theory, resolution independence has been dropped from Leopard as well.

I agree, totally. The new Interfacebuilder who devs have right now has the same style aqua widgets as Tiger.
Of course they do. Why would there be different ones than used by the OS itself? Interface Builder provides access to the core components of the OS--they have to be created first, though.

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.
Why? The developers are irrelevant. The large ones have the resources to update their applications almost immediately, and the small ones don't have prerelease software, so we'll be waiting months for those products either way.

I'm just tired people keep pointing out circumstantial evidence while ignoring the flat-out realities of software development. :rolleyes:
The reality is that UI widgets are just about the easiest thing to change in software. They take a lot of time and effort to create, especially when you're doing a coordinated theme, but it's a simple resource swap in the end. You don't have to test it until the very end, so why release it before that? With just graphics designers working on it, there's a distinct Apple 'wow' effect when it's unveiled. We've been promised a new Finder, which so far doesn't exist at all; resolution independence certainly isn't finished, because almost none of the widgets scale properly; there have been ZERO changes to the appearance so far, which has never happened in a previous OS X release.

Something new is coming. It might not be the visage of God that some people seem to expect, but all the signs point in the right direction.
 
If they use custom widgets, nothing Apple does will affect them. This is precisely why it doesn't matter whether or not developers have access to the new UI widgets, so long as common layouts are generally preserved. Anything using the default set will simply be updated to reflect the new look, just as a properly-styled website will when switching stylesheets.

Resolution independence requires all-new widgets. None of those have surfaced yet...so by that theory, resolution independence has been dropped from Leopard as well.

Of course they do. Why would there be different ones than used by the OS itself? Interface Builder provides access to the core components of the OS--they have to be created first, though.

Why? The developers are irrelevant. The large ones have the resources to update their applications almost immediately, and the small ones don't have prerelease software, so we'll be waiting months for those products either way.

The reality is that UI widgets are just about the easiest thing to change in software. They take a lot of time and effort to create, especially when you're doing a coordinated theme, but it's a simple resource swap in the end. You don't have to test it until the very end, so why release it before that? With just graphics designers working on it, there's a distinct Apple 'wow' effect when it's unveiled. We've been promised a new Finder, which so far doesn't exist at all; resolution independence certainly isn't finished, because almost none of the widgets scale properly; there have been ZERO changes to the appearance so far, which has never happened in a previous OS X release.

Something new is coming. It might not be the visage of God that some people seem to expect, but all the signs point in the right direction.


Thank you :) That makes me happy to hear. I'm not a dev myself but I would think something like a UI change would be the least of a devs concerns, and could be changed quickly and easily. It didn't makes sense reading how some of them need months to prepare for something like that.
 
If they use custom widgets, nothing Apple does will affect them. This is precisely why it doesn't matter whether or not developers have access to the new UI widgets, so long as common layouts are generally preserved. Anything using the default set will simply be updated to reflect the new look, just as a properly-styled website will when switching stylesheets.


Resolution independence requires all-new widgets. None of those have surfaced yet...so by that theory, resolution independence has been dropped from Leopard as well.


Of course they do. Why would there be different ones than used by the OS itself? Interface Builder provides access to the core components of the OS--they have to be created first, though.


Why? The developers are irrelevant. The large ones have the resources to update their applications almost immediately, and the small ones don't have prerelease software, so we'll be waiting months for those products either way.


The reality is that UI widgets are just about the easiest thing to change in software. They take a lot of time and effort to create, especially when you're doing a coordinated theme, but it's a simple resource swap in the end. You don't have to test it until the very end, so why release it before that? With just graphics designers working on it, there's a distinct Apple 'wow' effect when it's unveiled. We've been promised a new Finder, which so far doesn't exist at all; resolution independence certainly isn't finished, because almost none of the widgets scale properly; there have been ZERO changes to the appearance so far, which has never happened in a previous OS X release.

Something new is coming. It might not be the visage of God that some people seem to expect, but all the signs point in the right direction.

This is exactly what i have been trying to say. Thanks
 
Resolution independence requires all-new widgets.

Why is that? The widgets could look exactly the same as they do now.

Why? The developers are irrelevant. The large ones have the resources to update their applications almost immediately, and the small ones don't have prerelease software, so we'll be waiting months for those products either way.

Large developers tend to be pretty slow at major changes from what I've seen (see: Adobe, Microsoft transitioning to Intel).

The reality is that UI widgets are just about the easiest thing to change in software. They take a lot of time and effort to create, especially when you're doing a coordinated theme, but it's a simple resource swap in the end.

Easy to change, maybe. But since they're used all throughout the system they could negatively effect things they shouldn't. They'd be easy to change, but how easy would the changes be to test?

For example, picture a media playing application which displays a black screen when nothing is present. Now, if Apple makes their Windows all black, the "screen" no longer shows up. There are little things like that. It's not just colors, but dimensions of widgets and so on.

Another thing is that some developers use custom widgets. I think a lot of widgets in iTunes are custom-made for the application. Would these still look good if the system changed it's look dramatically?
 
We already have Illuminous

I think Illuminous, if it exists, isn't an Aqua replacement, but is instead complementary to Aqua.

I think we already have Illuminous, in the form of Front Row, Time Machine, etc. The darker elements seem to be how it was described in the rumour. We can also see it in the iPhone somewhat, where they switch between a "black" theme and a "white" theme.

I've posted on this before, but essentially I think "Illuminous" applies to using your computer outside the contexts of "normal computing". Or something like an interface for when you're not using a keyboard and mouse.

So apps like Safari, Word, Mail stay in Aqua, while apps like Front Row (sit back and use the remote), Time Machine (explore "through time"? kind of weak), slideshows (remote), iChat Video Conference (using camera).
 
there have been ZERO changes to the appearance so far, which has never happened in a previous OS X release.

This is a very good point.

It is certainly a lot better arguement than “well they haven't changed it radically before so they won't change it now” arguement which is being so frequently trotted out…
 
This is a very good point.

It is certainly a lot better arguement than “well they haven't changed it radically before so they won't change it now” arguement which is being so frequently trotted out…

But apps such as iChat, Preview, and iCal now look like mail. Why bother to change the look if you're just going to replace everything in a few months?

Also, they've vectorized Aqua already for resolution independence. Again, why bother to do this if you are just going to use a new UI? It just doesn't make any sense.

I for one don't think Aqua looks outdated. I'm all for a new interface though if they go in the direction of their pro apps (instead of iTunes, which I use UNO with).
 
But apps such as iChat, Preview, and iCal now look like mail. Why bother to change the look if you're just going to replace everything in a few months?

Also, they've vectorized Aqua already for resolution independence. Again, why bother to do this if you are just going to use a new UI? It just doesn't make any sense.

I for one don't think Aqua looks outdated. I'm all for a new interface though if they go in the direction of their pro apps (instead of iTunes, which I use UNO with).

They can still change and or update the UI without replacing aqua. For example they could just update the bright blue buttons and scroll bar get rid of the brushed metal, update the finder interface, ad more of the new Quick View and to most people it would be content and believe it was an entirely different ui
 
If they use custom widgets, nothing Apple does will affect them. This is precisely why it doesn't matter whether or not developers have access to the new UI widgets, so long as common layouts are generally preserved. Anything using the default set will simply be updated to reflect the new look, just as a properly-styled website will when switching stylesheets.


This I agree with, but the reality is quite different. If everyone stuck to the standard widgets and followed the HIG then totally overhauling the look of the OS would be a walk in the park. Devs wouldn't have to do nothing at all and the whole system would get a shiny new look.

But the fact is, for Tiger especially the HIG is out of the window. Custom widgets are everywhere and these will remain in place after Apple changes the 'default set' in Leopard.

It's easy to replace Brushed metal, scrollbars, round aqua buttons etc but changing these does not automatically change the countless other aqua elements on your system.

Just look inside the resource folder of Mail.app, hundreds of custom aqua graphics that are outside the 'default set'.

My point is that it's impossible to remove Aqua in one release. And even if Apple does switch the standard widgets, it's not as simple as developers just have to update their custom widgets to the new style. If they do that, then their apps will look screwed up in Tiger.

This is the problem, and it's one Apple has created itself. And I personally do not think Apple want their shiny new OS littered with apps that look half new style Leopard and half Aqua.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.