POLL: Is Yosemite UGLY or NOT?

What do you think about OS X 10.10 Yosemite's GUI graphical changes?

  • Yosemite is UGLIER than ALL Prior versions of OS X

    Votes: 55 11.9%
  • Yosemite is UGLIER than SOME prior versions of OS X

    Votes: 40 8.6%
  • Aesthetically, I can't decide so it doesn't really matter to me.

    Votes: 36 7.8%
  • Yosemite is PRETTIER than ALL Prior versions of OS X

    Votes: 236 51.0%
  • Yosemite is PRETTIER than at least MAVERICKS. Full steam ahead!

    Votes: 83 17.9%
  • The GUI isn't really important to me

    Votes: 13 2.8%

  • Total voters
    463
  • Poll closed .

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Original poster
Jun 18, 2007
5,144
1,356
Ok, enough with the bickering over whether Yosemite is beautiful, ugly or indifferent. How about an actual poll? I realize this is hardly definitive, but 900+ posts discussing if Yosemite is ugly is not the same as 900+ people saying it is, since there's plenty of staunch defenders, although perhaps not numerous.

So here's the question with 6 possible polling answers. 1&2 can be summed for "uglier", 4&5 for "prettier" and 3&5 for "I don't really care what way it goes". They're divided solely to give a better idea of whether Mavericks is better looking than various incarnations of AQUA or its evolution after Aqua to Leopard and Snow Leopard which changed some parts to a more "metal" look, but otherwise still maintains much of the Aqua base look.

What do you think of the current (although still evolving) OS X 10.10 Yosemite Beta graphics?

1. They're UGLY *OR* UGLIER than Mavericks (current official OS X)
2. They're UGLY *OR* UGLIER than other prior versions, especially AQUA.
3. They're about the same looking so I don't really have a preference.
4. Yosemite is PRETTIER than Mavericks.
5. Yosemite is PRETTIER than all prior versions to Mavericks, especially AQUA
6. I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE GUI GRAPHICS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER

Obviously, comments to explain one's choice in more detail can appear below, but there are already threads to discuss "beautiful" and "ugly" so qualifying answers rather than arguments are probably the best way to go.

Please Note: This poll is not asking whether you like new FEATURES in Yosemite, just the GUI. In other words, if you could have Continuity, etc. with either the Mavericks GUI overall "look" (dark mode with or not withstanding, but rather the Icons, Fonts, etc. and other graphical changes) or even an older Aqua look, would you? Or are you happy with Yosemite's new graphics overall? I realize, you could like some things but not others, so it'll have to be a tipping balance or about the same.

The poll is available for 30 days starting from today (September 7th, 2014)
 
Last edited:

Shawzborne

macrumors 6502a
Jun 12, 2013
679
51
Ok, enough with the bickering over whether Yosemite is beautiful, ugly or indifferent. How about an actual poll? I realize this is hardly definitive, but 900+ posts discussing if Yosemite is ugly is not the same as 900+ people saying it is, since there's plenty of staunch defenders, although perhaps not numerous.



So here's the question with 6 possible polling answers. 1&2 can be summed for "uglier", 4&5 for "prettier" and 3&5 for "I don't really care what way it goes". They're divided solely to give a better idea of whether Mavericks is better looking than various incarnations of AQUA or its evolution after Aqua to Leopard and Snow Leopard which changed some parts to a more "metal" look, but otherwise still maintains much of the Aqua base look.



What do you think of the current (although still evolving) OS X 10.10 Yosemite Beta graphics?



1. They're UGLY *OR* UGLIER than Mavericks (current official OS X)

2. They're UGLY *OR* UGLIER than other prior versions, especially AQUA.

3. They're about the same looking so I don't really have a preference.

4. Yosemite is PRETTIER than Mavericks.

5. Yosemite is PRETTIER than all prior versions to Mavericks, especially AQUA

6. I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE GUI GRAPHICS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER



Obviously, comments to explain one's choice in more detail can appear below, but there are already threads to discuss "beautiful" and "ugly" so qualifying answers rather than arguments are probably the best way to go.



Firstly calm down.

Secondly the Main reason I think it looks better is the new FaceTime system. And of course the dark theme looks great.
 

Daenerys

macrumors newbie
Aug 11, 2014
13
0
United Kingdom
1.

I think it's uglier than Mavericks, and Mavericks was hardly my favourite OS in terms of looks.


It's not all bad though. I'm rather fond of the transparency, but it seems like with that being toned down even more that whatever I liked about it is fading. I still like the new sidebar, and the log in screen is a massive improvement upon Mavericks, but I I hate everything else about it aesthetically.
 
Last edited:

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Original poster
Jun 18, 2007
5,144
1,356
Firstly calm down.

Secondly the Main reason I think it looks better is the new FaceTime system. And of course the dark theme looks great.
Calm down? This is a poll, not a lecture. However, please note that the poll is not about whether you like new FEATURES. It's ONLY about the OVERALL GUI *LOOK*. In other words, if you could have all the new features, but keep the same overall look of Mavericks (or even an older version of AQUA), would you or are you happy with the overall look of Yosemite.
 

Eithanius

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2005
1,419
285
2. Definitely uglier than ALL other prior versions. I wished they could bring back the real Aqua interface in Leopard and SL, not the half-baked Aqua on L, ML, Mav...

By the way, they don't even have a name for Yosemite UI, do they...? :eek:

Even Microsoft named their Windows 7 UI Aero... Talk about Apple being sloppy...
 

tkermit

macrumors 68040
Feb 20, 2004
3,420
2,340
This poll is not asking whether you like new FEATURES in Yosemite, just the GUI[/b].
Are you asking whether we like the GUI (i.e. want to use it), or whether we think it's pretty (i.e. like to look at it)? There's a difference....
 

TheBSDGuy

macrumors 6502
Jan 24, 2012
317
29
Every time I use Yosemite I just shake my head in disbelief. It just looks...what's the word....cheap? Amateurish? I don't know. I think it looks pretty bad though.
 

vi2867

macrumors 6502
Oct 11, 2006
455
17
Eastvale, CA
I think it is a little too flat. Feels kinda of cheap... I still can't wait for all the features to work and get integrated with iOS, though.
 

mmomega

macrumors 68040
Dec 30, 2009
3,220
1,415
DFW, TX
2. Definitely uglier than ALL other prior versions. I wished they could bring back the real Aqua interface in Leopard and SL, not the half-baked Aqua on L, ML, Mav...

By the way, they don't even have a name for Yosemite UI, do they...? :eek:

Even Microsoft named their Windows 7 UI Aero... Talk about Apple being sloppy...
Naming the UI is one of the things I disliked the most about Microsofts naming schemes.
We don't need a name just for the sake of naming something. IMHO. Microsoft is the worst company at naming anything.
 

leman

macrumors G3
Oct 14, 2008
9,985
4,556
By the way, they don't even have a name for Yosemite UI, do they...? :eek:

Even Microsoft named their Windows 7 UI Aero... Talk about Apple being sloppy...
Because Yosemite UI is Aqua ;) It a reduced, more polished and subtle version of Aqua. In fact, Yosemite goes back to Aqua's basics and reimplements them in a more consistent way. Look up first OS X screenshots.
 

Jessica Lares

macrumors G3
Oct 31, 2009
9,200
722
Near Dallas, Texas, USA
Changed it from Blue to the Gray UI, changed the wallpaper, and I'm pretty happy with it. I will be calibrating my monitor settings once the GM comes out though.

No, it isn't ugly, it's just different and we will get used to it over the next few months.
 

Platskies

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2012
47
3
NSW, Australia
Because Yosemite UI is Aqua ;) It a reduced, more polished and subtle version of Aqua. In fact, Yosemite goes back to Aqua's basics and reimplements them in a more consistent way. Look up first OS X screenshots.
As proof, Apple still refers to the new interface as Aqua in their WWDC session videos.

As for the new interface, I think it is both a more cleaner and functional improvement over previous releases. I'm really glad they're finally bringing a more consistent look to the new icons - things like the iTunes and App Store icons next to each other in the Dock always bugged me. Translucency as the default sidebar appearance is both a functional and beautiful change, giving the appearance of "glass-backed" windows. Also nice to see applications becoming more content-focused through the unified title-toolbar.
 
Last edited:

Eithanius

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2005
1,419
285
Changed it from Blue to the Gray UI, changed the wallpaper, and I'm pretty happy with it. I will be calibrating my monitor settings once the GM comes out though.

No, it isn't ugly, it's just different and we will get used to it over the next few months.
You mean Graphite...? The UI is already too grey and dull without Graphite, don't you think...? :eek:
 

Joshoon

macrumors regular
Aug 18, 2014
143
20
Netherlands
Prettier

I really love the new interface, especially the dark mode.
I've always been a fan of the Windows UI, but this Mac OS beats it all, and I am a graphic-whore, so I am quite specific with choosing the OS based on the UI and the stability.

Yosemite beats them all :D

So my choice is 5. Yosemite is PRETTIER than all prior versions.
 

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Original poster
Jun 18, 2007
5,144
1,356
Are you asking whether we like the GUI (i.e. want to use it), or whether we think it's pretty (i.e. like to look at it)? There's a difference....
I'm asking if you think the graphical changes to Yosemite (not any functional improvements which I think most people would probably want in theory at least) are an improvement over Mavericks or whether Mavericks or older versions looked better. This is a poll in response to "Yosemite is Beautiful" and the "Yosemite is Ugly" threads. Those threads have people arguing about it, but you don't get an idea of whether it's just a few vocal people on either side or whether there's a large scale feeling one way or another. Someone suggested maybe 1-2% think it's ugly (based on iOS7 acceptance), but it's not like you have a choice when you get a newer iPhone or even a newer Mac at some point, so to me those numbers speak almost nothing about whether people actually LIKED or PREFERRED Johnny Ive's visual changes. They're stuck with them regardless if they want the newer features or a newer phone. What's the alternative? Buy a Samsung? I'm not sure even a truly hideous GUI set of icons and colors is worth giving up all your apps and ecosystem, especially since it's likely to change again the following year. Thus, the only way to get a reasonable idea of whether people like the GUI changes is to poll. Now this is a limited forum voluntary poll, so it's not going to be super accurate, but maybe it would at least give an idea if people like this new "flat" look over intermediate (Mavericks) or even more skeuomorphism (older Aqua).

Personally, just the new "flat" traffic lights turn me off. They look like they took about 5 seconds to make in Photoshop with a basic flat fill. Steve Jobs said at the unveiling of OS X 10.0 that people spent MONTHS just making the Aqua "gel" buttons. It felt like they put some real thought into making a modern usable interface back then that was then tweaked over the years. To me, Yosemite feels like change for change's sake and since "flat" is "different" then "flat = good". That defeats the usability factor, IMO. If it's harder to read the text due to thinner fonts designed to look different on a huge Retina display only, harder to find the window edges and harder to tell what a particular window is doing due to a lack of a title bar, then it's not a step "forward". I'd prefer to see them put the effort into functional changes and bug fixes (like NFS network activity keeping the computer awake or the ability to move a side dock to other monitors or to get a unique dock on each monitor or to make Finder more like Xtrafinder, etc.) Apparently, "flat graphics" are more important than being able to keep your computer from going to sleep while other devices are trying to access it.... :rolleyes:
 

Eithanius

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2005
1,419
285
Personally, just the new "flat" traffic lights turn me off. They look like they took about 5 seconds to make in Photoshop with a basic flat fill. Steve Jobs said at the unveiling of OS X 10.0 that people spent MONTHS just making the Aqua "gel" buttons. It felt like they put some real thought into making a modern usable interface back then that was then tweaked over the years. To me, Yosemite feels like change for change's sake and since "flat" is "different" then "flat = good". That defeats the usability factor, IMO. If it's harder to read the text due to thinner fonts designed to look different on a huge Retina display only, harder to find the window edges and harder to tell what a particular window is doing due to a lack of a title bar, then it's not a step "forward". I'd prefer to see them put the effort into functional changes and bug fixes (like NFS network activity keeping the computer awake or the ability to move a side dock to other monitors or to get a unique dock on each monitor or to make Finder more like Xtrafinder, etc.) Apparently, "flat graphics" are more important than being able to keep your computer from going to sleep while other devices are trying to access it.... :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmz30G9TVQw

How many of us actually remember the event on the link above...? That was like 14 years ago...?

Like I said previously on another thread, late comers to OS X will never understand the design purpose of Aqua.
 

leman

macrumors G3
Oct 14, 2008
9,985
4,556
Personally, just the new "flat" traffic lights turn me off.
I think you are a bit stuck on the notion of 'flatness'. I don't believe that Yosemite is flat, its actually quite 3D (due to translucency).

And again, Yosemite UI is Aqua. It is going back to Aqua's origins and fixing many inconsistencies that have historically accumulated since then. OS X started diverging from the Aqua design with all the brushed metal backgrounds, and then they started toning it down again. Yosemite is nothing new. Its just Aqua as it could be done on modern hardware.
 

Eithanius

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2005
1,419
285
I think you are a bit stuck on the notion of 'flatness'. I don't believe that Yosemite is flat, its actually quite 3D (due to translucency).

And again, Yosemite UI is Aqua. It is going back to Aqua's origins and fixing many inconsistencies that have historically accumulated since then. OS X started diverging from the Aqua design with all the brushed metal backgrounds, and then they started toning it down again. Yosemite is nothing new. Its just Aqua as it could be done on modern hardware.
It is nothing more than just getting rid of the rivalry between Scott Forstall and Jony Ive... In this case, the former lost, and the latter just exercising his poor UI design concepts mismatched by his hardware designing talents.
 

PsykX

macrumors 6502a
Sep 16, 2006
891
262
It's not ugly per se, but previous versions were much more refined graphically... Yosemite's flatness will become like iOS' flatness : boring after no time. I don't have a problem with the new Aqua form controls, I have a problem with the app icons, the Dock from Tiger, the plain menu bars, the toolbar icons (outlined icons in the toolbar buttons are ugly, and less distinguishable), and some interfaces in general.

Time Machine for example had the coolest interface I've had ever seen to date, and I loved its thematic to "go back in time". We've all lost that thrill in Yosemite, and now they stuck my background in a blurry form, and used classic OS X buttons.

Guys, you'll definitely hate the comparison that I'm about to do, but I have to do it. I'm having the same feeling with Yosemite as when I played Final Fantasy XIII. FFXIII is not a bad game per se by itself, but considered to the rest of the franchise, notably FFVI, FFVII or FFIX, it's a real let-down and it's the first one that I've never finished. It looks like it's sporting the wrong name.