Things that need to change in Tiger before it is released

[broken_keyboard]

Things that need to change in Tiger before it is released:

1. Lip Windows. Tiger has Lip Windows. Great big ugly lips at the top of each window that are reminiscent of the big ugly lip at the bottom of the iMac G5. What it is is the toolbar and titlebar have been merged. This does not make logical sense because the toolbar represents shortcuts to the most commonly used menu items. Merging it with the title bar would only make sense if the title bar contained the menus ala Windows, but it doesn't.

2. Safari. The key thing to do with Safari, which it looks like they haven't even started on, is to print off the KHTML rendering engine code on old fashion perforated printer paper and go outside and put it on the grass and take a dump on it. When done, proceed back inside and migrate Safari to the Gecko engine.

3. Font smoothing. Apple is supposed to have this big tradition of publishing, but just put a Mac OS X screen on a desk next to a Windows laptop with Microsoft Cleartype enabled. The difference is startling: the MS fonts look truly beautiful, whereas the Apple fonts look like some clumsy attempt has been made to use "bold" as a way to smooth them. Please Apple if you can't work it out then just stop trying and license Cleartype.

4. Finder. The file info window: get rid of the collapsable sections and just make a single nice layout. The icon view: stop wasting so much whitespace. The column view: make the columns size to fit the longest filename by default. Remove the metal look from the Finder: it makes apps look heavy, but the Finder should be simplest of apps, with the lightest weight interface.

5. Spotlight. There needs to be some way, e.g. option-return to execute the top hit immediately. Otherwise it can't really replace the Finder for app launching.

 

[phonic pol]

Things that need to change in Tiger before it is released:

Sounds like you would be happier using windows
This is the largest pile of crap I've read all day!

 

[jsw]

Easy change which we probably won't see:

Make windows resizable from more than the lower right corner. I know, I know, this is a bizarre request, but I remember seeing an OS that did it, and it was nice. Can't remember which one, though. BeOS? Linux? Solaris? Maybe Windows 95? Oh, wait, now I remember: every other GUI I've ever used allowed me to do just that.

 

[MacRy]

Does it still have blue corners on the spotlight and apple logo because that really needs to be changed I think. Looks a bit Windowsish. I like the current uniform colour on the menu bar.

 

[broken_keyboard]

Does it still have blue corners on the spotlight and apple logo because that really needs to be changed I think. Looks a bit Windowsish. I like the current uniform colour on the menu bar.

The corners are still there but they are grey now.

 

[rendezvouscp]

Easy change which we probably won't see:

Make windows resizable from more than the lower right corner. I know, I know, this is a bizarre request, but I remember seeing an OS that did it, and it was nice. Can't remember which one, though. BeOS? Linux? Solaris? Maybe Windows 95? Oh, wait, now I remember: every other GUI I've ever used allowed me to do just that.

I'd usually keep something like this under NDA, but it's not really there. They may add this feature, but I really have no inside info. I just noticed that when I put my mouse at the left edge of a Safari window, it turns into the black icon that represents movement (ie, in the Finder, when hovering over the sidebar bar.

Hm, must've been a bug. I can't get it to do that anymore.

IMO, Apple's approach to making the window size changeable only through the bottom right hand corner is actually good. However, I'd like to see the left bottom corner changeable too.
-Chase

 

[madmaxmedia]

IMO, Apple's approach to making the window size changeable only through the bottom right hand corner is actually good. However, I'd like to see the left bottom corner changeable too.
-Chase

Both bottom corners works for me too. Much more convenient when you want to stretch a window out to the left side of the screen.

 

[stevehaslip]

The corners are still there but they are grey now.

could someone post a pic?

 

[TigerPRO]

Things that need to change in Tiger before it is released:

I'm fascinated by your observations. With one exception I agree with all of them. You are right about the "lip" on the windows. That highly aggravates me. Hopefully they will either remove it or I'll be able to get use to it. It seems to me that it's not only a little ugly, but very space consuming.

As for KHTML, I'm not sure what to say. The Gecko engine is definitely more mature and clean, but they have done an excellent job with it. For coming up with it like they did, it's impressive how well it conforms and supports W3C standards. Sometimes I even find it doing a better job than the Gecko engine in FireFox and Mozilla. But I've also seen it far apart on a few points. There were a couple times I ran into problems while using some advanced CSS2 in conjunction with alpha channel enabled PNG files. In that case, only Gecko seemed to handle it correctly. What I really like about safari is that is somehow manages to not just do well with the latest W3C specs, but also handles IE proprietary programming.

Could explain more what you mean about font smoothing? At least in Panther here, I haven't had any noticeable complaints. Are they trying something new in Tiger; is that what you mean?

You also right about the Finder info panels. The interface needs to be improved, but I'm not sure what. I don't think you have the best idea there. We'll see if they come up with anything. It's my guess there will be some changes along those lines.

I like your idea about spotlight. They should do something like that.

 

[musicpyrite]

The only problem I have with Tiger currently is the color of the apple icon, and spotlight icon in the menu bar. I hate the way they are colored.

 

[TigerPRO]

The only problem I have with Tiger currently is the color of the apple icon, and spotlight icon in the menu bar. I hate the way they are colored.

As first that really bothered me too. What I do like it the fact that the whole corner is clickable. That's a big plus. On Panther you can't "jam" your mouse into the corner and click on the Apple menu. Tiger will be nice in that way.

 

[broken_keyboard]

Could explain more what you mean about font smoothing? At least in Panther here, I haven't had any noticeable complaints. Are they trying something new in Tiger; is that what you mean?

I don't know if they have changed the font smoothing with Tiger or if it is the same as Panther, but in any event it needs some work. The letters either look too fat, if you put the standard, medium or strong setting or feathery if you use the light setting.

The idea is not to make them look fat or thin. It's to make them look like they are rendered at 3000x3000 resolution when your display is only 1280. They should have perfect circles etc. Cleartype actually achieves this in my opinion.

 

[shidoshi]

Things that need to change in Tiger before it is released:

Totally disagree with you on your first three items.

First, the new style for titlebars under Tiger. I like it. It's a small change that makes things look more natural, in my mind. It doesn't change anything in the actual use of the system, so far as I know, so it's basically a matter of design opinion.

Safari. How does working off of the KHTML engine bring Safari down? Let's have some examples. In designing websites, I've yet to run into anything but the most minor of differences between Safari/KHTML and Gecko. (I've not run into the mentioned problem with CSS2 and PNG alpha-level transparent images, which was mentioned.) My complaints with Safari are more in the way of missing features: a poor level of preferences (STILL no "don't underline links" options without using an external CSS file), a Google searchbox that now looks ancient with all of the search options Mozilla/Firefox, OmniWeb, etc. have, stuff like that.

Font smoothing, I don't know. I use a PC with WinXP at work every day, and I think the Mac font smoothing looks better. Again, though, a matter of opinion, and of course I wouldn't mind if Tiger had even more options for font smoothing.


I think what I'd like to see more under Tiger is a Finder that doesn't feel so half-assed. Under colum view, give more options, such as the ability to have files and folders seperate into two lists, give a lot more options for the file info tags (for example, give labels for used and free space on drives that are in the lefthand "shelf"), tabbed Finder, allow for icon previews for graphics under Column view, etc.

 

[TigerPRO]

Totally disagree with you on your first three items.

First, the new style for titlebars under Tiger. I like it. It's a small change that makes things look more natural, in my mind. It doesn't change anything in the actual use of the system, so far as I know, so it's basically a matter of design opinion.

Under colum view, give more options, such as the ability to have files and folders seperate into two lists, give a lot more options for the file info tags (for example, give labels for used and free space on drives that are in the lefthand "shelf"), tabbed Finder, allow for icon previews for graphics under Column view, etc.

Yeah, I suppose design has a lot to do with opinion and personal preference. But there is a science to interface design as well as an art. Meaning that there can be objective "rights" and "wrongs". But nevertheless, the ugly "lip" probably falls more in the personal taste category for me. Does anyone have anything to say about this?

There's something very interesting I've noticed about Apple. I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed it, but it's something I struggle with. They seem not so motivated to create "feature rich" applications as they do "practical" and "easily usage" ones. While I see and acknowledge the importance of not loading down programs with too many tabs and preferences to accommodate the kinds of features that only 5% of users with take advantage of, I think they should strive more towards supporting these functionality in at least some way. Like maybe implementing more "show advanced preferences" pop-out menus and panes. There are just certain time when OS X seems like "baby OS" because they are trying to keep it too simple. Anyone kinda/sort know what I mean?

 

[AllieNeko]

I only have comment on two things. I like KHTML much much better than Gecko. It's a better rendering engine, and I consider Safari's rendering nicer than Firefox's.

As for Apple's font antialiasing vs. ClearType - Apple's is MUCH better. Far more readable small sizes and SMOOTH large sizes (ClearType's method works OKAY from about 12-14pt but otherwise is awful). See Apple's is REAL antialiasing. ClearType is subpixel rendering, which on an LCD is sharper but not nearly as nice looking or clear. Apple's AA uses subpixel also.

 

[madmaxmedia]

Yeah, I suppose design has a lot to do with opinion and personal preference. But there is a science to interface design as well as an art. Meaning that there can be objective "rights" and "wrongs". But nevertheless, the ugly "lip" probably falls more in the personal taste category for me. Does anyone have anything to say about this?

There's something very interesting I've noticed about Apple. I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed it, but it's something I struggle with. They seem not so motivated to create "feature rich" applications as they do "practical" and "easily usage" ones. While I see and acknowledge the importance of not loading down programs with too many tabs and preferences to accommodate the kinds of features that only 5% of users with take advantage of, I think they should strive more towards supporting these functionality in at least some way. Like maybe implementing more "show advanced preferences" pop-out menus and panes. There are just certain time when OS X seems like "baby OS" because they are trying to keep it too simple. Anyone kinda/sort know what I mean?

Well, there's a difference between the OS and the applications. I assume you are talking solely about the applications (although you mentioned "baby OS".)

I think a lot of the Mac apps are less featured, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. They're not designed to compete with fully-featured apps, I don't think Apple wants to drive every software developer out of business. And as the subsequent versions come out, Apple will gradually add to them. It's still better that they do it slow and steady, vs. adding too much at once without having figured out the best interface for it.

OTOH, I wouldn't mind seeing iCal be at least equivalent to the really old Palm Desktop program. It is a little bit frustrating when you have the integrated beatiful looking iApp, but can't really justify switching to it because your older app does more. I'm faced with that crux right now with Entourage/Palm Desktop/Apple iApps. The main hindrance is that iSync doesn't preserve categories when I sync from my Palm. But I'm still contemplating using the iApps over the other choices...

Finally, some of the iApps seem to have performance problems that gradually get ironed out. So adding even more features to these apps wouldn't help there either.

 

[gekko513]

I do not want the windows to be resizeable on all edges. That would require all windows to have an edge.

 

[maya]

I do not want the windows to be resizeable on all edges. That would require all windows to have an edge.

Not really, the diagonal stripes they currently have on the low, right corner is not needed either. When your mouse is placed on or near the edge it should automatically change face to a resizable window option.


Keep it clean and simple looking.

I wish they had this option invisible to look at however activated if rolled over for the entire frame of the window not just corners.

Don't know why TIGER has coloured corners in the menu bar, it looks ugly I like the coloured Apple Icon in the menu bar at present. I don't see why spotlight needs some special treatment, I am sure people who are new to the OS will grasp it in due time.

In regards to the text in OS X, I have had no issues with it. Its easy on the eyes and quite comfortable for a long duration. If they had an option to do as you say with "ClearType" some people might be happy. Options are always good.

And why have they not implemented the iApps (iTunes, iMovie, Garageband, iPhoto) the option to be represented in the menu bar to open close and do some basic features. I have requested this for sometime now, get with the program Apple I want the option for a short cut like so since with a hugh screen (menu bar) why waste the space YEAH. The dock it alright it gets on my nerves at times. It just seems the menu bar and dock are split up since windows task bar has booth in one and the application options in its app window. Maybe a a dock icon in the menu bar that drops down vertically would be better, again its simple and looks clean. Use and expand the menu bar options.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

'Lip' windows...

So let me get this straight: the new Mail 2.0 look has crept into every non-metal app/window? In other words, that is the new Aqua?

I guess it means the GUI between Aqua and Brushed Metal is now more similar - i.e. Aqua is flatter, so that the icons are consistent in both. (For an example of current differences in Panther, try looking at the Back/Forward buttons first in Safari or the Finder, and compare them with those in Preview or Open/Save dialogue boxes).

However, it then begs the point: why did Apple invent Brushed Metal in the first place? Why not just have one interface?

There is a striking amount of 'Windows XP'-ness to Tiger, although I'm sure we'll get used to it and then Panther will look garish and outdated (as anyone going back to Jaguar will find now).

Oh, and keep window resizing to the corner. It may occasionally require two steps instead of one, but the zoom button fits my needs 95% of the time and accidental resizing of windows can get annoying sometimes on Windows.

 

[gekko513]

I'm sorry maya, but that invisble edge idea isn't going to work well because it would cause a lot of problems for Applications when they are allowed to draw all the way to the edge but not allowed to catch the mouse events. It could work for new cocoa Tiger apps, but it could break a lot of pre Tiger apps and apps that are developed for several platforms.

Just one example is the scroll bar ... the way it is now ... do you scroll or do you resize? It wouldn't be a good UI at all if the right half of the scroll bar would resize the window and just the left half would scroll.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

I'd think that the color of the Spotlight menu, as well as other Aqua-related things, could be controlled from the Appearance pane of System Preferences. If Apple keeps the current choices (Aqua and Graphite) in Tiger (and doesn't add any new ones), simply selecting a graphite appearance should get rid of all the gaudy colors. That's the way I'd do it, at least.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

I'd think that the color of the Spotlight menu, as well as other Aqua-related things, could be controlled from the Appearance pane of System Preferences. If Apple keeps the current choices (Aqua and Graphite) in Tiger (and doesn't add any new ones), simply selecting a graphite appearance should get rid of all the gaudy colors. That's the way I'd do it, at least.

Possibly, but I'd hardly call the Appearance menu in System Preferences brimming with opinions at the moment. There's no evidence that this will change with Tiger.

And of course, Tiger may forget to add this programming. I never use Graphite appearance because it is inconsistent. If I choose Graphite, all the traffic light buttons turn grey and most highlighting will go grey (if I also choose Graphite for text selection) but the source list in iTunes will still be bright blue and so will the buttons and address bar 'progress' bar in Safari, yet these should turn grey. In the early Panther releases, the Finder itself would ignore it too and use multi colours and blue even when Graphite was selected, but this bug was fixed in 10.3.2 or 10.3.3.

 

[TigerPRO]

Well, there's a difference between the OS and the applications. I assume you are talking solely about the applications (although you mentioned "baby OS".)

I think a lot of the Mac apps are less featured, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. They're not designed to compete with fully-featured apps, I don't think Apple wants to drive every software developer out of business. And as the subsequent versions come out, Apple will gradually add to them. It's still better that they do it slow and steady, vs. adding too much at once without having figured out the best interface for it.

Finally, some of the iApps seem to have performance problems that gradually get ironed out. So adding even more features to these apps wouldn't help there either.

Yeah, I know what you're saying about the iApps. Actually I feel the same way. What I meant by limited features was the lack of setting on OS X itself. I know I kinda bounced back into the iApps a little, but I was really just meaning to illustrate Apple's strategy in general. Because sometimes those lack of features in the iApps you were referencing is the same problem I see in the lack of customization in OS X. Do you think that Mac OS X is lacking in a couple areas like the iApps?

 

[madmaxmedia]

Yeah, I know what you're saying about the iApps. Actually I feel the same way. What I meant by limited features was the lack of setting on OS X itself. I know I kinda bounced back into the iApps a little, but I was really just meaning to illustrate Apple's strategy in general. Because sometimes those lack of features in the iApps you were referencing is the same problem I see in the lack of customization in OS X. Do you think that Mac OS X is lacking in a couple areas like the iApps?

So far, I don't see anything really lacking in Mac OS X, but then again I just switched a month or 2 ago. So right now I'm still in the honeymoon period, although I pretty much already know that I'll never willingly buy a Windows PC again (I did have a Mac Classic a long time ago...)

What areas do you consider OS X lacking?

I'm also really looking forward to Spotlight. In fact, I'm going to switch to the PIM iApps just so my email and contacts are 'Spotlightable' (previously used Outloook on the PC.)

I think the fact that I switched to 10.3, rather than 10.1 or 10.2, has improved my transition. I really love 10.3...

 

[wrldwzrd89]

So far, I don't see anything really lacking in Mac OS X, but then again I just switched a month or 2 ago. So right now I'm still in the honeymoon period, although I pretty much already know that I'll never willingly buy a Windows PC again (I did have a Mac Classic a long time ago...)

What areas do you consider OS X lacking?

I'm also really looking forward to Spotlight. In fact, I'm going to switch to the PIM iApps just so my email and contacts are 'Spotlightable' (previously used Outloook on the PC.)

I think the fact that I switched to 10.3, rather than 10.1 or 10.2, has improved my transition. I really love 10.3...

If the MBU at Microsoft is smart, they'll either release an update for Office 2004 that includes Spotlight support or put support for it in the next major Office:Mac release (I'd prefer the first option, even though I don't use Office:Mac).

As far as Mac OS X is lacking goes, it could really use some configuration options for things like icon spacing, as well as improvements mentioned here.