Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

UI changes you'd like to see in Leopard

jellybean said:
Anyone else think the UI could do with a major update in Leopard? Nothing too radical, just enough to bring it a bit up to date.

I've been playing with the latest build of Vista and I must admit OS X's interface feels very dated in comparison :(

I think most people agree brushed metal will most likely be gone in Leopard but replaced with what? Smooth metal? Still nothing amazing. And those red yellow and green buttons in the corner of windows feel so "fisher price" :rolleyes:

I know, i know... it's how Leopard works at the end of the day what is so important, but there are a surprising number of people in the eye candy crowd who would be won over by just what looks and feels cooler. And I really don't want Vista to steal OS X's thunder :(
Click to expand...

I too think that Vista is making OS X look a tad bit dated, but not enough to warrant changes...

However, there are A LOT of inconsistencies in the UI for OS X, and I am really looking for some unification to the UI across the board.

Next, I would love to see an overall improvement in the "controls" for the windows. Im totally bored of the red, yellow green circles, and I love the way the close circles look in Safari (on the tabs) - the right hand slider and arrows look like they were designed independantly of the rest of the UI in OS X - they just dont look like they fit.

Also, I would LOVE to see a total rework of Finder...I'll just get in line and wait on this one.

Oh, and most importantly - I am NOT impressed with Spaces. Thats a poor excuse for a major "feature"...I am looking for something more revolutionary for defining a workspace. I dont think of things in terms of open app windows...I think of things in terms of open projects, which usually involve between 2 and 5 different open applications with tasks being accomplished across applications, not JUST within them.
 
AvSRoCkCO1067 said:
You want to get rid of the dock!?!?!?!?!? GASP :eek: . HERESY! :p
Click to expand...

At least, it doesn't look like the NeXTStep Dock. How people are using WindowMaker and liking it, I'll never know, because it's a copy of NeXTStep's look.
 
MacVault said:
YES! This is a great example of the type of integrated gui/features found all over the place in Windows, but Apple, on the other hand, tries to "simplify" everything and in doing so a lot of great features and GUI concepts are just non-existent. Apple needs to grow up and admit that these type of things should be in the OS, because they really should be there!
Click to expand...

Couldn't have put it better myself :cool:
 
1) Consistency. Uno is okay, but I want some Apple flair!

2) A better toned-down UI without all the bells and whistles. Maybe something less Aqua, for the performance-minded / G3 users. And changing the stop sign button colors to gray (Graphite) doesn't count!

3) A wacky new crazy performance killing UI choice. Ripple effect for the progress bar. Or maybe have all the System Preferences fall into the window like Core Animation style.

4) System-level support for theming (NO Shapeshifter).

5) Start focusing more on usability. Example: remote X11 session. There's no way I can see a yellow mouse cursor on a white background.
 
mac_os_x_trio.png
vs.
windows_vista_trio.jpg


Um, which one is looking outdated? ;)
 
Unfprtunatly, I gotta say that the appearance of Vista is very nice, I love the glass look of Aero. However, I also thought OSX is sexy, but as previously mentioned, the brushed metal could get upgraded somewhat.... Maybe if Apple decided to give Microsoft some of its own medicne, and developed a new UI with a name similar to Aqua/Aero, with an appearance of both.... Can't quite picture it, but damn it'll be hot!!! lol

Cheers
 
Who cares what the buttons look like? Those of us who use keyboard shortcuts to get around never touch the damned things.

User-interface is not so much about the form rather than the function or rather, how the two are intertwined. Who cares if the window surrounds are brushed metal when Finder can be such a dog at times?
 
bousozoku said:
At least, it doesn't look like the NeXTStep Dock. How people are using WindowMaker and liking it, I'll never know, because it's a copy of NeXTStep's look.
Click to expand...

Windowmaker is nothing like NeXTSTEP. What Keith Ohlfs did with that UI goes beyond the color or icons look n' feel.

Everything in NeXTSTEP/Openstep was designed to get out of the way of the user/developer, paid homage to spatial relations, made use of vertical menus that toggle between apps and free up the top of the window views, allowed tear off windows that remember last known positioning after app closure, was 100% consistent throughout the UI, etc.

GNUstep has never lived up to what it could be mainly due to the fact they couldn't afford Keith Ohlfs who was offered Chief UI to oversee Rhapsody/OS X but due to contractual/stock agreements with the then WebTV/Microsoft merger couldn't pass up on that deal.

Keith has been enjoying married life, seeing the world, and who knows if he gets bored with not being "creative" perhaps he'll recontact Steve and take that job offer.

Anyone who says Windowmaker was NeXTSTEP never worked for NeXT/Apple nor worked in that environment/developed in that environment.

Having been there I can say that OS X is still not nearly as efficient, consistent nor as intuitive as NeXTSTEP, not to mention affords me with being more productive.

If Leopard can do something it is to get the ****ing UI consistent, get Services consistent across the system, continue to streamline Cocoa and get the OS to a state that satisfies the Consumer to the Fed.
 
mdriftmeyer said:
Windowmaker is nothing like NeXTSTEP. What Keith Ohlfs did with that UI goes beyond the color or icons look n' feel.

Everything in NeXTSTEP/Openstep was designed to get out of the way of the user/developer, paid homage to spatial relations, made use of vertical menus that toggle between apps and free up the top of the window views, allowed tear off windows that remember last known positioning after app closure, was 100% consistent throughout the UI, etc.

GNUstep has never lived up to what it could be mainly due to the fact they couldn't afford Keith Ohlfs who was offered Chief UI to oversee Rhapsody/OS X but due to contractual/stock agreements with the then WebTV/Microsoft merger couldn't pass up on that deal.

Keith has been enjoying married life, seeing the world, and who knows if he gets bored with not being "creative" perhaps he'll recontact Steve and take that job offer.

Anyone who says Windowmaker was NeXTSTEP never worked for NeXT/Apple nor worked in that environment/developed in that environment.

Having been there I can say that OS X is still not nearly as efficient, consistent nor as intuitive as NeXTSTEP, not to mention affords me with being more productive.

If Leopard can do something it is to get the ****ing UI consistent, get Services consistent across the system, continue to streamline Cocoa and get the OS to a state that satisfies the Consumer to the Fed.
Click to expand...

Who said that it was?

I'm glad that NeXTSTEP was so spatial. It was so spatial only a mother could love its looks.
 
If I can't delete something that is 'in use by another application', please tell me what application, goddammit.
 
I've always maintained since OS X was first released, that the option to run it in a stripped down version, devoid of the processor hungry eye candy would be a good option for people that value performance over the pretty stuff.
 
Blue Velvet said:
If I can't delete something that is 'in use by another application', please tell me what application, goddammit.
Click to expand...

Exactly! And give the user the option to kill that process/session! This reminds me of another issue with OS X that totally grinds me... when copying a bunch of files it will get to one (or many) file that for some reason it cannot copy - like if it has too long a filename when copying to NTFS or over the network, etc. and it will kill the entire copy process. IT SHOULD GIVE ME THE OPTION TO SKIP THAT FILE OR GROUP OF OFFENDING FILES and not abort the entire process.

Crap like this is what makes OS seem dated. This kind of crap just really erks me! Get with it, Apple! It's not like your dev team is Ma & Pop shop with 4 people making minimum wage.
 
MacVault said:
Exactly! And give the user the option to kill that process/session! This reminds me of another issue with OS X that totally grinds me... when copying a bunch of files it will get to one (or many) file that for some reason it cannot copy - like if it has too long a filename when copying to NTFS or over the network, etc. and it will kill the entire copy process. IT SHOULD GIVE ME THE OPTION TO SKIP THAT FILE OR GROUP OF OFFENDING FILES and not abort the entire process.

Crap like this is what makes OS seem dated. This kind of crap just really erks me! Get with it, Apple! It's not like your dev team is Ma & Pop shop with 4 people making minimum wage.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that the dev team is targeting the Ma and Pop shop that doesnt have networks with NTFS shares and applications using multiple documents that might want to get deleted (ok so the last one is a stretch), but apple does need to pay attention to a more mixed environment, and learn from windows, cal it copy can it whatever, but just adapt.
 
MacVault said:
YES! This is a great example of the type of integrated gui/features found all over the place in Windows, but Apple, on the other hand, tries to "simplify" everything and in doing so a lot of great features and GUI concepts are just non-existent. Apple needs to grow up and admit that these type of things should be in the OS, because they really should be there!
Click to expand...

Wrong

Os x is built on the basis everything you need to do on a daily basis is do-able with ease. THat is what makes os x so easy to use, WIndows puts every option everywhere making horrible confusing menus for less able users.
 
superted666 said:
Wrong

Os x is built on the basis everything you need to do on a daily basis is do-able with ease. THat is what makes os x so easy to use, WIndows puts every option everywhere making horrible confusing menus for less able users.
Click to expand...

WRONG! As an example, going back to the other poster's wish of being able to right clicking on a picture on a website to make it the desktop background, why shouldn't I be able to do that instead of having to "save" the picture to the drive and then go right click on the file to set it as the desktop background?

In Windows even if I don't know of a contextual window I can usually try right clicking on wherever I feel there should be one and usually low and behold there are all the features I'm looking for. I've always been a Mac lover, but after being a Network Admin in a Windows environment I've come to love the options Windows gives by right clicking on stuff, or whatever - the above issue being a pretty good example.

If YOU don't want the right-click features, just don't "right click", but for the rest of us it will be there! I'm not saying right clicking is the answer to everything, but that's an example of something I think Windows really has got right. I will also agree that Windows has it's problems too.
 
yea maybe you got a good point about the contextual menu's
however windows uses them almost as a must, my dad a complete novice hates them but has to use them.

The problem is microsoft puts every option everywhere confusing things
 
Integrated Contextual Help System

Another improvement for OS X would be an integrated contextual help system as you will find in Windows Server 2003 and in XP... Have a window open and you're not sure what one of the buttons or fields does??.. Then just click on the question mark at the top of the window, your pointer gets a little question mark on it, and then you click on the field/feature/button you're interested in learning about. WITHOUT having to wait for an actual "application" to load, bounce in the Dock, etc. I hate the OS X help program!
 
dejo said:
mac_os_x_trio.png
vs.
windows_vista_trio.jpg


Um, which one is looking outdated? ;)
Click to expand...

This screenshot shows just how bad Microsoft is. I mean, why on earth would you make the CLOSE button the BIGGEST button? It makes is so easy to accidently close the window.

And I don't understand why some people don't like the "Traffic" buttons. I think it's a really smart idea.
 
maxrobertson said:
This screenshot shows just how bad Microsoft is. I mean, why on earth would you make the CLOSE button the BIGGEST button? It makes is so easy to accidently close the window.

And I don't understand why some people don't like the "Traffic" buttons. I think it's a really smart idea.
Click to expand...

I think both sets of buttons looks bad.
 
Blue Velvet said:
If I can't delete something that is 'in use by another application', please tell me what application, goddammit.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. One thing I loved so much about Classic Mac OS is that it had a "Tell the user" mentality. It told you how many characters you could have in a file name (or which ones you couldn't use), it told you how much space you needed to add an item to a disk (and it offered to empty the trash if that would help), and it told you pretty much everything else. Now, you have to figure out all that stuff yourself. It's just so... Windows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back