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.
why is itunes 10 grey?
- Thread starter zxcvb
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That would be a good example minus the fact they are marketing that as a 'premium' controller. People associate those colors with more expensive and higher quality goods. The colored buttons on controllers are still way more user friendly.
Thanks for the comparisons. By switching back and forth between your images, I was able to confirm in even greater measure that I hate the new interface in just about every way! I don't think I'll ever be "upgrading" unless/until they return to a better interface. I want my information densely packed, clearly delineated and easy to navigate (including important color-cues for peripheral perception). I detest this new design....But I also appreciate the grayness, so what do I know
All these posts about the colors bogging it down remind me of back in the day when you set your Mac OS 7 laptop to black and white to save battery life.
While I think what you've posted is a perfectly fine description of your needs and wants (and who knows whether the current design will even last - although I must say I don't hear Spotify users complaining), wouldn't you agree that the exact same point you've made about peripheral perception could similarly be made by proponents of the new design? Only they would argue, that when you're not looking at the source icons you want to be distracted by them as little as possible. So you'd actually try to eliminate peripheral perception of details in the source list. Especially in a content-driven application. It seems like a simple trade-off to me: Usability of the source list vs. distraction by it. Of course I'd be interested in user testing results that show by how much usability is even reduced now (if at all). I may be wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if users were quicker to read the text label when there's a black-and-white icon next to it, which might give them an advantage in this respect.
Seems to me, that eliminating distraction as much as possible is the point behind OS X's menu bar being completely b&w nowadays - and the same thinking could even be applied to the dock as well, but of course there you have the option to hide it if you want to (and in the case of the dock, lack of color would probably really ruin its usability). Admittedly, all of these UI elements serve very different purposes. But remember that Windows' notification area did actually have color icons up until Windows 7, where only hidden icons remain colored.
Of course, it may just be a transient design that Apple has fallen in love with - like pinstripes or something...
Attachments
Because people have been complaining for years that the sidebar icons are far too distractingWhile I think what you've posted is a perfectly fine description of your needs and wants (and who knows whether the current design will even last - although I must say I don't hear Spotify users complaining), wouldn't you agree that the exact same point you've made about peripheral perception could similarly be made by proponents of the new design? Only they would argue, that when you're not looking at the source icons you want to be distracted by them as little as possible. So you'd actually try to eliminate peripheral perception of details in the source list. Especially in a content-driven application. It seems like a simple trade-off to me: Usability of the source list vs. distraction by it. Of course I'd be interested in user testing results that show by how much usability is even reduced now (if at all). I may be wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if users were quicker to read the text label when there's a black-and-white icon next to it, which might give them an advantage in this respect.
Seems to me, that eliminating distraction as much as possible is the point behind OS X's menu bar being completely b&w nowadays - and the same thinking could even be applied to the dock as well, but of course there you have the option to hide it if you want to (and in the case of the dock, lack of color would probably really ruin its usability). Admittedly, all of these UI elements serve very different purposes. But remember that Windows' notification area did actually have color icons up until Windows 7, where only hidden icons remain colored.
Of course, it may just be a transient design that Apple has fallen in love with - like pinstripes or something...
Bring some color Mac!
I agree, I get tired of everything being grey. My safari browser is grey, my whole user interface is grey, including Logic Pro.. and now my iTunes is completely grey.
What happened to having some color ??
The newest quicktime for example, with the black bar and the stop light glyphs.
love it.
I want my interface to be like that.
and the new iTunes icon is lacking depth and personality. it looks like a rubber stamp mark sitting on my dock.
I agree, I get tired of everything being grey. My safari browser is grey, my whole user interface is grey, including Logic Pro.. and now my iTunes is completely grey.
What happened to having some color ??
The newest quicktime for example, with the black bar and the stop light glyphs.
love it.
I want my interface to be like that.
and the new iTunes icon is lacking depth and personality. it looks like a rubber stamp mark sitting on my dock.
Because people have been complaining for years that the sidebar icons are far too distracting
Since when does Apple listen to what people are actually complaining about? They fix what you didn't even realize was broken and improve , or should I write "improve", what you were perfectly happy with
*don't take this post personal* Where did I say anything about Apple? My point was that your post is terribly inaccurate for the simple fact that the complaint of distraction hasn't ever been an issue. Using that as a counter-argument puts your point null and void. You find and see the icons when you are consciously thinking about them, otherwise they get lost in the distance. This is true for many things. Think about when you are focusing on your computer screen. Do you notice things to the left of the screen, the right of the screen, above the screen, and so on? Do you feel the seat against your butt? Now you do, because I brought it to your conscious level. How about the clothes on your body? I think you get the idea.Since when does Apple listen to what people are actually complaining about? They fix what you didn't even realize was broken and improve , or should I write "improve", what you were perfectly happy with
Let me break down the usability of the icons in iTunes 9 vs iTunes 10 in a very simple method.
iTunes 9 icons: shape, text, color
iTunes 10 icons: shape, text
iTunes 10 takes away a thought path in the recognition process. If I recall correctly processing shapes is different from processing color which is different from processing words. Those who recognize by shape or text wouldn't notice any issues. Those who rely heavily on color in the recognition process may suffer greatly. If this was Apples goal (now I've mentioned Apple) they have succeeded.
I'll try
Yeah, but my jokily made point was, that while people didn't complain about being distracted, the distraction may still have existed. Just like I'm currently "distracted" by the dock on my screen although I'm certainly not complaining about it. Now that people do realize that they were being distracted before, and are offered a solution that fixes this, they have an argument for the new design. It's kinda like a Jedi mind trick.
Admittedly it's kind of a stretch to argue like this. You'd really have to do tests to see whether people are actually less distracted now and able to better focus on and/or enjoy the content in iTunes.Unless one is uncomfortable, noticing what one's body parts are rubbing against is usually little more than proprioception. I wouldn't compare that to the sight of colorful symbols that appear in front of you, almost in your direct line of sight at almost the exact same distance as whatever you're currently looking at (I have a relatively small screen). I would disagree with you that things in your field of view that you're not focusing on automatically fade into the distance. There's a reason why traffic lights are colorful. I've made this analogy before in this thread, but I wouldn't want to have a colorful control panel in my car, because I'd expect that it would actually distract me slightly (I also might not like the look of it).
I just searched for "109" in this thead, and it came up with nothing. I can't believe no one has mentioned it. It's all over the place on Macworld.com.
Try iTunes 109. Download it after you download iTunes 10. It keeps everything the same, but it restores the color. You even have the chance to keep or change the icon. I chose the new icon - I kinda like it.
But it's restored all the color to the sidebar!
Again, I can't believe no one has mentioned this.
Try iTunes 109. Download it after you download iTunes 10. It keeps everything the same, but it restores the color. You even have the chance to keep or change the icon. I chose the new icon - I kinda like it.
But it's restored all the color to the sidebar!
Again, I can't believe no one has mentioned this.
Attachments
Dude you "scared" me - For a second there I thought Apple had released an updated version of iTunes that restored color to the icons. Wouldn't that be awful
I like the gray (or is it grey?) sidebar icons. It looks nice and doesn’t pop out as much as they did in previous versions.
Er... really? I can count 4 different colours on the Numbers icon, for example. OS X icons have always seemed colourful to me.
Grey if you're British, gray if you're american
Thanks, I’ve been writing it incorrectly (Gray) for the last few years.
I mean: I’ve been spelling the colour gray wrong for the last few years
And as long as the default theme in 10.7 isn’t graphite, I’m fine with a little grey. as long as its a nice gradient instead of just one color. iTunes looks fine IMO, except the vertical traffic lights.
Your question regarding peripheral perception is a fair one. Respectfully, I would answer it in this way: No.
The color of the icons (in iTunes 9) provides an instant dose of important information either sub- or semi-consciously. Without the color cue, it becomes necessary to "read" the icon by consciouslyalbeit brieflyexamining the form of the graphic elements in order to gather the information about the type of item(s) at which you are looking. The new interface is clearly less-efficient at communicating that information. "Less-efficient" = "absolute failure" when it comes to user-interfacesespecially on this scale. Although made up of fractions of secondsthe cumulative amount of wasted time across the massive iTunes user-base (millions of people) would be an interesting stat to know.As I type this, I have iTunes maximized behind my Safari window. I can see without even taking my eye off of what I'm typing that I have a small-ish folder of Smart Playlists expanded, and a larger folder of Regular Playlists expanded below that. I wouldn't have that ability with iTunes 10.
One final pointI'm a graphic designer and I appreciate the value of minimalism very much. I would have loved a more streamlined design in iTunes 10 (compared to iTunes 9), but "streamlined" is most definitely not what we got. "Less-color" doesn't necessarily make something more minimalistic. By removing the color from the icons, the iTunes design team abandoned a highly-functional resource. The need forand the task ofcommunicating and differentiating the types of items hasn't gone away; it's just been reassigned. The forms of the icons themselves (rather than the color) are now tasked with communicating that information to the end-user. Have you ever read the words on someone's t-shirt before you "read" the color of the shirt? Noyou haven't. It requires more cognitive effort to examine a shape than it does to perceive color. Fire-hydrants are red for a reasonbecause it's much easier to spot them by their color than by their shape.
I would have supported changing the purple "folded-page + gear" icon and the blue "folded-page + music-note" icon to a simpler form. Simple rectangles would have done it. Hecksimple little colored dots would function well too. Insteadwe have playlist icons that are comprised of 3 horizontal lines plus a musical note. In a list of 30 playlists, that equates to 120 individual graphic elementsnot counting the typographic information! In addition to being less-efficient, the new icon system is inelegant and unattractive (in my personal/professional opinion) and it's demonstrably less-functional than the previous design.
If you like the aesthetic look of it more, I can understand thatbut "cooler-looking" ≠ "improvement" in this case.
Can you explain the reasoning why people happen to run red lights? It's because they weren't consciously aware of it. When you are driving you are looking for lights, stop signs, things running out in the road, and other vehicles. These things could even be happening on the subconscious level. I don't feel this is a reasonable comparison to navigating iTunes. (and as for traffic lights, do you notice the Mac window buttons when you are typing a post?I'll try
Yeah, but my jokily made point was, that while people didn't complain about being distracted, the distraction may still have existed. Just like I'm currently "distracted" by the dock on my screen although I'm certainly not complaining about it. Now that people do realize that they were being distracted before, and are offered a solution that fixes this, they have an argument for the new design. It's kinda like a Jedi mind trick.
Unless one is uncomfortable, noticing what one's body parts are rubbing against is usually little more than proprioception. I wouldn't compare that to the sight of colorful symbols that appear in front of you, almost in your direct line of sight at almost the exact same distance as whatever you're currently looking at (I have a relatively small screen). I would disagree with you that things in your field of view that you're not focusing on automatically fade into the distance. There's a reason why traffic lights are colorful. I've made this analogy before in this thread, but I wouldn't want to have a colorful control panel in my car, because I'd expect that it would actually distract me slightly (I also might not like the look of it).
) It has a lot less to do with color than it does brightness compared to it's surroundings. The color is used for differentiating what to do, which validates the point of color and association. On to the colorful car control panel. I'd agree that, if you are moving from a non colorful control panel to a colorful, you would be distracted. We humans have this amazing ability though, some better than others, to habituate. That can bring us into the topic that iTunes icons could have been distracting but now we have become accustomed to them (which is the point you made earlier in a way). Them no longer being there now feels foreign for many. In simple terms, people will say 'get used to it'.
All programs go Black/White because they are preparing eInk devices that have only B/W screens similar to the Kindle. Basically a "iKindle touch". I would buy it if it was $139
I'll try
There's a reason why traffic lights are colorful. I've made this analogy before in this thread, but I wouldn't want to have a colorful control panel in my car, because I'd expect that it would actually distract me slightly (I also might not like the look of it).
I like the analogy... but the only thing is when your driving a car your supposed to be looking at the road not your dashboard and only occasionally glancing down quickly. When your on your computer your always looking at the screen. Why not have something exciting with easy to recognize colors!! Why don't we just go back to boring black screens with white text?? lol
Thanks guys for the very reasoned replies! You've made very good points.
I always thought people ran red lights because they incorrectly assumed they could still make it. At least that's how it's always been for me…um, I mean…for people I know.
Well yes, you are sensitive to visual elements in your field of view that your brain deems to be important during that situation. The exact nature of that sensitivity is based on your experience, learnt traffic symbols, cultural elements as well as simple human nature. There's a quite natural reaction for example to the color red, which is used to signify importance of some kind. Other colors similarly convey an automatic message and your brain is attuned to noticing such colored objects. It makes it relatively easy to drive in a foreign country without being aware of the exact signage they use. Notice that some metaphors that are used for traffic signage can be found in UI design as well: The traffic light, warning signs, the sign that looks like a "no parking" sign (red circle and a red diagonal line) used in some places etc.
I think even the verb you're using indicates that such a comparison may have its merits.
Yes, they do act as a stimulus while I'm typing my post and whether I notice it or not, it takes effort for my brain to not let myself be distracted by them.
I would think that (bright, saturated) color is, in a (relatively colorless) UI that is already very uniformly bright, most effective at grabbing your attention.Of course, as far as I can see, the source list icons are still in color actually, just a very muted color.
True. The brain is an amazing thing. Of course, just because it will adapt to almost any situation, doesn't mean that there aren't ultimately conditions that it favors and those that it merely endures and which may drain a lot more of one's energy.
But you're singling out one UI element here without considering whether the overall UI may be more efficiently usable now for the reasons mentioned in my previous posts. And even if that's not the case, the new interface may still be able to further your enjoyment of your music library. After all we're talking about a non-productive application that people use in their leisure time. I'll readily trade in a few seconds per day if that makes the whole experience more enjoyable.
If I'm not overlooking anything, the basic dominating colors of the iTunes interface were muted blue/grayish tones, with more or less the only exception being bright colors appearing in four UI element categories:
- window buttons
- activated buttons at the bottom of the window
- source list icons
- Content (album covers)
It's obvious to me, that elements from these categories serve as more of a stimulus to your brain than other parts of the interface. It's also obvious to me that telling your mind what to pay attention to, which naturally requires effort, is easier to do when there are less stimuli competing for your attention. It would follow that it's easier and more relaxing to focus on your album covers if you remove bright color from the source list, which was, apart from the album covers, most prominently colored and spread out over a relatively wide screen area.
Now this I don't quite get. Why would you want the source list content to stand out when it's not your current focus?
You've made very good points. I always thought people ran red lights because they incorrectly assumed they could still make it. At least that's how it's always been for me…um, I mean…for people I know.
Well yes, you are sensitive to visual elements in your field of view that your brain deems to be important during that situation. The exact nature of that sensitivity is based on your experience, learnt traffic symbols, cultural elements as well as simple human nature. There's a quite natural reaction for example to the color red, which is used to signify importance of some kind. Other colors similarly convey an automatic message and your brain is attuned to noticing such colored objects. It makes it relatively easy to drive in a foreign country without being aware of the exact signage they use. Notice that some metaphors that are used for traffic signage can be found in UI design as well: The traffic light, warning signs, the sign that looks like a "no parking" sign (red circle and a red diagonal line) used in some places etc.
I think even the verb you're using indicates that such a comparison may have its merits.
Yes, they do act as a stimulus while I'm typing my post and whether I notice it or not, it takes effort for my brain to not let myself be distracted by them.
I would think that (bright, saturated) color is, in a (relatively colorless) UI that is already very uniformly bright, most effective at grabbing your attention.Of course, as far as I can see, the source list icons are still in color actually, just a very muted color.
True. The brain is an amazing thing. Of course, just because it will adapt to almost any situation, doesn't mean that there aren't ultimately conditions that it favors and those that it merely endures and which may drain a lot more of one's energy.
Your question regarding peripheral perception is a fair one. Respectfully, I would answer it in this way: No.
But you're singling out one UI element here without considering whether the overall UI may be more efficiently usable now for the reasons mentioned in my previous posts. And even if that's not the case, the new interface may still be able to further your enjoyment of your music library. After all we're talking about a non-productive application that people use in their leisure time. I'll readily trade in a few seconds per day if that makes the whole experience more enjoyable.
If I'm not overlooking anything, the basic dominating colors of the iTunes interface were muted blue/grayish tones, with more or less the only exception being bright colors appearing in four UI element categories:
- window buttons
- activated buttons at the bottom of the window
- source list icons
- Content (album covers)
It's obvious to me, that elements from these categories serve as more of a stimulus to your brain than other parts of the interface. It's also obvious to me that telling your mind what to pay attention to, which naturally requires effort, is easier to do when there are less stimuli competing for your attention. It would follow that it's easier and more relaxing to focus on your album covers if you remove bright color from the source list, which was, apart from the album covers, most prominently colored and spread out over a relatively wide screen area.
Now this I don't quite get. Why would you want the source list content to stand out when it's not your current focus?
Actually that is incorrect. In my previous post I brought up noticing various things such as feeling your seat or the clothes on your body. The reason you aren't always consciously aware of these senses is that it would require far too much energy and resources.
The fact of the matter is, we are getting far too concerned with the psychological aspects of a computer applications aesthetic design. While it has been fun to discuss the various prospectives of this design, let us agree to disagree.