Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac OS X > Official Leopard GUI discussion thread

Official Leopard GUI discussion thread (Page 3)
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 08:20 PM
 
There is no keyboard hotkey for Time Machine???
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 08:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!! View Post
I'm having a hard time imagining something that could visually represent going back in time to retrieve a file using the conventional interface.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 08:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
Actually, the Time Machine's GUI, as seen in this movie, (that's right, Steve, it's public information) is fairly retarded. Invoking Time Machine causes the frontmost Finder window to be displayed in Time Machine's interface, but the way to invoke Time Machine is to launch an application. And if you decide to save Dock space by not including the Time Machine icon there, then in order to launch the app, you'd have to navigate to the Applications folder - which changes the frontmost Finder window! Not the most brilliant UI design I've ever seen.
Sounds like you can't use Time Machine in another application like iPhoto if you don't have it in the Dock.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 08:40 PM
 
Right... basically, Time Machine has to be in the dock to use it. Probably the only reason they didn't lock it to the dock like Finder and the Trash is because some people won't use it at all.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 08:45 PM
 
And the reason they didn't put it into the menu bar when turned on is?
     
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 09:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
This app doesn't even compare to how Time Machine works. Show me something that can visually show changes within a specified folder...not an entire volume snapshot.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 10:18 PM
 
The important thing is, how does 10.5 compare to Vista? Because those are the two OS's that people will be choosing between.

I have had Vista installed on my Mac for a few months now. Vista has much better over-all consistency, and looks way nicer. I like the transparent windows in Vista, the way windows fade out when you close them and minimize them, the way the open/save dialogs work, the SPEED of exploring files on your hard drive.

My developer build of Leopard 10.5 has an even more "plain" feel to it than Tiger 10.4 did. Everyone criticized Apple at first for their GUI being too flashy, but now they have gone the opposite direction, and are trying to make their GUI more plain and minimalistic.

I do really love CoverFlow and QuickLook. They are much better than anything in Vista.

But as for "skin" of the interface -- the texture and color of windows, the overall feel of things -- I think Microsoft has really nailed it in Vista and that 10.5 really feels like a confused step backwards from 10.4. The new folder icons are CRAP. The interface feels very much more flat and plain. There is less of a 3D feel to things, even with the shiny dock (my dock is always hidden anyways, so I could care less how shiny it is as I rarely if ever use it -- I use LaunchBar).

The Start Menu in Vista is far more functional and useful than the Spotlight window. The fact that every explorer window can also bring up a web page is very cool in Vista. The way Vista always displays the current file path in every explorer window is very very nice. OS X still has horrific keyboard navigation in Open/Save and Finder windows compared to how easy it is in Vista.

Overall I am not impressed with 10.5's "unified look" nor the fact that it does not address many of the complaints I had about 10.4, such as jerkiness when you are scrolling through a newly openined folder full of 200 things (even on a very fast system it's still jerky in 10.5). Spotlight is also greatly flawed in the System Preferences window still, as the pop-down window covers up what it is spotlighting sometimes. Open dialog still does not default to the last place you saved something!! UGH!!!

Every OS sucks.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 11:28 PM
 
I agree that Vista looks cool in theory... but why don't you try layering tons of transparent Windows. Wow. That's confusing and cluttered.

Now try a maximize. Hey wait! What the hell happened to the transparency? It's been replaced by blackness. Not even a black gradient, just black...

Hmmm...

Whereas in Leopard, there is no "seethrough" confusion, and windows look the same no matter what size.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 11:38 PM
 
Don't feed the troll. Even Windows diehards can't stand Vista.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2007, 11:40 PM
 
I don't think he's trolling... He gives both sides of his opinion. If it is trolling, it's nice trolling. My post still stands
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 12:30 AM
 
If you want a flashy UI, spray glitter on your screen.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 07:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
That image is from Dec. 2005, so I guess that would be a poor copy of Panther? Or was Tiger out then? Lost track of time...
Yes, they have gotten better, But not by much.

http://www.osnews.com/img/7596/aqua4.jpg

I admin a large sized screenshot site too. And I don't know why linux users always insist on making their screenshot compressed with JPG artifacts. Not everyone that runs Linux and posts to the site does this. And not everyone that does it runs Linux. But a good bit of them do. It makes the shot look like poo. Well.. even poooier. I mentioned poo because I know you like poo.
Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!! View Post
Leopard is awesome...but not "I had to wait 2 years for this" awesome.-
Agreed. That is also why I was expecting a more finished looking GUI. I guess all their time has been spent on iPhone. And making OS X work with iPhone.
...
Feature 351 - Redesign of the Aqua checkbox to match the new Leopard look.
Feature 352 - Redesign of the Aqua radio button to match the new Leopard look.
Feature 353 - Redesign of the Aqua scrollbar to match the new Leopard look.
...


Don't worry Horsepoo, someone will design a replacement that fixes these inconstancies.
Then Apple will eventually.

Originally Posted by Dark Goob View Post
I have had Vista installed on my Mac for a few months now. Vista has much better over-all consistency, and looks way nicer.
The OS is more consistent, but the apps never will be. And it's sad that Windows users can now say their OS is more consistent than Apple's. Though I don't think it looks good at all. And it detracts from the content like 10.0.0 did. Both were consistent, but wrong at the same time.
I like the transparent windows in Vista, the way windows fade out when you close them and minimize them, the way the open/save dialogs work, the SPEED of exploring files on your hard drive.
Yes, OS X had these almost a decade ago.
My developer build of Leopard 10.5 has an even more "plain" feel to it than Tiger 10.4 did. Everyone criticized Apple at first for their GUI being too flashy, but now they have gone the opposite direction, and are trying to make their GUI more plain and minimalistic.
Which they should be doing. GUIs should not distract from the content.
But as for "skin" of the interface -- the texture and color of windows, the overall feel of things -- I think Microsoft has really nailed it in Vista and that 10.5 really feels like a confused step backwards from 10.4.
The new folder icons are CRAP.[/quote] NO WAY! They are 10x better than the stripped Aqua folders Apple has been giving us.
The interface feels very much more flat and plain. There is less of a 3D feel to things
Good. Because it's just framing for the content.
The Start Menu in Vista is far more functional and useful than the Spotlight window.
Those are two completely different things. I would compare OS X's dock and it's stack ability to Windows antiquated start menu and dock.
The fact that every explorer window can also bring up a web page is very cool in Vista.
That has been that way with Windows since 98". And I hated it then. I hated the fact that the Regular windows, that BTW are bloated with overly large buttons, can turn into a web-page just by accidentally hitting a button. BAD GUI design.
( Last edited by Kevin; Oct 21, 2007 at 08:30 AM. )
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by Dark Goob View Post
I have had Vista installed on my Mac for a few months now. Vista has much better over-all consistency, and looks way nicer. I like the transparent windows in Vista, the way windows fade out when you close them and minimize them, the way the open/save dialogs work, the SPEED of exploring files on your hard drive.
Windows Vista is cluttered with legacy icons from Windows XP, Windows 2000, Windows 9x and even Windows 3.1. There are still windows floating around using the exact same style as they did back in the Windows 3.1 days.

Next to that there's no consistent rule to when and where an application should have it's menu bar. Some applications have the menu bar disabled by default, others show it below the toolbar, above it, inside a button or got rid of it all together. Microsoft really messed things up here. Menu Bar options like settings/preferences are all over the place, no real consistent rule that says it should be under "Application Name" like on Mac OS X.

Overal there are extremely few applications (if any) that actually use the proper Aero interface. Microsoft's own popular applications like Windows Live Messenger and Office 2008 have a 99% custom build GUI. Third-party developers don't seem to have much interest in following Aero guidelines either (Microsoft actually wrote some!).

Windows Vista's open/save dialogs are almost a direct rip of the ones found in Mac OS X. And you should keep in mind Mac OS X had advanced minimization effects since 2001. I for one am also glad that Apple didn't decided to put previews inside the folder icons to show us what's inside. Not only does it become an utter mess on Windows Vista, it adds no value whatsoever unless you have the folder icons set to 256x256 pixels.

While I have to admit I thought Aero looked nice and fresh in the beginning when seeing it on demo machines in the stores, I find it absolutely dreadful to work with. Windows have gigantic thick borders just for the sake of showing off ridiculous amounts of transparency, something Mac OS X actively used for 6,5 years now be it in more normal proportions. In some cases those thick borders are filled with nothing except ONE back button and the min/max/close buttons. Complete waste of space, especially on smaller laptops. Something I "love" as well are those one tab windows in the configuration panel, that keep popping up, while other configuration panels are properly integrated in the main window. Talking about an unfinished UI.

Honestly I don't see what's consistent about Windows Vista, Microsoft's own applications and thrid-party ones. They all use their own different styles, way beyond the occasional scroll bar or button style that sticks out on Mac OS X. Nor do I understand in what way the Start Menu is that much better at showing system-wide search results than Spotlight is. Not to mention the fact indexed searching on Windows Vista is slower compared to the instant results Mac OS X Leopard gives.

PS
Every Finder window on Mac OS X Leopard can be set to show the path bar at all times. You do know that right?
( Last edited by .Neo; Oct 21, 2007 at 08:28 AM. )
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:22 AM
 
Well let me rephrase my "OS is more consistent" comment about vista then.

MSs screenshots of Vista makes Vista's GUI look more consistent than Apple's screenshots of 10.5.

I've only used Vista for a few hours before I wiped it off Bekah's computer. I reminded me of running OS 7 on a mid 90s performa with the Aaron extension on.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:44 AM
 

     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 09:04 AM
 
That shot captures beautifully the way how Microsoft innovates.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 09:15 AM
 
That has to be an old screenshot of leopard. And it looks awful. :/
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
That shot captures beautifully the way how Microsoft innovates.
"Make it work like the Mac"

I bet that has been echoing down the halls of the redmond headquarters for decades.

After all Bill called Apple "R&D South"
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 09:20 AM
 
BTW I've been seeing lots of these lately



By and large, I don't think 10.5 reflects that look at all. :/
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 09:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
That has to be an old screenshot of leopard. And it looks awful. :/
It's basically the same as it is right now in Tiger, only borderless and with the standard blue sidebar color.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 09:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
That has to be an old screenshot of leopard. And it looks awful. :/
I see nothing particularly wrong with it (except that the folder icons appear to be designed to go with the iLife style of widgets, but we're over that already).

Feature wise I don't see how the Vista version is supposed to be much superior. It has a lot busier look which makes it not as nice to look at.
And by the way: I can fully navigate the open dialog with the keyboard in Tiger, so I fail to see what Dark Goob was talking about.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
It's basically the same as it is right now in Tiger, only borderless and with the standard blue sidebar color.
Yeah thats how it looks now in Tiger yes.
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
I see nothing particularly wrong with it (except that the folder icons appear to be designed to go with the iLife style of widgets, but we're over that already).
Well you are over that anyhow. I guess I am just tired of Aqua. It's dated. The funny thing about Platinum is, even though the GUI itself is dated, the look never makes me cringe when I see it. Aqua does that to me. Always has.
Feature wise I don't see how the Vista version is supposed to be much superior. It has a lot busier look which makes it not as nice to look at.
Well a GUI in general isn't for looking at. It's more of a shell for the content you are looking at. It should never distract from the content. Or effect the look of the content at all. That is what my problem with the "Aqua" theme and the stripes. The design itself made layouts I was doing that looked decent in say, OS 9, but they looked weird with Aqua. I guess because Aqua and the design I was making clashed. So that i why I switched to the graphite look and got rid of the stripes in the first place. The slick looks and colors were clashing with certain designs I was making, and it was effecting the colors I used. While I am sure this doesn't bother everyone, it did me. And that is one thing Platinum did. It stood out of the way. And it's the one reason why I LOVE Adobe CS3s new GUI.

As far as the Vista vs OS X comments go.. I made a thread about that, so this one wont turn into a MS vs Apple thread. (I am guilty of making said comments in this thread about it as the next person..)

http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lou...really-giving/
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 09:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Yeah thats how it looks now in Tiger yes.
Uhm no it doesn't.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 10:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
Uhm no it doesn't.
Of course Tiger doesn't have that layout. I was talking about GUI elements. Not the layout.

It's Leopard "layout" and "features" with Tiger "elements."

And is it me or did the image auto resize feature stop working? (That's a wiiiide OS X window)
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 10:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Of course Tiger doesn't have that layout. I was talking about GUI elements. Not the layout.

It's Leopard "layout" and "features" with Tiger "elements."
So you basically are repeating what I already said, only in a more difficult way?

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And is it me or did the image auto resize feature stop working? (That's a wiiiide OS X window)
You can resize it to whatever you want. Which has been possible for many years now.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 10:22 AM
 
Well I was agreeing with you in my reply wasn't I? Why wouldn't what I say match with what you say unless we were disagreeing?

I don't totally get where you are going here.
You can resize it to whatever you want. Which has been possible for many years now.
I was referring to the forum's auto image resizer. It's borked. (Look at his pic)
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 10:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Well I was agreeing with you in my reply wasn't I? Why wouldn't what I say match with what you say unless we were disagreeing?

I don't totally get where you are going here.
You said the open dialog window looks awful. Which is a strong statement considering it's almost the same as it is right now in Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger.

When you replied "Yeah thats how it looks now in Tiger yes." after that I completely lost track.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I was referring to the forum's auto image resizer. It's borked. (Look at his pic)
Haha OK. Yeah it doesn't seem to work.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 10:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
You said the open dialog window looks awful. Which is a strong statement considering it's almost the same as it is right now in Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger.
I was referring to the look of that Leopard screenshot, comparing it with the Look of how Leopard looks now.
I am a BIG fan of the Unified windowstyle. I am glad they switched over. You mentioning that it looks like Tiger really made no sense to me in that context. So I agreed yeah.. it looks like Tiger.. and then you replied to me that no, no it didn't. So now I am like WTH?
When you replied "Yeah thats how it looks now in Tiger yes." after that I completely lost track.
Um, ok, whatever. Seems to be some miss-lapse of understanding. Whatever it is, I am sure it's not worth arguing over.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 11:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
And it's sad that Windows users can now say their OS is more consistent than Apple's.
No they can't, until their apps will work in a consistent way and have consistent behaviors.

If there's no way to predict what the menu item for the program settings will be called (or, in many cases, the menu item for the settings that I want, as there will be more than one of them), nor what menu it will be in, then that is not consistent. And it will waste my time looking for the item, causing actual usability issues, whereas the skin will never be able to do that.

I mean, Windows' skin was always fairly "consistent" in your definition of the word - I mean what was Windows 95? Every window had the same look - a flat blue title bar, and some grey scrollbars - it was ugly, but what was inconsistent about it?

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 11:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
No they can't... <snip>
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Well let me rephrase my "OS is more consistent" comment about vista then.

MSs screenshots of Vista makes Vista's GUI look more consistent than Apple's screenshots of 10.5.
text needed to be added to get this to post
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 01:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
text needed to be added to get this to post
Believe me Kevin when I say that if you think Mac OS X Leopard lacks consistency, Windows Vista will probably be enough to push you over the edge and slit your wrists.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 01:33 PM
 
Oh I am sure. XP was bad enough.

They at least let you revert to the OLD Windows look though...

Something OS X should have been able to do IMHO. They had plans for doing it anyhow. Then scrapped it.

I hate the fact that Windows has more choices that way though. You can set your font (Not that I dislike Lucinda Grande... I don't)
and change little things here and there. With OS X you basically get "Aqua and Graphite" People like to make their computer THEIRS. To mark their ground so to speak.

BTW going back to that OS X box



The only thing that really looks like that is Time Machine... The box doesn't match it's contents. IMHO.

And I wish it did.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 02:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
They at least let you revert to the OLD Windows look though...

Something OS X should have been able to do IMHO. They had plans for doing it anyhow. Then scrapped it.
Have you at least looked at what happened to "Classic" in Window Vista? Because it's become a monstrosity. The 12-year-old theme just isn't capable of showing off the new window layouts properly and it doesn't match the new icon and toolbar button style at all. Makes sense because it was designed for the OS and features of it's time. Microsoft kept it there for the sake of people that can't handle changes even though it looks awful.

Apple didn't want that to happen on their OS and that's why they got rid of their old look. You can't maintain an old theme like Platinum indefinitely on a platform that's rapidly changing. Microsoft clearly demonstrated that with Windows Vista.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I hate the fact that Windows has more choices that way though. You can set your font (Not that I dislike Lucinda Grande... I don't)
and change little things here and there. With OS X you basically get "Aqua and Graphite" People like to make their computer THEIRS. To mark their ground so to speak.
My Mac, using default Aqua, feels more personal than my Windows XP-based PC ever did.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
BTW going back to that OS X box



The only thing that really looks like that is Time Machine... The box doesn't match it's contents. IMHO.

And I wish it did.
Maybe it's time for you to lower your standards a bit. You'll probably live longer. Plus the two most important features the new desktop and Time Machine have a space theme. There's only so much to can stick on a box.
( Last edited by .Neo; Oct 21, 2007 at 03:00 PM. )
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 03:15 PM
 
Hey, is the Terminal icon still that updated version with the newer Cinema Displays, or is it back to that old original pinstripe version? I remember seeing an updated version, but Apple's 300+ feature has the old Terminal icon still. Boo. I miss the old System Preferences icon, too.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 03:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by MindFad View Post
Hey, is the Terminal icon still that updated version with the newer Cinema Displays, or is it back to that old original pinstripe version? I remember seeing an updated version, but Apple's 300+ feature has the old Terminal icon still. Boo. I miss the old System Preferences icon, too.
It's been updated with more or less the same frame as the new System Preferences icon.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 04:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
Have you at least looked at what happened to "Classic" in Window Vista? Because it's become a monstrosity. The 12-year-old theme just isn't capable of showing off the new window layouts properly and it doesn't match the new icon and toolbar button style at all. Makes sense because it was designed for the OS and features of it's time. Microsoft kept it there for the sake of people that can't handle changes even though it looks awful.
Hmm I didn't seem to notice any differences when I used it. But then again I never used it for that long.
Apple didn't want that to happen on their OS and that's why they got rid of their old look. You can't maintain an old theme like Platinum indefinitely on a platform that's rapidly changing. Microsoft clearly demonstrated that with Windows Vista.
Actually I was told that Steve axed it when he decided Aqua should be the main GUI. This was from an Apple employee. This was shortly after DP3 I believe.
My Mac, using default Aqua, feels more personal than my Windows XP-based PC ever did.
Ok, but I am not sure that is what I am talking about. People like to personalize their OS. To make it THEM. That is why so many screenshot/wallpaper/icon/GUI sites are out there. You can still have ONE GUI and it be consistent and still have things you can modify to make it "you"
Maybe it's time for you to lower your standards a bit. You'll probably live longer.
I don't see how lowering my standards has anything to do with living longer. I assure you it's not bothering me to the point that it would effect my life in any way. But that doesn't mean I can't expect better does it?
Plus the two most important features the new desktop and Time Machine have a space theme. There's only so much to can stick on a box.
New desktop has an outerspace theme, and Time Machine wont be used by MOST Mac users. Why? Most don't have external drives of the like the use it with. At least at home.

     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 04:03 PM
 
Ever notice there wasn't much talk about dashboard in 10.5?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 04:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Actually I was told that Steve axed it when he decided Aqua should be the main GUI. This was from an Apple employee.
Was it the same Apple employee who told Kosmo that 4K78 wasn't going to be OS X GM and they had this secret, debug-code-free superbuild waiting in the wings? I'm kind of skeptical of Apple employees.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 04:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Actually I was told that Steve axed it when he decided Aqua should be the main GUI. This was from an Apple employee. This was shortly after DP3 I believe.
Different story. Apple wanted to use it as the default GUI, not as a second one next to Aqua.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
New desktop has an outerspace theme, and Time Machine wont be used by MOST Mac users. Why? Most don't have external drives of the like the use it with. At least at home.

In that case they can use a different partition of their internal drive.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 04:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Was it the same Apple employee who told Kosmo that 4K78 wasn't going to be OS X GM and they had this secret, debug-code-free superbuild waiting in the wings? I'm kind of skeptical of Apple employees.
Nope, this one used to send pics of her in a transparent shower curtain to my gf.
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
Different story. Apple wanted to use it as the default GUI, not as a second one next to Aqua.
I was just saying why no "classic" theme came to be. It was an option in DP3.
In that case they can use a different partition of their internal drive.
Where are they gonna back up their stuff to to partition the drive?
Not that the average person partitions their drive.

Anyhow, this is getting off topic.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 04:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Nope, this one used to send pics of her in a transparent shower curtain to my gf.
I was just saying why no "classic" theme came to be. It was an option in DP3.
Very likely because it was still a beta and Aqua was still under heavy development. I doubt they ever intended to keep the two of them that way.

Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Where are they gonna back up their stuff to to partition the drive?
Not that the average person partitions their drive.
Let's just see how things turn out once Leopard is released. And btw, I know a lot of people who partitioned their drive for backing up purposes. Many of them are just average users.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 07:42 PM
 
Are these people aware that their backup is of no use in case of a disk failure?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 07:43 PM
 
It is useful in the case of accidental file deletion, though, so it makes some sense if they can't get an external drive.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
Are these people aware that their backup is of no use in case of a disk failure?
Same thing applies when my external HD would fail. Chances are the same.

And like adamfishercox said it's still very useful to prevent the aftermath of accidental file deletion, which is basically the soul purpose of Time Machine. Not so much the storing of files on an external HD so you don't have to keep them on your internal HD anymore.

In any case I wouldn't keep my most important files like family photos etc. on a HD only. Best is to backup stuff like that on CDs and/or DVDs.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
Same thing applies when my external HD would fail. Chances are the same.
Not really. If you have a partitioned drive, and it fails, then both your backup and originals are gone. If you have a internal and an external backup, if one goes, the other one is still there.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by adamfishercox View Post
Not really. If you have a partitioned drive, and it fails, then both your backup and originals are gone. If you have a internal and an external backup, if one goes, the other one is still there.
In that case of course. But what I meant was an external HD is just as likely to fail as an internal one. So using it as some sort of storage disk will leave you just as vulnerable.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:28 PM
 
Yes, but using it as a backup disk by having all your data copied so it exists on both drives, means you won't lose your data unless both drives manage fail at the same time somehow (like if a tornado hits your house or something).

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:28 PM
 
If you use it as some kind of storage, then that's not a backup.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 21, 2007, 08:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
If you use it as some kind of storage, then that's not a backup.
haha got me there.
     
Kevin  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 22, 2007, 02:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by .Neo View Post
Very likely because it was still a beta and Aqua was still under heavy development. I doubt they ever intended to keep the two of them that way.
Well the developers were wanting to (Most hated Aqua, believe me, there was a reason I was getting dev builds right and left to update my sosumi theme for OS X at the time) Steve just didn't want to do it in that way. He wanted to KILL any remnants of OS 9 he could. Then Adobe started throwing fits and they came up with the classic layer.
Let's just see how things turn out once Leopard is released. And btw, I know a lot of people who partitioned their drive for backing up purposes. Many of them are just average users.
I really wouldn't call anyone that posts here "average users" and from the screenshots I have seen..

Either way my copy of 10.5 GUI will be fixed accordingly. If anyone else's doesn't, That is on them. I know swiz plans on tackling it too. And probably Max as well.

Three old school themers that have pretty much not themed in awhile, having a reason to now.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Amsterdam, NL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 22, 2007, 07:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I really wouldn't call anyone that posts here "average users" and from the screenshots I have seen...
Nothing in my post indicated I was talking about the people here. I was referring to people I really know, you know, outside of this forum.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:42 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2