|
|
SmoothStripes Surprise
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
I am a HUGE fan of SmoothStripes...but to my surprise, when I reverted to Aqua before applying 10.2.5, I found the interface pleasing. The dreaded stripes were there, but they seem muted to me now...and they are nice for the eye to follow in drop down menus.
This is a complete reversal from my old stance on Aqua.
Even weirder--things seem (ahem) SNAPPIER. This is before the update.
Am I crazy? I feel crazy...I have always been convinced that Aqua was flawed, but I made that assumption a long time ago, and now it suddenly looks fresh.
I thought I would mention this because it is striking, and so that folks who theme CONSTANTLY should, once in a while, check out the default to see how the other half lives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montpellier
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by mrmister:
I am a HUGE fan of SmoothStripes...but to my surprise, when I reverted to Aqua before applying 10.2.5, I found the interface pleasing. The dreaded stripes were there, but they seem muted to me now...and they are nice for the eye to follow in drop down menus.
This is a complete reversal from my old stance on Aqua.
Even weirder--things seem (ahem) SNAPPIER. This is before the update.
Am I crazy? I feel crazy...I have always been convinced that Aqua was flawed, but I made that assumption a long time ago, and now it suddenly looks fresh.
I thought I would mention this because it is striking, and so that folks who theme CONSTANTLY should, once in a while, check out the default to see how the other half lives.
I jus got the same feelling!..reverted to aqua before updating to 10.2.5 and found the interface pretty nice.
But it lasted only 10 minutes.. I just switched back to smoothstripe...No problem by the way with 2.5...
|
Powerbook 1.67ghz 15" (100GB HD, 128MB VRAM, 1.5GB RAM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
I think I just figured out part of what it is--I just did the sam reversion for the iBook, in prep for the upgrade, and Aqua doesn't look as good. i think the stripes only become nice over 1024 x 768...up til then you can't draw as many, and they stand out more.
Just a theory. haven't decided if I'll keep this, or if I'll revert to SmoothStripes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2002
Location: U.S.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Every now and then I go back to good old Aqua for a few days. It's a nice change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status:
Offline
|
|
I can't even stand to use Aqua on Cheryl's computer. She seems to like the stripes, or doesn't care either way.
I might sneak SimpleAqua up and see if she notices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
when i switched from CRT to TFT i found out, that the stripes looked much more subtle...... not that disturbing as on CRT..... anyway, i switched to Smooth Stripes because i wanted to get rid of them completely.....
can�t imagine that there is any big speed-difference between stripes and no stripes.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Smoothstripes is nice, 10.2.5 feels nicer due to the new OpenGL code I think.
but aqua is alot nicer, smooth is so plain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by mrmister:
Am I crazy? I feel crazy...I have always been convinced that Aqua was flawed, but I made that assumption a long time ago, and now it suddenly looks fresh.
You're not crazy... I had the exact same experience recently. I'd been running Milk since it was originally released, and then I had a stint with Watercolor Red (which are both *excellent* themes, btw) but I had reverted to default Aqua to check a UI I was working on, and ended up falling in love with it all over again. Aqua rocks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status:
Offline
|
|
I use Aqua Extreme - it's the best of both worlds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montpellier
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
Powerbook 1.67ghz 15" (100GB HD, 128MB VRAM, 1.5GB RAM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Oh! I never saw that.
What is the difference between standard Aqua and Aqua Extreme?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by mrmister:
What is the difference between standard Aqua and Aqua Extreme?
I think the main difference (other than the obvious in the square corners variant) is that Max fixed the "Path" and "View" Finder widgets so they fit in properly with the Jaguar version of Aqua. Apple somehow forgot to update those two so by default they still have the pre-Jaguar Aqua look.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|