[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

some more information about Time Machine, how it works, what its limitations are (there seems to be very little info provided in the sites I frequent)

It stands to reason that anybody who's actively testing Time Machine cannot talk about it, and that most people who are running pirated deveoper builds and who'd be willing to talk about it aren't *quite* stupid enough to actively use a data backup feature that is still in beta.

Data backup and restoring is something that just *has* to work properly before I'd ever consider touching it, at least.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by .Neo 

Beyond the obvious visual differences and addition of new view options not much has changed in the inner workings of the Finder. From what I know it's still partially Carbon/Cacoa.

If that's true I will be thoroughly disappointed. The WWDC Finder build seemed much better all round in the responsiveness/performance department.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by analogika 

It stands to reason that anybody who's actively testing Time Machine cannot talk about it, and that most people who are running pirated deveoper builds and who'd be willing to talk about it aren't *quite* stupid enough to actively use a data backup feature that is still in beta.

Data backup and restoring is something that just *has* to work properly before I'd ever consider touching it, at least.

The screenshots that these sites post show what looks to be virgin installs of the OS on computers I'm assuming are not their primary workstations. Why can't they test backups with some unimportant dummy data?

[analogika]

What info are you looking for that isn't in the demos online and in the screenshots so far?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by analogika 

What info are you looking for that isn't in the demos online and in the screenshots so far?

1) Whether you can point Time Machine at a non OS X Server machine, and how it would connect to this machine, what service protocols are supported, and whether it will automatically mount these volumes when needed without disrupting workflow.

2) Whether TM does file revision control, and how often its database is updated, whether this revision control works with binary files or images without having to keep entire older copies of the file. From this we can ascertain the disk usage required for these backups

3) What kind of controls there are for TM in deciding how far back to keep data for for particular files, if possible at all

4) Whether switching to and from an application with a file stored on a network volume via AFP or SSHfs spinning beachballs

5) Whether the network going away or hiccuping causes spinning beachballs in the Finder when connected to a network volume

6) ZFS - there is no information about this in the demos at all, obviously. There is a developer preview out now with R&W ZFS support, so hopefully some info will come trickling in

7) Anything about using iCal with iCal Server


I'm sure I can think of more questions...

[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

1) Whether you can point Time Machine at a non OS X Server machine, and how it would connect to this machine, what service protocols are supported, and whether it will automatically mount these volumes when needed without disrupting workflow.

remote volume backup is indeed an interesting question, but since TM is from all we've seen, NOT a solution for timed back-ups, but rather complete, continuous, and seamless backups, I somehow doubt this.

OTOH, Apple has an Airport Extreme-based network storage solution, so hm.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

2) Whether TM does file revision control, and how often its database is updated, whether this revision control works with binary files or images without having to keep entire older copies of the file. From this we can ascertain the disk usage required for these backups

Again, it LOOKS like a full backup, with the database updated continuously as writes are made - or probably queued until the backup drive is mounted again.

But again, I'm quite certain that the people who'd actually KNOW about the technical details of what goes on in the background are NOT at liberty to discuss any of this at the moment.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

3) What kind of controls there are for TM in deciding how far back to keep data for for particular files, if possible at all

I think we've seen all there is to see at this point in those screenshot posts you find so boring over on the various rumor sites.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

4) Whether switching to and from an application with a file stored on a network volume via AFP or SSHfs spinning beachballs

5) Whether the network going away or hiccuping causes spinning beachballs in the Finder when connected to a network volume

6) ZFS - there is no information about this in the demos at all, obviously. There is a developer preview out now with R&W ZFS support, so hopefully some info will come trickling in

7) Anything about using iCal with iCal Server


I'm sure I can think of more questions...

None of that has to do with Time Machine.

And the question about the network-related Finder beachballs was already answered months ago.

Edit: see also here - Leopard and beachballs - Topic Powered by eve community

Fixed. No more beachball. You can mount an SMB, FTP, and AFP share, pull the ethernet cable and still navigate the finder without missing a beat.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by wobbly 

Can't you customize all the colors and look in the preferences?

Um, no?

[vertigociel]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

2) Whether TM does file revision control, and how often its database is updated, whether this revision control works with binary files or images without having to keep entire older copies of the file. From this we can ascertain the disk usage required for these backups.

3) What kind of controls there are for TM in deciding how far back to keep data for for particular files, if possible at all

I'm pretty sure it doesn't do file revision, but I don't know for certain. However, you can set (to a limited extent) a more frequent time window for backups in a certain range. After a backup is out of this time range, it will consolidate it. For example, you can have it backup every hour, and for backups older than 24 hours, it will consolidate it into a single backup per day. You can also set the maximum age for a backup before its deleted (anywhere from a month to a year, IIRC). As far as I could tell, there's no way to set per-file time windows.

[- - e r i k - -]

Time machine does indeed do file revisions.

[- - e r i k - -]

Time machine keeps:
• Hourly backups for the past 24 hours
• Daily backups for the past month
• Weekly backups until your backup disk is full

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by analogika 

remote volume backup is indeed an interesting question, but since TM is from all we've seen, NOT a solution for timed back-ups, but rather complete, continuous, and seamless backups, I somehow doubt this.

OTOH, Apple has an Airport Extreme-based network storage solution, so hm.

You can also backup to an OS X Server machine.

But again, I'm quite certain that the people who'd actually KNOW about the technical details of what goes on in the background are NOT at liberty to discuss any of this at the moment.

I understand, but this is the kind of thing that somebody who is happy to leak information (MacRumors, ThinkSecret, AppleInsider, etc.) could find out fairly easily just by putting it through its paces. It sucks that the only information getting out there courtesy of them is new icons and screensavers.

And the question about the network-related Finder beachballs was already answered months ago.

Edit: see also here - Leopard and beachballs - Topic Powered by eve community

That is my impression too, although somebody here said that there have been no Finder changes beyond interface tweaks... I hope that is wrong.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by vertigociel 

I'm pretty sure it doesn't do file revision, but I don't know for certain. However, you can set (to a limited extent) a more frequent time window for backups in a certain range. After a backup is out of this time range, it will consolidate it. For example, you can have it backup every hour, and for backups older than 24 hours, it will consolidate it into a single backup per day. You can also set the maximum age for a backup before its deleted (anywhere from a month to a year, IIRC). As far as I could tell, there's no way to set per-file time windows.

So, with regards to backup ranges, do you mean something like anacron?

[- - e r i k - -]

Yeah. I haven't had Finder beachball me since the WWDC build

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Time machine keeps:
• Hourly backups for the past 24 hours
• Daily backups for the past month
• Weekly backups until your backup disk is full

Hourly backups? Is that in addition to file revisions, or is this what you meant? If so, I would imagine that the revisions are stored locally, and synced with the server at scheduled intervals? That was sort of how I theorized it would work when we first heard about TM.

Can you set TM to only use a certain amount or percentage of your disk?

[shaun3000]

Other than the license, is there anything preventing me from installing 10.5 on more than one computer? I don't want to buy multiple copies if I don't have to!

[0157988944]

*cough*no*

The license should be enough. Apple trusts that you will follow it's rules. If you don't and many others don't, they may have to institute OS registering and insanely long codes to type in like Microsoft. Which would suck. So buy a family pack for $199. it gives you 5 licenses.

[0157988944]

HEY HEY HEY...

Is Leopard Finalized?

Mac Rumors: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 'Finalized'?

[analogika]

Originally Posted by adamfishercox 

HEY HEY HEY...

Is Leopard Finalized?

Mac Rumors: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 'Finalized'?

Update: no.

[0157988944]

It can still be "finalized" just not... "GM"

Soon, though... Soon...

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by shaun3000 

Other than the license, is there anything preventing me from installing 10.5 on more than one computer? I don't want to buy multiple copies if I don't have to!

As Adam said, the license should be enough. We're lucky enough to have an OS that doesn't have any kind of ridiculous registration scheme employing draconian surveillance methods.

Simply put, yes, you have to buy multiple copies. (but as mentioned above, a Family pack is a great value. Even better if you're a student.)

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by .Neo 

Aqua = The entire Mac OS X user experience.

Then you are agreeing with me..

BINGO! And that's the reason why Mac OS X doesn't feature a completely open theme engine: It won't ever be as consistent as it is when developing application interfaces for only one UI design.

I wouldn't say that was the only reason. Esp when Apple itself has never commented on why.

That doesn't change the fact that the issue is or was iPhoto related. Not Mac OS X, something you claimed in the first place.

No I claimed the issue was consistency with the whole OS. Remember, Aqua isn't just the OS's GUI. Aqua = The entire OS experience. If they code Aqua to work poorly in one application that entire OS experience is diminished.

So it turns out that even Mac OS 9 had it's "alien" application UIs.

Or that Apple was giving it's users a glimpse into the next OSs GUI. We saw DP3 but we never got to see the shiny goodness on our own desktop. And I think iTunes was testing grounds for Aqua GUIs over the years. If you look the the transitions.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

You aren't at all alone in your thinking, but my theory is that there are a lot of graphic designers here that enjoy analyzing Apple's designs. I don't quite understand why some get worked up about this stuff to the extent they do, but to each their own...

Again besson it's not just graphic designers. Repeat that over and over again like a mantra.
I don't think ghreporter is a graphics designer.
The GUI forum is filled with non-graphics designers. Go tell them that.
Not that any of this matters. I read through posts of people going on and on about the terminal and how they want a more "powerful" one. I rarely use it, and don't really care that much about it. But I also don't complain and whine when people that do, and that are interested talk about it.

Everyone is different. It's what makes the world go round. This thread is about OS X, not just the parts you are interested in.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Also, you'll notice that a lot of these rumors sites that have posted stories about builds of Leopard have catered to this crowd in displaying new icons and stuff that to me couldn't be any more boring.

Well then don't read them. Mac user as a whole are interested in these things. It's probably why the MacOS is different, and does have a over all more usable and polished GUI than Windows or any Linux distro. Because Mac users as a whole, care about these things.

I was just on the Undernet's #Macintosh channel which is FULL of developers, and very little graphics people. What were they talking about? The GUI. And how Aqua was getting long on a the tooth..

Imagine that.

[Kevin]

Anyone getting back to my point about theme changing the gui at the last minute.

Anyhow, as I have shown Apple has been modifying the GUI in about every build. Even these last builds this month. What we see now certainly wont be what we see when it comes out. These changes can be minor, or they can be major.

9A527 features a new installer graphic, new space-themed Welcome movie, new space-themed desktop, and for the first time Mail now lists the new features of version 3.0, not the previous 2.0 Tiger placeholder," Think Secret reports.

"The Mac OS X interface also continues to show signs of refinement since the major changes introduced in build 9A466. In partciular, toolbar elements are more defined while the gem-like window controls are bolder and more saturated in appearance," Think Secret reports. "Virtually every application in build 9A527 also sports a new high-resolution icon."


And from what I just heard from others that just got a newer build, even more GUI changes have been made. *GASP* and we have what, less than two weeks away? I was told in this thread Apple didn't do this.



Wow .. I am not into DARK themes.. but wow. I'd love for OS X to have a scroll-bar like



Can't say I like the dock. Or the BLACKness of it all. (RACIST!11)

[Simon]

never mind

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Anyone getting back to my point about theme changing the gui at the last minute.

Anyhow, as I have shown Apple has been modifying the GUI in about every build. Even these last builds this month. What we see now certainly wont be what we see when it comes out. These changes can be minor, or they can be major.

[INDENT]9A527

you don't actually bother reading replies to your posts, I see.

The last changes to the GUI were made in 9A527, IN AUGUST.

I'm out. Get stuffed.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Time machine does indeed do file revisions.

No, it doesn't.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by analogika 

you don't actually bother reading replies to your posts, I see.

No, I don't reply to troll posts.

The last changes to the GUI were made in 9A527, IN AUGUST.

Prove it. Prove that their has been no gui modifications made since August. Wait, don't bother

9A559

Think Secret - Gallery: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 9A559

"Of note, Front Row has seen a substantial face-lift with 9A559 and along with getting its own icon in the Applications folder, like Dashboard, Expose, and Spaces, the interface now resembles that of AppleTV."

"Other smaller changes include the addition of a couple new space-themed desktop pictures, although the tiger stripes and leopard print pictures from Mac OS X 10.4 have been removed. System Preferences sees some new icons, and Dictionary and Directory gain high-resolution icons in the Finder, the last two components to gain the improvement."

Each build has GUI changes to them. And will till it hits the FC stage. Having said that, I am not saying that Apple is still making DECISIONS on these things. They just may be adding stuff they decided on long ago. That wasn't needed for "developer" purposes.

So as far as my claim that Apple changes things up until the last minute. True.

As far as my claim that Apple will unleash a different GUI than what we see now? Wont know till it comes out.

But if no new GUI shows, I will admit I was wrong.

BTW analog, we can discuss things as adults without the "GET STUFFED" comments.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by analogika 

The last changes to the GUI were made in 9A527, IN AUGUST.

I'm out. Get stuffed.

Not according to thinksecret. The latest seed had UI changes:

http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0706...59gallery.html

[Kevin]

I noticed the old aqua folders matched Aqua, and it's scroll bars in that the both had that pattern inside of them that screamed "AQUA"

The new folders, simply scream "iTunes new toolbar"



What parts of the GUI look out of place here?



Aqua simply looks out of place.

And if Apple DOES keep it looking this way. *shakes head* they need to hire new GUI designers.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Not according to thinksecret. The latest seed had UI changes:

Think Secret - Gallery: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 9A559

And so will every seed after until the FC stages hit I bet.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Not according to thinksecret. The latest seed had UI changes:

Think Secret - Gallery: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 9A559

No.

I actually quoted that exact article above, as you could have noted, and in fact, it says:

A new design graces the window of the installation disc and new music plays during the intro movie, but most changes are generally not noticeable.

Applications have been updated - there's a new Front Row, and the Installer got a makeover, but there are NO GUI CHANGES to Aqua since 9A527 in late August.

There never are this close to release.

I wish you'd read previous discussion before piping up.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by analogika 

there are NO GUI CHANGES to Aqua

Oh look, there's a new qualifier ("to Aqua") that was not there before. System components are completely revamped, icons and menus are changed, completely new panels appear in system applications. But I guess whatever changes in the GUI you will just define that this just wasn't part of "to Aqua". Nice cop-out.

Fact is that neither you nor Kevin know whether the next seed will include GUI changes or not. You know diddly-squat . The closer to release the less will change, but nobody here knows when that is going to be.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by analogika 

No.

I actually quoted that exact article above, as you could have noted, and in fact, it says:

That doesn't mean changes weren't made. There was.

I wish you'd read previous discussion before piping up.

Who said he hasn't? And you made no revelations in the previous discussion.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Fact is that neither you nor Kevin know whether the next seed will include GUI changes or not. You know diddly-squat . The closer to release the less will change, but nobody here knows when that is going to be.

And I agree to this. And *I* am admitting me believing there will be a GUI change is purely a belief. I am not saying it WILL happen.

But the fact that someone is claiming Apple doesn't change GUI elements up until the FC stages is ridiculous.

I had my head in "aqua" for almost 2 years straight in every build. There was so many changes it's not even funny. There are files still now in the Extras.rsrc that Apple no longer uses. And haven't used since before the Public Betas.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Oh look, there's a new qualifier ("to Aqua") that was not there before. System components are completely revamped, icons and menus are changed, completely new panels appear in system applications. But I guess whatever changes in the GUI you will just define that this just wasn't part of "to Aqua". Nice cop-out.

Not at all.

This whole discussion was about Aqua. Front Row is not part of the operating system; it's developed by a different team. And are you trying to tell me that a new splash screen and music for the Setup Assistant constitutes a change to the system interface?

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Fact is that neither you nor Kevin know whether the next seed will include GUI changes or not. You know diddly-squat . The closer to release the less will change, but nobody here knows when that is going to be.

That is correct.

[ghporter]

Let me just point out a couple of things. First, even though it seems that Apple does pay some attention to what we say in our forums, I seriously doubt that their designers give a rat's skinny tail about our opinions with regard to whether or not they're changing anything about any part of the GUI. In that case, what's the point of bickering about whether or not they actually are or aren't going to make any change, specific or global? If you want to place bets, hit one of the Vegas gambling sites; I'll bet there is at least a small number of groups taking bets on things like when Leopard will be released and what changes will be included in it. Otherwise, it's just bickering.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by analogika 

And are you trying to tell me that a new splash screen and music for the Setup Assistant constitutes a change to the system interface?

As Neo said, and I agreed to. (And that isn't what was all changed either)

Originally Posted by .Neo
Aqua = The entire Mac OS X user experience.

Anything that effects the users GUI experience matters. If two GUIs are inconsistent it matters.

10.5 is supposed to be a polishing of Steve's GUI ideas. As a Mac user I may expect more than just average work. I wont deny that. But it was things like consistency that made the Mac worth more than the other guy's OS. It's something lacking in other OSs.

If Apple loses it, it has no edge over the other OSs.

As anyone that hopes that OS X flourishes, should hope Apple keeps up with consistency. Regardless of grudges or "being right"

I think Apple should give more OPTIONS to the users.

Obviously looking here different users want different things. Some still like Aqua, I want it gone.

Maybe Apple needs to give a choice?

All I know is, until Apple gets it "right" to me, I will me hacking things until they are usable.

So if anyone likes my idea of what 10.5 should be, and it doesn't end up that way. Get ahold of me. I'll be hacking it to look that way anyhow.

But I STILL would apologize for being wrong. I just hope I am not.

And not for selfish, chip on my shoulders reasons.

All I have are :

1. The changes I have seen Apple make recently with the iApps.
2. The complete removal of Aqua from Apple's website
3. The fact Aqua elements look out of place with the rest of the 10.5 theme.

That is all. Again, this is just a guess. But I think it's a good one. And for those that are "Sick of all the GUI talk.. It's part of 10.5 too. A huge part. And Apple are known for it's wonderful GUIs. But I apologize anyhow for making you read my post.
I know I don't like talk about things in here that I am not interested in. But I read them anyhow. Because I always LEARN something.

[ghporter]

I wouldn't equate a minor inconsistency in GUI implementation to the entire reason OS X is a superior OS to others that are available. Yes, the GUI experience IS the user experience, but I don't see a problem with a transition between one variation of a GUI for mainstream usage and another variation for something like TextEdit or (more appropriately) some admin application.

With all that said, I'd prefer these variations to be VERY minor. Something akin to different slider embellishments, minor differences in menu fonts or text sizes, etc., would be acceptable, while having some apps show up with one menu structure and others with a very different one would not be acceptable. Mac OS's consistency makes it easy for new users to pick up operations and techniques quickly; big variations would indeed have a negative impact on that.

[- - e r i k - -]

I sympathise with Kevin here, even though he is largely hyperbolic, overly optimistic and twisting his argument (as per usual). Inconsistencies in the GUI is something we've had to live with for a long while and we'll all like to see Apple fix things. For me, the scrollbars are usable, as I am in graphite. They do look horribly out of place with Aqua though.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

I wouldn't equate a minor inconsistency in GUI implementation to the entire reason OS X is a superior OS to others that are available.

Not one minor one no. But a bunch of them? Sure. Then it would be no better than Windows in that way.

Yes, the GUI experience IS the user experience, but I don't see a problem with a transition between one variation of a GUI for mainstream usage and another variation for something like TextEdit or (more appropriately) some admin application.

I don't mind variation either. For example the black transparent "inspect" window in Safari has a different GUI altogether. But it CONSISTENTLY fits with the rest of the GUI. Well at least 10.5 It doesn't fit very well with Aqua.. When I say consistency I am not just meaning Look the exact same. But for it to all consistently "Fit" together as far as the GUI looks like. You yourself admitted the newer scrollbars LOOKED and fit better than the older ones did in 10.5s new GUI. The Aqua elements simply look out of place. Inconsistent with the rest of the OS.

having some apps show up with one menu structure and others with a very different one would not be acceptable.

Agreed. And that is still happening too. But they seem to be fixing it.

Mac OS's consistency makes it easy for new users to pick up operations and techniques quickly; big variations would indeed have a negative impact on that.

Indeed.

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

I sympathise with Kevin here,

No sympathy needed.

even though he is largely hyperbolic, overly optimistic and twisting his argument (as per usual).

The first I am not so sure about, the second I am definitely, and the third definitely not.

Inconsistencies in the GUI is something we've had to live with for a long while and we'll all like to see Apple fix things.

Well tell that to the people that claim only graphics designers care about such things.

For me, the scrollbars are usable, as I am in graphite. They do look horribly out of place with Aqua though.

The Aqua scrollbars look ok in Aqua IMHO. They stick out in Unified (what Apple is calling it's new theme)

[Kevin]

Found this to be interesting too. (Old article I know)

RUMOR: Aqua to be replaced with Illuminous

Apple Gazette has received a tip from an apple insider that the Mac OS Aqua User Interface will be replaced with a new UI named Illuminous.

The source goes on to say that we will see a demonstration of Illuminous at Macworld 2007.

The gensis for this rumor started earlier this year when Apple posted a position on Monster.com seeking a senior visual interface designer “to conceive, design and develop future enhancements to Aqua, the dynamic user interface for Mac OS X”.

This is the first time a name for the supposed Aqua replacement has been given.

What will Illuminous look like?

That’s anybody’s guess at this point, but we might be seeing some hints of what Illuminous holds in the recent release of iTunes.

We will keep you posted as more information becomes available.

UPDATE: Interesting bit from MacShrine. They state that a new build of Leopard was seeded to employees on Friday. What’s interesting, as it relates to this rumor, is the following bit of text:

“Apple continues to gloss over the interface, refining it even more and there is an overly presence of black gloss.”

So we know that Apple planned to replace Aqua. If not 10.5, soon.

[Kevin]

Doing some research, it seems I am not the only one...

Aqua is dead, long live Aqua! - The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)

"Apple seems to use iTunes as a test-bed for new user interface design styles, and iTunes 7 brings with it an almost complete overhaul the Aqua look we have all grown to love/hate/tolerate. While on the surface, the iTunes 7 interface may seem very similar to that of previous versions, there are a few very distinct differences that I think forebode greater system wide changes to come in 10.5 Leopard."

"Since the initial version 10.0, OS X has gone through a variety of system-wide interface changes while still keeping some very important aspects of the original Aqua UI. First we lost the pinstripes, then we got brushed metal, and most recently, we see the move with most applications to a "unified" interface. With iTunes 7, Aqua is gone for good. Glossy radio buttons, scroll bars, control buttons and track information windows are all gone; replaced by sleek utilitarian sand-blasted metal. I think this is the first significant peek we've had into the rumored complete redesign of the OS X UI for Leopard. "

He goes onto agree with me too

"I, for one, welcome this change. While the glossy days of old were an exciting way to draw new users–indeed, it was part of way I switched– it quickly became an eyesore for many; designers in particular. The introduction of the Graphite visual style fixed a lot of issues graphics professionals had with the bright colors of the interface clashing with their work, but everything was still not dandy. For pro and power users their Mac is not only a computer, it is the tool of their trade, and something they use day in and day out to get things done, and while no one wants to work in a badly designed, ugly UI, minimalist utilitarianism is sometimes the key to reducing distraction.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

So we know that Apple planned to replace Aqua. If not 10.5, soon.

Not at all...it was a bullshit rumor that snowballed out of control and people lost their effin' minds over it.

There is zero proof Apple wanted to replace Aqua.

It's a hundred times more believable that Apple was trying to get someone to lead the Aqua refresh so that it becomes resolution independent.

edit: your second post is closer to the mark I think. Apple is probably looking to replace the glossy, candy-like elements of Aqua for a more refined and professional look. One that we see in iTunes as well as on the iPhone and iPod touch. And I suppose once all the candy is gone, it would be stupid to call it Aqua. At which point I would agree with you and the rumor that Apple was looking to replace Aqua.

Still though...how hard can it be to replace the Aqua elements? Why weren't these changes done at the early stages of Leopard. Why the remaining few Aqua elements in the latest build of Leopard? Someone's sleeping at the switch in Cupertino because I can't imagine that a team of 3 people wouldn't be able to handle the graphics art for Leopard's UI elements.

I'm seriously hoping that the last couple weeks since 9A559 were dedicated to squashing the remaining bugs *AND* finishing up the UI elements. Bugs are important but I feel like changing graphics elements in a point update would look much more stupid than fixing bugs. So, in my opinion of course, I think the UI elements have to be top priority (higher priority than fixing minor bugs) since whatever ships in 10.5 will define the look-n-feel of 10.5 thereafter.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!! 

edit: your second post is closer to the mark I think. Apple is probably looking to replace the glossy, candy-like elements of Aqua for a more refined and professional look.

Agreed.

One that we see in iTunes as well as on the iPhone and iPod touch. And I suppose once all the candy is gone, it would be stupid to call it Aqua. At which point I would agree with you and the rumor that Apple was looking to replace Aqua.

Agreed.

Still though...how hard can it be to replace the Aqua elements? Why weren't these changes done at the early stages of Leopard. Why the remaining few Aqua elements in the latest build of Leopard? Someone's sleeping at the switch in Cupertino because I can't imagine that a team of 3 people wouldn't be able to handle the graphics art for Leopard's UI elements.

It would be easy to change. Like I've told others before. It would take no-time. The reason I gave is, they don't want the past "Aqua effect" to happen. The internet and themes of other things than what Apple designed got FLOODED of Aqua GUI elements before the OS even came out. Aqua was dated by the time 10.0.0 hit the market. And since Apple IS KNOWN to hide things to the last minute...

I know YOU remember all teh crap pin-striped horribly done Aquafied webpages that hit the internet as soon as Apple released pictures of what Aqua looked like.

I doubt they want it to happen again.

[Big Mac]

If that's true, Kevin, they why blow most of the surprise by showing off the unified theme every place else? Why not keep it bottled up until release?

[Art Vandelay]

Those of you expecting the last Aqua elements to be completely replaced by the GM are going to be really disappointed. Also, you guys must not be running 9a559 or you wouldn't still be expecting it. If you were using 9a559, you'd have noticed by now that they have updated the look of the Aqua progress bars. Now why would they bother tweaking Aqua elements so late in the development cycle if they're going to replace them entirely with something new?

[OreoCookie]

Apple won't include any major changes, in the last builds, the only things Apple does is polishing and squashing bugs. New folder icons (polishing) or a new intro movie (by the marketing department) don't constitute new features.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

If that's true, Kevin, they why blow most of the surprise by showing off the unified theme every place else? Why not keep it bottled up until release?

I don't think showing off just the unified look, and maybe the scrollbars they might use is letting the whole cat out of the bag.

That's just the paw sticking out.

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

Those of you expecting the last Aqua elements to be completely replaced by the GM are going to be really disappointed.

What do you know that we do not?

Also, you guys must not be running 9a559 or you wouldn't still be expecting it.

This still proves nothing. Even if all of us were running it. (Anyone here could if they really wanted to.. it's not that hard to get)

If you were using 9a559, you'd have noticed by now that they have updated the look of the Aqua progress bars. Now why would they bother tweaking Aqua elements so late in the development cycle if they're going to replace them entirely with something new?

Testing for bugs without... get this, showing off the package.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Apple won't include any major changes, in the last builds, the only things Apple does is polishing and squashing bugs. New folder icons (polishing) or a new intro movie (by the marketing department) don't constitute new features.

Nope no major changes. I don't think replacing graphic files is a major change either. It's the same as new folder icons.

I don't think anyone that has made a comment about 10.5s GUI said anything about any MAJOR changes.

I don't believe it's what they are showing now. And I've given my reasons.

Why would Apple abandon the whole Aqua look from all the web pages? I can't find a single Aqua GUI element on any of their pages.

And the only ones that the new iTunes uses are the ones it gets from 10.4's own Extras.rsrc.

[Kevin]

Here is another thread on another forum on the matter.

Is Apple`s Aqua dead? - Aqua-Soft Forums

Nice to see no real flames went on.

And..

Digg - Gallery: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard 9A559- Think Secret

"The aqua scroll bar doesn't fit in at all with the rest of the Leopard theme. I thought they would have changed it by now."

"Aqua radio buttons, Aqua check boxes, Aqua buttons, Aqua sliders and Aqua scroll bars. WTF Apple? They just have to be talking the piss here."

Another thread..

Leopard 9A527 - Page 10 - AppleNova Forums

Like I said... people see what is going on. Apple is pulling another "You can't open the present till Christmas" game. IMHO

EIther that, or they are putting out a Frankenstein of a OS that certainly can't be called Unified.

[- - e r i k - -]

Nope. They have completely recreated all the aqua elements for RI and refined some of them too. They wouldn't go on developing Aqua if they were going to throw it away at the last minute (seeing as they have the iLife resources already ready to go ).