Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by hyperb0le:
and I don't understand the reasoning behind making the toolbar in System Preferences be part of the titlebar.

That's a bit of a trend just now in some areas. You can see that happening in Longhorn too. I quite like it, it also opens up the posiibilities to drag and extend the bar to accomodate the info you wish to show It also moves away from the old titlebar as thin bar paradigm..

hyperb0le · Jun 27, 2004, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by vertex:
That's a bit of a trend just now in some areas. You can see that happening in Longhorn too. I quite like it, it also opens up the posiibilities to drag and extend the bar to accomodate the info you wish to show It also moves away from the old titlebar as thin bar paradigm..

But what happens if an app doesn't have a toolbar? The titlebar gradient gets cut off half-way, and looks weird. Also, I don't know if anyone noticed, but the system preferences shots didn't have a show/hide toolbar pill in the titlebar, so the shots use a fake toolbar (like Safari)

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 02:52 PM

Originally posted by hyperb0le:
But what happens if an app doesn't have a toolbar? The titlebar gradient gets cut off half-way, and looks weird. Also, I don't know if anyone noticed, but the system preferences shots didn't have a show/hide toolbar pill in the titlebar, so the shots use a fake toolbar (like Safari)

Not really, the way it's coded is to allow for the scaling of tool/statusbars and the GUI updates to reflect the state you choose. In practise it works quite well, but going by those screenshots, I'm not sure exactly how, if at all, Apple will implement it.

Didn't this happen last year too whn various pics were shown in the web, and lots of us thought they were fake? I think the Apple legal thing is a bit of a clue though, they probably are real.

hyperb0le · Jun 27, 2004, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by vertex:
Not really, the way it's coded is to allow for the scaling of tool/statusbars and the GUI updates to reflect the state you choose. In practise it works quite well, but going by those screenshots, I'm not sure exactly how, if at all, Apple will implement it.

Didn't this happen last year too whn various pics were shown in the web, and lots of us thought they were fake? I think the Apple legal thing is a bit of a clue though, they probably are real.

However, if you code it to change the gradient, then you end up with even more inconsistency. Not only will we have Aqua, Brushed Metal, and ProKit, but there will be several different styles of aqua, each with their own gradient sizes.

And yes, several people thought last year's shots were fake. And the Apple Legal thing is not a definite giveaway. Apple Legal also asked AppleInsider to take down the "pictures" they had of the new G5 innards (this is before the latest revision), but the pictures turned out to be nothing like the new innards.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by hyperb0le:
However, if you code it to change the gradient, then you end up with even more inconsistency. Not only will we have Aqua, Brushed Metal, and ProKit, but there will be several different styles of aqua, each with their own gradient sizes.

True, but the gradient won't be present on the area of the current statusbar. It's a subtle effect in which the eye wil assume there is one because of the blend between the title bar and statusbar. Even with this new style,I'd assume that it would replace the current Aqua type, so still leaving an Aqua and brushed.

And yes, several people thought last year's shots were fake. And the Apple Legal thing is not a definite giveaway. Apple Legal also asked AppleInsider to take down the "pictures" they had of the new G5 innards (this is before the latest revision), but the pictures turned out to be nothing like the new innards.

Yes, but I think thos AI shots were actual pre-release versions that refered to the various build machines and not the release ones.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 03:51 PM

ThinkSecret are saying they have heard they are genuine, as well as the concepts laid out in the screenies.

I'm really more interested in the underlying stuff though, hope huge gains have been made there. There is one rumour I dearly hope isn't true, and that's the one saying a .Mac account wil be standard with 10.4, with the cost of 10.4 rising to near $200. As well as this, the integration of .Mac services throughout the OS. I really hope that's a joke, it's one thing to hear people joke about the Apple tax, but with something like this, a tax is what it wil be.

RooneyX · Jun 27, 2004, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by vertex:
ThinkSecret are saying they have heard they are genuine, as well as the concepts laid out in the screenies.

I'm really more interested in the underlying stuff though, hope huge gains have been made there. There is one rumour I dearly hope isn't true, and that's the one saying a .Mac account wil be standard with 10.4, with the cost of 10.4 rising to near $200. As well as this, the integration of .Mac services throughout the OS. I really hope that's a joke, it's one thing to hear people joke about the Apple tax, but with something like this, a tax is what it wil be.

If they tried to pull of a compulsory subscription service, which I doubt because Steve Jobs doesn't work like that, everyone should demand .Mac subscription come free with any machine they buy.

chezpaul · Jun 27, 2004, 04:25 PM

If real, Apple would have already asked to have them removed.

hyperb0le · Jun 27, 2004, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by chezpaul:
If real, Apple would have already asked to have them removed.

MacRumors (who posted the images first) have been forced to remove them already. Apple probably just hasn't gotten to ThinkSecret yet. That, or MacRumors is playing a prank, and pretended that Apple Legal contacted them. However, MR hasn't been known to do that.

RooneyX · Jun 27, 2004, 04:55 PM

Spymac claimed Apple asked them to remove the iWalk. Those websites will do anything to look legit and attract advertisers. They make a living out of bullturd.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by RooneyX:
If they tried to pull of a compulsory subscription service, which I doubt because Steve Jobs doesn't work like that, everyone should demand .Mac subscription come free with any machine they buy.

Yup, I'd say so too. Personally I wouldn't bank on something like a subscription service linked to OS X in that way happening.

Stradlater · Jun 27, 2004, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by hyperb0le:
MacRumors is now reporting that the images have been removed at the request of Apple Legal. That doesn't necessarily mean that they are legit, but it might be a clue. IMO, this is unfortunate, as the dashboard feature looks really inconsistent, and I don't understand the reasoning behind making the toolbar in System Preferences be part of the titlebar.

Agreed.

Chuckit · Jun 27, 2004, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by vertex:
I think the Apple legal thing is a bit of a clue though, they probably are real.

As has been pointed out, they showed pretty strong signs of Photoshopping -- the pop-up list for the System Preferences search pane was hopelessly confused. In the first picture, it was transparent and placed right where you'd expect a pop-up list to be. In the second, the transparency had vanished and the list had moved down about three pixels -- obviously they thought it was a smaller feature in that image, so they needn't spend as much time on it. And the transparency in the first one was funny, too: the scrollbar was transparent as well as the list. Apple has never used transparent scrollbars. Look at Terminal.app -- it's just the content view that's rendered transparent.

Not to mention those "Dashboard" widgets are too gaudy to live.

I guess we'll find out tomorrow who's right.

Originally posted by hyperb0le:
However, if you code it to change the gradient, then you end up with even more inconsistency.

The gradient in brushed metal windows changes every time you resize the window.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 06:01 PM

They very well could be fake, but it's hard to say. I've seen previous Apple pre-releases and some elements were completely disfunctional, and looked awful at best. I hope the dashboard is a bad joke, it really looks bad, plus in the way it's implemented.

zachs · Jun 27, 2004, 06:10 PM

Those photos, at least the Dashboard one, look fake to me. Why would Apple make a Calculator "gadget," when there's already an application that does the same thing? Nevermind the fact that it just looks completely unlike what something Apple would design.

But, hey, I could be totally wrong. We'll all find out tomorrow.

hyperb0le · Jun 27, 2004, 06:10 PM

Originally posted by Chuckit:
The gradient in brushed metal windows changes every time you resize the window.

But that's a horizontal gradient. If you change a vertical gradient, it messes with the lighting source; right now, the light is supposed to come from the horizontally center, and towards the top of the window. If the gradients are different sizes, the lighting source could be coming from 100 pixels down in one window and in another window the lighting could be from 300 pixels down. It's horribly inconsistent.

RooneyX · Jun 27, 2004, 06:13 PM

Transparent scroll bar in Sysprefs was the funniest. It's not even part of the GDI/SDK/Or Anything else and never will be.

lngtones · Jun 27, 2004, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Transparent scroll bar in Sysprefs was the funniest. It's not even part of the GDI/SDK/Or Anything else and never will be.

Never is pretty strong language. Apple never had sunken widgets in OS X until they did...

Chuckit · Jun 27, 2004, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Transparent scroll bar in Sysprefs was the funniest. It's not even part of the GDI/SDK/Or Anything else and never will be.

Well, a list like that could very easily be done. Since the list is obviously implemented as a separate window, a naive way of getting transparency would be to make the whole window partially transparent. But I have a bit of difficulty believing Apple's people are silly enough to do it that way, even in an alpha. It would be simpler not to implement transparency at all until you're ready to do it right.

TheSpaz · Jun 27, 2004, 06:45 PM

How come all major OS X update screenshots seem to leak only a day or two before it's demoed? And if I remember correctly... I was also one of the ones who saw the screenshots of Panther and thought how UGLY and inconsistent they seemed to be. I am still a little unhappy with Panther, but there's nothing I can do... if you think about it... how long can you actually use an OS without upgrading... Before you know it, you'll NEED Tiger to do a lot of the latest things in the OS X world... So all in all, we have no choice but to upgrade to Tiger one way or the other.

I kinda feel bad about the people using Jaguar and missing out on some of the new apps that REQUIRE Panther.

Also, by the looks of the screenshots (before they were removed) it seems as if they didn't change the GUI at all... I was kinda hoping for them to update the scroll bars and progress bars eventually... it's been what... umm... 4 years since they touched them?

What baffels me is... how come the screenshots couldn't get leaked earlier? I think an Apple employee waits for a few days before the actual product to be announced to leak some real or fake screenshots just to get everyone HYPED for Tiger... that's what I think.

And it HAS to be someone from Apple because Developers weren't given copies yet... Maybe they'll get them at WWDC like last year.

Who knows... anyone wanna follow this up?

zachs · Jun 27, 2004, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by TheSpaz:
How come all major OS X update screenshots seem to leak only a day or two before it's demoed? And if I remember correctly... I was also one of the ones who saw the screenshots of Panther and thought how UGLY and inconsistent they seemed to be. I am still a little unhappy with Panther, but there's nothing I can do... if you think about it... how long can you actually use an OS without upgrading... Before you know it, you'll NEED Tiger to do a lot of the latest things in the OS X world... So all in all, we have no choice but to upgrade to Tiger one way or the other.

I kinda feel bad about the people using Jaguar and missing out on some of the new apps that REQUIRE Panther.

Also, by the looks of the screenshots (before they were removed) it seems as if they didn't change the GUI at all... I was kinda hoping for them to update the scroll bars and progress bars eventually... it's been what... umm... 4 years since they touched them?

What baffels me is... how come the screenshots couldn't get leaked earlier? I think an Apple employee waits for a few days before the actual product to be announced to leak some real or fake screenshots just to get everyone HYPED for Tiger... that's what I think.

And it HAS to be someone from Apple because Developers weren't given copies yet... Maybe they'll get them at WWDC like last year.

Who knows... anyone wanna follow this up?

Well, regarding the GUI: Jaguar's didn't get updated to the flatter, glassier look for several months, as I recall. In the beginning, it still had the old 10.0/10.1 widgets.

And about the timing, well...the Panther screenshots were released only a day or two before the keynote. Maybe a wider range of Apple employees are given a copy two days or so before, so that could explain the timing. I dunno.

brink · Jun 27, 2004, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Well, a list like that could very easily be done. Since the list is obviously implemented as a separate window, a naive way of getting transparency would be to make the whole window partially transparent. But I have a bit of difficulty believing Apple's people are silly enough to do it that way, even in an alpha. It would be simpler not to implement transparency at all until you're ready to do it right.

The scrollbar in the popdown list that appears in Safari for autofill choices is translucent.

lngtones · Jun 27, 2004, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by brink:
The scrollbar in the popdown list that appears in Safari for autofill choices is translucent.

Anyone using Panther, type into a Cocoa text box the beginning of a word and press F5. There's your translucent scrollbar.

Zimphire · Jun 27, 2004, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by gotterdamm:
Yeah, and the new Sherlock can't be real either, Apple would never make such a blatant rippoff of Watson!

Er the coder of Watson just took Apple's idea, and added things which would have gotten added anyhow.

He just beat Apple to it.

If anyone ripped off anything, it was the coder of Watson.

Chuckit · Jun 27, 2004, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by lngtones:
Anyone using Panther, type into a Cocoa text box the beginning of a word and press F5. There's your translucent scrollbar.

Well, I'll be. I never noticed the scrollbar transparency before because it's much slighter than in the picture. Never mind that, then.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 07:54 PM

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Er the coder of Watson just took Apple's idea, and added things which would have gotten added anyhow.

He just beat Apple to it.

If anyone ripped off anything, it was the coder of Watson.

The Watson controversy was a bit more than that, you couldn't know what Apple might have released if Watson wasn't released. Sherlock did blatantly copy a whole chunk of stuff from Watson.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by TheSpaz:

And it HAS to be someone from Apple because Developers weren't given copies yet... Maybe they'll get them at WWDC like last year.

Who knows... anyone wanna follow this up?

They'd be really dumb to leak info from the Apple of today Not saying it doesn't happen, but the dev teams are on a tight leash. My brother is an engineer at Apple, works on OS X, and that's all I really know about his job. The various teams at Apple aren't even allowed to talk to each other about certain aspects of ther work, or visit their areas, funny stuff..

lngtones · Jun 27, 2004, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by vertex:
The Watson controversy was a bit more than that, you couldn't know what Apple might have released if Watson wasn't released. Sherlock did blatantly copy a whole chunk of stuff from Watson.

One sentence you say you can't know what they would have released. The next sentence you claim that you can know because by asserting that they blatantly copied from Watson is to claim that you knew they wouldn't have released similar features otherwise. I still believe that the new sherlock is a direct evolution of the sherlock idea and would have happened without Watson being released.

Just take a look at the old Sherlock:

http://reviews.macnn.com/MacOS9/images/shapple.gif

Services across the top, some kind of searching functionality, list of results below. The new Sherlock and Watson took the same idea but expanded it to have more than just lists returned, allowing more specialized content like maps, movie previews, and stock charts. It's still the same thing though.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by lngtones:
One sentence you say you can't know what they would have released. The next sentence you claim that you can know because by asserting that they blatantly copied from Watson is to claim that you knew they wouldn't have released similar features otherwise. I still believe that the new sherlock is a direct evolution of the sherlock idea and would have happened without Watson being released.

You misunderstood me. The other poster said Apple would have probably added things that the Watson developer did before Apple; but I am saying you can't ever know that. Watson's features were out before Sherlock, so it's natural that people would think Apple copied them in certain areas.

See, you can't really say that Sherlock's features would have been released anyway if Watson hadn't beenreleased.

vertex · Jun 27, 2004, 08:14 PM

here's what the Watson developer has to say, it's on their site.

http://www.karelia.com/watson/watsonFAQ.html

Q What is the relationship between Watson and the new Sherlock 3?
A. When Watson -- openly inspired by Sherlock for the concept of bypassing the Web browser -- was first released in 2001, it was envisioned as Sherlock's "companion" application, focusing on Web "services" rather than being a "search" tool like Sherlock.

Sherlock 3, part of Apple's new 10.2 "Jaguar" release, has now changed its focus to Web services. It bears a great resemblance to Watson -- almost its entire capability (image search, news, stocks, movies, phone listings, eBay auctions, reference, and translation) is found in Watson's tool set, and many individual tools behave remarkably like their Watson counterparts.

Watson's Movie Tool
Sherlock's Movie Channel
(as found on this page)

Many users have contacted Karelia, congratulating us on Apple "buying out" Watson. However, Karelia Software was not involved in any aspect of Sherlock 3, other than serving as ... shall we say ... inspiration. While Apple recently recognized Watson as 2002's "Most Innovative Mac OS X Product" -- and we appreciate the recognition -- the company didn't hesitate to make use of Watson's specific innovations for its next OS release, without any concessions to Karelia.

But we're not that upset anymore. Really. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Unfortunately for Apple, Sherlock 3 is not quite up to par with Watson in terms of speed or capability, so we're not that worried. With the addition of the new Google searching Tool for Watson � much more useful than the web-searching feature that is part of Sherlock 3 � we are confident that Watson will continue to be the market leader in Web services, in spite of Sherlock 3.

Technical readers may be interested in a comparison of Watson's and Sherlock's plug-in architecture on this page.

Cadaver · Jun 27, 2004, 09:36 PM

Me = registered Watson user.

lngtones · Jun 27, 2004, 10:55 PM

Originally posted by vertex:
You misunderstood me. The other poster said Apple would have probably added things that the Watson developer did before Apple; but I am saying you can't ever know that. Watson's features were out before Sherlock, so it's natural that people would think Apple copied them in certain areas.

See, you can't really say that Sherlock's features would have been released anyway if Watson hadn't beenreleased.

Right, you can't say that, but you can't say that Apple "blatantly" copied Watson either. It goes both ways see. You also have no way of knowing if Apple had been working on the new Sherlock before Watson was released.

lngtones · Jun 27, 2004, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by vertex:
here's what the Watson developer has to say, it's on their site.
*SNIP*

Karelia Software obviously has vested business interests in portraying Sherlock as a rip off.

Musti · 11:52 PM

Originally posted by lngtones:
Anyone using Panther, type into a Cocoa text box the beginning of a word and press F5. There's your translucent scrollbar.

Wow, I'll sleep a little less stupid tonight. Thanks for the tip.

arn · Jun 28, 2004, 12:44 AM

Originally posted by hyperb0le:
MacRumors (who posted the images first) have been forced to remove them already. Apple probably just hasn't gotten to ThinkSecret yet. That, or MacRumors is playing a prank, and pretended that Apple Legal contacted them. However, MR hasn't been known to do that.

We don't do that.

arn
MacRumors.com

Simon · Jun 28, 2004, 03:14 AM

Originally posted by lngtones:
Anyone using Panther, type into a Cocoa text box the beginning of a word and press F5. There's your translucent scrollbar.

Wow, auto-completion in Cocoa. Cool, didn't know the F5 thing. Thanks!

I'm amazed how much stuff is "hidden" in OS X. Even after countless hours of use since the PB days, you still discover stuff years later.

Apfhex · Jun 28, 2004, 03:18 AM

Originally posted by lngtones:
Anyone using Panther, type into a Cocoa text box the beginning of a word and press F5. There's your translucent scrollbar.

Woah. Is this thing documented anywhere? Is it on macosxhints? Absolutely never seen mention of that, pretty neat...

MindFad · Jun 28, 2004, 04:00 AM

Option-Escape also performs that function. It is a bit flawed, though, since, when it's used near the bottom of the screen, if the list is too long, it will flow over the screen, and you can't see what it on the list, and you can't scroll through it. It doesn't even need to be that close. It's a little irritating. I still find it useful, though.

sambeau · Jun 28, 2004, 06:57 AM

Arlo Rose seems pretty pissed off about something..

http://www2.konfabulator.com/forums/...er=asc&start=0

Hmmm..

Diggory Laycock · 07:26 AM

Originally posted by Apfhex:
Woah. Is this thing documented anywhere? Is it on macosxhints? Absolutely never seen mention of that, pretty neat...

http://www.macosxhints.com/article.p...31019214026732

I first heard of this one year ago - from the WWDC2003 streams.

[edit] - does anyone have a mirror of those screenies?

sambeau · Jun 28, 2004, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by Diggory Laycock:
http://www.macosxhints.com/article.p...31019214026732

I first heard of this one year ago - from the WWDC2003 streams.

[edit] - does anyone have a mirror of those screenies?

Thinksecret still has them..

http://www.thinksecret.com/news/tigerleak.html

vertex · Jun 28, 2004, 07:27 AM

Originally posted by sambeau:
Arlo Rose seems pretty pissed off about something..

http://www2.konfabulator.com/forums/...er=asc&start=0

Hmmm..

I love this line.

"Again, this is by no means proof of anything. Still, it would be a shame if Apple did to Konfabulator what it already did to Watson."

vertex · Jun 28, 2004, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by lngtones:
Right, you can't say that, but you can't say that Apple "blatantly" copied Watson either. It goes both ways see. You also have no way of knowing if Apple had been working on the new Sherlock before Watson was released.

That makes no sense. If product A exists, and product B comes along offering things way in advance of product A,takling the concept farther than what product A offered, then product A comes out sporting very similiar features. Then I;m more inclined to think that product A copied, or was heavily influenced by product B. That is what happened. It's no good trying to envisage what Apple might have done with Sherlock since that's not how the history of events bore out. Watson did come out before the revamped Sherlock, it sported those features, and Apple even made it clear they wanted Watson.

Fact is, Apple approached Watson's developer, he declined, then Apple release a product sporting the exact same features, I;'m not saying this is bad, but let's not jump to wild thoughts that Apple wold have just released somewthing like Watsin anyway. You can;t know that, none of us can since it never happened like that.

Fact is too, many people don;t see it as clear cut asd this, there is.was an issue with how Apple developed those features for Sherlock.

Here's Ars Technica's thoughts on it.
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/...x-10.2-13.html

Johm Siracusa's thoughts on it.

"I don't think Apple's actions can be considered "developer friendly" by any reasonable measure. If Karelia software is driven away from the Mac platform by Apple's actions, it will be a loss for Mac users as well as Apple itself. Here's more from Wood:"

Krypton · Jun 28, 2004, 01:57 PM

Haha I think the naysayers shall eat their words!!

(Although I am disappointed they are true, I was expecting some *wow* features, not things people have been making mock ups of for years such as Ars Technica reviews)

idyll · Jun 28, 2004, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Are we really meant to believe Apple has produced a bright orange calculator and a fire engine-red calendar? Next thing we know, Steve's going to start going to keynotes in a wifebeater and torn jeans.

Hahhahaha this is so true.. I am really dissappointed by these updates

Chuckit · Jun 28, 2004, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by Krypton:
Haha I think the naysayers shall eat their words!!

Yep. Right after gouging out my eyes after that Dashboard preview. Good grief, is anybody going to intentionally press a button that brings that stuff onto their screen?

JLL · 05:44 PM

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Yep. Right after gouging out my eyes after that Dashboard preview. Good grief, is anybody going to intentionally press a button that brings that stuff onto their screen?

Well, the colors make them easy to target, and I'm sure you can change the color (it's based on JavaScript):

"Elegantly designed Dashboard accessories animate in cool and interesting ways using the new Core Image technology built into Tiger. To change the color or font for a sticky note, flip the note around � all Widgets controls are on the back to keep them out of sight until you need them. Configuring your Widgets is fun, too."

Edit: It's in the details

Notice AAPL, MSFT and PIXR:

Notice the number in the calculator:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/th...dashboard.html

iOliverC · Jun 28, 2004, 05:30 PM

Some movies of Tiger:

Spotlight
Dashboard
Safari

Mr Scruff · Jun 28, 2004, 08:07 PM

Well my humble apologies to Arn at macrumors. Although I'm still amazed to have the first Tiger leak come from GNAA of all places.

Simon · Jun 29, 2004, 03:16 AM

Originally posted by Simon:
If the Konfabulator shot were real the guy at Apple who had done it would have to be shot.

While eating my words, could somebody tell me what the hell Apple's thinking? I mean, where are their graphics guys and artists? Are they on some sort of mental sick leave or what? Who designed the look of Dashboard?