Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Chuckit · Sep 24, 2007, 12:53 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I just posted what I am basing it on. Resolution Independence was promised with Leopard. It's not happening. Not now, and certainly not in a 10.5.x update.

OK, so let me get this straight. In 2006, we're told that resolution independence is coming in Leopard, and that we should be ready for it by 2008. We're still being told that resolution independence is coming in Leopard, and Apple has actually not changed any of its claims…but somehow in your mind this means that resolution independence is not coming? This is like a logical leap into a black hole. Seriously, I'm not following at all. It's not like the developer page you quoted says, "Oh, by the way, the deadline we told you before for resolution independence has been moved up! It's now February 2007!" You're just reading something in that isn't there and basing this entire huge scenario on that imaginary deadline.

- - e r i k - - · Sep 24, 2007, 01:07 AM

No, I am saying that as USERS we won't see it until 10.6. Apps could have been RI by Leopard. User adjustable RI could have been in Leopard. It's not happening. Not for third party apps, not for Apple apps. Leopard will be a development platform for RI apps sure, but without Apple leading the way, it won't be any different from the RI that was already implemented in Tiger.

There's just no way the end user will see RI in Leopard at this pace. Apple has the technology, but isn't even utilising it in their core apps making for a very poor example for third party developers.

Chuckit · Sep 24, 2007, 01:38 AM

Why, if Apple has said all along that it would be in a point release in 2008, do you suddenly doubt it? Seriously, where's the trouble except in your head? Maybe there's something I'm not seeing, but you haven't pointed it out yet.

PaperNotes · Sep 24, 2007, 02:31 AM

System wide RI will only be useful when you break free of fixed resolution desktops and there is a practical need for zooming in and out of the interface.

- - e r i k - - · Sep 24, 2007, 02:54 AM

Originally Posted by PaperNotes

System wide RI will only be useful when you break free of fixed resolution desktops and there is a practical need for zooming in and out of the interface.

Not true. People are already using high DPI screens. Like the one you can order with the 17" PowerBook.

- - e r i k - - · Sep 24, 2007, 02:55 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Why, if Apple has said all along that it would be in a point release in 2008, do you suddenly doubt it? Seriously, where's the trouble except in your head? Maybe there's something I'm not seeing, but you haven't pointed it out yet.

I still await a written source where they stated that it would come in a point release.

PaperNotes · Sep 24, 2007, 03:03 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Not true. People are already using high DPI screens. Like the one you can order with the 17" PowerBook.

High DPI is besides the point. When it comes to RI it doesn't matter if you have an XGA or UWSXGA resolution (both are fixed). RI becomes truly useful for navigating and zooming an interface that isn't confined to any sort of fixed resolution and has features such as 3D object icons and the use of a Z-axis for zooming in and out. Time Machine makes some use of this. The Dock, Spaces and Cover Flow could easily evolve to include all.

An aside: I thought how cool it would be if Leopard used pixel shaders for depth of focus effects. Like why not blur out the wallpaper when I'm working in a document in the foreground and then when I select the desktop it comes into sharp focus.

CharlesS · Sep 24, 2007, 03:22 AM

No, RI's biggest draw is that it allows you to use a higher resolution screen and still be able to read the text.

Well, that and the fact that when elderly people have a computer, you won't have that beautiful MacBook or iMac screen looking like crap because they set the resolution to 640x480.

- - e r i k - - · Sep 24, 2007, 03:32 AM

Originally Posted by adamfishercox

Me.

Originally Posted by PaperNotes

High DPI is besides the point. When it comes to RI it doesn't matter if you have an XGA or UWSXGA resolution (both are fixed). RI becomes truly useful for navigating and zooming an interface that isn't confined to any sort of fixed resolution and has features such as 3D object icons and the use of a Z-axis for zooming in and out. Time Machine makes some use of this. The Dock, Spaces and Cover Flow could easily evolve to include all.

An aside: I thought how cool it would be if Leopard used pixel shaders for depth of focus effects. Like why not blur out the wallpaper when I'm working in a document in the foreground and then when I select the desktop it comes into sharp focus.

You seem to have little grasp of what RI really is. RI is all about high DPI displays and has nothing to do with 3D.

PaperNotes · Sep 24, 2007, 04:16 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

You seem to have little grasp of what RI really is. RI is all about high DPI displays and has nothing to do with 3D.

That's a black and white statement. RI is enhanced by higher resolutions but is ideally implemented in an interface that isn't restricted to the screen's resolution no matter how low or high the DPI is. By extension that means RI works best in an interface that would include an infinite 2D plane as well as a 3D plane (Z axis). I already mentioned that Time Machine, Space, Cover Flow, the 3D Dock and the way Front Row launches are a step in that direction. Clarity of text and size of window widgets is a small part, a baby step towards where RI takes interfaces.

Horsepoo!!! · Sep 24, 2007, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by PaperNotes

An aside: I thought how cool it would be if Leopard used pixel shaders for depth of focus effects. Like why not blur out the wallpaper when I'm working in a document in the foreground and then when I select the desktop it comes into sharp focus.

F--

Kevin · Sep 24, 2007, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

I do. The all-gray scrollbars and window controls are too bland.

GUIs are supposed to be bland wrappers for the content. It's not supposed to DISTRACT from the content. The key is to make a the most modern looking GUI, while still not distracting from it.

This is what MOST Mac users have been complaining about when it comes to Aqua. It was simply too distracting. Esp with the pinstripes.

With EACH OS X upgrade Apple has made Aqua more subtle and less garish.

The Human Interface Guidelines is a good thing to read.

Kevin · Sep 24, 2007, 06:51 AM

Originally Posted by .Neo

For the full 100%? I'd like to see that.

Well I redid OS X's theme to look like OS 9s back in the Public Beta days. Called it Sosumi. I am sure someone here can vouch for it.

Kevin · Sep 24, 2007, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

No, RI's biggest draw is that it allows you to use a higher resolution screen and still be able to read the text.

Well, that and the fact that when elderly people have a computer, you won't have that beautiful MacBook or iMac screen looking like crap because they set the resolution to 640x480.

LCDs also don't have the high res abilities that CRTs did.(Well some of the HIGH END ones do now..) And therefore this will compensate for it as well.

Horsepoo!!! · Sep 24, 2007, 07:08 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Erm. Let me rephrase that: If the system applications like Finder and the rest aren't resolution independent, why would a user ever turn it on? Or in fact, since the option is not even there, why should developers bother?

It really is a chicken and egg situation, and Apple needs to get more on the ball here. Resolution independent is not really further ahead than it was in Tiger, even though it was touted as such.

Apple has always been terrible at leading. They've always told developers one thing and done the complete opposite instead. Apple's sending mixed signals all the time and that's not cool.

Fishing through the latest builds, I can see that you're mostly right...some of the very basic elements are RI-ready. But there are still glaring bugs with RI and, the thing that makes me most sad, is that 99% of Apple's apps still contain tiny .tiff files for their UI elements (such as buttons) instead of larger RI-ready ones or vector PDF ones. To me, this leads me to your conclusion: RI isn't coming in 10.5.

Even if all the bugs with RI are fixed, point updates with new RI-ready graphics would make for a prohibitively large update. What makes the bulk of an apps size? That's right, graphics elements. Unless Apple trickles these RI-ready graphics files for each of their apps in the span of several point updates to keep the download sizes smaller, we're not gonna see RI in 10.5...because like you said, erik, Apple's not gonna allow RI until their own apps are RI-ready...and since that means 10.6, why should developers waste time on getting their apps RI-ready.

It's a sad day.

Horsepoo!!! · Sep 24, 2007, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by Kevin

Well I redid OS X's theme to look like OS 9s back in the Public Beta days. Called it Sosumi. I am sure someone here can vouch for it.

Yup...it was an awesome theme. I used your theme for awhile after I had shown Aqua to my friends and after Aqua's novelty had worn off. I always loved the Platinum look. Leopard's new look though is getting close to being a modernized Platinum. The neutral grays make for a very pleasant experience.

Horsepoo!!! · Sep 24, 2007, 09:21 AM

I almost feel like creating a petition to let Apple know that some people would rather see Leopard be released later if it gave them time to finish the incomplete features.

As of right now (the latest build), there are still waaaay too many compatibility problems with even Apple's own apps (Aperture, iWork, iLife). You'd think 1st-party apps that shipped 1-2 months before the release of Leopard would be Leopard-ready but NO...you'd be wrong and you'd feel like strangling someone at Apple.

The last thing Apple wants is the media shitting all over Leopard because it's buggy and apps break under it (even Apple ones) and some announced features are left hidden and incomplete. I think it would be more damaging to Apple than a story about Apple missing its deadline. Seriously. Vista is already released so what's the rush now?

Remember a year ago when people were hoping Apple would steal Microsoft's thunder by releasing Leopard before Vista? Well, Apple missed its chance (good thing too) and now there's ZERO rush. So why is Apple rushing?

JLL · Sep 24, 2007, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

OK, so let me get this straight. In 2006, we're told that resolution independence is coming in Leopard, and that we should be ready for it by 2008.

They even said by the end of 2008, and since we won't see 10.6 in 2008 it looks like it will be enabled in a 10.5.x release.

- - e r i k - - · Sep 24, 2007, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by adamfishercox

Me.

Originally Posted by PaperNotes

That's a black and white statement. RI is enhanced by higher resolutions but is ideally implemented in an interface that isn't restricted to the screen's resolution no matter how low or high the DPI is. By extension that means RI works best in an interface that would include an infinite 2D plane as well as a 3D plane (Z axis). I already mentioned that Time Machine, Space, Cover Flow, the 3D Dock and the way Front Row launches are a step in that direction. Clarity of text and size of window widgets is a small part, a baby step towards where RI takes interfaces.

No. You still have no clue. I see what you are trying to say though, it's just that it has nothing to do with Resolution Independence - and everything you talk about can be (and already are) implemented independent (hah!) of resolution independence.

You are simply confused over terminology.

- - e r i k - - · Sep 24, 2007, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

Remember a year ago when people were hoping Apple would steal Microsoft's thunder by releasing Leopard before Vista? Well, Apple missed its chance (good thing too) and now there's ZERO rush. So why is Apple rushing?

If Apple is rushing it's because they already put forward Leopard's release date once. But I don't really think they are. Leopard is pretty close to finish. The jump from 9A528d to 9A559 took me by surprise. It is a leap forward in polish and stability that I didn't expect at all.

Compatibility issues in apps like iLife and Aperture are more down to tiny fixes in the apps themselves. Getting things like Safari and Mail to be more stable is more of an issue, although the leap there as well has been astonishing. I have all faith in Apple (having been through betas of OS releases since the OS 8 days) that they will pull through with the spit and polish well before the October release.

And as you probably know, just because there is a GM lockdown does not mean development stops. You might very well see a 10.5.1 update the same week of release, as you saw with the iPhoto 7.0.1 update

Simon · Sep 24, 2007, 11:48 AM

Well I'd like to see Leopard released in such a state that no immediate 10.5.1 update is required. If that means delaying Leopard by another few weeks that's perfectly fine with me.

Chuckit · Sep 24, 2007, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I still await a written source where they stated that it would come in a point release.

Do you doubt Leopard will cost $129 because they only announced it at a huge event?

CharlesS · Sep 24, 2007, 12:43 PM

Plans change. I'd give examples, but I can't because of the NDA. Ask me again in a month.

MindFad · Sep 24, 2007, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by PaperNotes

High DPI is besides the point.

High DPI is exactly the point. Regular consumer monitors aren't far off from those 200+ DPI content creation/medical imaging/engineering high-end monitors. We're obviously approaching the point in display pixel density where resolution independence of the interface matters. Apple recognizes this, else they wouldn't be pushing to complete its implementation in Leopard. I don't think it's imperative that it be their for Leopard's release, but I would be surprised if it didn't see its final implementation at some point in Leopard's lifetime (which I would assume would be sometime in '08, as Apple has even said).

Resolution independence is meant for the interface to meet the resolution of the monitor. This has nothing to do with 2D or 3D planes. Density will increase, not monitor sizes (e.g., the 17" MacBook Pro's 23" ACD worth of pixels in a 17" space), and new resolution size standards will be set. (I certainly wouldn't want a 60" ACD at 2560x1600).

Chuckit · 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Plans change. I'd give examples, but I can't because of the NDA. Ask me again in a month.

That is true, but until a change has been announced (or until there's some sign that what they'd said would happen won't), it seems kind of random to believe they have.

Eug · Sep 24, 2007, 02:22 PM

New requirements - G4 867 MHz

It used to be 800 MHz. Anything less and Leopard won't install. Upgraded Power Macs don't count either.

MindFad · Sep 24, 2007, 02:34 PM

And what about my dual 800 G4?

Eug · Sep 24, 2007, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by MindFad

And what about my dual 800 G4?

Dunno, but my guess is no. Anyone know for sure?

My GF has an iBook G4 1.07 so once I get Leopard I'm gonna try transferring a Leopard install from that to my Cube. My Cube has a 1.7 GHz G4 and a GeForce 6200, so it should work OK for most stuff I'm guessing, even though the Cube has a crappy 100 MHz bus.

cybergoober · Sep 24, 2007, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by MindFad

Yikes, you're not kiddin' about those Desktop pictures.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1224/...5c80754d_o.jpg

That's total cheese right there. Yeah, a huge hurricane. That's what I want on my desktop—cheesy "stars" and a doomsday storm. Maybe they're just havin' some fun with us?

Well, from what I have managed to sleuth about that photo (which may or may not be of any real interest - or maybe I'm trying to read more into it than there really is) is that appears to be a photo of hurricane Josephine which was shot from the Space Shuttle Challenger in October of 1984...

It looks nearly identical to this one:
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/mirrors/...G/10061867.jpg
minus the shuttle.

BTW - the first one (the one of Earth) is "Blue Marble", the most famous picture ever.

MindFad · Sep 24, 2007, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by cybergoober

Well, from what I have managed to sleuth about that photo (which may or may not be of any real interest - or maybe I'm trying to read more into it than there really is) is that appears to be a photo of hurricane Josephine which was shot from the Space Shuttle Challenger in October of 1984...

It looks nearly identical to this one:
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/mirrors/...G/10061867.jpg
minus the shuttle.

BTW - the first one (the one of Earth) is "Blue Marble", the most famous picture ever.

Hey, that's cool.

If they lose the cheesy "stars," it would look OK.

Originally Posted by Eug

Dunno, but my guess is no. Anyone know for sure?

My GF has an iBook G4 1.07 so once I get Leopard I'm gonna try transferring a Leopard install from that to my Cube. My Cube has a 1.7 GHz G4 and a GeForce 6200, so it should work OK for most stuff I'm guessing, even though the Cube has a crappy 100 MHz bus.

Boy, so it won't even allow me to install it? I really hope that's not the case. I'll be more than a little pissed if it doesn't.

besson3c · Sep 24, 2007, 04:13 PM

What if Apple doesn't allow us to change our desktop pictures and we are stuck with the cheesy stars??

MindFad · Sep 24, 2007, 04:19 PM

Then my cat will FTP into Cupertino and stealz their ikonz!

Eug · Sep 24, 2007, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by MindFad

Boy, so it won't even allow me to install it? I really hope that's not the case. I'll be more than a little pissed if it doesn't.

Not sure about the dual 800, but somebody reported that his upgraded 1.8 GHz Cube isn't a supported config either, and the Leopard disc just refuses to install. (This is with a previous version of Leopard, that only required a 733 MHz G4.)

Chuckit · Sep 24, 2007, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by MindFad

Boy, so it won't even allow me to install it? I really hope that's not the case. I'll be more than a little pissed if it doesn't.

XPostFacto

Timetheus · 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by cybergoober

BTW - the first one (the one of Earth) is "Blue Marble", the most famous picture ever.

Close but not quite, the new desktop image is one of NASA's more recent composites, whereas the more famous and sadly abused and overused "Blue Marble" pictures Africa (and not North America as in the desktop) and was taken by the Apollo 17 crew.

The Blue Marble

- - e r i k - - · Sep 25, 2007, 01:10 AM

Arrrgh. They removed the option to Include System Files in search again!

Unless I am missing something...*sigh*

Kevin · Sep 25, 2007, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

What if Apple doesn't allow us to change our desktop pictures and we are stuck with the cheesy stars??

And this is why besson will never understand.

Kevin · Sep 25, 2007, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Arrrgh. They removed the option to Include System Files in search again!

Unless I am missing something...*sigh*

That sucks... I was wanting that..

Art Vandelay · Sep 25, 2007, 12:21 PM

It's still there, you just need to dig for it.

Chuckit · Sep 25, 2007, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

And this is why besson will never understand.

Because he makes jokes?

mdc · Sep 25, 2007, 03:09 PM

I remember reading something about CoverFlow in the Finder being only in one view? I can't remember the name of the view, it's not icon view and it's not columns, the other one with the disclosure triangles.

Is CoverFlow still 'locked' to that view?
I'd like to use CoverFlow in the top half of Finder and colums in the bottom half.

TETENAL · Sep 25, 2007, 03:24 PM

The view is called CoverFlow view and it looks like it's always combined with a list of files. That's what makes the most sense.

mdc · Sep 25, 2007, 03:49 PM

Please ignore the mismatch in colums and coverflow. I found the columns image with Google Images and used MS Paint (I'm at work) to put them together.
I think Columns and CoverFlow would work together. CoverFlow showing the files that are in the currently selected column.

- - e r i k - - · Sep 25, 2007, 07:47 PM

I think they confined it to list view to avoid confusion.

ebah · Sep 26, 2007, 04:32 PM

Tried to read through the thread but still can't find it -
Will classic run on Leopard? I still have 1 custom app that is vital to my business that I don't have time to recode.
Thanks

0157988944 · Sep 26, 2007, 04:49 PM

No.

SirCastor · Sep 26, 2007, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by ebah

Tried to read through the thread but still can't find it -
Will classic run on Leopard? I still have 1 custom app that is vital to my business that I don't have time to recode.
Thanks

Time to find Time to Recode:
No Classic in 10.5

SirCastor · Sep 26, 2007, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by mdc

Please ignore the mismatch in colums and coverflow. I found the columns image with Google Images and used MS Paint (I'm at work) to put them together.
I think Columns and CoverFlow would work together. CoverFlow showing the files that are in the currently selected column.

I like this picture. I'd love to see that in Leopard...

Big Mac · Sep 26, 2007, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by SirCastor

Time to find Time to Recode:
No Classic in 10.5

Or keep a Tiger partition with Classic around. It's really stupid that Apple is eliminating Classic support, but at least there's still that remedy.

SirCastor · Sep 26, 2007, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Or keep a Tiger partition with Classic around. It's really stupid that Apple is eliminating Classic support, but at least there's still that remedy.

I don't think it's stupid. Apple ships no computers that can run classic, and classic's existence was for the sake of having usability while projects migrated to Coco or Carbon, not as a method of maintaining full-scale backwards compatibility. It's been long enough that Apple doesn't need to be using resources on maintaining something which very few people use.

On the plus side of all that, there are a few groups which produce PPC and 68K emulators which should (theoretically) serve purposes of folks who need to run legacy OSs