Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

0157988944 · Oct 10, 2007, 06:47 PM

I'll hold out hope that they at least change the scrollbars and buttons.

Kevin · Oct 10, 2007, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by - - 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

).

Again.. we will see.

Again, really praying Apple doesn't make that huge GUI no no.

Catfish_Man · Oct 10, 2007, 07:06 PM

...it's October, guys. Apple isn't changing the GUI for 10.5.0. The scrollbars will remain inconsistent as they have been since 10.2.

Horsepoo!!! · Oct 10, 2007, 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man

...it's October, guys. Apple isn't changing the GUI for 10.5.0. The scrollbars will remain inconsistent as they have been since 10.2.

I know you're playing the "Pessimist" game. I play it all the time. It's a fun game, 'cuz you're always pleasantly surprised when things go right and can tell people "I told you so" when things go wrong. It's a win-win situation.

BUT...Apple would have to be effin' retarded not being able to update the final elements of the GUI. What's left? Scrollbars, radio buttons, checkboxes, tabs, buttons. 9A599 was released 3 weeks ago? If nobody was able to create the remaining graphics art in the last 3-4 weeks, then there's something wrong.

Anyway...I'm playing the pessimist game also 'cuz I have been disappointed by Apple many times so I wouldn't be surprised if Leopard did ship with a half-Aqua look.

Catfish_Man · Oct 10, 2007, 07:35 PM

Actually I'm not.

Horsepoo!!! · Oct 10, 2007, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man

Actually I'm not.

Uh huh.

0157988944 · Oct 10, 2007, 08:36 PM

We should all hope for a consistent UI, but prepare for disappointment. That's how I do most unknowns, and I usually end up pleasantly surprised. I won't go crazy if Apple releases a build graphically identical to 9A599 as the GM, but I hope to god they just update those what? 5-10 images?

it shouldn't be that hard to do.

Simon · 04:46 AM

Originally Posted by adamfishercox

I'll hold out hope that they at least change the scrollbars and buttons.

Mee too, but:

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man

...it's October, guys. Apple isn't changing the GUI for 10.5.0. The scrollbars will remain inconsistent as they have been since 10.2.

this seems the more likely scenario. In the past Apple had no problems releasing a GM with inconsistencies in its GUI. Why should it be different this time?

Oh well, at least they'll have enough time to get rid of Aqua once an for all during 10.6 development.

Kevin · Oct 11, 2007, 05:44 AM

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man

...it's October, guys. Apple isn't changing the GUI for 10.5.0. The scrollbars will remain inconsistent as they have been since 10.2.

They looked IN PLACE in 10.2. They actually fit. You didn't hear a ton of people complaining about it like you are now.

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

BUT...Apple would have to be effin' retarded not being able to update the final elements of the GUI. What's left? Scrollbars, radio buttons, checkboxes, tabs, buttons. 9A599 was released 3 weeks ago? If nobody was able to create the remaining graphics art in the last 3-4 weeks, then there's something wrong.

My guess is, that they have already been created awhile back.

Anyway...I'm playing the pessimist game also 'cuz I have been disappointed by Apple many times so I wouldn't be surprised if Leopard did ship with a half-Aqua look.

I wouldn't be surprised either. Disappointed in Apple? Sure. They don't design GUIs like they used to. GUIs that won them awards.

mdc · Oct 11, 2007, 12:41 PM

Has anyone been testing 10.5 on a Core 2 Duo MacBook?
What's the snappiness like in regards to Core Image/Animation stuff? I'm looking to get a MacBook and was wondering what it's 10.5 performance is like.

Thanks.

Kevin · Oct 11, 2007, 04:17 PM

I hear 10.5 is faster than 10.4 on computers it supports. But that is just what I heard..

Chuckit · Oct 11, 2007, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

They looked IN PLACE in 10.2. They actually fit. You didn't hear a ton of people complaining about it like you are now.

Wasn't 10.2 when Apple flattened all of Aqua except the scrollbars.

0157988944 · Oct 11, 2007, 04:40 PM

Nuh-uh. Everything was still nice and lickable in 10.2.

.Neo · Oct 11, 2007, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Wasn't 10.2 when Apple flattened all of Aqua except the scrollbars.

Nope that's what the 10.3 Panther revision of Aqua did.

SirCastor · Oct 11, 2007, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

I hear 10.5 is faster than 10.4 on computers it supports. But that is just what I heard..

Well yes, They've taken out all the debug code in this version...

Big Slick · Oct 11, 2007, 07:21 PM

It will be nice if I can purchase Leopard for $129 USD (especially since our Canadian buck is worth MORE than US dollar). Does Apple always sell its operating systems cheaper than pc op systems? Places in my city are selling copies of XP for over $300 still!

Chuckit · Oct 11, 2007, 07:26 PM

Depends on how much the PC operating system costs. OS X has always been $129.

MartiNZ · Oct 11, 2007, 08:32 PM

I'm assuming it will still be $273 here in New Zealand, even though current exchange rates would suggest more like $173.

Big Slick · Oct 11, 2007, 09:29 PM

Current price for Tiger (single user) is $149 CDN.

Kevin · Oct 12, 2007, 06:01 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Wasn't 10.2 when Apple flattened all of Aqua except the scrollbars.

Not all of Aqua. And no, that was 10.3. They just made the drop shadows less prominent in some of the more obnoxious elements. Something I did to my Simple Aqua theme from the start. And they sunk in the close/minimize etc buttons.

BTW Max's Smooth Stripes does a wonderful job on the scroll bars. Making them a lot nicer looking than Apple's. A lot more elegant. They should get HIM to run their design team. And I think he's just a kid. But he has a eye for consistency.

Originally Posted by SirCastor

Well yes, They've taken out all the debug code in this version...

Well 10.4 was faster than 10.3. Maybe that is what they have been doing all this time. Just removing debug code, and releasing a faster OS?!?!

analogika · Oct 12, 2007, 03:25 PM

AppleInsider | Road to Mac OS X Leopard: Time Machine [Page 2]

0157988944 · Oct 12, 2007, 03:27 PM

They've released an internal GM Candidate Build, according to Mac Rumors.

Mac Rumors: Mac OS X Leopard 10.5 GM Candidate Build

analogue SPRINKLES · Oct 12, 2007, 05:32 PM

I sure hope 559 isn't the GM as I am using it and it is really damn buggy.

Art Vandelay · Oct 12, 2007, 06:04 PM

It isn't. I don't know why anyone thinks it can potentially be the GM when it has a known issue of upgrade failures on PowerPC Macs.

0157988944 · Oct 12, 2007, 06:35 PM

yeah, we've established that 559 is not he GM, but one of the final releases before the GM candidiates.

0157988944 · Oct 12, 2007, 06:51 PM

The new internal build is 9A581... Anyone know why the number went DOWN?

And also, I wonder if the new internal build might have a few select GUI tweaks......

Art Vandelay · Oct 12, 2007, 06:53 PM

What bizarro universe do you live in where 9a581 is lower than 9a559?

analogue SPRINKLES · Oct 12, 2007, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay

What bizarro universe do you live in where 9a581 is lower than 9a559?

Call it what you will but it is buggy as hell. Within 10 minutes of using it I found about 5 reproducible bugs.

Art Vandelay · Oct 12, 2007, 08:52 PM

What does that have to do with what you quoted from me?

analogue SPRINKLES · Oct 12, 2007, 09:08 PM

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay

What does that have to do with what you quoted from me?

It was just a comment on how such a recent build could still be so damn buggy. a few days later with another build I don't expect any miracles.

Most of the bugs I had were in the Finder also which scares me.

Art Vandelay · Oct 12, 2007, 09:23 PM

9a559 was done about a month ago. If 9a581 is the current internal build, that's over 20 builds newer with about a month of work done. A lot was accomplished between 9a527 and 9a559 in a similar time frame.

Still, don't see how this has any relevance to what you quoted. It seems more relevant to what adamfishercox said earlier about final candidate status for 9a559.

0157988944 · Oct 12, 2007, 10:16 PM

Oh... Wow... I just saw the 1 at the end and said "Lower than 9"...

That was scary.

analogue SPRINKLES · Oct 12, 2007, 10:25 PM

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay

Still, don't see how this has any relevance to what you quoted. It seems more relevant to what adamfishercox said earlier about final candidate status for 9a559.

Do you want me to write a signed letter to your mom clearing you from involement or something?

Relax.

0157988944 · Oct 12, 2007, 10:27 PM

Your quoting of him made no sense and your explanation made no sense. We're just trying to figure out your logic...

Art Vandelay · Oct 12, 2007, 10:29 PM

Exactly.

- - e r i k - - · Oct 12, 2007, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES

It was just a comment on how such a recent build could still be so damn buggy. a few days later with another build I don't expect any miracles.

Most of the bugs I had were in the Finder also which scares me.

WTF? I've been using 9A559 for a month now. It's not recent.

Sure it has bugs, most of which are with applications, not the OS. I'd expect the OS bugs to be fixed before release, and then we'll see application updates trickling in shortly after that.

Art Vandelay · Oct 12, 2007, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES

Do you want me to write a signed letter to your mom clearing you from involement or something?

Relax.

Leopard is probably going to follow the same pattern as previous releases... It will be faster on supported hardware than the previous OS.

Art Vandelay · Oct 12, 2007, 10:34 PM

That post doesn't make much sense, does it analogue SPRINKLES?

You did the same thing to me. That's what I was trying to get clarification on. No need to get bent out of shape. I certainly wasn't. I was just trying to find out the relation between my quote and your post because it certainly wasn't obvious.

analogika · Oct 13, 2007, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES

It was just a comment on how such a recent build could still be so damn buggy. a few days later with another build I don't expect any miracles.

Most of the bugs I had were in the Finder also which scares me.

559 is MORE THAN SIX WEEKS OLD.

cybergoober · Oct 13, 2007, 06:28 AM

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES

Call it what you will but it is buggy as hell. Within 10 minutes of using it I found about 5 reproducible bugs.

Did you file bug reports?

Kevin · 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by adamfishercox

And also, I wonder if the new internal build might have a few select GUI tweaks......

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay

9a559 was done about a month ago. If 9a581 is the current internal build, that's over 20 builds newer with about a month of work done. A lot was accomplished between 9a527 and 9a559 in a similar time frame.

Exactly. I know how much work *I* myself can get done in a book we do yearly. The last month deadline I have more O/T than I do regular hours.

People think just because they just INSTALLED a build, that it's the most recent, or close to it.

By the time most builds get around to getting leaked, Apple has probably released 3 or 4 builds in that time.

I installed early OS X builds and beta builds back in the day because I was developing themes for the OS and wanted them ready for when said build hit the shelves.

I am not sure why some are installing it if they don't develop any software or do any themeing work. Other than just to "check it out" for a sec, or just brag "I got it installed"

Back 5 years ago that might have been impressive. But anyone, even without a clue can get their hands on early OS builds now. So the "look at me I am r33t" reason is no longer applicable.

I have too much stuff on this computer to mess with OSs in development right now. Esp when I am not developing anything for it. (Yes, I back up, but we all know what a PITA it is to get things right were they were)

Originally Posted by cybergoober

Did you file bug reports?

I can see it now... going to a rumors site that has reviewed said build said person is using, and then copying and pasting the article to Apple. "Here are teh bugs I found"

Kevin · Oct 13, 2007, 09:59 AM

Apple insider forums has a thread on the matter too..

Aqua buttons, Aqua radio-buttons, Aqua check boxes, Aqua sliders, Aqua scroll-bars??? - AppleInsider

Kevin · Oct 13, 2007, 10:09 AM

And I just wanna say, except for the stoplight buttons, this looks hot

TETENAL · Oct 13, 2007, 11:10 AM

The help button looks out of place. The active tab colour is wrong. And I wouldn't mind having the slider handle colour in the same colour as the scrollbar.

I also detest hyper-links in the UI. It was fine as a hack when we had text only terminals, but it doesn't belong into a GUI. The right arrow in a circle ➭ that Apple uses in the iTunes Store looks more elegant.

Horsepoo!!! · Oct 13, 2007, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

I also detest hyper-links in the UI. It was fine as a hack when we had text only terminals, but it doesn't belong into a GUI. The right arrow in a circle ➭ that Apple uses in the iTunes Store looks more elegant.

Good call. Sometimes I wonder how these little things are allowed to get past quality testing. I don't think there are other examples of Apple using hyperlinks inside explanations or warnings, I don't know why this one was allowed to exist.

0157988944 · Oct 13, 2007, 11:35 AM

Wow... that active tab color is wayyy to bright. But I otherwise agree.

Kevin · 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

The help button looks out of place. The active tab colour is wrong. And I wouldn't mind having the slider handle colour in the same colour as the scrollbar.

I also detest hyper-links in the UI. It was fine as a hack when we had text only terminals, but it doesn't belong into a GUI. The right arrow in a circle ➭ that Apple uses in the iTunes Store looks more elegant.

The mockup I believe looks better than the Aqua elements that are in it now. But I don't believe for a second that if Apple does change the GUI that it will look like the screenshot I posted above. Which IS a hack.

All of this is just really interesting to me. Simply because 10.5's GUI seems to be headed towards the same direction that I've been themeing it to be/complaining that it should be. Not that I am trying to be so pretentious as to say Apple is listening to me. No way. It's just that a lot of Mac users think and believe like I do about what the GUI should be/look like. I've posted links to MANY sites of people saying basically the EXACT same things I have. It's not that we have some sort of crystal ball, or supernatural ability. It's just common sense.

Platinum's GUI was brilliant. People don't realize just how brilliant it was. It isn't the most modern of design. When it came to look, or features.

If Apple could take Platinum's brilliance, and make a modern version of it for 10.5, they would have a winner as far as what I have read most die hard Mac users talking about.

You have to ride that fine line of having a modern slick GUI, without it distracting from the content. And Aqua simply did not do this. You WANTED to look at the scroll bars and the textures etc. It effected the way documents looked when designing them. Platinum didn't do any of these things.

And I don't think 10.5 will either. I still have hope for Apple and their abilities to make THE killer GUI. I understand the need for something flashy like Aqua at the time. But it's time to move on. Apple is in a different position now. Time to bring elegance and brilliance back into the fold.

Kevin · 01:50 PM

Anyone notice Photoshop CS3 has a non-Aqua (Except for what it gets from the Extras.rsrc) GUI? I find their open and close dialog GUI simple, yet elegant.

It actually has a AWESOME new GUI, that has that black translucent GUI that Apple has been using a lot in it as well.

CS3s GUI is a real step forward in Photoshop IMHO. I am hoping Adobe knows something we don't.

I am not saying that Tiger's "stoplights" will look like the open and close widgets in Photoshop. I am just saying Photoshop no longer uses the Aqua ones anymore for CS3...

But they don't look bad in Safari.

Of course they would have to have some kind of mouseover feedback like Photoshop does.

.Neo · 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

And I just wanna say, except for the stoplight buttons, this looks hot

The blue tones of the tab clashes with the scroll bar's color like you wouldn't believe.

It's obvious that the current choice between blue and graphite won't work when applying the complete iTunes 7 look system-wide. They need to come up with different colors instead of the purple.

Kevin · Oct 13, 2007, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by .Neo

The blue tones of the tab clash with the scroll bar's color like you wouldn't believe.

Yeah.. I didn't make that screenshot. It came from the Appleinsider thread. I am too lazy at the moment to make one.

It's obvious that the current choice between blue and graphite won't work when applying the complete iTunes 7 look system-wide. They need to come up with different colors instead of the purple.

I have been saying it would be cool if they'd offer colors like they used to in OS 9.

That at least would give us SOME choice back. There also needs to be some feedback when "grabbing" onto the scroll bars like their used to.

I still thing some sort of hinges to "grab onto" would also be better. Like the screenshots that were posted in here.

I found old screenshots of the FIRST variations (Note not finished nor polished) version of sosumi and my old simple aqua themes.

http://screenshots.haque.net/screens...enshot-379.jpg

http://screenshots.haque.net/screens...enshot-364.jpg

http://screenshots.haque.net/screens...enshot-344.jpg

And the darker grey Simple Aqua theme.

http://screenshots.haque.net/screens...enshot-677.jpg

I remember making those folders too... wonder what happened to em..

I was making these themes I believe in the pre-public beta days (Those that were in here at the time remember)

I am glad Apple it taking the direction of a darker, less Aqua'd theme.

And I agree about the platinum buttons. Platinum just rocked the house all together. And a vectored polished version would really kick butt.

I really hope Apple comes through. I haven't been this excited about a GUI since Copeland.