apple
Report a problem

Minor new Mac OS X Snow Leopard features revealed

Michael Brown   on 12 February 2009 - 20:35 · 37 comments & 15283 views

Advertisement (Why?)
As recently revealed by MacRumors, the latest builds of the upcoming Mac OS X Snow Leopard contain some interesting unannounced features. QuickTime Pro is reported to have been axed completely, its features built into QuickTime X, the redesign of QuickTime based off of the iPhone version of QuickTime. This means that users will no longer need to load up iMovie or Final Cut Pro to make minor adjustments to movies, nor pay $30 for this privilege.

But today brings the news that Snow Leopard also has two more minor changes. "Put Back" allows users to restore an item stored in the Trash to its previous location by simply right-clicking. Windows users will be familiar with this, and the feature was mysteriously lost in the transition from OS 9 to OS X, up until now. The second feature allows a user to select a folder within a stack and browse that folder in the stack view, as opposed to opening the Finder. Not exactly earth-shattering by any means, but Snow Leopard has so far not been pitched as packed with new features by Apple.

New screenshots have been posted at Italiamac.com, confirming the smaller app sizes, displaying the new features, and showing the new Cocoa-based Finder. Keen-eyed readers may spot some subtle differences from the present-day Finder to the new Finder.






Images courtesy of Italiamac.com

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 37 additional comments
(11 replies) #1 profets on 12 Feb 2009 - 20:43
"Put Back" allows users to restore an item stored in the Trash to its previous location by simply right-clicking. Windows users will be familiar with this, and the feature was mysteriously lost in the transition from OS 9 to OS X, up until now.


why would apple have even removed something so simple if it already existed?
#1.1 +tunafish on 12 Feb 2009 - 20:47
profets said,
why would apple have even removed something so simple if it already existed?

I have no idea, always wondered why bloody mac never had this feature
#1.2 PureLegend on 12 Feb 2009 - 20:53
It wasn't so much about "removing", more about "never remaking". OS X is basically a whole new operating system compared to Mac OS 1-9, based off of the work of NeXT.
#1.3 ahhell on 12 Feb 2009 - 20:53
Wow that is revolutionary.
#1.4 DigitalE on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:06
And Apple is going to tout "Put Back" as a revolutionary new feature.
#1.5 simon360 on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:14
No, they aren't going to tout it as a revolutionary feature...

Do you have any idea how many little things like that they added in Leopard, and didn't even put on that 300 features list?
#1.6 +Kirkburn on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:35
Gotta wonder, why not just call it "restore" like most people will recognise.
#1.7 PsykX on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:20
And Apple is going to tout "Put Back" as a revolutionary new feature.

Wow, even I would never say something like that from MS and God knows I hate them.

They're going to mention it on Apple's website as a new feature (which is actually a changelog, so they NEED to put it there no matter how big or small the change is, because yes it's new). But don't worry, they won't even mention it in a keynote or as a huge feature or something. If they ever mention it in a keynote, they'll just say "there's a put back button" period. 5 words. But I doubt it.
#1.8 mcloum on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:38
how about the catchy name of iBack
#1.9 rakeshishere on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:46
I'm Back ...... (from movie Terminator)
#1.10 KavazovAngel on 12 Feb 2009 - 23:35
"If you click this button, I'll be back."
#1.11 roadwarrior on 12 Feb 2009 - 23:39
Kirkburn said,
Gotta wonder, why not just call it "restore" like most people will recognise.


Because the name most Mac users (at least those of us who used OS 9 and earlier versions) would recognize is "Put Back". Just because "restore" is the name Windows users would recognize doesn't make it the right name on OS X. Kind of how Apple calls the file browser "Finder" and not "Explorer", or how they continue to use "Trash" instead of "Recycle Bin".
(5 replies) #2 Evolution on 12 Feb 2009 - 20:46
According to the screenshots, the program sizes have increased, not decreased.
#2.1 virtorio on 12 Feb 2009 - 20:48
Evolution said,
According to the screenshots, the program sizes have increased, not decreased.

No it doesn't. The left column has the new sizes, the right column is the current 10.5 sizes.
#2.2 PureLegend on 12 Feb 2009 - 20:50
The size on the left is the Snow Leopard size.
#2.3 matt_hobbs05 on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:10
The left screenshot of Quicktime Player surely cannot be from Snow Leopard. The modified date is April 15, 2005..
#2.4 Johnny Heavens on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:29
matt_hobbs05 said,
The left screenshot of Quicktime Player surely cannot be from Snow Leopard. The modified date is April 15, 2005..

LOL-good catch
#2.5 PsykX on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:36
LOL this is funny... I wonder if they used "touch" or something :-
(2 replies) #3 +Chicane-UK on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:06
Bloody hell.. how was Mail.app EVER 303MB?! It needed to go on a diet!! I know it needs to contain multiple binaries but jeezus!
#3.1 Furrybeagle on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:17
Chicane-UK said,
Bloody hell.. how was Mail.app EVER 303MB?! It needed to go on a diet!! I know it needs to contain multiple binaries but jeezus!


I don’t think the comparison of application sizes is valid here. If I remove all the language files except English, the size of my Mail.app would shrink from 289 MB to about 28 MB. Do the Snow Leopard dev builds even have the option to install multilingual files? I was under the impression that localization was one of the last parts of the development process…
#3.2 PsykX on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:21
Universal binaries can sometimes take twice the space of usual apps.

Also, like Furrybeagle said, localizations take up a LOT of space.
(1 reply) #4 Johnny Heavens on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:31
This doesn't mean the apps are smaller. It may just mean that the apps use more files that are part of the OS and have a smaller app folder footprint.
#4.1 PsykX on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:17
No. They aren't localized everywhere, period.

Instead, if you have a spanish version of the OS, it might install English and Spanish. Then, if you want it in french (as if you really would switch 10 billion times in a week) I think you might just download it or just put the DVD back in and install french or something. Right now, apps are localized in so many languages that it takes a lot of place.
(1 reply) #5 Smethead on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:39
What is the icon in the left bottom corner of the Finder window? I never saw that before.
#5.1 osirisX on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:42
Smethead said,
What is the icon in the left bottom corner of the Finder window? I never saw that before.


That has always been there. Says the current folder is in Icons view.
(1 reply) #6 osirisX on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:43
More importantly, there is a icon resize slider in all Finder windows now. But Aqua looks ****ing ugly on the metal windows. Browsable Stacks are very welcome.
#6.1 RealFduch on 13 Feb 2009 - 01:48
osirisX said,
More importantly, there is a icon resize slider in all Finder windows now. But Aqua looks ****ing ugly on the metal windows. Browsable Stacks are very welcome.

Wow! Another cool Apple innovation!

Wait... It seems to me I saw it somewhere already!
(1 reply) #7 +Xerxes on 12 Feb 2009 - 21:53
I wounder if the "improved" QuickTime will also be available for Windows? or will Windows users still need to pay for the "Pro" features? (features I might add, that should of been free to begin with)
#7.1 PsykX on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:28
Hmm I couldn't answer to this.

I could understand that paying for OS X, in some way, means paying for QuickTime. When you buy Windows, there's no QuickTime and you don't pay for it natively. So I would see Windows users paying a small fee maybe.

BUT, QuickTime's a god damned media player. It *needs* to be free for whichever platform it is developped on.

So honestly, I would make this free for both OS X and Windows. And I would completely eliminate "different versions of QuickTime". Apple doesn't like making all kinds of different versions of products (Normal, Pro, Extra-Pro, ....) so in order to make things uniform, make just one version, a proper one, and make it free on Windows and OS X.
(3 replies) #8 g_denne on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:13
"Put Back" a feature? Really, Apple? That's like saying being able to "File...Quit" is a feature. LOLs all round with that one... the PR garbage these companies try to pull, eh? Oh, wait...people actually fall for this kinda spin.
#8.1 PsykX on 12 Feb 2009 - 22:23
Ok. First of all, Apple NEVER reported anything about a "Put back" button. Journalists and/or wannabe journalists did, like here on Neowin, on Macrumors, etc.

Second, the thing that annoys me the most, Apple just put the button there. Nothing else. And you're making a whole story up about it? Woah...
#8.2 icooo on 12 Feb 2009 - 23:57
PsykX said,
Ok. First of all, Apple NEVER reported anything about a "Put back" button. Journalists and/or wannabe journalists did, like here on Neowin, on Macrumors, etc.

Second, the thing that annoys me the most, Apple just put the button there. Nothing else. And you're making a whole story up about it? Woah...


From: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html

Empty Trash Button
Empty the Trash from the Trash itself with the Empty Trash button.

Word of the Day Screen Saver
Expand your vocabulary with the Word of the Day screen saver. Each day the screen saver will offer up five new words for you to learn.

Search System Files
Use Spotlight to search system files.

Seriously, they really do put all that stuff on their "massive 300 features" list
#8.3 PsykX on 13 Feb 2009 - 00:55
You see, I think their "features list" in fact is a changelog. But I don't think the common user would know what this word means. If I were them, I'd rename it to something else. Nothing comes to my mind right now, but I'd do it.

This is how I see it. That button might as well go there, but I don't see it as a feature, but a change.
(2 replies) #9 LTD on 12 Feb 2009 - 23:12
Details, details. It's all about the details.

Speaking of which, I wouldn't mind seeing some of the older Aqua elements GTFO already from the UI.
#9.1 DanielZ on 13 Feb 2009 - 00:28
Which ones? I think the shiny buttons should be replaced with flat buttons to match the newer, not-so-shiny Leopard UI. Or at least the shines should be toned down.
#9.2 CalumJR on 13 Feb 2009 - 11:43
DanielZ said,
Which ones? I think the shiny buttons should be replaced with flat buttons to match the newer, not-so-shiny Leopard UI. Or at least the shines should be toned down.


The whole UI should match iTunes 8 (or what was in iTunes 7 a year before Leopard was released...), I cannot believe Apple overlooked such inconsistencies... (I'm talking about scrollbars mainly)
#10 hotdog963al on 13 Feb 2009 - 13:32
- Woot @ No Quicktime Pro, was getting fed up of having to *sort that out*.
- Awesome @ Sizes, won't have to bugger about with Monolingual anymore! ^_^

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)