Screenshots from the latest Leopard build

[xxdesmus]

I just had a quick scan through this thread and didn't see anything close to 95%—are you sure that number is correct?

Did I ever say I was referring to this thread in particular? My exact words were: "across the web". I won't name names or name sites because there really isn't a point.

It's my opinion based on my experiences, and that's really all there is to it.

[Southern Patriot]

As usual, C_Guy has many of his "facts" screwed up.

Most of the components in Mac OS X are open source

Actually, only the kernel and the base UNIX command line utilities are open source. "Most" of OS X is closed source, including Aqua, QuickTime, Core services, and pretty much everything else that most people deal with on a daily basis.

Ironically, the idea of a GUI which originated from Xerox was "photocopied" by Apple and that's why we have OS X today

Apple licensed the GUI concepts that they used from Xerox. Did they invent the concept? No, but then again, neither did Xerox. The concept of a GUI operated computer has been around since the 1930's, and was first put into practice in the 1960's ( http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/gui.ars )

I don't have a number but in Apple's OWN Server book they explain that the idea for ACLs came directly from Microsoft and anyone on this baord that's actually USED OS X Server will know that the ACL's look pretty much the same as Microsoft's.

Apple's server software was designed to interoperate with Microsoft's, therefore it is only logical that the ACL's would have to be similar.

Apple even calls their little boxes "windows" so that's a pretty big compliment and acknowledgement to Microsoft.

Huh? You must be joking here right? The boxes on your screen have been called "windows" since the SmallTalk GUI in the 1970's. Apple called them that on the Lisa and the original Macintosh as well, both of which came before Microsoft's Windows.

Now I know I will get flamed too for my post even though I am arguing facts and not opinions but I guess that's what fanboys do.

No, you are stating things as if they were fact in the hope that better informed people don't point out the errors in your post, at which point you will claim that you are being flamed.

[PyX]

There's already a bunch of applications that are black or have had black windows in OS X. Who's the copycat now?

Aperture and Dashboard, for example, are apps that were made before that vista Glass concept.

I am not blaming MS for using the black - don't get me wrong on that - I just hate that you say Apple will copy them. Plus, how can you confirm about iLuminous? You seem to have better sources than us... or not...

[raskren]

Sometimes it's like listening to a broken record. Mac OS X Leopard will continue to be little special until they start showing us the complete feature list, which they haven't decided to do so.

Plus Mac OS X Leopard features full 32 and 64-bit support in just one OS today: One version, one installed copy able to run 32-bit and 64-bit applications side-by-side, no dual booting, no performance loss, no emulation.

I'd call that pretty groundbreaking since Microsoft hasn't been able to pull the same thing off with Windows. They're still messing around with two different versions: The 64-bit edition filled with backward compatibility issues when it comes to 32-bit drivers and applications.

This is completely wrong.

Windows XP x64 runs 32-bit applications without a problem, natively, with no performance loss. In fact, some 32-bit apps run a little faster on x64. Vista will do the same.

Comparing Leopard with Vista is inevitable, but your post is just FUD.

[.Neo]

I love the fact that Apple is basically going to rip off Vista with the black (or dark) glass look and now all the fanboys are talking about how it's such a great idea...blah blah blah.

It's just funny. Perhaps someone else sees how ironic all of this is. It's the typical "Apple's s**t doesn't stink" phenomenon that has been going on for a while now ... :rolleyes:

Go ahead, flame me, see if I care. :whistle:

Your post is completely uncalled for considering that at this point no one actually knows what Mac OS X Leopard's interface will look like.

Last time I checked Mac OS X already had it's fair share of black elements long before Aero was shown to the public and the color "black" hasn't been patented by Microsoft. :rolleyes:

[the evn show]

Did I ever say I was referring to this thread in particular? My exact words were: "across the web". I won't name names or name sites because there really isn't a point.

It's my opinion based on my experiences, and that's really all there is to it.

If Neowin isn't infected with these fanatics would you mind doing us all a favour and save your vitriol for the places that those who have earned your scorn will actually see it? Nothing is accomplished by attacking people with ideas that you refuse to single out.

"There are these idiots with crazy ideas and I can't tell you were to find them, but I sure do I hate them and all that they stand for!" (paraphrased). That's all well and good but they aren't here so why don't you go find them and let them know?

[Southern Patriot]

This is completely wrong.

Windows XP x64 runs 32-bit applications without a problem, natively, with no performance loss. In fact, some 32-bit apps run a little faster on x64. Vista will do the same.

Comparing Leopard with Vista is inevitable, but your post is just FUD.

I think the point of his post was that Leopard will run 32-bit and 64-bit applications and drivers in one unified OS. There aren't different builds of Leopard for 64-bit and 32-bit machines either, just one OS. I've run several 32-bit applications (Newsleecher for one) on 64-bit versions of XP and Vista and all of them seem to run slower than on 32-bit versions. There's also the issue of the separate Program Files directories in the 64-bit versions, which leads to some programs not installing correctly.

[raskren]

Last time I checked Mac OS X already had it's fair share of black elements long before Aero was shown to the public and the color "black" hasn't been patented by Microsoft. :rolleyes:

And last time I checked Apple didn't hold any patents for "shiny buttons" but that didn't stop Apple from publicly calling Aero a rip-off.

[PyX]

There's the color, then way ahead there's the style.

Copying a style is much worse than copying a color. MS copied the style and some colors. It's okay for the colors, I mean, Vista can have all the black it wants, as for the style... ahem...

[Morphie]

And last time I checked Apple didn't hold any patents for "shiny buttons" but that didn't stop Apple from publicly calling Aero a rip-off.

I don't think "shiny buttons" is Apples main reasoning for calling Aero a ripoff. It's a little more in depth than that. Regardless, it's absurd to comment on Apple ripping off Microsoft, when we haven't even see screenshots of the new UI, if there even is a drastic change. I say, hold judgement until we see something concrete, and I don't think that screenshots from this current build would even be enough to be called concrete. If Apple really is holding things back, there could be a lot more coming than we know right now.

[raskren]

There's the color, then way ahead there's the style.

Copying a style is much worse than copying a color. MS copied the style and some colors. It's okay for the colors, I mean, Vista can have all the black it wants, as for the style... ahem...

I see -zero- graphic similarity between the two.

I don't think "shiny buttons" is Apples main reasoning for calling Aero a ripoff.

Then what was it?

[Morphie]

I see -zero- graphic similarity between the two.

Then what was it?

"With the first Vista beta, Microsoft seems to have taken many cues from Mac OS X with the user interface and features, right down to some of the terminology.

Even some of Vista's icons are amazingly similar to those in Tiger.

For instance, there's the interface names, Apple's Aqua and Microsoft's Aero.

In Vista, "My Documents" and "My Computer" are now "Computer" and "Documents," as they are in Mac OS X.

The search icon in the Vista beta is almost identical to Tiger's Spotlight icon, except that the magnifying glass turns the other way.

Vista buttons and other interface details have a shiny bulbous look similar to those in Mac OS X."

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1842175,00.asp

----------

And for a somewhat related example: http://daringfireball.net/2006/12/microsof...up_manager_icon

Apple is basically just saying, stop copying us, even little things. The look/usability of an Icon helps to define a company, if you steal those things you are attempting to steal another companies R&D in Icon development, UI usability. The placement of a button on the screen, the width of the bevel, the size/shape/composition of an Icon, all these things are important, and Microsoft doesn't seem to fully get it, and I think that is the majority of what Apple wants them to stop ripping off.

[raskren]

They've identified two similar graphic elements: a magnifying glass and shine. Pretty weak argument there. How many ways can you draw a magnifying glass? Not many.

[ATLien_0]

ok aero and aqua microsoft didnt do anything wrong as far as the name i mean aero stands for Authentic, Energetic, Reflective and Open. Microsoft stated why they took out the my in things already. We will just have to wait until the new osx interface comes out to see i mean they did say transparency will be in it, but i doubt it will be anything like vista.

[C_Guy]

As usual, RoadWarrior hasn't got it quite right...still...so let's sort this out:

Actually, only the kernel and the base UNIX command line utilities are open source. "Most" of OS X is closed source, including Aqua, QuickTime, Core services, and pretty much everything else that most people deal with on a daily basis.

Aqua and QuickTime do not make up "most" of OS X. There is a ton of open source in there (incluidng the Kernal, as you stated) so get your facts right before you go ranting and raving all over the place.

Apple's server software was designed to interoperate with Microsoft's, therefore it is only logical that the ACL's would have to be similar.

Yup, just like I said, they copied it from Microsoft.

No, you are stating things as if they were fact in the hope that better informed people don't point out the errors in your post, at which point you will claim that you are being flamed.

Hey, whatever you want to tell yourself to make yourself feel better. If you were actually pointing out errors (Not as in the first case) or not simply validating my point (as in the second case) then this might be an interesting conversation.

<snipped>

Edited December 13, 2006 by John S.

[ATLien_0]

ill never forget how steve jobs spent half his keynote talking about the "competitor" and the videos, thats just plain wrong, after that i sure hope apple follows through with something good and not based off vista

[Morphie]

They've identified two similar graphic elements: a magnifying glass and shine. Pretty weak argument there. How many ways can you draw a magnifying glass? Not many.

That isn't what that quote says at all. Besides, it's taken from an article where it is only a paragraph out of a totally different subject, I just felt it represented some decent examples.

All I know is, Apple has quite often made signifigant leaps forward in less is more UI design and Microsoft only seems to do so when copying Apple, which makes their movement more of a copy than a leap.

Expose, changes the way you use computers.

Spotlight, changes the way you use computers.

OS X, revolutionized the modern UI and continues to do so with each update.

In response to the "Apple stole from *nix" commentary, where is this even coming from? Apple hasn't for a minute said that their operating system isn't built on top of BSD. It is a fact they are proud of and advertise at great length. As far as ACL's go, they are supported in 10.4 for the following reason:

Mac OS X Server v10.4 is the only UNIX-based operating system to implement file system access control lists (ACLs) that are fully compatible with Windows Server 2003 Active Directory environments and Windows XP clients. ACLs provide an extended set of permissions, giving you fine-grained control over share points and folder access privileges, as well as the ability to assign multiple users and groups as owners on a file.

Such things aren't new, and duplication/similar usage in networking is something to be happy about. If everyone did things differently in networking, we'd end up with more networking support issues than we already have. Apple is trying to create an Operating system (both user and server) that will understand any type of machine/network/security it needs to be compatible with any setup. This is something you'll likely never see from Microsoft.

[C_Guy]

Where exactly in the online documentation, source code, or physical documentation will I find this?

I don't have it in front of me but the book you want is called Server Essentials by Peach Pit Press. You can also look on a Windows NT/2000/2000 Server/XP/2003 machine.

[Rodrigo]

That looks so childish. REALLY. The colors, the layout, etc.

[gkl]

I have a question: is it really that ****ing hard not to turn a topic about screenshots of the latest OS X 10.5 build(!) into a Windows vs. OS X/Microsoft vs. Apple debate? For quite some time this topic was relatively flame free but then comes a rumor that Apple might use black shiny graphics in their next OS release and BAM! 3 new pages in a day. I mean, what the ****?!

[bangbang023 Veteran]

this has gone way off topic

thread closed