Apple's "New" GUI  

725 members have voted

  1. 1. Yay or Nay?

    • Kicks Ass!
      294
    • Meh, Who Cares?
      249
    • Utter Piece of Garbage
      182


Recommended Posts

-Apple unified the windows. Whoopee. We've had this look available via themes and Uno for...how long now? Not to mention, this is really nothing incredible.

-My dock has reflections. Yay. Is anyone actually considering this a feature? Hell, I find it annoying, simply because it makes the dock more bulky. I'm using a pretty small dock with cleardock and the reflections icons, and it's nice and minimal. It's functional, but stays out of my way. And the stacks, I'm pretty sure I took care of that a billion years ago by sticking a folder on my desktop where all my downloads go automatically.

-New Menubar? They made it...non-curved at the top corners and gave it a terrible transparency. It looks like something you'd see on a crappy rehash over at Macthemes.

-Pinstripes, again, minor editing of resources.

-HUD panels? What, you mean the transparent black windows? Those already existed before Leopard, for crying out loud.

-Yay.

If you're going to act like that nothing will ever be impressing enough.

And how did those themes come into existence in the first place? That's right they copied Apple's iTunes Unified Brushed look. iTunes always featured new UI elements before the OS: Brushed and the plastic toolbar buttons are a perfect example of it. A great portion of Mac OS X' Panther look was available via SmoothStripes for Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar as well. Months before Apple even featured the final Aqua revision.

I'm not going to debate you wether this new UI is impressive or not. But the change itself is just as mayor as the change from 10.2 Jaguar to 10.3 Panther like I stated before.

My biggest complaint is this. Apple always hypes the hell out of everything. And after all the hype, the Leopard delay, and all the jabs made at Microsoft, this is a pretty poor showing. The UI is sloppy. Honestly, I could live with it if it wasn't for the menubar Change the look, get rid of that terrible transparency. The rest is mostly superfluous crap, that I would even go as far as Aero to compare it to. There's no reason for the dock to have some stupid reflective floor gimmick. It's not functional in any way whatsoever and only makes the dock bigger.

Apple never hyped anything about a potential new UI in Mac OS X Leopard. We did that all on our own.

I remember just as many people moaning and complaining about Mac OS X 10.3 Panther's new Aqua UI, now, 4 years later, everyone loves it.

Yep, the hype is completely everyone's fault. Only thing apple said is that there were some secret features that they wouldn't reveal until WWDC 2007. They didn't say revolutionary new features, they said secret features.

People read into things way too much.

I for one will enjoy Leopard. Time Machine, Spaces, Stacks, new iChat features, new Mail & iCal features, and so on are great features that I can use immediately. Plus all of the little refinements will add some nice polish to the OS.

People are looking for stuff to complain about, because they can't take the positives at all. It isn't like Apple took a Windows GUI and plastered it onto OS X, come on people!

I find it funny, how Mac and some PC users detested Aero and now their own future UIs heads in that same area called FUNCTION

Don't go behind your computer waiting to be entertained by a standalone desktop, that's what media and content are for..

Leopard gets it done right.

If the transparent menu bar were to be accompanied with actual transparent (not opaque) menus, it wouldn't be so bad. But yeah, I'm pretty impressed with Leopard now, especially with the unified interface, new Finder, Stacks, and Quicklook. Definitely a much more revolutionary step than the change from XP to Vista, that's for sure. Should have been referred to as Mac OS XI (11.0) or something.

How is it a bigger step then XP>Vista. Vista's explorer alone added stacks, search folders, groups, about 200 filters, quick previews, supersized thumbs. Video, audio, pics, spreadsheets, emails, webpages, etc can all be previewed right in explorer without launching an external app.

they rushed the GUI. it's obvious.

also, did anyone else get a Filmstrip view flashback from that 'coverflow-finder' screenie? i swear it's like Filmstrip view in Explorer on Windows XP.

this is all looking really creepy.

i'm sure it's on everybody's minds that it looks freakishly like an Aqua skin on XP or something. transparent menu bar? after they made fun of Vista's translucent UI?

as for Stacks? functionaly no different from putting a folder on the taskbar in taskband mode. and why is Apple all of a sudden obsessed with reflections?

i'm gonna hide under my bed now and hope for this nightmare to be over...

Oh my gosh and gee whizz - Shock and Horror! A new gui that looks suspiciously like other gui's. :rolleyes:

If you don't like Leopard's gui you can always stay with Tiger and use Shapeshifter to give you that little extra something some of you so achingly desire, or perhaps change to XP where you can theme it until it looks like Apple's desktops or some mishmash from a sci fi series, or dare I suggest try any number of Linux distro's and fire up Beryl to have a desktop that can turn upside down if you wish.

This thread's dead.

Generalizations like that negate any valid comments you might have had. :no:

Actually, no, it really doesn't - but you can continue to think that if it's what your little heart desires.

P.S. - look how much I care! I'm caring what you think about my post! No, really.

they rushed the GUI. it's obvious.

Pretty much. You honestly mean to tell me that a bunch of UI designers from Apple, a multi-billion dollar company, sat down, and the best they could come up with was a transparent menubar and some copy/pasted iTunes 7 resources?

Oh my gosh and gee whizz - Shock and Horror! A new gui that looks suspiciously like other gui's. :rolleyes:

The general complaint is not that it looks like other GUIs, it's more along the lines of "it looks like ****".

Pretty much. You honestly mean to tell me that a bunch of UI designers from Apple, a multi-billion dollar company, sat down, and the best they could come up with was a transparent menubar and some copy/pasted iTunes 7 resources?

The general complaint is not that it looks like other GUIs, it's more along the lines of "it looks like ****".

Agreed.

also, did anyone else get a Filmstrip view flashback from that 'coverflow-finder' screenie? i swear it's like Filmstrip view in Explorer on Windows XP.

this is all looking really creepy.

i'm sure it's on everybody's minds that it looks freakishly like an Aqua skin on XP or something. transparent menu bar? after they made fun of Vista's translucent UI?

That sums it up pretty well. Coverflow doesn't seem to be much more than a fancy filmstrip and the new itunes style sidebar is a step closer to the XP sidebar IMO. Even though the items are fairly different it has the same hide/show groups scheme in a list-like view.

Besides that, the menu bar just doesn't work. It seems like little more than transparency for transparency's sake. It seems out of place not having the same reflective look as the dock and not having any other element in the OS really matching it. From what I can tell it doesn't even blur the background which really helps with transparency, and seeing as Vista has that perfected you'd think that it would be a given. It looks even worse when you open one of the menus and its opaque(or mostly opaque). At least that's what I think.

Besides that, the dock seems pretty cool and the larger shadows do add a better sense of depth to the desktop. But as someone stated earlier, the keynote video sums it up well with the laughter when it was unveiled followed by the "oh...he's serious " moment. I was just hoping for more.

Personally i could care less of Vista looks like OSX, or OSX looks like vista,, grow up people, who cares of 1 did / had something before the other.

*and i use a Mac, so there isnt any MS Fainboyism, i said the same thing when Vista came out, get over it

So you rather create a folder in some directory, make aliasses of all of your - let's say - applications, move those to the folder you just created and then drag it to the Dock; instead of just picking up those same applications, drag them to the Dock and let it create a virtual folder (called a Stack in this case) automatically for you for quick access?

A Stack seems like a more convenient option to me.

dude, that's what the original Apple menu was for.

call me crazy, but i honestly find searching (on the Start Menu at least) for an application and launching it from the results list to be a lot more convenient than hunting down all the apps. i think i'll ever need and then building a stack for them.

dude, that's what the original Apple menu was for.

call me crazy, but i honestly find searching (on the Start Menu at least) for an application and launching it from the results list to be a lot more convenient than hunting down all the apps. i think i'll ever need and then building a stack for them.

I prefer Ctrl-Space myself. (Bless you Quicksilver)

In OSX, a window can't go behind the menubar can it? Whats the point in the transparency then? :\ (have I posted in this thread? I can't remember :\)

Currently it can't. Most of the time the Menubar isn't used by the end-user. Maybe that's the reason Apple wanted to make it blend in more with the UI. Apart from that I can't think of a reason.

I find it funny, how Mac and some PC users detested Aero and now their own future UIs heads in that same area called FUNCTION

Are you actually comparing the amount of transparency of Leopard to that of Vista?! :|

dude, that's what the original Apple menu was for.

call me crazy, but i honestly find searching (on the Start Menu at least) for an application and launching it from the results list to be a lot more convenient than hunting down all the apps. i think i'll ever need and then building a stack for them.

Then don't. I can see myself using Stacks regularly. Especially during projects for college.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      459
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!