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

Perhaps you need to read up on Fitts' Law. From a usability standpoint, having the menus in a fixed location is a GOOD THING , especially when those menus are at the edge of the screen. The Dock also adheres to Fitts Law so long as you turn off magnification.

http://www.xvsxp.com/interface/fittslaw.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts_law#Suc...of_Fitts.27_law

Excellent point, Road. Absolutely correct.

For all of you bitching about the transparent menubar go and download Menushade now and try out the transparency. After using it for more than a minute you realise why Apple did it. On the right wallpaper it makes it fade-in and puts much more focus on the app windows. I imagine the 3D Dock has much the same effect.

Menushade has a nice effect where you can make the menubar become more opaque as you rollover it, I hope the Leopard menubar has that.

Note: Fitt's Law does NOT work with large screens and multi-monitors. Why? Because the distance the mouse has to travel becomes larger.

Note: Fitt's Law does NOT work with large screens and multi-monitors. Why? Because the distance the mouse has to travel becomes larger.

Fitts' Law applies no matter how large the monitor is. The point of putting the menu bar at the edge of the screen is that it becomes an infinitely large target (in other words, if you quickly move your mouse in that direction, you can't help but hit it). If the menu bar is attached to a window (as in Windows or most Linux desktops), then you have to be more accurate with where you move your mouse. In fact, at higher resolutions, having the menu bar in a fixed location that cannot be missed is MORE important because the menu bars on windows become smaller at higher resolutions, making them smaller targets.

It's just that it seems detached from the application. To a first-time user, it would seem more like a system menu than the menu for the current application. At least now in Leopard the active window is more prominent so that part is more obvious. As for menus being smaller, isn't Leopard supposed to have a resolution independent UI so that controls are the same physical size despite the screen resolution?

I'm not being anti-apple, just noting that they seem to have made the menubar - one of OSX's main UI differences when compared to linux/windows - so much less prominent that there might be a greater strategy behind it.

Edited by Stetson

I think it's great!

I especially like the translucent taskbar. Now I won't have to use MenuShade.

The dock looks much better too. I think the whole way the system functions via core-animation looks slick, but I still wonder how much system resources these new features will consume...

Overall very nice imho.

Fitts' Law applies no matter how large the monitor is. The point of putting the menu bar at the edge of the screen is that it becomes an infinitely large target (in other words, if you quickly move your mouse in that direction, you can't help but hit it). If the menu bar is attached to a window (as in Windows or most Linux desktops), then you have to be more accurate with where you move your mouse. In fact, at higher resolutions, having the menu bar in a fixed location that cannot be missed is MORE important because the menu bars on windows become smaller at higher resolutions, making them smaller targets.

I understand your point (and Fitt's law) but I seriously believe it doesn't "fit" well on high resolution displays (not only "big" displays). The time spent travelling say 1000 pixels can be easily used to locate a finite target.

What exactly is so good about it? I dunno feels like the same thing as Tiger just a very minor change.

I know. I'm a Windows User, but then sometimes I get this moment where I love Apple, it happens with everything, of course then it goes away, but anyway, I thought they were making this huge new thing, I thought it was going to look like the iPhone's UI. I thought that they would have the iPhone have the same UI as Leopard because if they didn't and it was the tiger UI just like the iPod, then when Leopard comes out, the UI on the iPhone would be outdated and they would probably have to update it 4 months after it came out. But since the iPhone has it's very own UI and Leopard has it's UI, they are both new. But still, I wish Leopard had used the iPhone's UI, black, glossy, and transparent. But no they kept Aqua, they could've removed the menu bar if they made it that ugly, because now it uses the same type of transparency as Linux, no special effects like blur or anything, just normal transparency, nothing like glass. Oh well, maybe 10.6 will have a significant improvement from now specifically about the desktop and the UI.

the iTunes interface is HORRIBLE and now that they have incorporated it into the os, it makes me want to puke.

I never thought the interface was bad at all. I just STRONGLY dislike the way iTunes organizes the actual iTunes files [the files in your music folder - not in the iTunes app itself]. Very sloppy / disorganized. That's why I still use Winamp on the PC. Each Album gets its own folder in which the albums' artwork and playlists go. Clean and simple. It's also easier to get around when you have to use a "non-apple/iPod" device to transfer media to. I have a mac mini that I rarely use. I didn't think integrating it into the OS was so bad. I just wish the way it manages files was cleaner. I feel the same about iPhoto too. For a company that thrives on simplicity, they sure make a sloppy mess with apps organizing actual files. :/ just my opinion though....

I never thought the interface was bad at all. I just STRONGLY dislike the way iTunes organizes the actual iTunes files [the files in your music folder - not in the iTunes app itself]. Very sloppy / disorganized. That's why I still use Winamp on the PC. Each Album gets its own folder in which the albums' artwork and playlists go. Clean and simple.

This is disorganized? Each artist gets a folder, with subfolders for each album, how is that so different from what you just described?

itunes is the biggest joke ever, you have no idea how Infuriating it is to try to add music onto it, couldnt you SIMPLY just add single mp3's on, NO you have to put them into a special folder and all sorts of gay things happen, why couldnt you simply drag and drop.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. In the OS X version, File -> Add to Library and select the file or folder you want to add to the library. In the Windows version there are separate "Add to Library" commands for single files or for folders, but the concept is the same. Depending on your settings in iTunes' preferences, the file is either copied to the iTunes Music folder or left where it is.

This is disorganized? Each artist gets a folder, with subfolders for each album, how is that so different from what you just described?

Mainly with compilations / mixed CDs, of which I own a lot of. It tends to drop files in artist folders rather than a folder for the album. It would also be nice if/when downloading album artwork, the app would drop the image file/s directly in the artist\album folder. I don't hate iTunes, I just think the way it organizes the actual files could be a bit more neat/tidy. I may switch back at some point, but for now I'm happy with what I'm currently using. I've always thought that Apple makes great products. I just thought I'd post what I would like to see improved in some of their apps.

Edited by EXO242
Mainly with compilations / mixed CDs, of which I own a lot of. It tends to drop files in artist folders rather than a folder for the album. It would also be nice if/when downloading album artwork, the app would drop the image file/s directly in the artist\album folder. I don't hate iTunes, I just think the way it organizes could be a bit more neat/tidy.

OK, I can see how it would be a little annoying if you have mostly compilations. However, in my mind, keeping the artwork separate from the music is actually MORE neat and tidy than lumping them all in the same folder.

I stopped by the Apple store and used a Tiger machine while there. I can see why they are making the changes that they are in Panther. After using Vista for awhile now - Tiger does seem slightly dated. Not as bad as XP - but Vista seems a step forward from Tiger.

I stopped by the Apple store and used a Tiger machine while there. I can see why they are making the changes that they are in Panther. After using Vista for awhile now - Tiger does seem slightly dated. Not as bad as XP - but Vista seems a step forward from Tiger.

Panther was 10.3, I think you mean Leopard, which is 10.5.

I think he meant what he meant. I'm not so sure Apple Stores have Leopard beta running on the demo machine as i's a "developer preview" version

I think your reading comprehension is a little off today. He said he used Tiger in the store.

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
      458
    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!