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

Nope they're normal .icns files. The only new thing is that they hold two new sizes: 256x256 Pixels and 512x512 pixels. Unfortunately there's no way to view those two on Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, not even with Preview. :/

Cool, it's nice to see Leopard supporting giant icons, just like in Vista. That means even higher resolution icons can be made that will look good at any size. Like I said, they have the same thing in Vista, but it seems no one takes advantage of it, they still make ugly small icons.

Ah, thanks for the info.

I think the only thing you'd be able to open the icons with on Tiger is IconBuilder & IconExaminer (comes with IconBuilder), but that would only be to view & edit them. As you say you couldn't use them at the larger sizes on there.

IconExaminer won't display those large sizes either.

Cool, it's nice to see Leopard supporting giant icons, just like in Vista. That means even higher resolution icons can be made that will look good at any size. Like I said, they have the same thing in Vista, but it seems no one takes advantage of it, they still make ugly small icons.

That has always been Windows' problem. Many don't really bother using the latest technologies. It took years before most developers finally started using 32-bit alpha channel icons at 48x48 pixels for Windows XP. And even today you still have a lot of apps that carry icons that won't top 32x32 pixels at 24-bit. It's basically the exact opposite on Mac OS X.

Edited by .Neo
The folder icons look pretty nice, as if they were made from real paper. (Y)

iconszu4.png

Why are the folders now different colours? System and User maybe? That is so Windows Vista. :rolleyes:

Why are the folders now different colours? System and User maybe? That is so Windows Vista. :rolleyes:

And that doesn't make it bad :rofl: But seriously, maybe Apple is doing separate icons for both Aqua and Graphite?

The problem with the spaces icon is that it has too much details for nothing. Maybe if it was 1024x1024, it'd be nice, but at these sizes, never.

Just a fancy grid would be fine IMO. No need to add 4 wallpapers and application windows.

You're forgetting the fact that Mac OS X Leopard supports icons up to 512x512 pixels. What you're describing might be nice for 32x32 pixel icons back in the Mac OS 9 erra, but it won't really work for Mac OS X Leopard. Most of proper Mac OS X-styled icons are filled with details, just take a look at Safari, Mail and Keynote (to name three).

Yea, the Spaces icon looks really poor. Might look OK at larger sizes but in the dock (where it'll be seen the most) it just looks rushed, & not up to their usual standards.

I'm not too bothered though. I guess you'll be able to remove it from the dock & just use the hotkey which is what I'll do.

But even at 512x512, there's too many details that don't appear on the icon and that should.

I take it you've never seen the Spaces icon at 512x512 pixels?

It's as if they shrinked a whole desktop to fit 4 times in a 512x512 icon... I don't know... personally, I think that there's just something wrong with that.

Seems to me you miss the point of having such large icons. They're not meant to be used at 72 dpi, they come in handy when enabling the resolution independent UI. Which stands for having incredibly detailed interfaces without the need of having insanely large displays as well.

Of course, none of it changes the fact that both the Spaces and Expos? icons of Leopard look really poor. But it has (IMO at least) nothing to do with the level of detail, just the overal design.

Safari @ 512x512 pixels:

picture1jq7qo8.png

Edited by .Neo

One thing I HATE about this new UI is the menu bar at the top, it looks absolutely disgusting.

The new finder looks REALLY nice though, not sure on the dock however.

I find Tiger to be perfect, I Love it. Not sure about Leopard though :( I guess I'll have to wait for it to come out to truely find out. As will most of us here.

Yea, the Spaces icon looks really poor. Might look OK at larger sizes but in the dock (where it'll be seen the most) it just looks rushed, & not up to their usual standards.

I'm not too bothered though. I guess you'll be able to remove it from the dock & just use the hotkey which is what I'll do.

I agree is looks rushed. I think the icon doesnt look that good because if the poor use of lighting effects. With better lighting effect it would look better IMO

...I don't get it. It looks the same to me with a few minor changes. I don't get what all the hype is about. From that one image that was posted at the beginning of this topic, it just looks like Tiger with a few minor changes. Apple's going to make people pay an obscene amount of money for an operating system that's not a whole heck of a lot different than Tiger? To me, that's almost like the move from Win95 to Win98SE. Not much difference (and yes, I did watch the previews...), but same amount of $$ shelled out for it...

Has anyone else noticed how Apple has seemed to be ****ing more and more people off lately, and becoming more aggressive as a company, or is it just me? :unsure:

...I don't get it. It looks the same to me with a few minor changes. I don't get what all the hype is about. From that one image that was posted at the beginning of this topic, it just looks like Tiger with a few minor changes. Apple's going to make people pay an obscene amount of money for an operating system that's not a whole heck of a lot different than Tiger? To me, that's almost like the move from Win95 to Win98SE. Not much difference (and yes, I did watch the previews...), but same amount of $$ shelled out for it...

Look harder.

...I don't get it. It looks the same to me with a few minor changes. I don't get what all the hype is about. From that one image that was posted at the beginning of this topic, it just looks like Tiger with a few minor changes. Apple's going to make people pay an obscene amount of money for an operating system that's not a whole heck of a lot different than Tiger? To me, that's almost like the move from Win95 to Win98SE. Not much difference (and yes, I did watch the previews...), but same amount of $$ shelled out for it...

Has anyone else noticed how Apple has seemed to be ****ing more and more people off lately, and becoming more aggressive as a company, or is it just me? :unsure:

:|

No comment... no, seriously, no comment.

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!