Apple's "New" GUI

[FOOOD]

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.

[Quillz]

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.

[.Neo]

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 June 17, 2007 by .Neo

[FOOOD]

I haven't tried (really large) .icns files with IconExaminer but have viewed Windows icons at 256x256 & larger in there (with the version that comes with 8.5). Strange that it wouldn't show the larger sizes of .icns files :unsure:

[FOOOD]

Just tested & they load up OK in Photoshop through IconBuilder.

[.Neo]

Good. Gotta love that Safari icon at 512x512 pixels. :wub:

[crazzyyfool]

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

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

[Quillz]

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?

[FOOOD]

When I first started using them I thought they looked really nice at smaller sizes but pretty poor at larger sizes.

I'm warming to them at the larger sizes but the bottom of the folder looks a little too flat for me. The flecks are a nice touch though.

[XiXora]

is it me or is the spaces icon out of date now...

[sundayx Veteran]

OSX-E got some Leopard dock themes, FYI, cause ive been using one and it looks... good enough.

[Tech_Dude_5000]

is it me or is the spaces icon out of date now...

the spaces icon reminds me of the first windows sidebar icon Whtich imo, looked like a microwave :|

They might update some of the icons by final relase.

[PyX]

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.

[.Neo]

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).

[PyX]

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

[FOOOD]

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.

[.Neo]

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:

Edited June 19, 2007 by .Neo

[hotdog666al]

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.

[Southern Patriot]

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

In case you've missed it the other dozen or so times it's been mentioned, you CAN turn off the transparency on it if you like.

[FOOOD]

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.

Yea, it's not the level of detail, just the overall design/metaphors used.

[KoL Veteran]

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

[osirisX]

The problem with the Expose and Spaces icons is that they look like widgets instead of applications.

[patconn87]

...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:

[.Neo]

...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.

[PyX]

...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.