I do agree that the look of OS X needs refreshening big time. I don’t like the platinum look. Aqua was very fresh when it came out. But the mix the gray and the Aqua made the overall look too inconsistent. I predict that Leopard will be something new. There will be more black, I think. Just look at the latest Front Row and iPhone GUIs, the latter of which as you know was just revealed. That gives us a clue as to what to expect. I trust that Steve Jobs kept things close to the vest because he didn’t want Vista to steal the latest Mac OS look. M$ is counting on most consumers out there to buy Vista simply because it looks fresher than the old Fisher Price look of XP. Unfortunately that often drives sales, and those ignorant consumers do not realize that it’s what’s underneath that counts.
This whole thing is funny because my husband and I went to CompUSA Wednesday night just to see Windows Vista. It was a normal night. No crowds gathered around the PCs displaying Vista. Near the entrance CompUSA had a huge Vista display with laptops. We were the only ones looking at Vista running on the PCs.
What was my husband’s reaction after toying with Vista for about 10-minutes? He said, ”Vista is bright and shiny. It makes Tiger look a little tired.”
This just in from a response on Slashdot, regarding Gates’ treatment by the media during Vista’s rollout.
“In nearly every single Vista article, there is mention of OS X and how it’s had these features for years, which is a refreshing change. It’s been extremely frustrating for Mac users the last six years because they had this OS that, despite early flaws, was years ahead of its time, but the tech media continued to ignore it. Maybe this started after OS X Tiger was released, but since last year’s Vista delay, the media has been really harsh toward Vista and praiseworthy toward Apple. It’s like they’re finally giving Apple some long overdue credit for keeping the momentum going on OS X while the “biggest software company in the world” couldn’t even squeeze out an update to its aging Win32 codebase.
It’s like the press finally realized how behind Windows is and how it never really came to dominate the market based on its merits. Microsoft just got lucky with a braindead IBM contract in the 80s and rode the commodity PC wave. Everybody has realized that Microsoft isn’t that big and scary at all, and now that they’re being forced to compete with Google, Apple, and others, we see just how floundering they are. The tactics they used to use in the 90s (announcing vaporware to freeze the market, releasing buggy 1.0 versions and getting OEMs to bundle them over competitors, etc.) don’t work anymore.
Vista is a headache to use. The interface, the extra dialogs, the multiple menu styles, the redundant buttons...it’s a schizophrenic OS, and it even runs your games slower. Apps like Windows DVD Maker are a pathetic joke compared to iLife. I bet we didn’t see an iLife ‘07 announcement at MacWorld because it’s going to be bundled right into Leopard as part of the OS, just to stick it to Microsoft even further.
Seeing Bill’s reaction is just funny. This isn’t the first interview he’s been asked about OS X--there’s a clip on YouTube where a CNN guy asks him about it as well, and Bill just pauses and reacts. It’s funny. The press is finally waking up.”
That’s one of the most eloquent posts I’ve read about what’s happened in the past few years.
BTW - Jack is still right. All that candy-colored, sugar-coated paint on Vista makes OS X Tiger look a little gray.
After almost a year and a half, I am still thrilled with OS X “Tiger.” I am sad at the thought of possibly being ‘forced’ to move on (up?) to Leopard but, for me, Vista is definitely not an option.
It’s no secret that Apple has flattened the look of Aqua with each new release of OS X, I’m guessing to lighten the load on the hardware as X was god-awful slow on good HW until very recently. That flattening and the gradual destruction of the unified look of the interface has caused the impression you have of OS X. Apple’s recent habit of not following it’s own human interface guidelines has caused more than a few angry posts from developers, especially 10.3x & 10.4x.
A great deal of ranting over the finder has centered largely on it’s look and function, which I have no problem with. What I would like to see is a multi-threaded Finder that does not drag the system to a screeching halt if networking gets a hiccup (happens on wireless). Apps may recover nicely on OS X, but the Finder does not. If 10.5 doesn’t do anything else, a multi-threaded finder would make the upgrade worthwhile.
Purely in terns of UI, may I vote a definitive yuck on the look of Final Cut Suite (lots of busy gray windows full of tiny text), Garage Band (wood?), Mail (flat plastic) and Safari (brushed metal). Now that the G3/G4 series HW is on it’s way out, can we have the bright Aqua of OS 10.1 back? If not original Aqua, maybe a more 3d (less flat) looking version of the latest iTunes interface (contrast is nice).
Vista is colorful and bright, Tiger is “grey.” Grey to us Brits, even living in the US, means ”dull and nondescript; without interest or character.”
Yep. Except for the occasional Aqua slider bar, that describes Tiger. Grey equals old.
Let’s see what Leopard brings…
Color is very subjective. And I know something about the psychology of color. I think what you are all pointing out is the use of color in Vista as a marketing tool. It is effective in attracting attention and it changes your mood. But color in excess, and after a while of daily use, just becomes a background artifact. In some cases it could even get in the way of your work or activity. People, particularly professionals, don’t want the computer’s colors to compete with the colors of their pictures or videos or art work or games. Aqua, when it came out, received misgivings from the graphics industry for these reasons.
A company isn’t going to adopt an operating system because of its colors, and in fact, if color is distracting, could be a reason to not adopt it. To compete against Microsoft solely on the whimsy of the poplular or cultural trends in color is a waste of Apple’s time. Macs always need to be the more productive tool (by the way, that includes having fun). If Apple figures out how to make me more productive with colors in its GUI then they’re on the right track. Otherwise, they’re just chasing a passing fad. I’d prefer seeing that futile exercise left to Microsoft.
The OS is personified by what we see. Safari as a browser is wrapped in a cloak of brushed aluminum (grey). Mail, on the other hand, is wrapped in some kind softer pastel “grey.” Don’t get me started on the Finder, which has become an ancient, creaking mess of, well, grey.
I don’t know what you mean. My Finder in 10.4.8 is brushed metal. More important than color, I’d like to see the Finder updated functionally.
Those are just a few examples of what the average user will see when comparing Vista to Tiger. Vista is colorful and bright, Tiger is “grey.” Grey to us Brits, even living in the US, means ”dull and nondescript; without interest or character.”
I don’t buy that there’s that much comparison going on. That’s another issue I take with this article. The writer takes the attitude that everyone has the luxury of seeing Vista and Mac OS X side-by-side. Most people are going to be prejudiced in their choice before they even go to the store.
Let’s see what Leopard brings…
Let Leopard bring what it brings. I’m already getting it, sight unseen.
Well, I’d say something new and colorful will usually make the familiar seem average. Since OS X has been around now for six years of course it’ll start to seem like it may be losing its luster. I don’t care how much paint Microsoft throws on Vista, OS X has always felt like a polished user interface that only gets better as it matures. It is a very crisp and clean interface that isn’t in your face. Just as the original Mac OS, it gets out of the way and let you accomplish the task at hand.
It’s funny though how people seem to flip-flop over what they think they prefer. I remember back in the day when DOS was still pretty much the standard. The old “die-hards” would never give up their command line for a “toy” like the Macintosh. Oh, but Windows 3.1 was released, the graphical interface was the “wave of the future” even though it was years behind the Mac OS. Windows 95 was even billed as, “More Mac Like.” When OS X came out with all its fancy new-fangled animations and transparent-ness, they all said, “just eye candy. a waste of cpu cycles.” Now here we are again, Vista’s flashy new appearance is nothing special or new. There’s nothing there OS X can’t duplicate, if Apple were so inclined to do so.
Personally, the interface should get out of the way or, if there has to be some flash, it should at the very least have a real purpose.
I get a solid impression that the novelty is what is making people feel as if Vista is “new.” I don’t buy for a second that the OS X interface that is arguably effectively more colorful than when released and was received with as much fanfare as an update from OS 9, was considered novel because it had colorful interface widgets. The grey bit—and it’s really not grey-grey except maybe brushed metal, and that has texture—is, in this case, a scapegoat. I’m going to agree wholeheartedly with jolohaga on this one; unless Apple veers of course I fully expect them to consolidate the interface into a tasteful UI with minimal color accents. Or Apple could go with the mass market fad appeal and make the GUI look like a McDonald’s happy meal box.
Vista’s actual user-experience is bad, but I do agree that Aqua needs an update. Would be nice if 10.5 had built-in theme support.
I agree! I don’t want to mess with third party software to change my themes, I’m afraid of messing up my iMac. Question I have on Vista does it still use registry to track the programs? If so its still the same mess that Windows XP was…
Registry is still there, but my understanding is that it has been re-architected so it causes fewer problems and is easier to deal with. I can’t speak from experience though as I deal with Windows very little these days.
Interesting how easiliy some people are enchanted by kindergarten colors, not thinking about what’s behind the surface. I want a reliable OS with a serene interface. Some well-placed areas of color (e.g. red-yellow-green dots top left) are okay, if *color and function are in accordance*. And to the people hoping for a more colorful Leopard: If you take (as has been the case before) iTunes as a precursor or “preview” at what’s next, iTunes 7 (thank God) indicates just the opposite of what you’re expecting.
Are you one of those Maczealots that Windows users talk about?
I wouldn’t know. I don’t talk to Windows users much and they’re too polite to say it to my face.
“Maczealot”. That sounds like someone with whom you wouldn’t want to be associated. Funny, it’s also the term Microsoft likes to pin on the Mac community. It’s their word for “leper”. You seem to know something about the term and feel free to use it on a Mac user. Why pretend to favor Macs? Maybe you have a confession to make?
At least I choose Macs, which is more than I can say for the herd treading the tired trail to Microsoft’s slaughterhouse.
[quote author="jolohaga" date="1170553204"I don’t talk to Windows users much and they’re too polite to say it to my face.
“Maczealot”. That sounds like someone with whom you wouldn’t want to be associated. Funny, it’s also the term Microsoft likes to pin on the Mac community. It’s their word for “leper”. You seem to know something about the term and feel free to use it on a Mac user. Why pretend to favor Macs? Maybe you have a confession to make?
At least I choose Macs, which is more than I can say for the herd treading the tired trail to Microsoft’s slaughterhouse.
Welcome to the forums. Roughly 30-percent of Mac360’s readers hit the site via Windows, so we know we have plenty of Windows users checking out the Mac world. You’ll find the Mac360 staff to be a diversified bunch-- we like Apple, we like Macs, and our focus is reviews and commentary. We’re also not very dogmatic here, which means we don’t believe that Apple, Steve Jobs, et al, can do no wrong. That takes us out of the ‘zealot’ category. We have opinions and perspectives and so do our readers, of which you are one. We appreciate your consideration, your thoughts, your experience, and your respect of the opinions of others.
Those who dish it out to other readers often get it dished back.
I doubt if many people have heard ‘Microsoft’ pin the term ‘Maczealot’ on anyone. Who speaks for Microsoft? Sometimes it’s difficult to understand what ‘Microsoft’ is saying because there are so many feet stuck inside the mouth.
My point about Tiger looking ‘old’ (for a handful of reasons) next to Windows Vista is well taken, and agreed to by many experienced Mac users on this forum. That was the only substantive point being made. There was no criticism of Mac performance vs. Vista, or validity of the Mac as a platform. I use Windows daily. My personal Mac is a MacBook Pro. Our whole family uses Macs, so we know them (hardware and software) quite well, perhaps not at expert level, but certainly better than most.
As to the comparison of Vista vs. Tiger-- Apple has some work to do because OS X is a jumbled mess of “gray GUI"-- an interface soup that, sorry to say, looks a little old and tired next to Vista’s shiny, bright, colorful interface.
That was it. Nothing about usability, or stability, or performance, or anything else. Apple has a problem with the “gray GUI” portion of OS X and we, Mac users, expect them to fix it. I’m not even expecting Apple to add more color or be more ‘Vista like’ with Leopard. But I am expecting a needed refresh, perhaps along the lines of what we see in iTunes 7.x.
It’s hard to argue with the fact that Windows ‘95 was colorful and pleasant on the eyes back in 1995, while Mac OS whatever it was in those days, looked very tired and old. That was one of the items that cost Apple dearly, and I’d hate to see an updated Fisher-Price interface slow the increases Mac has made in recent years.
Somehow, I just can’t get too excited about the eye candy thing in the operating system, which is only a means to an end. The end is any or all of those programs that make the computer an essential tool today. In my hierarchy of things the operating system should be: functional, secure, reliable, efficient, adaptable, easy to use, ....., pretty to look at. Functional includes those features like communications, backup capability and interfacing between applications.
I do think that OSX needs a little visual tune-up. The lack of consistency among the Apps has always bothered me a bit (Mail Vs. Safari Vs. iPhoto, etc.)
However, paying $399 for a little bit of eye candy and security features (limited in Home Std. and Premium) that should have been available a long time ago is a bit much for me.
Yes, people that buy a new computer will have Vista included, but most people shouldn’t upgrade at all.
Besides, problems with Vista are ALREADY starting to show up:
I’d rather wait for Leopard which will give me some more useful features like: “Spaces”, “Time Machine”, “Core Animation”, etc.
Maybe OSX doesn’t have the most eyecatching GUI of the day, but I don’t think it’s a train wreck or “old” like Mr. Miller seems to imply.
By the way, I also use PC’s daily and nothing reminds me more of the pain in the butt that Windows is, than when I try do something that on the Mac is easy but in Windows is a colossal pain.
Even Vista’s version of Expose is ugly and not as practical.
