Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yosemite looks terrible!
- Thread starter OldGuyTom
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
2.5 GHz Core i5.... "Snow Leopard" got smacked right in the middle of 2. and 5...
If my signature is a mess, I would appreciate knowing what it should be. Intel core i5 is the processor. I upgraded to snow leopard by buying the software from apple. I can't remember what the software was that I had when the computer came from the seller (Digital Inn Webshop).
Late 2012 MacBook Pro w/ Retina, 13-inch, 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5, 8GB RAM, Intel HD 4000 768 MB, OS X 10.8.5 Mountain Lion...
For the record, 10.8.x is Mountain Lion, 10.6.x is Snow Leopard. None of the Retina MBP can ever run Snow Leopard natively.
Just remove the " (Snow Leopard) " and you're good. 10.8.x is Mountain Lion and would have been the OS your late 2012 rMBP originally came with. rMBPs can't natively boot 10.6.x which is Snow Leopard.
Good to know that you're happy with whatever OS you have (Mountain Lion) but have you even tried Yosemite?
Thanks for those feedbacks, very helpful. 
----------
No, I haven't, too put off by the storm of criticism. I would not even know how to fiddle with the programme to make it better. I'm not very computer literate.
----------
No, I haven't, too put off by the storm of criticism. I would not even know how to fiddle with the programme to make it better. I'm not very computer literate.
Anyone that wants to try Yosemite should do it on an external drive first. That way if they don't like it or find too many applications no longer work or it's too slow they won't have to restore or try to revert back to their original OS.
complainants ignored
I empathise with the frustration, but it's not always possible for recognised complaints to be actionable, by Apple, in a way that suits the complainant.
I'd like to add something positive, about approaches to feedback that might increase the likelihood of improvements by Apple, but no. A few hours ago I spent a short while with 10.10.3. Suffered flashbacks to how I felt about Yosemite before its initial release. Revolting.
A screenshot from another recent topic:
Simple, logical. The dimmed background allows greater focus on the front window.
Apple's Yosemite novelty: make the background brighter than the foreground.
What, what, what, what, what, WHAT is going on in the minds of the designers?
Spotted Mavericks in latest Apple Watch Advertisement
It's funny how every single iMac shown in the room has Yosemite running, while the main person it features is sticking with Mavericks.
For a planned advertisement shot like this, I am kind of surprised.
Apple Watch - Up (0:36)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GtyB3cees
It's funny how every single iMac shown in the room has Yosemite running, while the main person it features is sticking with Mavericks.
For a planned advertisement shot like this, I am kind of surprised.
Apple Watch - Up (0:36)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GtyB3cees
Attachments
According to your signature you are running 10.8.5. 10.8 is Mountain Lion. 10.6 is Snow Leopard. So which are you running, 10.6 or 10.8?
Then you are running Mountain Lion not Snow Leopard. You also might want to correct your signature as it states "2 5GHz". Did you mean "2.5GHz"?
i just got a 2015 MBA. Was thinking of buying a 2014 model since I can revert back to Mavericks. The whiteness of Yosemite has been bothering me. But I'm wondering if this is because of the hardware (MBP non-retina 2012 vs. 2015 MBA) or software (Mavericks vs. Yosemite).
No, that's Jonathan Ive's "glaring white background with black print is beautiful" design model. Many complained about iOS 7 and beyond because of the "glaring white everywhere." I think he got the idea after looking at the output from a laser jet printer. This guy seriously doesn't have a clue what he's doing.
You'll have to excuse me now. I'm in an artistic mode, and accordingly, I need to stare at a tungsten light bulb for an hour or two.
Yosemite: bothersome whiteness; disgustingly bright background windows
No. Earlier in this topic, for example:
No. Earlier in this topic, for example:
… disgusts me, especially when working with low brightness... the inactive windows are BRIGHTER than the active one... wtf were they thinking
… the inactive windows are BRIGHTER than the active one... wtf were they thinking
Which is true of every version of OS X...
Which is no different than background windows in earlier versions of OS X
Last edited:
OK, I see Main, Key, and Inactive Windows under http://web.archive.org/web/20140815...Windows.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20000961-SW8 with subtleties such as
"… a non-key transparent panel displays a darker title bar …"
I'm amongst the people who can't bear the default lack of contrast in Yosemite. So maybe increased contrast improves accessibility whilst aggravating the Yosemite brightness problem.
A 2009 screenshot of Safari 4 beta (below) reminds me that it was normal for a tab in front to appear brighter. If I'm not mistaken, Safari 7.x in Mavericks continues the tradition of the a thing (a tab) in front being brighter. So to me it's no surprise that people can be disgusted by some things (windows) in the background being so much brighter than what's active/in front.
And so on … there may be various, more technical explanations for the perception that excessively bright background windows are a novelty in Yosemite.
In a 2002 discussion of a 'Modern Platinum' theme for the OS, someone found the dark and light "too close to the same shade". Maybe so (I don't recall that theme) but last year, Apple suddenly went too far in the other direction. Now too many customers are justifiably dissatisfied with Apple's changes to shading.
"… rather than the bright white interface …"
– OS X Yosemite and iOS 8, WWDC 14. | GizmoCube (2014-06-29)
"… OS X Yosemite is gratuitous. But even that is not right, it is damaging to usability in too many scenarios. And MPG might summarize this more bluntly: “one designers’s maniacal ego trip is another person’s visual pollution”. …"
– MacPerformanceGuide: OS X Yosemite: Screen Bleed-Through for Images Impairs Perception (2014-10-16)
"The bleached out effect makes the Mac environment unusable for some of us. None of the accessibility options help at all. Unless the background white can be changed fundamentally, this is one long time Apple customer (I have both an Apple II and a Mac I in my closet) who will have to abandon Apple. No choice in the matter. Yosemite in this format is unusable. "
– 2014-10-26 commentary under OS X Mavericks Vs. Yosemite - A UI Elements Comparison - Make Tech Easier
Also worth remembering: that change to the title bar was beta tested but abandoned as a default before release. To Apple's credit: the 2009 experiment did allow the title bar to sometimes show the title in its entirety. Where Apple's 2009 experiment with the title bar partly succeeded, but was abandoned …
… its 2014 experiment with the title bar typically failed to show the title – and was released.
My take on it is this: The lighter color is closer to how it was done in Panther and Tiger before it was darkened in Leopard, but similarly to Leopard and later on Yosemite there is more of a difference between inactive and active window color (and of course it doesn't use those subtle pinstripes to differentiate). You definitely did your homework, but I fail to see how this "bleaching" hugely impacts usability.
Something I will admit is on my wish list for 10.11 is a system-wide dark mode that matches the menu bar and dock. I'm sure a system-wide dark mode would fix this problem.
Name one browser that in its current form still has a title bar by default. Removing the title bar meant more space for the webpage and a more streamlined interface. Safari was actually one of the last browsers to do this in the final release.
More space? One line? Who gives a crap? This isn't a 5 inch screen we're talking about or do you have a Mac Netbook that was never released to the general public?
I think the point here is that Chrome started a BAD HORRIBLE AWFUL LOOKING TREND LIKE TYPING IN ALL CAPS. And just because lots of people do that doesn't mean it's "better". Worse yet is unreadable fonts. Worse than that is an unusable operating system feature (for example, I cannot put my Mac Mini to sleep because then my devices using NFS transfers to the Mac Mini Server stop working when the damn OS refuses to recognize NFS activity as a reason to not go to sleep (no sleep token recognition). I've reported this a half dozen times since Mavericks came out and they have yet to fix it because they are too busy butchering the GUI with POINTLESS WORTHLESS STUPID UNNECESSARY CHANGES so that they apparently have no time to fix actual real world bugs and problems that cause real people to abandon the platform for lack of usability (e.g. see businesses that have left OSX due to these changes and/or a lack of updates to computer hardware such as the Mac Pro over the years as Apple shows no interest in keeping their lines up to date and refuses to listen to customer feedback).
Yeah I'd like that too. Dark Mode in its current form is a joke. Oh and please no full white text on full black backgrounds... Dark greys, nuances, sublety...
Title at the top
If I'm not mistaken, all of the following browsers have the title at the top of the window in either a title bar or a toolbar:
Key point: whilst Google, Microsoft, Apple and some other developers have chosen to demote and/or abbreviate the title, there are plenty of other browsers that respect a tradition of showing, by default or as an option:
Removing the title from the title bar typically means failure to show the HTML title in every new window of Safari 8.x; and the tab bar is not a substitute for the title bar.
Adding the tab bar to a non-tabbed Safari window, to show the title somewhere other than the title bar, does not mean more space.
If I'm not mistaken, all of the following browsers have the title at the top of the window in either a title bar or a toolbar:
- Avant Browser
- iCab 5.5
- K-Meleon
- Konqueror
- Lunascape
- Midori
- OmniWeb, including 6.0 test (v625 r219164) on Mavericks; I assume that yesterday's test build r232234 shows the title bar by default on Yosemite (when I last tested on Yosemite, the bar was shown)
- QupZilla
- rekonq
- Safari 6.2.5
- Safari 7.1.5
- Web
- WebKit nightly Safari r183352 on Mavericks.
Key point: whilst Google, Microsoft, Apple and some other developers have chosen to demote and/or abbreviate the title, there are plenty of other browsers that respect a tradition of showing, by default or as an option:
- the title at the top.
Removing the title from the title bar typically means failure to show the HTML title in every new window of Safari 8.x; and the tab bar is not a substitute for the title bar.
Adding the tab bar to a non-tabbed Safari window, to show the title somewhere other than the title bar, does not mean more space.
- Status