Yosemite looks terrible!

[Etan1000]

We live in a world of diverse opinions for sure, some of which have about as much rationality as passing some gas and putting it in a divers helmet. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, based on individual likes and dislikes.

It is hard to create a successful product of any kind, nearly impossible to create one that pleases everybody. People just choose what fits their tastes, bitch about everything else, and all of us know some who's tastes in our views are simply Yosemite Rancid. Not sure I said anything here, but enjoyed taking some time out to toot my views.

Yes, I like and acknowledge what you have said, when it comes to aesthetics and artistic taste, but Apple demonstrated to the world years ago, through the Human Interface Guidelines, that when it comes to software design as opposed to art for art's sake, there is a direct link from form --> functionality and utility. While some of the complaints about Yosemite sound as if they are about taste, in most cases they really boil down to a negative effect on performance, either through eyestrain, headaches and/or a reduced intuitive recognition of the available software tools.

Automakers discovered this years ago. You can slide into the driver's seat of most any automobile, and the symbols for various functions are uniform, clear, sharply defined and instantly and uniformly recognizable by the brain, and are virtually the same, across almost all model years and makes, spanning the last several decades. Body and interior stylists are not permitted to mess with what automakers have learned from scientists and psychologists about how the human brain best interfaces with machinery.

Best wishes, Etan

 

[F1Mac]

So then, my friends, how do you account for the difference in reaction by the same audience?

Could it be that the designers of this forum's new interface possibly know more about software design than a designer of the external appearance and composition of hardware cases?

Etan

I was just joking Etan, hence the

 

[Etan1000]

I was just joking Etan, hence the

Okay
Gotcha

Etan

 

[F1Mac]

Automakers discovered this years ago. You can slide into the driver's seat of most any automobile, and the symbols for various functions are uniform, clear, sharply defined and instantly and uniformly recognizable by the brain, and are virtually the same, across almost all model years and makes, spanning the last several decades. Body and interior stylists are not permitted to mess with what automakers have learned from scientists and psychologists about how the human brain best interfaces with machinery.

...And yet: http://www.livescience.com/38579-drivers-confused-dashboard-lights.html

 

[Paulk]

I read that link, its interesting: I could recognise the 2 orange ones - battery and oil - but no idea at all what the helicopter is...

 

[navaira]

The helicopter obviously means "gee mate, you're stuck so bad you'll need a helicopter to lift the car"

(I think it's a gas valve)

My biggest pet peeve with Yosemite is the icon for Photos. When I look at it I see a flower, I see a sort of rainbow, and it's round. This is related to photography how? Of course with time I learned what it means. But I don't see why I should have to.

 

[F1Mac]

This is related to photography how?

The color spectrum...

 

[Etan1000]

...And yet: http://www.livescience.com/38579-drivers-confused-dashboard-lights.html

That's an interesting article, but it is not about the topic of my example, which was: clearly and consistently designating the function of each of the knobs and controls on automobiles.

Instead, that article is about warning lights on automobiles, which are the equivalent of error messages on computers, which is a whole separate topic. I agree that software designers have not done such a hot job on error messages, with Microsoft being the most notorious offender.

I continue to believe that, when it comes to clearly designating the function of each tool or control, whether on a computer operating system or on an automobile, it is important to first study and design a symbol or graphic which effectively communicates that function to the human mind, and next then to maintain consistency in its employment.

Respectfully, Etan

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

We live in a world of diverse opinions for sure, some of which have about as much rationality as passing some gas and putting it in a divers helmet. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, based on individual likes and dislikes.

It is hard to create a successful product of any kind, nearly impossible to create one that pleases everybody. People just choose what fits their tastes, bitch about everything else, and all of us know some who's tastes in our views are simply Yosemite Rancid. Not sure I said anything here, but enjoyed taking some time out to toot my views.

And that is precisely why a THEME manager for OSX would be a good idea. In fact, OS9 had a basic theme editor. It was Steve Jobs that decided everyone's desktop should look like HIS desktop. Steve's dead and so I can only assume it's Johnny fIVE that now thinks the same thing (I don't think Mr. Cook gives a crap; he's admitted he hardly even touches a Mac these days and is more into selling gold watches and a plethora of pastel colored phones).

 

[Paulk]

That's an interesting article, but it is not about the topic of my example, which was: clearly and consistently designating the function of each of the knobs and controls on automobiles.

Instead, that article is about warning lights on automobiles, which are the equivalent of error messages on computers, which is a whole separate topic. I agree that software designers have not done such a hot job on error messages, with Microsoft being the most notorious offender.

I continue to believe that, when it comes to clearly designating the function of each tool or control, whether on a computer operating system or on an automobile, it is important to first study and design a symbol or graphic which effectively communicates that function to the human mind, and next then to maintain consistency in its employment.

Respectfully, Etan

This is a very good point.

 

[Paulk]

And that is precisely why a THEME manager for OSX would be a good idea. In fact, OS9 had a basic theme editor. It was Steve Jobs that decided everyone's desktop should look like HIS desktop. Steve's dead and so I can only assume it's Johnny fIVE that now thinks the same thing (I don't think Mr. Cook gives a crap; he's admitted he hardly even touches a Mac these days and is more into selling gold watches and a plethora of pastel colored phones).

Yes, we keep coming back to diversification, "watches and a plethora of pastel colored phones" and the loss of focus on readability.

 

[Etan1000]

If we had only thought to contact Taylor Swift about Yosemite in the first place …

Dear Taylor Swift, Get Apple to change these things too, Love everyone…
Taylor Swift’s power over Apple has got the internet thinking. What else can she ask it to change about our iPhones, iPads and Macs?

Everything has changed. Taylor Swift has spoken out against Apple and seemingly achieved the impossible – she’s persuaded the tech giant to actually change something. After Swift’s intervention, Apple will now pay artists as it gives their music away for free as part of its Apple Music streaming service trial.

Some might say Apple were always looking for a way to shake off its previous stance, but that shouldn’t lead us to underestimate the sway Swift holds. There’s no bad blood between the parties that we know of, so what’s to stop Swift asking Apple for more? What else could she change for us? What in our wildest dreams …
​

http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...ift-apple-change-these-things-too?CMP=ema_565

Best wishes, Etan ;-)

PS - The most hysterically funny thing is that so far 278 people have added comments to that article in The Guardian, most of them asking Taylor to pass on to Apple their individual requests for changes or improvements! :-)

 

[Paulk]

useful Guardian article, what an astonishing flood of complaints against Yosemite and the frequent changes from one update to the next!

 

[Etan1000]

useful Guardian article, what an astonishing flood of complaints against Yosemite and the frequent changes from one update to the next!

The photo selected by The Guardian is perfect!
One can imagine it depicting Taylor confronting and scolding Tim Cook and Jony Ive!

A little comic relief for the rest of us.

Etan

 

[navaira]

The color spectrum...

True. But the beach ball of doom could also be the icon then. Or the Game Center icon. Or it could mean Photoshop. Or a Rainbow Generator...

 

[grahamperrin]

Around three weeks ago I had an opportunity to perform a day and night evaluation of a new (mid-2015) Mac with a Retina display. Day, night and long term; I could have kept it. From the first evening:

if I'm not mistaken, this display at its darkest is significantly darker than the MacBookPro5,2 at its darkest. Around 20:35 now in the UK, probably close to dusk, no lights on in my front room, I'm sat not far from the window and there's not yet a sense of Yosemite being excessively bright.

I kept an open mind, slept, and awoke in the early hours of the morning. The early start is not unusual, and I never have trouble with night-time use of Mavericks; I wondered whether Yosemite would be more tolerable on a Retina display.

Waking to Yosemite was ghastly – the Retina display did not help

The mid-2015 MacBook Pro can not boot Mavericks. So the costly, brand new, high-spec, beautiful, well-designed Apple hardware that was offered to me went back, next morning, in its box, to a secure area. For a few months, maybe. To be used, eventually, by someone else in the School.

Beautiful hardware marred by an ultimately ugly operating system. @OldGuyTom was right. Eleven months later, yes: Yosemite looks terrible!

(New hardware aside: we'll simply upgrade a spare 2011/2012 MacBook Pro that will run Mavericks. 16 GB memory and I'll be happy.)

 

[Paulk]

I'm almost tempted to try Yosemite on a boot camp part of my hard drive, but it is just too much bother.

 

[redheeler]

Around three weeks ago I had an opportunity to perform a day and night evaluation of a new (mid-2015) Mac with a Retina display. Day, night and long term; I could have kept it. From the first evening:



I kept an open mind, slept, and awoke in the early hours of the morning. The early start is not unusual, and I never have trouble with night-time use of Mavericks; I wondered whether Yosemite would be more tolerable on a Retina display.

Waking to Yosemite was ghastly – the Retina display did not help

The mid-2015 MacBook Pro can not boot Mavericks. So the costly, brand new, high-spec, beautiful, well-designed Apple hardware that was offered to me went back, next morning, in its box, to a secure area. For a few months, maybe. To be used, eventually, by someone else in the School.

Beautiful hardware marred by an ultimately ugly operating system. @OldGuyTom was right. Eleven months later, yes: Yosemite looks terrible!

(New hardware aside: we'll simply upgrade a spare 2011/2012 MacBook Pro that will run Mavericks. 16 GB memory and I'll be happy.)

My late 2014 Retina iMac also can't boot Mavericks and I get along just fine. I really don't get why someone would hate Yosemite enough to turn down a brand new rMBP just because it can't be downgraded.

I agree, Aqua charm is something that's sadly gone in Yosemite (and anything after Snow Leopard to some extent), but it's still a modern-looking Retina-minded OS. I would take a nice Retina display running Yosemite over non-Retina running Mavericks any day.

https://forums.macrumors.com/attachments/about-this-mac-mavericks-png.514781/ Proof that I have tried

 

[Paulk]

red heeler said: "I really don't get why someone would hate Yosemite enough to turn down a brand new rMBP just because it can't be downgraded."

I don't think anyone here has said they would.

 

[redheeler]

red heeler said: "I really don't get why someone would hate Yosemite enough to turn down a brand new rMBP just because it can't be downgraded."

I don't think anyone here has said they would.

If what @grahamperrin said is correct, it seems that he did.

 

[BigxMac]

(New hardware aside: we'll simply upgrade a spare 2011/2012 MacBook Pro that will run Mavericks. 16 GB memory and I'll be happy.)

I wish I could run Mavericks. I make iOS apps and in about January Apple dropped the latest Xcode support on Mavericks

 

[grahamperrin]

… I really don't get why someone would hate Yosemite enough to turn down a brand new rMBP just because it can't be downgraded. …

926659, part of the explanation belongs in 1827806. Much of the explanation is in 1758379.

If any reader can agree that none of those numbers is self-explanatory, then he or she will be a step closer to understanding my loss of respect for Apple.

 

[Etan1000]

My late 2014 Retina iMac also can't boot Mavericks and I get along just fine. I really don't get why someone would hate Yosemite enough to turn down a brand new rMBP just because it can't be downgraded.

I agree, Aqua charm is something that's sadly gone in Yosemite (and anything after Snow Leopard to some extent), but it's still a modern-looking Retina-minded OS. I would take a nice Retina display running Yosemite over non-Retina running Mavericks any day.

https://forums.macrumors.com/attachments/about-this-mac-mavericks-png.514781/ Proof that I have tried

I thought grahamperrin made it pretty clear that his reason for rejecting it was impaired usability and function due to Yosemite. I don't think he said anything about whether or not Yosemite was/was not pretty.

Respectfully, Etan

 

[redheeler]

926659, part of the explanation belongs in 1827806. Much of the explanation is in 1758379.

If any reader can agree that none of those numbers is self-explanatory, then he or she will be a step closer to understanding my loss of respect for Apple.

Perfectly self-explanitory. What I want to know is how are two random posts made in 2005 are relevant to this.

 

[grahamperrin]

two random posts made in 2005

Heheh. Not 2005, both are current. The two larger numbers are, of course, topics. I'm playing along with Apple's pretence that a URL is an acceptable substitute for a title.

Less obscurely, in an Apple world, the MacRumors Forums title for this topic is Yosemite-looks-terrible.1751546 -- I don't like long URLs, but it might help with orientation in some types of browser.

The Apple Developer Forums title for discussion of a feature of an operating system is 5275. In an Apple world where URLs are titles. Welcome to the future.