Ah, the modern day Mac user.
So nice to see how our community has evolved over the years.
-SC
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
Ah, the modern day Mac user.
So nice to see how our community has evolved over the years.
-SC
Perhaps if smokesletsgo had a title bar he/she would have seen the topic
Seriously, the topic here is "Yosemite looks Terrible", that's a fair discussion. Apple is changing the way the Mac OS looks, they have released a Beta requesting Feedback. These sort of discussions have been prompted by Apple, no harm no foul.
Over the years I've worked for successful and unsuccessful companies and I noticed something I'd like to share. The companies that were highly successful had engineers and management that were very self examining. We used to say we are our own worst critics and it was true. We questioned everything, redress was part of the process.
The failing companies, people took their marching orders and unthinking built whatever they said, keep your head down, don't rock the boat. Creativity was completely stunted.
I knew a manager that took a job doing statistical analysis of surveys. He told me one day that the biggest complaints came from engineers, and beyond that engineers that worked for our company!
Last edited:
The subject is "Yosemite looks terrible"
Back in the day it was "Mac OS X looks terrible". People really hated the look of Aqua compared to OS 9. They threatened to go to Windows, etc, etc..
But what actually happened is that most people adapted and grew to like Aqua, which evolved slowly into a mature look.
The UI from Yosemite is doing the same thing. Remember this is the first iteration. As we go to the next major revision, the UI will get honed and people will adapt again.
Back in the day it was "Mac OS X looks terrible". People really hated the look of Aqua compared to OS 9. They threatened to go to Windows, etc, etc..
But what actually happened is that most people adapted and grew to like Aqua, which evolved slowly into a mature look.
The UI from Yosemite is doing the same thing. Remember this is the first iteration. As we go to the next major revision, the UI will get honed and people will adapt again.
Some of this is repetitive …
Before Yosemite, I never disliked the look of an Apple operating system for Mac hardware. I never imagined abandoning Mac OS X or OS X.
No, it's not.
The Yosemite experience has destroyed my confidence in Apple's ability to make satisfactory improvements.
A similar suggestion was made by someone (you, maybe?) a while ago. You might not realise, but it's repetitive.
Before Yosemite, I never disliked the look of an Apple operating system for Mac hardware. I never imagined abandoning Mac OS X or OS X.
No, it's not.
The Yosemite experience has destroyed my confidence in Apple's ability to make satisfactory improvements.
A similar suggestion was made by someone (you, maybe?) a while ago. You might not realise, but it's repetitive.
Last edited:
I agree. This is the first version of the new design.
I am looking forward to 10.11. I think they will polish the new UI with every new iteration.
I don't have to jump on every new OS X version. Mavericks will work fine also in 2015. After 2015 it's time for me to update.
I am expecting them to darken the traffic light buttons and I don't like the white buttons at all (for example back and forward in safari). I think a grey button on grey background would work great.
I welcome the new flat design, or better said, I welcome the idea of flat design and less glossy elements, but for my taste Apple hasn't figured out the perfect flat design yet.
But I am looking forward.
IMHO it's not just the ability to make satisfactory improvements, but their ability to make satisfactory decisions, and it's been getting progressively worse.
Why was the rotating icon that came on when a back up was going on removed? Why was the ability to put an icon in the menu bar for display settings in system preferences removed? Why was Expose, a great feature IMHO, removed, only to be replaced with a kludge after the fact? There were so many complaints about the translucent menu bar in Leopard that they had to offer a solid one, and now, for some reason, translucency is all over the interface. There is little or no logic here.
I've noticed that Mountain Lion and Mavericks seem to have an abnormally high number of bugs, and there appears to be little or no effort getting them fixed. Instead what they've decided to do is take a user interface that's loved and respected world wide and literally beat the crap out of and replace it with a gimmicky user interface for no apparent reason.
If this is the second time you hear about it, maybe it's time to act on it. You definitely have my blessings.
Did you ever consider that the reasons do actually exist, but you just don't have as much information as the people making the decisions?
Exactly. They'll tweak the design from release to release.
10.0-10.2 had pin stripes. They even matched the studio displays of the time. The interface was referred to as childish by some classic OS diehards. Gimmicy was another word used. A fad was another. People made similar comments to those being made now. Maybe not by the same people, but similar comments were made.
10.3 introduced the brushed metal look, this was taken forward a step with 10.4, but you still had pin stripes in some places. The UI was inconsistent and hotch-potch.
Then came 10.5. Pinstripes and brushed metal were gone, instead you got a grey uniform colour. The dock changed from a flat look at the same time to the dock that essentially ran through to Mavericks. The OS had finally got some consistency. But some people still hated it.
I'll be honest, it (Yosemite) feels unfinished to me. I don't like it that much. But it's the first iteration. If you look at some of the competition, it's worse.
Also the comments about bugs.
Snow Leopard has a huge memory leak. It had it from 10.6.0. They never fixed it. What happened was that inactive memory wasn't freed when other applications needed it, so the system would page to disk. The only way you could free it without a reboot was to run disk utility and repair permissions (the disk didn't need it, but for some reason the memory was released and became available RAM). IMO the best ever version of OS X is still Tiger. When that came out, all Macs were PowerPC. It would still run on a G3. It's never been as good since. But it's still better than the competition.
Last edited:
I guess that Completely new is a reason. From this topic it's clear that novelty alone does delight some customers.
A variety of logical explanations are offered here, but the variety is not coherent. There are many conflicts within and between those logics, and changes of subject (or silences) when a logic that supposedly applies to Yosemite is shown to apply to Mavericks, or vice versa.
I wonder how long we must wait before Apple makes known its human interface guidelines. And then it will be interesting, frustrating and amusing to discover how people interpret those lines, especially with regard to the aspects of Yosemite that are contentious/divisive.
If you took time to read the relevant information about timescales, and so on you would realise that such comments from you are irrelevant to me, and quite off-topic for other readers of this topic.
----------
HIG for Yosemite. Apple's reasons, those are what I want.
I don't expect to see them in public, but has anyone seen the HIG?
I just have the tab bar set to always visible in Safari, meaning that it performs the job that the title bar used to.
Obviously, the titles shrink as you have more and more tabs open, but I tend to open another window before readability suffers.
It took me a little adjustment, but I'm used to the tab bar being always there now and it means I haven't lost any functionality. Perhaps the tab bar should be turned on by default?
To be honest, Safari is the only app that I've really felt the missing toolbar's effect in. In many others (e.g. Calendar), it was a bit pointless and a waste of space.
Obviously, the titles shrink as you have more and more tabs open, but I tend to open another window before readability suffers.
It took me a little adjustment, but I'm used to the tab bar being always there now and it means I haven't lost any functionality. Perhaps the tab bar should be turned on by default?
To be honest, Safari is the only app that I've really felt the missing toolbar's effect in. In many others (e.g. Calendar), it was a bit pointless and a waste of space.
Adjustment to Yosemite: not always as easy as people imagine
For you, but not for everyone.
Difficult to see web site title a critical, high priority bug (2014-08-11)
Tabs are no substitute for a title bar (2014-08-08, 2014-08-12)
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=19500584#post19500584 (2014-08-19)
Dyslexia, learning and unlearning (2014-08-21)
For more than seven weeks I made ample use of Safari 8 and other apps in Yosemite. At the end of that period, the overall sense of things being wrong was at least as strong as when I began testing.
For you, but not for everyone.
Difficult to see web site title a critical, high priority bug (2014-08-11)
Tabs are no substitute for a title bar (2014-08-08, 2014-08-12)
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=19500584#post19500584 (2014-08-19)
"
The attentional bias persisted for nearly 200 trials after training and was unabated by explicit instructions to distribute attention evenly.
"
Dyslexia, learning and unlearning (2014-08-21)
For more than seven weeks I made ample use of Safari 8 and other apps in Yosemite. At the end of that period, the overall sense of things being wrong was at least as strong as when I began testing.
Apple has always preached simple, while delivering a rather convoluted look, then sorting it out later on. Just about the time they've got it looking good they go off the rails and begin again. It's fun to watch if you take Apple with a grain of salt. If not for their weird ways MacRumors would be a less entertaining place.
I'm just thinking - everyone crying about the removal of the title bar
Anyone used Chrome? There is no window title bar for years and I havent heard anyone moaning about it in chrome. Yes I dont mean the argument thats the reason you all are using Safari but when I switched from Firefox to Chrome at chrome release I never missed them. Havent even thought about the title bar because for me I dont really use them. In chrome often I have so many tabs I cant even read the title at the tab and change them only looking at favicons and knowing where the right tab is (yeah the bad part in Safari is there are no favicons in the tab bar anymore.. thats the reason I dont use it)
Anyone used Chrome? There is no window title bar for years and I havent heard anyone moaning about it in chrome. Yes I dont mean the argument thats the reason you all are using Safari but when I switched from Firefox to Chrome at chrome release I never missed them. Havent even thought about the title bar because for me I dont really use them. In chrome often I have so many tabs I cant even read the title at the tab and change them only looking at favicons and knowing where the right tab is (yeah the bad part in Safari is there are no favicons in the tab bar anymore.. thats the reason I dont use it)
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=19487265#post19487265 (2014-08-16)
– OmniWeb uses title bars.
Yes. I use Chromium, Google Chrome, Google Chrome Canary and so on very rarely; I never liked the user interface. Still, I reported bugs (e.g. Issue 160274 – chromium – outdated stable versions of Google Chrome make false statements that they are up-to-date).
Apple offering choices to beta testers (2014-08-02)
– my feedback to Apple, during that experiment, made clear a preference for the title bar on top.
… Alongside Safari 7.0.x and WebKit nightly builds, my second favourite browser is OmniWeb …
– OmniWeb uses title bars.
Yes. I use Chromium, Google Chrome, Google Chrome Canary and so on very rarely; I never liked the user interface. Still, I reported bugs (e.g. Issue 160274 – chromium – outdated stable versions of Google Chrome make false statements that they are up-to-date).
Apple offering choices to beta testers (2014-08-02)
… Rewind five years or so, a feature of Safari: tabs on top … the experiment failed. …
– my feedback to Apple, during that experiment, made clear a preference for the title bar on top.
favicons in tabs in Safari
If you would like to use Safari in Mavericks: Glims 1.0.42 allows favicons in tabs. I don't use the feature but I enabled it for this screenshot:
Glims is not yet compatible with Safari 8 (discussion).
If you would like to use Safari in Mavericks: Glims 1.0.42 allows favicons in tabs. I don't use the feature but I enabled it for this screenshot:
Glims is not yet compatible with Safari 8 (discussion).
Attachments
I know, people complain about everything, I couldn't care less, and actually, a lot of people usually open more than one tab, so yeah, there's your title bar in the tab.
Not me.
You and I both care enough to post.
Four in the current window.
Only if you confuse yourself with me.
I think there is more than a merely aesthetic change of a new look, or simplicity - because it is a certain kind of "simplicity" - which does not make, at least for me, the life more simple. It seems to me more a politic: In the last years, Apple is trying to join iOs with Os, but it isn't very useful.
in aestehtics, for 2 reasons
a) a computer screen is not as little as a tablet or iphone. So what is ok on a iPod, like a notification in the middle of the screen, is highly obtrusive on a desktop monitor. Concrete: i have a retina with a very high resolution, I use normally 2 external monitors for my work. AN example: the spotlight in one corner is enough visible for me, in the center it bothers, and imagine the spotlight window appearing in the middle of your iMac 21' when you are just looking for a link to integrate into a text?
b) a context of work on a computer is not the same as the use context of an phone. When I use a computer, I am sitting in front of it, if I use it to work or study, I am in a context of concentration, at a desktop, not doing other stuff (except procrastinating).
If i am using a handheld device, i am dwelling with cotidianity, my concentration is more dissipated and the info on the screen has to jump into my eye. So, the bright colors of the folder icons would be great on a tiny phone screen, where you have to detect them fast. But when I am working on monitor for example at a edition, the bright colors jump into my eye and distract me. I am always tweaking the icons to less disruption, the bright new aesthetics just create that disruption.
Resumed: in a context of iOs, because of the velocity I want the info, the context of dissipation, and the size of the screen, I need the info coming to me, in the context of Os we are talking of a working atmo mostly (people who just want to be communicated are well served with a tablet, today, a mobile phone can take care of ALL that), so I prefer to go to the info myself IF NEEDED. Ok, it is great to have it ordered and clear where to find, but not have it jumping to me.
the other reasons are in usability and purposes.
There is this terribly thing of social media. In Lion, all the publicity was about sharing and social media integration. I was disappointed, i wanted info about the system getting faster, programming under the hood, etc. It came back with mavericks: a better CPU admin, less energy and more speed, better monitor admin. But now, again the only publicity so far is about design and social media integration, and just getting like iOs. If I would want something which can do iOs, I would get a tablet (anyway, I have a iPod 2 gen which isn't compatible with anything, and for there rest I use android). I got a lap for a purpose which isn't social media. So this system is for me again a step backward. ( Like FinalCut: it got lost, in X presets were the priority, but they aren't the purpose of serious work - if my priority would be work to get easy I would use iMovie, I prefer the liberty of choice and own control. So I had to leave FCP.)
I use my computer as a working machine, not as a socializing machine, I get paid (and pay that fore buying a computer) for my work and not for chatting.
So, please Apple, stop mixing up iOs and Os, I guess you want to influence the hardware buying, but get aware that we are two different markets. It is not only about leaving back power users and give priority to "light" users, today a "light" user who does not want to work with a computer DOES NOT NEED ONE because mobile devices can fulfill all his needs (chatting, surfing, mails, location), so improve your iOs for them, but don't mix it up with Desk/Laptop Os.
in aestehtics, for 2 reasons
a) a computer screen is not as little as a tablet or iphone. So what is ok on a iPod, like a notification in the middle of the screen, is highly obtrusive on a desktop monitor. Concrete: i have a retina with a very high resolution, I use normally 2 external monitors for my work. AN example: the spotlight in one corner is enough visible for me, in the center it bothers, and imagine the spotlight window appearing in the middle of your iMac 21' when you are just looking for a link to integrate into a text?
b) a context of work on a computer is not the same as the use context of an phone. When I use a computer, I am sitting in front of it, if I use it to work or study, I am in a context of concentration, at a desktop, not doing other stuff (except procrastinating).
If i am using a handheld device, i am dwelling with cotidianity, my concentration is more dissipated and the info on the screen has to jump into my eye. So, the bright colors of the folder icons would be great on a tiny phone screen, where you have to detect them fast. But when I am working on monitor for example at a edition, the bright colors jump into my eye and distract me. I am always tweaking the icons to less disruption, the bright new aesthetics just create that disruption.
Resumed: in a context of iOs, because of the velocity I want the info, the context of dissipation, and the size of the screen, I need the info coming to me, in the context of Os we are talking of a working atmo mostly (people who just want to be communicated are well served with a tablet, today, a mobile phone can take care of ALL that), so I prefer to go to the info myself IF NEEDED. Ok, it is great to have it ordered and clear where to find, but not have it jumping to me.
the other reasons are in usability and purposes.
There is this terribly thing of social media. In Lion, all the publicity was about sharing and social media integration. I was disappointed, i wanted info about the system getting faster, programming under the hood, etc. It came back with mavericks: a better CPU admin, less energy and more speed, better monitor admin. But now, again the only publicity so far is about design and social media integration, and just getting like iOs. If I would want something which can do iOs, I would get a tablet (anyway, I have a iPod 2 gen which isn't compatible with anything, and for there rest I use android). I got a lap for a purpose which isn't social media. So this system is for me again a step backward. ( Like FinalCut: it got lost, in X presets were the priority, but they aren't the purpose of serious work - if my priority would be work to get easy I would use iMovie, I prefer the liberty of choice and own control. So I had to leave FCP.)
I use my computer as a working machine, not as a socializing machine, I get paid (and pay that fore buying a computer) for my work and not for chatting.
So, please Apple, stop mixing up iOs and Os, I guess you want to influence the hardware buying, but get aware that we are two different markets. It is not only about leaving back power users and give priority to "light" users, today a "light" user who does not want to work with a computer DOES NOT NEED ONE because mobile devices can fulfill all his needs (chatting, surfing, mails, location), so improve your iOs for them, but don't mix it up with Desk/Laptop Os.
Last edited:
App Nap is a feature, if you want to call it that, introduced in Mavericks and continuing in Yosemite. What does it do? It will put apps to sleep that the kernel deems inactive. It's logic likely came from the iPhone, which has tiny batteries and low processing power compared to a computer. If the kernel deems the application inactive, it reduces it's processing down to near zero.
Example: You're processing a video conversion clip that's gigabytes in size. Without app nap the conversion, which might be quite time consuming, might process completely in, say, 30 minutes. With app nap, if the converter application isn't active on the user interface, it's processing power is reduced. What used to be done in minutes might take hours. If you're aware of app nap, and for a lot of people, that's a big if, then you can disable it, if the interface is working properly which seems sketchy. If you're unaware of it, you will likely think there's something wrong with your systems.
This is just another example of Apple failing to think about the consequences of their actions. The dumbed down, "The users are all idiots doing nothing more than sexting, viewing videos of kittens chasing a button on a string, or yacking about the weather on Facebook" doesn't quite apply.
How about this scenario: A cardiac patient has a monitor attached to his heart that's digitally converting heart activity to a recorder. Your job is to take the digitized output and convert it to a viewable format because he's now having a heart attack. I'm sorry....we put your insignificant app to sleep. You weren't watching the conversion from format A to format B consistently, therefore the app is insignificant so to sleep it went.
This is just another example of how bad these guys have gotten. Stupid ideas, and now an interface that appears to be oriented to those entertained with shiny objects and the "magical" effects of translucency.
My rant is now done!
- Status