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
It reminds me of an episode of Star Trek: Voyager where the crew landed in 20th century San Francisco. On accessing a computer, Chakotay thought that it was funny that UIs had pictures and icons to symbolise something, in his usual dismissive (and slightly ignorant) tone. I thought that was pretty funny.
I'm with you on this one.
When shopping I don't buy "Economy" or "Just the basics" food items, I go for the "Extra taste" and "Finest" versions because I can afford to be a little luxurious and extravagant. Apple products fall into the same perception in my opinion but OSX/iOS seems to be going back to basics with their plain looking design trend. It's ordinary.
Obviously it is personal taste and time will tell how well they pull it off.
When shopping I don't buy "Economy" or "Just the basics" food items, I go for the "Extra taste" and "Finest" versions because I can afford to be a little luxurious and extravagant. Apple products fall into the same perception in my opinion but OSX/iOS seems to be going back to basics with their plain looking design trend. It's ordinary.
Obviously it is personal taste and time will tell how well they pull it off.
Nope. They definitely share the same philosophy.
Just take the UI from the bottom, use the technologies we have today, such as the color, high density resolutions, anti-aliasing, add a Dock, and you'll end up with the UI at the top.
This is how I compared it, because obviously there is no way you can directly compare a UI from 1984 to a UI from 2014, without adapting one to the current technologies. It's like comparing a dollar from 1984 to a dollar from 2014, an accountant will actualize one to the realities of the other.
The only major difference is the transparency, which you can disable in the Accessibility pane to make both interfaces look alike even more. Again, I'm speaking in terms of philosophy.
Last edited:
It reminds me of an episode of Star Trek: Voyager where the crew landed in 20th century San Francisco. On accessing a computer, Chakotay thought that it was funny that UIs had pictures and icons to symbolise something, in his usual dismissive (and slightly ignorant) tone. I thought that was pretty funny.
Do you (or anyone) know which episode this was?
I love Star Trek.
Everyone is a critic!
It is free, you do not like it, just do not use it. Stop whining!
Except that Apple will start to require Yosemite for nearly everything except iTunes (because this is where the money is). I guarantee "Photos" will need Yosemite.
What is it with people not handling change... if you need the same crappy old experience, go back to Windows.
OOps, guess they ruined that with 8... not sure what to tell ya, but Yosemite is gorgeous.
OOps, guess they ruined that with 8... not sure what to tell ya, but Yosemite is gorgeous.
Following your post this means that "change" is always good. I don't think so.
Yosemite looks childish, comparable to the early OS X years except for the 3D effect. So, Yosemite has to evolve.
It is Jony Ive's second try (iOS and now OS X) - there is room for improvement.
Really, I was indeed happy when Jony took over, but to be honest I expected more. Modern flat design could be better. Really! It seems like Jony played around with his crayons. I expected frosted glass and I am happy that this is part of Yosemite, but the choice of color is not perfect.
If you really think 10.10 is the worst looking version of OS X ever than I just don't know what to say. Early beta versions and early official releases were markedly worse by today's standards. Yosemite is gorgeous and nearly every UI change was for the better. I was just looking at a screenshot of an old 10.9 desktop I had saved and compared it and I preferred everything in 10.10 besides an icon or two. The Apple logo in the menu bar, the cleaner menu bar icons, the text, the dock, most icons. It isn't even close. Not to mention dark mode, Apple is actually giving us an option to theme OS X now. Dark mode is brilliant.
Also, your unoriginal rant of Apple dying is very cute. Face the "facts", Apple's products are better than they've ever been and the company is as well. Go use 5 year old hardware with old OS versions if you want to bask in the "glory days", we'll all be here in the present waiting for you.
Also, your unoriginal rant of Apple dying is very cute. Face the "facts", Apple's products are better than they've ever been and the company is as well. Go use 5 year old hardware with old OS versions if you want to bask in the "glory days", we'll all be here in the present waiting for you.
Last edited:
Exactly. You want quality non-Apple hardware? Be prepared to pay just as much, and it still won't match Apple's build quality.
Want to save some money? That's fair. Just don't come complaining on here when your laptop creeks when you pick it up and makes hollow plastic noises when you tap it.
I highly doubt it. But even if it does happen it will be a refreshing take on it and will be nothing like past versions. People like to say that the new "flat" design just looks like the past, but in reality that couldn't be further from the truth. No one I've asked can actually post on an old UI from the 80's or 90's than looks anything like today's "flat" designs.
I also really dislike the term "flat". OS X Yosemite is NOT flat. It's simplified, streamlined, not as much depth, but definitely not flat. Look at the new icons, there is clear depth in the design. The thing that did leave was depth in title bars and buttons, and good riddance for that. The bubbly buttons were horribly dated.
Let me add my two cents.
I'm not a DP user so I'm only going by the screens on Apple's site and what people here have posted, but on aesthetics alone I really, really like Yosemite's look. For example I was initially so-so on the dock but after a while I now think it's perfectly fine. iOS7 was a bit of a shock but I'm a fan of the UI. Flat or quasi-flat, Yosemite looks streamlined, cleaner and sexier. It's a positive move in the right direction.
On a side note I'm still a supporter of getting rid of the dock altogether and sticking with Launchpad and Spotlight for accessing apps. I think that's another argument for another time.
I'm not a DP user so I'm only going by the screens on Apple's site and what people here have posted, but on aesthetics alone I really, really like Yosemite's look. For example I was initially so-so on the dock but after a while I now think it's perfectly fine. iOS7 was a bit of a shock but I'm a fan of the UI. Flat or quasi-flat, Yosemite looks streamlined, cleaner and sexier. It's a positive move in the right direction.
On a side note I'm still a supporter of getting rid of the dock altogether and sticking with Launchpad and Spotlight for accessing apps. I think that's another argument for another time.
Sigh. OS 1 and 3.1 look NOTHING like 10.10 and W8. Stop this nonsense. It's completely different design.
Show me a UI that looks like Yosemite from 2002, please. Last I checked 2002 UI was bubbly 3D Aqua crap.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
The bigger issue is that the changes are cosmetic. Apple isn't changing how OS X works at all. I think it sorely needs better window management. Mission Control is a mess if you have a lot of windows open in any one particular application. iOS 7 rethought the paradigm a bit of where apps live, etc. OS X is still using the same paradigm it did back in 2000.
I don't get this apparent desire to make OS X look more and more like Windows. It used to be unique and refreshing, now it is moving towards the same boring Microsoft look that everyone else is using these days.
Windows is an archaic, bloated, ugly, horrible system that I really dislike. Imitating it takes away the quality look and feel OS X once had.
Apple should lead the way, not be a follower.
Windows is an archaic, bloated, ugly, horrible system that I really dislike. Imitating it takes away the quality look and feel OS X once had.
Apple should lead the way, not be a follower.
Yosemite is a radical transition. Most user interface designs originated with the Open Software Foundation nearly 2 decades ago which was supported by nearly every computer manufacturer and OS maker in the world. What Jonathan Ive has done is basically declared, "All those people are idiots. I know what's best," or he simply doesn't know what he's doing.
Gone are clearly marked buttons that made it obvious to users where the controls are, replaced by colored regions with iconic images that won't be familiar to non-Apple users, or worse yet, control items that look more like hyperlinks (iOS 7 and probably Yosemite as well) that may end up, once again, confusing people. The "it just works" motto can be replaced by "It just works after you re-learn how to do everything." Yosemite might be clear to Apple users, but I bet it won't be to non-Apple users.
Call it a hunch, but this won't appeal to potential converts, and it's clear that about half the people that have seen Yosemite don't see it as an improvement, thus opening the door for them to move. If the objective of Yosemite was to make people look at platforms other than Apple, I'd say "Job well done, Mr. Cook. Job well done."
Gone are clearly marked buttons that made it obvious to users where the controls are, replaced by colored regions with iconic images that won't be familiar to non-Apple users, or worse yet, control items that look more like hyperlinks (iOS 7 and probably Yosemite as well) that may end up, once again, confusing people. The "it just works" motto can be replaced by "It just works after you re-learn how to do everything." Yosemite might be clear to Apple users, but I bet it won't be to non-Apple users.
Call it a hunch, but this won't appeal to potential converts, and it's clear that about half the people that have seen Yosemite don't see it as an improvement, thus opening the door for them to move. If the objective of Yosemite was to make people look at platforms other than Apple, I'd say "Job well done, Mr. Cook. Job well done."
The elements like gradients, shadows, in/out effects in buttons etc are crucial information telling user what is happening and what are the possibilities. The content isn't important alone, the user interface is as important, actually more important because without good user interface you user experience becomes terrible and no matter how much you focus to content you can't get better experience.
Take a quick thinking time for elevator buttons. Think them without mechanical pressure feedback, sound, light or so on. You would not know has you input being registered or not. You would not see on what floors elevator is stopping when you step in middle of its travel half-full of people so you would go and press for sure the button where you want, couple a times.
That's why floors has a direction lights/hands and floor numbers telling people at floors to what direction elevator is going, how long it can take to come or what is the closest one and then finally alert people the elevator has arrived with a sound and lights.
For simple thing there are requires many things to be taken care. Not to forget the height of the buttons so different height people can easily use them, different colors so colorblind people don't have problems, how to inform blind or deaf people. How about one handed people or people carrying stuff. On what side trafficking people have custom to (right or left side), how in emergency situations you quickly can use things....
On computer the user interface is not just the graphical user interface. People forget the most important ones = keyboard, mouse and display. Then other not attached to device like chair, table and lightening environment.... All those belongs or affects to user interface.
Are you using device indoors or outdoors, in dim lightening or bright situations, on table or on lap...
And graphical user interface is required to be designed so it works in such as well, among different people and so on.
There is no intuition as people believe it to mean. You are either familiar to things or then you are not. Like today it can be said that it is intuitive that a open paper sheet drops slower than same paper sheet compressed to small ball because we are familiar of the laws of physics how air resistance affects to speed. But let's go back couple hundred years and you would have hard time to explain it as people are not familiar of the subject.
Same thing is with computers, Even today there are people who are not familiar to all processes and then it is more difficult to them to use computers. But once you learn the logic, the visual differences does give you information what you can use as you are already familiar what it does mean.
And when you are not familiar with computer buttons, you are more often of what they try resemble from real world and you can use that knowledge to work with the computer.
And once you are familiar to different visual functions, you don't any more think what you do, you simply do it.
All the time we require to use familiar signs, signals and inputs, like road signs, price tags etc. With computers we are easily familiar where the buttons in keyboard are so we can actually write without looking at it. Like this I wrote on 7" tablet with its virtual keyboard without watching at once it as I am familiar where the keys are on screen position and I could even put tape over bottom of screen and I could write without problems. Does that mean you and others would not require virtual keyboard to be a visible on tablet because it is so intuitive to write with it? No.... Just that I am familiar with layout and device size.
And when you design a graphical user interface, you can't so it following a pre-defined style, but you need to find best to each situation, again and again and again.... One graphical user interface design doesn't fit to all devices, all situations, all applications or for all people...
- Status