Yosemite looks terrible!

[cjmillsnun]

In fact, based on how people write their criticism, I have a very strong suspicion that the group which tends to dislike Yosemite the most are the self-proclaimed die-hard Apple users. Often the same people who complain how Apple tries to make OS X look and be like iOS and say that 'Apple is used to be so much better', 'Apple lost their way', 'OS X is being dumbed down', 'OS X is being locked down' and so on. The ever popular 'old good days' syndrome. Of course, by far not every negative post here is like that (there are some very insightful and constructive comments!) , but many of them go along the lines of 'I have been using Apple for 10/15/20 years, but Yosemite will make me move to Windows/Linux/RaspberryPi just because it does not look exactly like OS X used to look 10 years ago!'. Just some food for though. But then again, what do I know.

You know a fair bit.

We had die hard Apple fans wailing when OS X came out, not just at the lack of speed and the terrible stability (and believe me 10.0 makes iOS 8 look like an extremely stable and bug free OS), but also about the look and feel of Aqua compared to Platinum as used in OS 9.

It was labelled childish, fisher price, dumbed down, not for pro users, and many other similar labels.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Yosemite is water-themed...? Man, you better get your eyes checked...

The only things left in Mavericks were the stop light buttons and some of the flashing print and checkmark type buttons. I think they're gone now in Yosemite as well. The sliders, window buttons and even the Apple logo haven't been "AQUA" themed for some time now.

Aqua was 100% until Tiger when some hints of metal appeared in iTunes and what not. Leopard and Snow Leopard added a LOT of skeuomorphic "Metal" elements. Lion phased out metal for just plain GREY colors (very Linux/Windows-like sadly) and by Mountain Lion, skeuomorphism was dying out entirely. In Mavericks, many elements of from early OS X are still present (e.g. still have a dock; actually the Yosemite Dock is the one thing that looks more like the original than the 3D dock of Leopard, but to me that seems to be going BACKWARDS in progression. Steve liked the 3D dock. I use a side-dock so I don't really care, but I do care that it won't migrate to my 2nd monitor!).

It's sad that I have to get an Aqua theme for Firefox to maintain any gel sliders and buttons ,what-so-ever. I remember thinking when I had a Windows machine (and Amiga before that) before I got my first Mac (PowerMac Digital Audio used in 2006) how freaking COOL looking OS X looked. I actually got an Aqua theme for Linux long before I got a Mac. It was COOL looking. I really dug it. I still do a decade later. It's Apple that is abandoning me theme-wise, not me abandoning Aqua.

Frankly, I think it's high time Apple gave us a Theme Manager back. OS9 had one. Why the heck can't we just select between 10.1 to 10.10 for whatever graphical look we like best instead of Jony Ive deciding for us? It was one thing when Steve Jobs insisted he make such decisions (we all know he was a control freak), but come on, I don't give a fracking flying dip-crap about what Jony Ives WANTS. I guess the only answer will have to be something like FLAVOURS theme manager. It'll probably break on every other update or something, but at least it gives you some choices. They even have some cool OS9 themes available for it (I always liked the OS9 window decorations too. I don't like the Yosemite ones at all since they look like a 3rd grader made them in Photoshop with the FLAT FILL tool. God my Amiga could have flat colors in 4-16 colors even back in 1985. Who wants them in 2014? Every Apple fanboy that's who! They don't care what Apple puts out. It's always awesome to a fanboy.

 

[bennibeef]

The one thing I dont get, if you go out of an Apple based forum before Yosemite, OSX got already bashed to hell for it only beeing so eye candy-ish and playful icons and childish looking UI. Just read what most Windows/ubuntu/[put any other distro of linux] users said years ago. Now we have everyone saying yosemite looks childish. And most of them got on board with OS X (and most of its aqua look) and now miss the old "childish look" for the new "childish look"

 

[bobbydaz]

The Aqua theme is GONE in Yosemite. The only things left in Mavericks were the stop light buttons and some of the flashing print and checkmark type buttons. I think they're gone now in Yosemite as well. The sliders, window buttons and even the Apple logo haven't been "AQUA" themed for some time now.

Aqua was 100% until Tiger when some hints of metal appeared in iTunes and what not. Leopard and Snow Leopard added a LOT of skeuomorphic "Metal" elements. Lion phased out metal for just plain GREY colors (very Linux/Windows-like sadly) and by Mountain Lion, skeuomorphism was dying out entirely. In Mavericks, many elements of from early OS X are still present (e.g. still have a dock; actually the Yosemite Dock is the one thing that looks more like the original than the 3D dock of Leopard, but to me that seems to be going BACKWARDS in progression. Steve liked the 3D dock. I use a side-dock so I don't really care, but I do care that it won't migrate to my 2nd monitor!).

It's sad that I have to get an Aqua theme for Firefox to maintain any gel sliders and buttons ,what-so-ever. I remember thinking when I had a Windows machine (and Amiga before that) before I got my first Mac (PowerMac Digital Audio used in 2006) how freaking COOL looking OS X looked. I actually got an Aqua theme for Linux long before I got a Mac. It was COOL looking. I really dug it. I still do a decade later. It's Apple that is abandoning me theme-wise, not me abandoning Aqua.

Frankly, I think it's high time Apple gave us a Theme Manager back. OS9 had one. Why the heck can't we just select between 10.1 to 10.10 for whatever graphical look we like best instead of Jony Ive deciding for us? It was one thing when Steve Jobs insisted he make such decisions (we all know he was a control freak), but come on, I don't give a fracking flying dip-crap about what Jony Ives WANTS. I guess the only answer will have to be something like FLAVOURS theme manager. It'll probably break on every other update or something, but at least it gives you some choices. They even have some cool OS9 themes available for it (I always liked the OS9 window decorations too. I don't like the Yosemite ones at all since they look like a 3rd grader made them in Photoshop with the FLAT FILL tool. God my Amiga could have flat colors in 4-16 colors even back in 1985. Who wants them in 2014? Every Apple fanboy that's who! They don't care what Apple puts out. It's always awesome to a fanboy.

My suggestion would be that we leave the design of OS and UI to the designers. I.e the people that know what they are doing. We can't have a design by committee situation that try's to cater for all. I guess that a lot of people that hate Yosemite are not creatives. As as designer I accept that like fashion, things will always change. It's what design is all about. Aqua is incredibly dated and way past its sell by date. Time to let it go.

 

[leman]

But that is exactly the issue here. What exactly is the Aqua theme? Everybody seems to have their own opinion. People earlier were arguing that Aqua is what we see in SL. Now you come with some 'Metal' elements (first time I have ever heard that name in this context). This is what makes it tricky to speak about it — a lack of a proper definition. It seems that you constrain the Aqua theme mostly to gel cap textures. Under that definition, sure, Yosemite is not Aqua. On the other hand, I think I made it fairly clear (because its what you write above) that for me Aqua is not limited to a particular implementation of the theme, but rather, its the ideology and design considerations behind it. All I was claiming is that Yosemite design is an evolution of the OS X interface, is based on the previous designs and continues an ongoing trend which has been present over the whole history of OS X. That is reason enough for me to keep calling it Aqua.

Maybe to make this a little bit more clear: in my opinion, Yosemite interface comes very close to what Apple would have designed if they would want to create Aqua in modern time. The basic ideas are still the same. The art style is different. In that sense — Aqua is dead! Long live Aqua. But whatever, you can call it Aqua Air or Apple Aero or Yosemite crap UI. Its just a name. It changes nothing about its historic origins and the intent behind the design.

BTW, Wikipedia article for Aqua has a picture of Mavericks UI as example of the Aqua theme, even though much of the earlier elements are gone by then.

Frankly, I think it's high time Apple gave us a Theme Manager back. OS9 had one. Why the heck can't we just select between 10.1 to 10.10 for whatever graphical look we like best instead of Jony Ive deciding for us?

Because Theme Managers just don't work if you want to have unified design guidelines for your apps. If you design your UI to look good under a particular theme, there is a high chance that it will not look good when sizes, bezels, colors, fonts change. Custom controls are even worse off. Its the reason why Linux interfaces on practice often look so disharmonious — because you often have a mix of applications using different toolkits and themes. Watch the WWDC videos on Yosemite interface — there is a part where Apple devs explain the troubles they had to go through to ensure that the button labels will still fit following the font change.

It was labelled childish, fisher price, dumbed down, not for pro users, and many other similar labels.

I have been wondering about this a lot. There is this weird very loud opinion that professionalism and good looks do not match. If its too pretty, it must be childish. As far as I am concerned, that kind of attitude is what should be called childish and unprofessional in the first place.

 

[thedeske]

I have been wondering about this a lot. There is this weird very loud opinion that professionalism and good looks do not match. If its too pretty, it must be childish. As far as I am concerned, that kind of attitude is what should be called childish and unprofessional in the first place.

This time around, the attitude here was "Let's see if the UI helps me along in day to day motion" as in, is it more efficient in certain areas? I didn't expect much and after only 1 day, I can see a few things that do peal away the "Apple Flashy Thing" to a point. Yes, the flatness (whatever) does lend to easier pinpoint of certain items. Thinning out a few things is take it or leave for most
people. Miss the old? It still has signs of Apple's playful nature, but nothing that kills me while getting work done. Refined? OK, but really most of us "Old Fu*s" will only care about performance we expect in the PKG when it's settled into a few more updates.
If anything, the "Old User Complaint" might be Apple's constant "Feature" additions that are nothing more than some fluffy little toy in the UI.
I'll adjust to the Toy if I get a boost where it counts. If I want to use some odd tweak, I'll install it. 3rd party creators are plentiful for those who just have to do it slightly different. Fine .. now Back To Work!

iTunes will continue to be a FUBAR hell on the interwhatevers. I try to stay away as much as possible. People who ask me why it's so screwed get the same answer as old Doctor Advice. Don't Do That

 

[leman]

This time around, the attitude here was "Let's see if the UI helps me along in day to day motion" as in, is it more efficient in certain areas?

There were not that many posts here that actually gave me that sort of constructive impression

If anything, the "Old User Complaint" might be Apple's constant "Feature" additions that are nothing more than some fluffy little toy in the UI.

That is the bit I have difficulty understanding. Yosemite introduces a number of really important power-user features. Among them full system scriptability with JavaScript as well as OS-level shared plugins. The later is an extremely powerful feature as it allows you to add additional shared functionality to third-party apps. The Markup extension has already saved me a lot of time (I use it to give feedback to statistical reports and student homework).

 

[hamis92]

Aqua was 100% until Tiger when some hints of metal appeared in iTunes and what not. Leopard and Snow Leopard added a LOT of skeuomorphic "Metal" elements. Lion phased out metal for just plain GREY colors (very Linux/Windows-like sadly) and by Mountain Lion, skeuomorphism was dying out entirely. In Mavericks, many elements of from early OS X are still present (e.g. still have a dock; actually the Yosemite Dock is the one thing that looks more like the original than the 3D dock of Leopard, but to me that seems to be going BACKWARDS in progression. Steve liked the 3D dock. I use a side-dock so I don't really care, but I do care that it won't migrate to my 2nd monitor!).

You seem to get some of the details wrong (when some elements appeared - the order in which they appear is somewhat correct).

Brushed metal: iTunes and QuickTime Player used the theme even on Mac OS 9. First new major Mac OS X applications to use brushed metal appeared in Mac OS X 10.2, when Safari, iCal and iChat were introduced. The theme was more prominently featured in Mac OS X 10.3 and 10.4 when Finder adopted it. Brushed metal was completely phased out in Mac OS X 10.5, in favour of a simpler style, the "unified" style.

"Unified" style: Mac OS X 10.4 introduced a new "unified" window style, which combined title bar and toolbar into one, seamless element (was used in Mail and System Preferences). Mac OS X 10.5 adopted this style for all windows with a darker shade of grey; iTunes had began using it in version 5 (released in late 2005). This style could be considered metal too, but there was no texture - it was just a gradient. 10.7, 10.8 and 10.9 are a continuation of this style.

Skeuomorphism: Apple went wild with this direction in Mac OS X 10.7 and 10.8 - remember Calendar, Address Book or Notes? Rich textures like leather appeared in those applications at that time. So no, skeuomorphism hadn't died out by then. It was in 10.9 Mavericks when Apple got rid of these textures and returned to the standard UI style in aforementioned applications.

All of that concerns the general window style. Most other user interface elements have stayed fairly consistent throughout the run of Mac OS X (notable changes include square buttons and removal of gel scroll bars as well as some other blue elements in 10.7).

Sorry to not contribute to the topic itself at this time - I just felt I had to set this record straight. Feel free to correct me if I got some of the details wrong. Having used Mac OS X full-time since 10.4 and studied earlier versions extensively, this should be pretty accurate, though.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

You seem to get some of the details wrong (when some elements appeared - the order in which they appear is somewhat correct).

You may be right about the skeuomorphism. I was going mostly by memory and never used 10.7 at all (skipped from 10.6 to 10.8 and had 10.8 about 11 months before moving to Mavericks). Come to think of it, it was Mavericks that made Activity Monitor so much more difficult to look at with just a glance since it made everything "white" that was themed/colored before. I would have kept Mountain Lion if it weren't for the improved multi-monitor support in Mavericks. I started with a machine that had Jaguar on it when I got it, but I immediately moved to Tiger and eventually Leopard. My 2008 MBP came with Leopard but eventually moved to Snow Leopard. My PowerMac had to keep using Leopard, of course since Snow Leopard removed PPC support. I got Mountain Lion with the Mini Server in 2012 that replaced my PowerMac server. I moved to Mavericks for the better multi-monitor support since I have two monitors in the system and I could finally watch full screen video on one without affecting the other. I detested much of the removal of skeuomorphism elements not because I needed Notes to look like a Post-it note, but because what they substituted it with is harder to look at, especially at at a glance.

Brushed metal: iTunes and QuickTime Player used the theme even on Mac OS 9. First new major Mac OS X applications to use brushed metal appeared in Mac OS X 10.2, when Safari, iCal and iChat were introduced. The theme was more prominently featured in Mac OS X 10.3 and 10.4 when Finder adopted it.

Maybe I was thinking of Jaguar to Tiger rather than Tiger to Leopard. I only had Jaguar for a few months. I do know Tiger had the gel cap Apple symbol, though that was changed to black in Leopard.

Brushed metal was completely phased out in Mac OS X 10.5, in favour of a simpler style, the "unified" style.

"Unified" style: Mac OS X 10.4 introduced a new "unified" window style, which combined title bar and toolbar into one, seamless element (was used in Mail and System Preferences). Mac OS X 10.5 adopted this style for all windows with a darker shade of grey; iTunes had began using it in version 5

Hmmm, looking at screenshots, it's clear that 10.5 was the first step to making OS X look plain/boring. I actually detested 10.5 on the PowerMac in some respects because it was slower and definitely unstable for several revisions and broke several games as well. But it also added Spaces and some other improvements (the 3D dock did look better, IMO but I eventually switched to side-docks as they're more out of the way) and eventually newer software required Leopard or newer (the eventual reason you HAVE to upgrade all forms of OS X in the long run whether you liked them or not).

Skeuomorphism: Apple went wild with this direction in Mac OS X 10.7 and 10.8 - remember Calendar, Address Book or Notes? Rich textures like leather appeared in those applications at that time. So no, skeuomorphism hadn't died out by then. It was in 10.9 Mavericks when Apple got rid of these textures and returned to the standard UI style in aforementioned applications.

I didn't use 10.7. You may be right about the other apps, though. Whether I liked the textures or not, at least they were easily distinguished. I don't recall ever having trouble glancing at Activity Monitor before 10.9, though. It must have at least had some kind of shading in place for the graphs, etc. They're all "white" now which I hate.

All of that concerns the general window style. Most other user interface elements have stayed fairly consistent throughout the run of Mac OS X (notable changes include square buttons and removal of gel scroll bars as well as some other blue elements in 10.7).

Yes, I hated the removal of gel scroll bars. I dislike "hidden scroll bars" even more since you can't tell your position on the page at glance and they were so tiny to begin with, it seemed completely unnecessary. Fortunately, they DO have a preference option to at least keep them visible. I hope that option doesn't magically disappear with an update.

 

[thedeske]

That is the bit I have difficulty understanding. Yosemite introduces a number of really important power-user features. Among them full system scriptability with JavaScript as well as OS-level shared plugins. The later is an extremely powerful feature as it allows you to add additional shared functionality to third-party apps. The Markup extension has already saved me a lot of time (I use it to give feedback to statistical reports and student homework).

Just stating an old complaint on the previous UI. After more time on the beta, I do see more and more things that speed me along and are good tweaks to the system.

While I don't use the ones you speak of, I'm warming up to some of the basic changes in the UI that offer more clarity or perhaps subtle simplification that makes navigating a little better.

Mr. Ives didn't convince me in the promos, but after using it a bit, I'm giving it an OK.

 

[FrtzPeter]

I think it boils down to one thing an one thing only:

Some people just don't like the way Yosemite looks. It's no more complicated then that.

My opinion is that people don't want to be bothered or distracted by the operating system. If you don't like the simplified cartoonish presentation of icons and buttons, it's going to bother you. If you find that the translucent changing of title bars and sidebars as you scroll through or over high contrast regions and colors is making you lose focus on your work, then it's distracting.

It should be obvious from the length of this thread, the number of views, and the number of negative posts, that clearly, very, very, very clearly, Yosemite is irritating a fair number of people.

Sorry Yosemite Fans. Every time I look at the damn thing I just end up shaking my head and thinking "Wow. What a joke."

 

[deviant]

Sorry Yosemite Fans. Every time I look at the damn thing I just end up shaking my head and thinking "Wow. What a joke."

I installed Yosemite on my old iMac and used it for 2 days. Then i had to go on a trip for 5 days and i have Mavericks on my MBA. It really looked odd and even kinda "old". I didn't like yosemite on screenshots, but after 2 days I already converted to it. Love it now. Same thing with iOS 6-7. After a couple of months on iOS 7 i picked up my old iPad 1 and it seemed straight back from 90s. But hey, if you don't need the new features, who cares about yosemite, right?

 

[thedeske]

I think it boils down to one thing an one thing only:

Some people just don't like the way Yosemite looks. It's no more complicated then that.

Valid Point & It's a free country

 

[punchwalk]

People new to Apple will look at the external hardware designs, look at the price of the units, and then look at the UI, and just walk away. The UI is a misfit with the hardware. It's as if you're visiting an extraordinarily expensive restaurant, and the waiter approaches you with your meal on a silver tray with a silver lid. He opens the lid to reveal a hot dog. The design doesn't fit the hardware.

Well said. Yosemite's look isn't inherenly bad or wrong, but previous versions of OS X were a much better compliment to the hardware.

That's not to say that a flat UI couldn't have paired well with the hardware; it absolutely could have. I don't think Apple went far enough, however. Yosemite is, in my opinion, the biggest wholesale design change since OS X was released. Apple, however, kept just enough of the old elements in place that, when coupled with the new elements, gives rise to a bit of an identity crisis.

Two other quick gripes:

1. The translucency does absolutely nothing for me. Windows has had it since Vista (8-ish years), and I don't feel like Yosemite did it in a way that made it feel fresh or useful.

2. I'm not sure I'll ever warm up to the iOS 7+/Yosemite icon style and color palette. It's just pure yuck.

 

[simonmet]

It had a good run. Maybe it's simply time to move on...

Image

Still gorgeous after all these years!

Aqua never really got the chance to shine. As soon as they started to optimise OS X they started moving away from Aqua. Oh the horrors of the brushed metal phase.

I would like to see Aqua given the chance it deserved!

 

[deviant]

Still gorgeous after all these years!

Aqua never really got the chance to shine. As soon as they started to optimise OS X they started moving away from Aqua. Oh the horrors of the brushed metal phase.

I would like to see Aqua given the chance it deserved!

Man cmon that aqua image is TURRIBLE

 

[leman]

I think it boils down to one thing an one thing only: some people just don't like the way Yosemite looks. It's no more complicated then that.

Well said. I was trying to make that particular point clear for at least the last 30 pages

 

[Eithanius]

Hmmm, looking at screenshots, it's clear that 10.5 was the first step to making OS X look plain/boring. I actually detested 10.5 on the PowerMac in some respects because it was slower and definitely unstable for several revisions and broke several games as well. But it also added Spaces and some other improvements (the 3D dock did look better, IMO but I eventually switched to side-docks as they're more out of the way) and eventually newer software required Leopard or newer (the eventual reason you HAVE to upgrade all forms of OS X in the long run whether you liked them or not).

I believe Apple screwed up Lion the way they screwed up Leopard, and here we are with Yosemite being another major screw-up from Apple. Leopard was completely bloated even on my MacPro2,1, that I downgraded back to Tiger until 10.5.7 came about. On previous builds of Leopard, whenever I'm crunching with all CPU cores, graphics and animations became choppy. Just the 3D Dock alone is enough to slow graphics down a little. It has been a problem from 10.5 to 10.9. Fortunately it was easy to revert to 2D Dock sans 10.9 requires the help of cDock.

The only difference between Leopard and Lion onwards was that Apple fixed Leopard by an optimised 10.6. Now, I don't see any optimisations at all for current OSes. Even rMBPs are not spared with choppy performance and stuttered animations. Just do not understand why Apple want to make it worse with all those so-called eye-candy translucencies. It seems they value form over function.

Yes, I hated the removal of gel scroll bars. I dislike "hidden scroll bars" even more since you can't tell your position on the page at glance and they were so tiny to begin with, it seemed completely unnecessary. Fortunately, they DO have a preference option to at least keep them visible. I hope that option doesn't magically disappear with an update.

I'm still struggling with it on Mavericks even with the option to keep it visible. As for Yosemite, don't get me started...

The Blue Aqua gel scroller on SL and before is so much easier to spot.

 

[grahamperrin]

Ideally I should refrain from posting in this topic until after 10.10 is released, but this must be challenged …

I think it boils down to one thing an one thing only:

Some people just don't like the way Yosemite looks. It's no more complicated then that. …

Well said. I was trying to make that particular point clear for at least the last 30 pages

Some people just don't like the way Yosemite looks: true.

Does it boil down to that one truth alone?

No! For some people's complaints it's entirely wrong to take such a dismissive, simplistic view.

Reasons for disliking the look of Yosemite, and maybe rejecting Yosemite, can be complex.

 

[punchwalk]

Ideally I should refrain from posting in this topic until after 10.10 is released, but this must be challenged …





Some people just don't like the way Yosemite looks: true.

Does it boil down to that one truth alone?

No! For some people's complaints it's entirely wrong to take such a dismissive, simplistic view.

Reasons for disliking the look of Yosemite, and maybe rejecting Yosemite, can be complex.

Yes, but those reasons are still subjective, which was the intended point of the comment to which you replied.

I can't sit here and pretend that I don't like to pit my preferences against those in this community, but at the end of the day we should all be cognizant that our preferences are often centered around what works for us individually, and not around a set of objective truths.

 

[grahamperrin]

Subjectivity and mindlessness

Yes, but those reasons are still subjective …

No – not entirely.

Moreover: are subjective reasons intrinsically any less valid than objective reasons for disliking the looks?

From a dictionary definition of objective:

not dependent on the mind for existence.​

Are we to imagine that developers and designers of Yosemite take an entirely objective approach?

 

[punchwalk]

Moreover: are subjective reasons intrinsically any less valid than objective reasons for disliking the looks?

At the heart of your question lies a point that philosophers have debated intensely for centuries without arriving at an answer, so I'm not even going to attempt to answer it here.

Are we to imagine that developers and designers of Yosemite take an entirely objective approach?

Of course not. I didn't suggest anything of the sort.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

Unless the look of future releases improves vastly I am probably going to stay on the last good version that doesn't make me feel like I what to rip my eyeballs from their sockets and ram them up JI's behind! Therefore I want to stay as current as possible with Apple's last visually appealing OS which is Mavericks.

(I'm still on iOS 6 due to JI's poor UI design decisions)

I agree - I believe it was a massive mistake letting Ive anywhere near the interface design team.

 

[vslist]

*sigh* didn't you read the post above you? There is no Aqua! Yosemite adopts a flat design instead which is fine, but it's not Aqua. Even if Apple attempts to name it such.

No, I don't read literally.

 

[simonmet]

Get info redesign, from terrible Yosemite, to beautiful Yosemite
What do you think

Image

more to see here, click

That's amazing!

Apple's problem is they're not hiring people like you.