Yosemite looks terrible!

[MagnusVonMagnum]

You are trivialising the issue. Different interfaces make use of different graphical elements and different visual paradigms. For instance, the graphical language of Yosemite is a superset of that of any other OS X. With Yosemite, app designers can make visual choices that they did not have before. And some of these choices would make no sense if you change the interface. This way, you are putting massive burden on the developer, who has to detect what kind of interface type is active on your system and adjust the application accordingly. The result is buggy and ugly, dysfunctional software. Not to mention that even such trivial things like system fonts will significantly affect the size of the UI elements, something that can screw up your app design completely.

People don't hate Yosemite because they added an extra window button. They have it because it's "flat" out ugly. I don't care about the interface design changes. I'm not upset in iOS8 that they put in a menu you can bring up by swiping upwards! I'm upset that the menu that comes up is FLAT and UGLY! The POINT is that you can get back the visual changes like drop shadows, "gel" stop light buttons and old icons and keep whatever new things are under the hood. In other words, I don't mind new features. I do mind flat/pastel/cartoony windows, backgrounds and color schemes. Of the three, I can only change the background picture. I'm stuck with the rest until Flavors is updated. Apple can easily theme OS X without removing features. If a new button is added, it gets added with the old icon/window graphics. It's something NEW. That doesn't mean to make my windows look like flat world.

The entire philosophy of OS X has always revolved around the common standards: standard UI, standard data model, standard interaction model. OS X has the best standard UI library in the world, and its looks are highly integrated into the OS itself. This holistic approach to the OS design is what made OS X successful in the first place. What you desire is simply not possible in OS X, beyond of course simple theming like dark theme/light theme and tweaks of the standard color theme.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong and/or do not understand what ANY of us have been saying since Day 1. We are not saying to not add new features to OS X and keep Mavericks until the end of time!!! Look at Flavors. How does it work? How had it ever worked? It doesn't wipe out new features. It just gives us the old icons and window decorations back! It doesn't turn OS X into Mac Classic OS. I wouldn't want it to for god's sake! But I find it pretty cool that I can have the OS 9 window decorations! Windows 7/8 has better theming support than Apple. That's sad for what was a graphics-heavy company in the past. And don't tell me Apple has never had theming as OS9 supported theming much better than OS X.

The problem here is that Apple didn't just progress OS X to the next stage. They completely and suddenly altered the visual look of OS X to be almost unrecognizable compared to past versions. The same happened with iOS. The changes were made for changes sake. The changes I'm talking about have nothing to do with new features or changes under the hood you can't see or some new way of opening the preference panel or continue working on iOS program on your Mac. They have to do with changing every icon, every window gadget, every window corner, etc. JUST TO LOOK *DIFFERENT*. The problem is that the killed functionality in the process because it's harder to read the text (on many non-Retina monitors). It's harder to see what windows is highlighted. The icons look like it's a kid theme. All 3D things like the dock have gone back to 2D whether you like it or not (after making a huge deal of the 3D dock in Leopard). Many/Most of these changes are TRIVIAL to change back to look like Mavericks or even Snow Leopard. Again, I'm not talking about functional changes. Some on here may hate the lack of Window titles. I don't really care. I simply want a professional looking OS and Mavericks LOOKS GOOD. So did Mountain Lion. So did both Leopards. Even Tiger was cool. Yosemite is the FIRST version of OS X where I can't STAND the graphical changes and that makes it a FIRST (and not in a good way).

 

[Etan1000]

Has anyone tried this?:

YosemiteRevert
https://sites.google.com/site/appleclubfhs/downloads/yosemiterevert-info

YosemiteRevert, as the name suggests, changes the icons in OS X Yosemite (10.10) back to the icons from OS X Mavericks (10.9). This includes icons for all built-in apps, menu bar icons such as the battery icon, Finder icons such as external drive icons and the default folder icon, and even the icons for preference panes in System Preferences. Now, you can enjoy all of the amazing new features in OS X Yosemite without losing the 3D look and feel of the operating system.

YosemiteRevert goes beyond the icons. It also changes the system fonts back to the fonts used in OS X Mavericks.

Although it does not currently offer this, a future version of YosemiteRevert will change other aspects of the UI as well, such as window backgrounds and buttons.

If so, any impressions?

Cautiously,
Etan

 

[grahamperrin]

YosemiteRevert

Has anyone tried this? … If so, any impressions?

Cautiously,
Etan

I haven't tried it, but there are obviously good intentions behind this first official app from the Club.

– the icons from Mavericks will certainly please some users. (Side note: that's a link to the image, not a copy.)

Just one consideration: system requirements do not include Apple's installer for Mavericks. More than caution, a gentle approach may be appropriate.

 

[Traverse]

I haven't tried it, but there are obviously good intentions behind this first official app from the Club.

– the icons from Mavericks will certainly please some users. (Side note: that's a link to the image, not a copy.)

Just one consideration: system requirements do not include Apple's installer for Mavericks. More than caution, a gentle approach may be appropriate.

Wow, I'm so behind on my reading for this thread, but will catch up soon!
_____________

These kinds of fixes don't really address the core of what's wrong with Yosemite. Except for maybe the font, these apps change only the most basic elements that don't really help the user experience.

Icons are not a massive deal, it's OS X's General design. Overly light gradients with even lighter buttons, a lack of shadow and contrast, overly used translucence material. Many of the issues will OS X can only be fixed through some major hacks which could compromise the stability of the system.

Granted, Apple has "Reduce Transparency" and "Increase Contrast", but I can't help feeling like these were half baked attempts. I dislike the all or nothing approach, but Apple could have at least put some thought into the system UI with these feature enabled.


And as a partially irrelevant side note: at least Apple is consistent (even if consistently ugly). The Mavericks style icons and font look so out of place to me. Personally, I would rather have a consistently poor designed system, than a mixture of different designs with opposing goals clashing on the screen. Still, that is just my option, which doesn't really matter.


Edit: I wanted to add one thing to reiterate what I've said before. I don't really care about "ugly" or "pretty" because that is entirely too subjective for Apple to try an design. I would have remained on Yosemite had it not been for usability concerns. I do find Yosemite "prettier" than mavericks, but even if I thought it utterly disgusting, I would have used it. Apple needs to remember that usability comes first. It's sad really, when I can to OS X from Vista that was one of the key things I loved. Bold, well designed fonts, clear buttons, great contrast. OS X was far more usable than Windows to me. Now, if Windows used a slightly bolder font, I'd say it's more useable than OS X in many areas.

 

[grahamperrin]

Saturday afternoon/evening

… can only be fixed through some major hacks which could compromise the stability of the system.

I understand the concern. Users will do pretty much what they want, which is not ideal from an Apple test/feedback perspective … maybe the best that can be done by developers of hacks is to communicate, to users, that some risk to stability may be involved.

… at least Apple is consistent … I would rather have a consistently poor designed system, than a mixture of different designs with opposing goals clashing on the screen. Still, that is just my option, which doesn't really matter.

Mixtures of design: see below (it's something I wanted to respond to a couple of days ago).

Opinions are welcome. Whilst the forum rules do encourage facts, they do not discourage opinion. Amongst the guidelines:

"… Be willing to engage in fact-based, constructive debate. Look for ways to inform and learn from others. …"​

– you are willing, and so on.

… Apple needs to remember that usability comes first.

+1

Does Apple now avoid demonstrating translucency? If so, I might take it as a quiet signal that Apple it reigning itself in. (A few months ago someone wondered whether Apple intentionally went over-the-top during the early pre-releases, to discover which things were most OTT, or words to that effect … I searched long and hard this morning but couldn't relocate that post.)​

…things I loved. Bold, well designed fonts, clear buttons, great contrast. OS X was far more usable …

+1

…You can't change the fonts on a website and still expect it to look good. …

That's an overgeneralisation (but I think I know what you mean).

Back for a moment to Traverse's comment about a notional "mixture of different designs with opposing goals clashing on the screen". I'm not sure about 'opposing goals' but …

… honestly, I don't mind variety. Yes I can see (and appreciate) greater degrees of consistency/coherence with stuff on Mavericks, but I'm not upset by mixtures – provided each variation within the mixture is, in itself reasonable.

Like, we can all flit from one good looking website to another good looking website without giving a moment's thought to the variety that is normal, expected. Positions of buttons might vary from one site to the next but hey, if each design is reasonable then there's a great likelihood that viewers will know where to click.

Bringing that thought back to the user interfaces to OS X: I wouldn't like to define limits, but things ain't what they should be in OS X Yoshoulditbe. I often recall Jason Snell's observation from a couple of days after the October release:

"… It makes me wonder if Apple was initially enthusiastic about this approach, then realized it wasn’t applicable to many situations, and rather than abandoning it just decided to live with the inconsistency. There’s certainly no clear, this-is-the-future signal. …"​

– that related to one type of inconsistency but it can, to a degree, I think, also apply to other aspects of the visual design of Yosemite. As if some things were progressed despite, not because of, milestones that had the potential to change mindsets during development. There's mindful and there's mindless; I don't suggest that Apple was mindless at those points in time, but … I'm not sure what to say (!) but lately, I keep coming back to a broad overview in which Yosemite is one long beta.

… I'm sorry, but you are wrong and/or do not understand what ANY of us have been saying since Day 1. …

Gently, please. I'm sure that most readers understand at least some of the concerns on both 'sides' of the fence. That mental fence has its benefits … on the downside, the unspoken middle ground can be lost/forgotten.

Without bias, I must say that leman does continue to bring new knowledge to this topic. Obviously there are points of contention – and that's true for most posts here – but I greatly appreciate, for example, the recent perspectives on how developers can and can not work with the given technologies.

(On the subject of mental fencing between the 'beautiful' and 'looks terrible!' topics, now might be a good time for me to say that I was amongst the people who voted for both topics to be pinned.)

 

[Etan1000]

…These kinds of fixes don't really address the core of what's wrong with Yosemite. Except for maybe the font, these apps change only the most basic elements that don't really help the user experience.

…
Edit: I wanted to add one thing to reiterate what I've said before. I don't really care about "ugly" or "pretty" because that is entirely too subjective for Apple to try an design. I would have remained on Yosemite had it not been for usability concerns. I do find Yosemite "prettier" than mavericks, but even if I thought it utterly disgusting, I would have used it. Apple needs to remember that usability comes first. It's said really, when I can to OS X from Vista that was one of the key things I loved. Bold, well designed fonts, clear buttons, great contrast. OS X was far more usable than Windows to me. Now, if Windows used a slightly bolder font, I'd say it's more useable than OS X in many areas.

I for one agree with your first and last quoted comments and, in fact, everything you said in between them! I too was prepared to accept the nursery-room appearance of the changes in Yosemite, but was shocked and disappointed by the loss of usability caused by eyestrain; and, if I were a new user, by the loss of Apple's traditional intuitiveness in the design.

Very well put!

Thanks,
Etan

 

[Alphabetize]

Been using Yosemite since the first beta, I love all the design changes. I would like it if it was even more like iOS 7 though.

 

[Traverse]

Back for a moment to Traverse's comment about a notional "mixture of different designs with opposing goals clashing on the screen". I'm not sure about 'opposing goals' but …

… honestly, I don't mind variety. Yes I can see (and appreciate) greater degrees of consistency/coherence with stuff on Mavericks, but I'm not upset by mixtures – provided each variation within the mixture is, in itself reasonable.

I found your sources interesting as usual, thanks!

I should clarify, I too like variety because it can help distinguish apps and just keep the experience interesting, but to me design should share some common consistencies.

Your website example was good. Those fonts, layouts, and colors change, most people recognize and can understand how to navigate each page. Looking for blue text or underlined font, or even "click here" buttons as a universally understood hyperlinks (even if they don't know the terminology). To insert older 3D style icons into an OS designed to be flat and minimal is just too visually inconsistent for me, but users can still recognize and use those icons as icons.

Where Apple failed to me was the completely disregard for some basic, universal design principles and they did so without consistency. I will use title bars as the example (yes I know that topic has been beaten to death here, but it's a good example nonetheless). I do not believe title bars are needed in every application, but sometimes I don't get the logic behind what apps get a title bar and what apps don't and I also don't care for the way Apple tired to merge the title bar in some apps.

For example, Calendar doesn't really need a title bar and they got rid of it. Okay, but they also got rid of it in contacts and Safari. Still they left it in System Preferences and some other apps (I haven't used Yosemite recently and can't recall which apps). I don't really understand what guidelines they used. Also, System Preferences is a good example of when they try to merge title bars unsuccessfully, in my opinion. In Mavericks the title/menu bar was thicker, but having the window controls and title on one level with the navigation and search on the other was a clean and seemingly symmetrical design. Now they combine window controls, title, and navigation on one line and it seems to have lost that sense of symmetry.

I for one agree with your first and last quoted comments and, in fact, everything you said in between them! I too was prepared to accept the nursery-room appearance of the changes in Yosemite, but was shocked and disappointed by the loss of usability caused by eyestrain; and, if I were a new user, by the loss of Apple's traditional intuitiveness in the design.

Very well put!

Thanks,
Etan

Thanks! Glad it was appreciated.

 

[b0fh666]

reporting back.

no unusual eye strain, same as always

but there is something that really disgusts me, especially when working with low brightness... the inactive windows are BRIGHTER than the active one... wtf were they thinking

thank $DEITY I mostly work with stuff zoomed all over the screen

 

[BradHatter]

I just finished installing a new drive on an acquaintance's system. She was hell bent on trying Yosemite. Yosemite doesn't bother me that much, but I'd hardly call it an improvement. Anyway, I had an external drive that I have a bunch of partitions with different OSes on it on my external drive so I let her boot off of it to see what she thought before she committed to it.

She has some vision problems. Not serious vision problems, but I guess a slight blur in near field. I had the background set to a dark background and when the translucent menus drop down, she had some problems seeing it. This surprised me. She had to put on glasses to make out the text. The problem can be alleviated by reducing the effect Accessibility options but that turns the dock into this butt-ugly gray box.

I noticed also that since active applications now have black dots instead of white dots to highlight active applications. With a dark background these are very difficult to see, even for me, and I have good vision.

What is it with the translucency? This seems to be creating a lot of problems and I see no need for it.

Quality wise, if I had to compare Yosemite to another OS, for some reason Windows 95 or Windows 98 comes to mind.

 

[grahamperrin]

Windowing and translucency

… something that really disgusts me, especially when working with low brightness... the inactive windows are BRIGHTER than the active one... wtf were they thinking …

At least in marketing, some people must have thought "Completely new" without due consideration to the effects of change for the sake of change.

… What is it with the translucency? This seems to be creating a lot of problems and I see no need for it. …

Elsewhere, with open source (and additional emphasis):

"… When you move a window around, the window becomes partially transparent, which makes positioning the window easy by allowing you to see behind it. It’s like the translucent eye candy found in Windows 7 and Mac OS X Yosemite—but more functional. …"​

https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=20545083#post20545083 for a longer quote that includes a screenshot.

 

[BradHatter]

Is it just me, or is the Apple Support Communities web site deleting posts that reflect negatively on Yosemite? I swear to God I saw a post on it complaining about some of the visual effects of the new fonts and translucency and it looks like it was deleted. I didn't bookmark it but I tried searching with the same search strings I had before and it seemed gone.

Do they have a habit of doing this?

 

[Eithanius]

Do they have a habit of doing this?

Not only that, it seems that whatever external non-Apple efforts being used to patch Snow Leopard security updates by its users have been deleted as well...

I guess this is what happens when Apple is being too open to communist Chinese market and learning a few bad things from them in the process - everything that reflects badly on Apple get suppressed...

 

[Wicked1]

It looks flatter than iOS8 and I am still keeping Lion as it works well

 

[TheBSDGuy]

The criticism of the flat look and its childish looking icons is all over the web. Last night I was looking at the possibility of doing some customizations to an iPhone running iOS 7 and stumbled upon a ton of them.

This look is not well liked. I can tolerate it but every time I observe a new "improvement" with Yosemite I nearly always end up making the exact same comment to myself: "Wow, does that look stupid."

 

[RenoGuy]

I went back

The criticism of the flat look and its childish looking icons is all over the web. Last night I was looking at the possibility of doing some customizations to an iPhone running iOS 7 and stumbled upon a ton of them.

This look is not well liked. I can tolerate it but every time I observe a new "improvement" with Yosemite I nearly always end up making the exact same comment to myself: "Wow, does that look stupid."

Just hated the look and went back to Mavericks before it was too late!

 

[grahamperrin]

Persistence of insults about Apple software in Apple Support Communities (ASC)

… is the Apple Support Communities web site deleting posts that reflect negatively on Yosemite? …

When I last checked, I got the impression that negativity of that type was tolerated.

… In fairness: Apple Support Communities (ASC) moderators seem to be reasonably tolerant of people describing Apple products as (for example) abortions https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=abortion site:discussions.apple.com – https://diigo.com/071dif for highlights from a topic that caught my eye around a week after the release of Yosemite. …

That insult ("the abortion called Yosemite") persists.

 

[Partron22]

Old timers imagining things.

Business Insider picks up on recent troubles: Apple's Software Is In A 'Nosedive' That Is Deeply Concerning, Longtime Apple Supporter Says
Marco Arment:

I suspect the rapid decline of Apple's software is a sign that marketing has a bit too much power at Apple today: the marketing priority of having major new releases every year is clearly impossible for the engineering teams to keep up with while maintaining quality. Maybe it's an engineering problem, but I suspect not — I doubt that any cohesive engineering team could keep up with these demands and maintain significantly higher quality.

via SlashDot: Tumblr Co-Founder: Apple's Software Is In a Nosedive

 

[joedec]

Business Insider picks up on recent troubles: Apple's Software Is In A 'Nosedive' That Is Deeply Concerning, Longtime Apple Supporter Says
Marco Arment:
via SlashDot: Tumblr Co-Founder: Apple's Software Is In a Nosedive

Design is not just what
it looks like and feels like.
Design is how it works.
-- Steve Jobs

 

[ZVH]

I just got a replacement for my iPhone, but this one had iOS 6 on it because the user didn't update it. Now I have 2 iPhones, one that I'll use - the one with iOS 6 on it, and the other, with iOS 7 on it, that I may just sell. Suddenly, the iPhone now has use and function again. Suddenly I'm not irritated when I turn it on and use it. Suddenly, I like it again. I assume that this will be my last iPhone since Jony Ive seems hell bent on turning everything into a cartoon fest. At least I'll have lots of time to test out other products like Samsung or anything else that comes along.

The nice thing about a computer's OS is that it can still be downgraded by restoring a previous version on it. I wonder how long that will last? It occurred to me that with iCloud, it's possible people might get more and more dependent on that service, which would make it more difficult for them to switch. I suppose Apple could put some type of security restrictions on computer systems as well, thus forcing users to accept Jony Ive's designs, whether you like them or not.

 

[F1Mac]

Business Insider picks up on recent troubles: Apple's Software Is In A 'Nosedive' That Is Deeply Concerning, Longtime Apple Supporter Says
Marco Arment:
via SlashDot: Tumblr Co-Founder: Apple's Software Is In a Nosedive

Haha there must be something more serious than BI for that kind of "study" (i.e. an article written by someone who has no problem with Apple hardware or software, but something negative just has to be said about Apple these days, so pick a blogger, oops sorry, a "respected developer" LOL, and "report" his "views", and choose a killer headline - those clowns have to click on it you know!)

 

[joedec]

Haha there must be something more serious than BI for that kind of "study" (i.e. an article written by someone who has no problem with Apple hardware or software, but something negative just has to be said about Apple these days, so pick a blogger, oops sorry, a "respected developer" LOL, and "report" his "views", and choose a killer headline - those clowns have to click on it you know!)

Its a very small fraction of people that launch successful startups, of course this guy gets Business Insiders attention. Marco Arment is not only a valley insider, but he has won big, his opinion matters.

Of course, I also agree with him.

 

[swedane]

Update: Marco Arment regrets his poor choice of words!

Its a very small fraction of people that launch successful startups, of course this guy gets Business Insiders attention. Marco Arment is not only a valley insider, but he has won big, his opinion matters.

Of course, I also agree with him.

Here's his take-back on WORDS.

What's it like to be way popular for one day!

 

[Etan1000]

Here's his take-back on WORDS.

What's it like to be way popular for one day!

Could he have gotten a "How could you!" call from a shouting/sobbing jilted Tim Cook?

After all, like every other corporation, Apple rewards and punishes media outlets with access and lack of access.

Etan

 

[joedec]

Here's his take-back on WORDS.

What's it like to be way popular for one day!

I can understand the guilt after the fallout, however his point is still valid, the problem is the people who only read the sound bites and article title and it spins out of control. I seriously doubt most responders even read the entire post.

He stated in the "original" article and I quote;

"The problem seems to be quite simple: they’re doing too much, with unrealistic deadlines.

We don’t need major OS releases every year. We don’t need each OS release to have a huge list of new features. We need our computers, phones, and tablets to work well first so we can enjoy new features released at a healthy, gradual, sustainable pace."

This is a fair appraisal and I think deep down we all know its true.