or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple working on 3D Mac OS X user interface (images)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple working on 3D Mac OS X user interface (images)

post #1 of 105
Thread Starter 
A series of Apple patent filings published this week reveal the Mac maker has spent a considerable amount of time outlining a new multi-dimensional interface for Mac OS X that would make better use of screen real estate by increasing the number of virtual surfaces capable of housing application and interface elements.

The most extensive of those filings is labeled "Multi-Dimensional Desktop" and was submitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office back in June of last year, around the same time the company took the wraps off the feature set for its upcoming release of Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard.

None of the latest interface enhancements described in the June patent are present in current pre-release builds of Snow Leopard, however, suggesting they'll be candidates for inclusion in versions of Mac OS X that would surface in years to come.

Generally speaking, the filings depict a 3D interface by which side walls, a top, and a floor all protrude from a back surface that resembles today's two-dimensional Mac OS X desktop. A few examples also suggest a radical departure from traditional interface design by which the Mac OS X menubar would be removed from the top of the screen and thrown into a stack or floating element.

An illustrated description of each of Apple's proposed design changes can be found below:



In the example above, Apple portrays an exemplary multidimensional desktop environment that includes a back surface like today's traditional two-dimensional desktop environment, which includes the Mac OS X menu bar and desktop surface. Protruding from this surface would be one or more side surfaces capable of housing object receptacles, including a "floor" that would contain the Mac OS X Dock and icon stacks positioned in the background. Other side surfaces would intersect with the floor, forming a three-dimensional box, though Apple says a "top" surface may not always be necessary.



Most of the diagrams in the filing show the multi-dimentional Finder with side surfaces, or "walls," as shown above. As is the case with the floor surface, object receptacles like the Dock can be placed along the walls at certain perceived depths. The example above shows the Dock displaced behind the 3D icon stacks sitting on the floor, but could also be arranged closer to the viewing surface so that it displays in front of the icon stacks.



The 3D icon stacks in the multi-dimensional Finder would fan outwards as they do in today's version of the Mac OS X but would not necessarily be tied to a linear path. They could instead fan in a three-dimensional arch towards a central region of the display, producing the perception of depth.



Alternatively, a short stack of icons could instead expand into a two dimensional matrix that would also display behind other elements such as the Dock. Apple adds that the stack items could corresponding to the categories of online buddies and music, which could be controlled contextually. For example, a stack item can automatically appear when the Finder receives a notification that an event associated with another user that is designated as an "online buddy" has occurred, such as an "online buddy" logging onto a network.



Apple in another example goes on to explain that the floor can be vast and sprawling, with only a portion of the surface displayed at any given time. "For example, upon a selection of the surface, [...] the surface can be scrolled in the directions indicated by the arrows," the company said. "The floor surface can include a scroll ingress and a scroll egress in which a scroll direction transitions from the scroll ingress to the scroll egress."

More specifically, the intersections of the two side walls may define a scroll ingress and a scroll egress for a left-to-right scroll direction, or the left edge and the right edge of the reflection region may define a scroll ingress and a scroll egress for a left-to-right scroll direction.

During a scroll, the stack items can be displaced from the floor surface by fading from view or by a failing effect. Meanwhile, application windows can be dragged to one of the side walls, where they'd appear in thumbnail form, or as stacks of windows. The windows could be restored to their traditional form by dragging them back to the back surface (Desktop) or through a simple double-click.

The side walls could also be colored to emphasize the back surface and the reflection regions of the interface. For example, the side surfaces could be black in color, or respective patterns, colors, or images can be rendered on each side surface. Other differentiation schemes including color schemes and image schemes can also be applied, Apple said.

A lighting aspect could also be employed to generate an illumination effect from window thumbnails or widgets placed on the side walls. For example, the illumination effect could comprise a simulated sunbeam emanating from one of the window thumbnails or widgets on the left wall. The illumination effect could change according to local environmental states. For example, it could track across the surfaces according to a local time, or its intensity could be modulated by local weather conditions that are received over the network -- high intensity for sunny days, low intensity for overcast days and during the early evening. Each element on the side walls could also cast its own shadow on subsequent interface elements to emphasize a depth aspect and an overall user interface relationship.



The above example shows how stack items on the floor can move in response to the addition of a new stack item. As the new stack item drops onto the surface, the stack items already on the surface can move in response to the displacement induced by the new stack item, shifting those stack items forwards, backwards, to the right or left.

"In one implementation, a maximum number of stack items can be displayed on the surface. If the addition of a new stack item causes the number of displayed stack items to be exceeded, then a stack item nearest a surface intersection can be displaced from the surface," Apple explained. "For example, if the maximum number of stack items to be displayed is four, then [one of the stacks] can continue to move to the edge of the surface, where [it would be] displaced, e.g., fades from view, atomizes, etc."



Another example shows a three-dimensional Finder that lacks a traditional menubar on the back surface. In this case, a stack item could be utilized to access menu items traditionally found at the top of the Mac OS X dektop. Alternatively, selection of the menu stack item could throw a traditional menubar back into place at the top of the screen, or display menu items on the back surface, or one of the walls.

The same diagram shown above also depicts a running application by which one or more application control elements -- such as palettes -- can be displayed on one or more side walls. For example, a tool bar or layers palette can be displayed on the side walls when Photoshop is running.



The above diagram expands on the concept of having application control elements reside on the walls of a multi-dimensional Finder by portraying those elements as 3D icons, which would expand their functionality. For example, each three-dimensional function icon could include a separate function command on each surface, and each three-dimensional function icon could be be rotated, positioned, and manipulated through the use of an input device, such as a mouse.

Additional 3D icons could be added to the surface by use of a menu, while removing one of the 3D icons can cause the remaining icons to "fall" in a downward direction on the surface wall. Apple said 3D icons can also be used to transition between work spaces, or to transition between a 2D Finder and a 3D Finder.



Windows in a 3D Mac OS X interface can also be dragged or displaced across one or more surfaces. For example, windows can transition out of view by sliding across the back surface and side walls. Side surfaces could also be used to implement a deletion characteristic.

"For example, the last access time for icons and other system object representations can be monitored. If the last access time for an icon or other system object representation exceeds a first threshold, the icon or other system object representation can be automatically transitioned to the surface implementing the deletion characteristic," Apple said. "Additionally, if the last access time for the icon or other system object representation located on the surface exceeds a second threshold, the icon or other system object representation can be automatically deleted from view."



One final multidimensional desktop environment described in the filing includes an arcuate back surface with side surfaces defined by arcuate regions having curvature intersections.

"Other multidimensional desktop environment geometries can also be used. For example, in one implementation, the multidimensional desktop environment can conform to a tetrahedron-shaped environment in which a front surface of the tetrahedron defines a viewing surface, and the remaining three surfaces define a left surface, a bottom surface, and a side surface," Apple said. "In another implementation, the multidimensional desktop environment can conform to a triangular environment, in which one axis of the triangle defines the viewing surface and the remaining two sides of the triangle define a left surface and a right surface."

The 54-page filing is credited to Apple employees Imran Chaudhri, John Louch, Christopher Hynes, Timothy Bumgarner, and Eric Peyton.
post #2 of 105
obviously reversed engineered about 20 years ago from alien technology.
post #3 of 105
Too bad the implementation seen in the patent diagrams would be utter garbage.

Stick with a 2D UI for 2D displays, Apple. When the time is right, a 3D interface for 3D displays will make sense. And hopefully, it won't be that pseudo-3D (read 2.5D) crap seen in the diagrams.
post #4 of 105
NO! PLEASE NO! This is awful!
post #5 of 105
Rest assured whatever they do will be more subtle that this patent suggests.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #6 of 105
wow. Talk about cluttering up a desktop.
post #7 of 105
Time Machine turned out pretty good for a 3d-ish environment. I'd be interested in more apps like it including the OS.
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
:-D * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Reply
post #8 of 105
Hey, ever since 3d graphics came out all those years ago, people were saying the desktop of the future would be 3d based. This is just Apple exploring a possible way of using 3D in a productive way. I doubt we'll see it anytime soon.

The Time machine view seems very similar to this patent filing as well. Maybe some of this research was used for that.
post #9 of 105
That circle diagram reminded me of the Cardassian user interface on Deep Space Nine.
post #10 of 105
Personally I do not like the look of it. It looks cluttered and fake.

I like a 2D environment as afterall the monitor is 2D. Why try to fake a 3D environment on it.

I already have the dock on the right of my screen (in 2d) as I do not like how it takes up screen space (in fake 3D) at the bottom even though it is pretty. With more "3D" I just see less and less screen space as the rest is taken up by walls that I do not want.

Hopefully this is not the future of OS 11?
post #11 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandau View Post

Time Machine turned out pretty good for a 3d-ish environment. I'd be interested in more apps like it including the OS.

well said
post #12 of 105
It could work well if it had the ability to detect the position of your head via your iSight camera, and adjust the 3d space accordingly.

Could be like looking into a little room within your computer.
post #13 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Too bad the implementation seen in the patent diagrams would be utter garbage.

Stick with a 2D UI for 2D displays, Apple. When the time is right, a 3D interface for 3D displays will make sense. And hopefully, it won't be that pseudo-3D (read 2.5D) crap seen in the diagrams.

Do you remember the patents we saw a few months ago? Take the pieces and build the puzzle. If not for use in the same product, at least there's a common theme.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._displays.html
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._hardware.html
post #14 of 105
"It's a UNIX system. I know this!"
post #15 of 105
Obviously there are details that need to be worked out for a 3D interface, but I don't think 2D displays are a problem. Humans can deal with 3D representations on a 2D surface, take a look at movies and games. Windowing GUI interfaces are already 3d-ish in a way, with layers. Dashboard comes down on top of the screen.

That said, I can deal with not having 3D, I can get all my work done in 2D-land just fine, and I don't even need fancy GUI animations, as far as I'm concerned, when I'm working, those just take time away from actual work and are often superflous, especially the "bounce" in iPhone dialog boxes and pans, the zoom in and out for application start and end.
post #16 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryn View Post

Personally I do not like the look of it. It looks cluttered and fake.

I agree.

However, I will reserve judgement because I think it is obvious that they are not showing their hand on the pattent application which they know will be public. They put in only what they have to to protect their ideas, but they DO NOT want to give MS or anyone any ideas of what they need to catch up to.

I don't know if if will be possible to come up with a clean 3-D interface, but I do have some hope that Apple will not implement it if they cannot...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #17 of 105
This wouldn't just be useful for a 2D environment. It could define a way to navigate 3d environments as well. It's not hard to imagine a time when the walls and ceiling would be covered by a display material with you and your Mac left to determine it's use.
post #18 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by qnp9999 View Post

NO! PLEASE NO! This is awful!

Yeah it looks awful from the patent application but you see elements of it in the current OS.

It makes sense now about Apple's push for OpenCL. The OS will need the GPU power to render the OS landscape. Snow Leopard is laying the foundations but this 3D OS in full form will probably be the version afterwards and dropping all legacy ties.
post #19 of 105
Interesting stuff.

It's particularly interesting to see Apple trying and playing with new ideas - even when they don't look 100% successful - and you can see how they took elements from this direction that were utilized (in a more conservative, modest way) both in Leopard's Stacks and specialized Time Machine UI.

I don't think we're going to see a 3D desktop as described by the above patents anytime soon.
post #20 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryn View Post

Personally I do not like the look of it. It looks cluttered and fake.

I like a 2D environment as afterall the monitor is 2D. Why try to fake a 3D environment on it.

I already have the dock on the right of my screen (in 2d) as I do not like how it takes up screen space (in fake 3D) at the bottom even though it is pretty. With more "3D" I just see less and less screen space as the rest is taken up by walls that I do not want.

Hopefully this is not the future of OS 11?

Same here, it looks so cluttered and untidy

____________
iPhone, iPod
Reply
iPhone, iPod
Reply
post #21 of 105
I haven't yet seen anyone mention multi-touch. A 3-D interface would be exactly what is needed to fully realize multi-touch, bridging the gap between the computer and the real world for the user. Adding Stacks into Leopard was just a baby step in this direction, and was probably part of this on-going research. You can also see elements of a real-world interface on iPhone, where windows are "springy" and pop in and out, as they respond to your touch.

People who say it looks cluttered aren't really seeing the big picture. This is just conceptual research in motion.
post #22 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

I agree.

However, I will reserve judgement because I think it is obvious that they are not showing their hand on the pattent application which they know will be public. They put in only what they have to to protect their ideas, but they DO NOT want to give MS or anyone any ideas of what they need to catch up to.

I don't know if if will be possible to come up with a clean 3-D interface, but I do have some hope that Apple will not implement it if they cannot...

I think you nailed it here.

Lots of people like 3D interfaces and this is Apple nailing down the metaphor in a patent so that someone else can't beat them to it. It's likely that this doesn't reflect actual product at this point, or even a product direction.

I don't really like this idea either but I was struck by the fact that the comments here about how awful it is are soooo similar to what folks said when 2D computing came out. Perhaps that means something, perhaps not, but even if it doesn't, it's kind of humorous.

Personally, I think the "room metaphor" has been done to death 2D or 3D. I liked it when General Magic did it, but it never caught on did it? Microsoft Bob anyone?

What would be better for me in terms of 3D environments is an actual 3D environment. A 3D space that you actually teleport into with an avatar and manipulate 3D objects that correspond to the programs would be much more useful IMO.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #23 of 105
That was excessive. I'm perfectly fine with my current desktop in all of its 2D glory.
post #24 of 105
I have the feeling Apple will offer this in OS 11, and will likely allow users to switch between 2D view and 3D view cause they wont want people suddenly to be shock with the changes. And like some user posted, it is certain that Apple will find a way to make this as un-obstructive as possible. I like the concept though, it will be nice if you press or tap a certain key it will auto switch to 3D mode where all the docks, stack and etc is shown. Toggle back the key and you will get a full screen view of the app.

Here is something to help you image.
Imagine you run a full screen safari, without the dock or the top menu bar. Press a button/move the mouse to a corner and it switches to the 3D view where you can access your documents and etc.

TimeMachine so far is an excellent example of a good way into using 3D. I also like to see Apple use of 3D display will encourage apps to be able to use HUD display as toolbars. I love HUDs!!!
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
post #25 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryn View Post

I already have the dock on the right of my screen (in 2d) as I do not like how it takes up screen space (in fake 3D) at the bottom even though it is pretty.

If you'd rather have the dock at the bottom in 2D, see here.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #26 of 105
well why couldn't this be the new version of expose? It looks like you could do stacks, widgets and window management all in one place. It would be awesome and a lot more simple than what we have now with dashboard, expose, multiple desktops and the like.

This would never work full time because people would complain that the screen could be larger. But as a modal view then i think it has big potential
post #27 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

obviously reversed engineered about 20 years ago from alien technology.


Actually, if you look at the car computer in Men In Black II and compare it with the oval shaped screen layout in the patents . . . . ; )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCcn8prSVdo

Go to 2:11 into the clip.
MT - Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.


101010
Reply
MT - Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.


101010
Reply
post #28 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandau View Post

Time Machine turned out pretty good for a 3d-ish environment.

The reason that 3D is a good choice for Time Machine is that the third dimension actually has a use, beyond simply being flashy. The third dimension is used to represent time; the further along the third dimension in the interface (into the screen) you go, the further back in time you go.

With the general desktop environment, there is simply no need for a 3D interface on a 2D monitor. When was the last time you did anything in Windows Explorer or OS X Finder and thought "damn, this could work so much better if it was 3D"? I'm guessing never. 3D for the desktop would be there simply to look flashy. In most situations, it creates clutter, reduces useable workspace, is harder to use/navigate, and uses additional computer resources. All in all, it's a bad, bad idea.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #29 of 105
While that would suck on a 17 inch display .... and maybe even on a 20 inch... When you start getting into larger displays on the desktop, some of those ideas might turn out to be rather useful.
I'm using a 20" iMac sitting about 18" from my face and I just don't see how a 30" display (in the same location) would be all that comfortable, unless a large portion of it were not really "dedicated workspace", as my field of vision just isn't that wide at this distance. But using the edges as more "dock space" could work well.
Will be interesting to see just how it gets implemented in the future.
Like others have said... those drawings are just to get the idea across for the patent... not to show exactly how it will be implemented.
From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...
Reply
From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...
Reply
post #30 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathue View Post

Actually, if you look at the car computer in Men In Black II and compare it with the oval shaped screen layout in the patents . . . . ; )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCcn8prSVdo

Go to 2:11 into the clip.

You beat me to it!

I've been on MacRumors and they weren't showing the curved diagram.
That's my favorite part of MIB II!
post #31 of 105
With Vista's Areo, and Leopard's Gui Gimicks (3D dock, transparent menu bar... etc)... I wish to see more done in ways of making things more stable (I'm really hoping for Snow Leopard to be rock solid OUT of the box). A desktop doesn't need to be 3-D to be usable and beautiful.

Its like video editing. Use too many effects and your film is lost, looks cluttered and uninspiring. Use the right amount, and it looks great. Often the right amount would be a few dissolves here and there, with the rest being cuts. Add on a color correction to make sure all your shots look the same, and when you want to go crazy, throw in a rack focus to separate your characters. Make your titles simple too. Unless you are making a music video which for then, definitely, throw everything you've got into it!

Same for GUIs. Too much whiz-bang, and the user feels lost and confused. Compiz Fusion and all its 3D effects are cool and all, but when in Linux, I often turn all of it down to simple fades as to make it more pleasing and natural to the eye.

And don't get me started on bloat associated with this. Lets wait a little while.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #32 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

The reason that 3D is a good choice for Time Machine is that the third dimension actually has a use, beyond simply being flashy. The third dimension is used to represent time; the further along the third dimension in the interface (into the screen) you go, the further back in time you go.

With the general desktop environment, there is simply no need for a 3D interface on a 2D monitor. When was the last time you did anything in Windows Explorer or OS X Finder and thought "damn, this could work so much better if it was 3D"? I'm guessing never. 3D for the desktop would be there simply to look flashy. In most situations, it creates clutter, reduces useable workspace, is harder to use/navigate, and uses additional computer resources. All in all, it's a bad, bad idea.

One thing that would be great, expanding on the ideas of Time Machine and Stacks would be a desktop mechanism that demonstrates version control of a document. That would work very well in 3D. Especially if you branch off different versions.

I was hoping Stacks would be something like that. Until then, all we have is folders with v1, v2, v3, etc. suffixed documents that can get hairy if you branch in multiple directions. Seeing what they did with Time Machine has me hoping that Apple will include some sort of version control of docs in an OS release and - more importantly - applications will not get screwed up by it. I'm talking to you Adobe!
post #33 of 105
I think all the features that could make their way out of that research and into the real world has already been added to OS X, in the form of Leopard.
post #34 of 105
I think this is the touch OS. I love it. Very original ideas. Better than Linux's eye-candy.
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #35 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zandros View Post

"It's a UNIX system. I know this!"

You are my hero.

Jimzip
"There's no time like the present, and the only present you'll never get, is time." - Me
Reply
"There's no time like the present, and the only present you'll never get, is time." - Me
Reply
post #36 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by crees! View Post

Do you remember the patents we saw a few months ago? Take the pieces and build the puzzle. If not for use in the same product, at least there's a common theme.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._displays.html
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._hardware.html

HMD UI for Apple iPhone+glasses?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #37 of 105
I think this is awesome! Don't look at this as a final presentation for a project because patents drawings are intentionally done this way to make some elements confusing and unclear. . These are basically schematic designs sketches that can be taken further and have the potential of solving some of todays limited 2D computing environment if done correctly. However, this can also be a disaster if done wrong.
post #38 of 105
This is what came to mind first - it is ugly and wastes precious screen real estate. I already have problems with the lack of screen space on my MBP and frankly I don't see how this would help that issue. If anything Apple should be working on methods of hiding information and interface elements on screen based on context. Frankly I'd like to see a layered approach instead of multiple desktops. For example a layer for the desktop, a layer for dashoard and a layer for user grouped apps. Make the layers viewable and switchable through a time machine like interface. The goal would be to make each layer totally user confgurable but accessible from others.

In any event my singular opinion won't stop Apple. That will require a ground swell of resistance. The problem is I'm not sure if the patent gives us enough reason to complain yet.

What really bothers me about this is that they where actually able to get a patent on the work. Let's face it they patented the inside of a box. I find this to be sad. Sad that Apple can't do better and even sadder that anyone could actually expect to get a patent for the inside of a box. It is no wonder there is such a negative opinion of the patent office. When it comes right down to it this isn't innovation nor is it all that original. It is nothing more than looking at the inside of a box!

Sometimes I think Apple has fallen off the deep end looking at some of the patents applications they have presentented lately. Maybe there is a method to their madness but I've yet to see it. Maybe they think a flood of patents makes it easier to get the better stuff through or questionable stuff. I don't really know, what I do know is that this is another example of a need to reform the patent process.
post #39 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillH View Post

This wouldn't just be useful for a 2D environment. It could define a way to navigate 3d environments as well. It's not hard to imagine a time when the walls and ceiling would be covered by a display material with you and your Mac left to determine it's use.

I suppose using real-time tracking software and some kind of very accurate proximity sensors (akin to LIDAR/echolocation) built into a pair of stereovision glasses, this would allow a screen, keyboard and work surface of any size to be "projected" onto any available surfaces or into the air to perform real gestural computing. Like the old Jaron Lanier VR experiments, but refined to near perfection. Actually, the only pieces of equipment that would be necessary would be the glasses and a keyboard for haptic feedback.

Apple's mission seems to be to "make the computer disappear" and this would be pretty close from a design standpoint.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #40 of 105
May I just remind all those that are complaining about ugliness/clutter etc, that these are patent filings, not the actual designs... Come on people, you've seen all this before. These are proof of concept sketches, if you're taking them literally, then you're not really seeing what's going on here. Apple is exploring alternate ways to represent the desktop, this is big.

Jimzip
"There's no time like the present, and the only present you'll never get, is time." - Me
Reply
"There's no time like the present, and the only present you'll never get, is time." - Me
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple working on 3D Mac OS X user interface (images)