Apple added "grain" to the light grey bar up top when they introduced their aluminium unibody product line. I speculate they will introduce a new lineup this year with liquid metal enclosure. Thus the new dark shinny top bar.
Apple added "grain" to the light grey bar up top when they introduced their aluminium unibody product line. I speculate they will introduce a new lineup this year with liquid metal enclosure. Thus the new dark shinny top bar.
What do you think?
I think it's more "UI change from Snow Leopard to Lion" than hardware. Same as the old "Aqua to pseudo-Illuminous" change from a few years back.
The article implies that there will not be a clear ratified standard in the future, only a murky html that is in constant flux. There needs to be a defined html5 standard to work towards.
No, I think what they have realized is that by having one flowing & constantly updating standard is more likely to push web devs to keep up with what's new. Many devs wait around for a full on version number released with stamp & all before they integrate it. They are saying instead that we release updates to the HTML standard that are then solidified & can be implemented immediately and not as part of a more massive overhaul.
People need to think outside the box, the web is a constantly moving & changing force, the reason standards take so long to implement is because by the time they get close something else totally changes the game & they have to be re-done. If you keep operating standards the old way eventually developers will begin ignoring them because they can't wait around on them to implement their visions for the web. Business is the same way, if you can't move with the market & the changing world you are dead. The days of locking in a niche & riding it out to retirement are gone.
I'm not really liking the new animations. I would have preferred animations closer to the MacOSX Dock, or iOS home page switching. Eh, personal preference. (aka: I don't like the little bounce the icons do.)
What still bothers me most, is the fact that iPod, iPhone, iTunes, and iPad get their own tabbed buttons, while all the Computer hardware AND their software is stored under one tab labeled Mac. Just one of those reminders that Apple is about the gadgets (and its been this way for a while now.) If it were me, it would be simple: Home, Store, Mac, iPod, Support, Search.
You hit the nail on the head ... iWeb 11 and iWeb Pro please! Is anyone listening at Apple?
Tend to doubt it. iWeb's history is of being compatible with nothing, let alone being fully standards compliant. Leastways I hit a wall when I wanted to export my site to another tool a few years back, and it hasn't received a lot of attention of late.
Also there's a proliferation of tools on hosting sites that let amateurs create and modify their sites in real time, like Squarespace - as sophisticated as you want it to be - to Google Sites - as dumbed down as you can imagine - and a bunch of (yeck) Flash-based ones like Wix which is both flexible and accessible for the I-like-flashy-flashy-animations types.
But if they have any revolutionary ideas over at the iLife Group, from your mouth to Cupertino's ears.
Really? Your FF works fine? FF on my PC at work is having an awful time of it. No image at all on the apple.com home page, just a bit empty grey square. And I get this lovely rendition of the MAC page. So they revamped their store so it only works on Safari?? That'll increase sales.
No issues in rendering graphics or speed on my Win Chrome at all, but I do notice a lot of jagginess in the rendering of black fonts on many pages - which I don't notice in say the Apple Insider logo I'm looking at right now (tho' that may be a graphic element) - or at least not quite as much on a random look at my other open tabs.
In fact, this is the first time the jaggies have jumped out at me on a site in awhile, 'cos I wasn't looking for it.
Check out "A new way to Nano" and "FaceTime: Video Calling is a reality." Wish I could go back to the old version and compare - but is this a change??
The pages of the new site are fast-loading, responsive, and very clean. I like the subtly refined look. Safari seems to demonstrate the HTML5 better than Firefox and Opera on my iMac. For instance, Safari shows the products on the Mac and iPod pages sliding on and off the page, even bouncing when they stop (a nice touch, I think), whereas the other browsers only display a fade out/fade in transition effect or instant switch.
Also, videos on the new site don't play well on Opera (video is very choppy even after fully loading in, though the audio plays fine). Firefox and Safari seem to handle HTML5 video and audio fine (Safari especially), though I had to turn off the AdBlock extension in Safari because it was interfering with playback. Hopefully the extension will be updated to work with HTML5 soon. I'm also using ClickToFlash to try to keep things snappy.
Yeah, I love how the nav bar at apple.com now floats below the background and mashes into the "points of interests" launch divs. #HTML5UpdateFAIL
On your computer/browser ... maybe .... on mine .... runs perfectly. Does anyone else notice how super fast the pages "load" and how great the tutorial videos run? Color me happy.
No, I think what they have realized is that by having one flowing & constantly updating standard is more likely to push web devs to keep up with what's new. Many devs wait around for a full on version number released with stamp & all before they integrate it. They are saying instead that we release updates to the HTML standard that are then solidified & can be implemented immediately and not as part of a more massive overhaul.
People need to think outside the box, the web is a constantly moving & changing force, the reason standards take so long to implement is because by the time they get close something else totally changes the game & they have to be re-done. If you keep operating standards the old way eventually developers will begin ignoring them because they can't wait around on them to implement their visions for the web. Business is the same way, if you can't move with the market & the changing world you are dead. The days of locking in a niche & riding it out to retirement are gone.
You do not do any real software development, do you? It is impossible to code to a moving target and be successful. The HTML5 spec is a simple case of horrible management. Simply set a date and no more features after that. Publish the spec and move on to defining the next rev. Very simple to do. There is no thinking outside the box. Simple timeboxing the HTML spec would solve this issue as it does for other major specifications.
anyone else like myself not liking the way the menu has gone from silver to black/grey, I sure hope this isn't the way lion is heading in terms of colour palette..
And yet not a single page passes HTML5 validation... I guess this is "standards compliant" right?
Yeaaaaa.... I'm not really feeling any more motivation to do anything more with HTML5 and there definitely isn't any negative impact for not jumping onto the bleeding edge of web technology when there are more capable solutions out right now for the desktop as well as mobile spaces.
Comments
Apple added "grain" to the light grey bar up top when they introduced their aluminium unibody product line. I speculate they will introduce a new lineup this year with liquid metal enclosure. Thus the new dark shinny top bar.
What do you think?
Quick thought.
Apple added "grain" to the light grey bar up top when they introduced their aluminium unibody product line. I speculate they will introduce a new lineup this year with liquid metal enclosure. Thus the new dark shinny top bar.
What do you think?
I think it's more "UI change from Snow Leopard to Lion" than hardware. Same as the old "Aqua to pseudo-Illuminous" change from a few years back.
Interesting... this does not happen when I open the same page in firefox or chrome.
Try IE!
The article implies that there will not be a clear ratified standard in the future, only a murky html that is in constant flux. There needs to be a defined html5 standard to work towards.
No, I think what they have realized is that by having one flowing & constantly updating standard is more likely to push web devs to keep up with what's new. Many devs wait around for a full on version number released with stamp & all before they integrate it. They are saying instead that we release updates to the HTML standard that are then solidified & can be implemented immediately and not as part of a more massive overhaul.
People need to think outside the box, the web is a constantly moving & changing force, the reason standards take so long to implement is because by the time they get close something else totally changes the game & they have to be re-done. If you keep operating standards the old way eventually developers will begin ignoring them because they can't wait around on them to implement their visions for the web. Business is the same way, if you can't move with the market & the changing world you are dead. The days of locking in a niche & riding it out to retirement are gone.
What still bothers me most, is the fact that iPod, iPhone, iTunes, and iPad get their own tabbed buttons, while all the Computer hardware AND their software is stored under one tab labeled Mac. Just one of those reminders that Apple is about the gadgets (and its been this way for a while now.) If it were me, it would be simple: Home, Store, Mac, iPod, Support, Search.
You hit the nail on the head ... iWeb 11 and iWeb Pro please! Is anyone listening at Apple?
Tend to doubt it. iWeb's history is of being compatible with nothing, let alone being fully standards compliant. Leastways I hit a wall when I wanted to export my site to another tool a few years back, and it hasn't received a lot of attention of late.
Also there's a proliferation of tools on hosting sites that let amateurs create and modify their sites in real time, like Squarespace - as sophisticated as you want it to be - to Google Sites - as dumbed down as you can imagine - and a bunch of (yeck) Flash-based ones like Wix which is both flexible and accessible for the I-like-flashy-flashy-animations types.
But if they have any revolutionary ideas over at the iLife Group, from your mouth to Cupertino's ears.
And those really are the only things I miss. Compared to Dreamweaver, TextEdit is worth it, even without them.
What do you use? I'd love to find something with those three features that retains the simplicity of TextEdit.
You can try TextMate. Cost: $55.
Fix a bug !
Eh, personal preference. (aka: I don't like the little bounce the icons do.)
Yeah they look cheesy. They don't have that natural snap. That last click into place doesn't have a nice easing feel like on iOS devices.
Really? Your FF works fine? FF on my PC at work is having an awful time of it. No image at all on the apple.com home page, just a bit empty grey square. And I get this lovely rendition of the MAC page. So they revamped their store so it only works on Safari?? That'll increase sales.
No issues in rendering graphics or speed on my Win Chrome at all, but I do notice a lot of jagginess in the rendering of black fonts on many pages - which I don't notice in say the Apple Insider logo I'm looking at right now (tho' that may be a graphic element) - or at least not quite as much on a random look at my other open tabs.
In fact, this is the first time the jaggies have jumped out at me on a site in awhile, 'cos I wasn't looking for it.
Check out "A new way to Nano" and "FaceTime: Video Calling is a reality." Wish I could go back to the old version and compare - but is this a change??
Also, videos on the new site don't play well on Opera (video is very choppy even after fully loading in, though the audio plays fine). Firefox and Safari seem to handle HTML5 video and audio fine (Safari especially), though I had to turn off the AdBlock extension in Safari because it was interfering with playback. Hopefully the extension will be updated to work with HTML5 soon. I'm also using ClickToFlash to try to keep things snappy.
But...but...IE supports HTML5!
Oh, I guess it doesn't after all....
Looks fine in IE 8, surprisingly. It just doesn't have the animations/transitions.
Yeah, I love how the nav bar at apple.com now floats below the background and mashes into the "points of interests" launch divs. #HTML5UpdateFAIL
On your computer/browser ... maybe .... on mine .... runs perfectly. Does anyone else notice how super fast the pages "load" and how great the tutorial videos run? Color me happy.
No, I think what they have realized is that by having one flowing & constantly updating standard is more likely to push web devs to keep up with what's new. Many devs wait around for a full on version number released with stamp & all before they integrate it. They are saying instead that we release updates to the HTML standard that are then solidified & can be implemented immediately and not as part of a more massive overhaul.
People need to think outside the box, the web is a constantly moving & changing force, the reason standards take so long to implement is because by the time they get close something else totally changes the game & they have to be re-done. If you keep operating standards the old way eventually developers will begin ignoring them because they can't wait around on them to implement their visions for the web. Business is the same way, if you can't move with the market & the changing world you are dead. The days of locking in a niche & riding it out to retirement are gone.
You do not do any real software development, do you? It is impossible to code to a moving target and be successful. The HTML5 spec is a simple case of horrible management. Simply set a date and no more features after that. Publish the spec and move on to defining the next rev. Very simple to do. There is no thinking outside the box. Simple timeboxing the HTML spec would solve this issue as it does for other major specifications.
the new design must really be something for the 0.00000001% of people who realize it is an implementation of HTML5.
for the rest of us...slightly new layout.
I'm with you on that, I couldn't care less if it's HTML 4, 5, Flash, whatever, what I care is:
1. Does it work?
2. Is it fast to load?
The Apple site as it is now passes on both fronts.
If HTML 5 is going to make things faster, I'm all for it.
What software can be used to create HTML5 web sites?
Flux 3
And those really are the only things I miss. Compared to Dreamweaver, TextEdit is worth it, even without them.
What do you use? I'd love to find something with those three features that retains the simplicity of TextEdit.
I use TextWrangler, it is a free download - http://www.barebones.com/products/te.../download.html or free in the App Store. Others I like are Espresso and TacoHTML edit.
*ETA - both Espresso and Taco support html5*
And yet not a single page passes HTML5 validation... I guess this is "standards compliant" right?
Yeaaaaa.... I'm not really feeling any more motivation to do anything more with HTML5 and there definitely isn't any negative impact for not jumping onto the bleeding edge of web technology when there are more capable solutions out right now for the desktop as well as mobile spaces.