I think the biggest thing to notice about the new iTunes UI is that it would be very easy to create this look and feel using vector data. I think this will help when Leopard goes live with resolution independence.
I can't decide whether I like it...just hope Apple soon decides on a look and sticks to it!
That's what my thoughts were - maybe they were having difficult getting the Aqua elements to scale nicely with a vector / resolution-independent UI and hence they are going for a simpler look and de-aquafying the OS.
My fear is that Core Animation make Apple go crazy. As cool, in some ways, as the TimeMachine interface looked, it has absolutely nothing to do with the look of anything else, which is alarming. Given that Dashboard has already broken new ground in the "stuff you couldn't do before should have its own interface" sweepstakes, the trend is not good.
Amen! I completely agree. From Apple, we should expect consistent, great UI design, no less. But lately they have been creating an UI mess.
- Dashboard. Close button only appears when you click the "+" icon on the left bottom of the screen, looks different and is in its whole unneccessary.
- Pro apps have a different look
- Garageband has its own look
- iTunes doesnt behave like a MacOSX app (the top buttons should be configurable and contain specific general actions for example)
I like a lot of the UI changes in iTunes 7, but the buttons at the bottom are really awful and the iPod manager -- while cool -- does not fit with anything else Apple has done in OS X. It looks like a frakking webpage!
But it doesn't change the fact it's inconsistent with normal Mac windows.
I would say that's because Widgets are not meant to be normal Mac windows. I think the closebox is hidden by default to make it much easier to not accidently close a widget especially when you have many placed together in close quarters.
iTunes has always been the bastard child of Apple. The UI facelift does not necessarily forebode things to come. In fact, I think the iTunes team* is kept locked in a dark and damp basement at 1 Infinite Loop and they never have any contact with the outside world or the rest of Apple (which explains why the UI is always so far-fetched and never resembles anything like the other Apple apps.)
...
Thank you for the laugh, i thought the very same. I think the iTunes team
occasionally brings some very intriguing proposals off their sheltered ivory tower
(which is translated fairly good into dark and damp basement).
But all they ever hear from Apple staff is: Come on guys, do you mean that for real?
But! Once in a month they have to report Jobs itself all their efforts. And this is the
hour they all stand bold up.
And Jobs is just listening for a couple of minutes, than he leaves the room with a
very straight face, knocking three times on a mighty imaginary oak table, whispering:
"You are the good guys of my company and you know that. So take it for granted i will
listen to you any time soon, ever. Damsels, hear that?"
After Jobs has departed and the door is closed again, they wait a safety minute,
than they all burst into a fierce, hysterical laugh...
Quote:
...
*also, the Finder team is in that same dark and damp basement
Same with the Finder team, except Jobs doesn't knock three times on
the oak, instead he air pulls his curled midfinger three times accompanied with a
imaginary bizz bizz bizz fizzling. More, he calls that particular Finder team
"his boom boys" instead of "the good guys".
Also, in a corner you'll see a I-want-to-believe-poster carefully covered
by a shelf full of assorted Macs from all ages. That corner The Finder team is
That's what my thoughts were - maybe they were having difficult getting the Aqua elements to scale nicely with a vector / resolution-independent UI and hence they are going for a simpler look and de-aquafying the OS.
de-Aquifying or de-Vistifying? Vista has all the glassy transparent stuff also and i'm wondering if Apple is gonna try something different with the gui when Leopard's final release comes.
iTunes 7 is actually rather ugly. it's dark and flat, with more of a classic Mac Os 7 flatness to it mixed with Windows 98.
de-Aquifying or de-Vistifying? Vista has all the glassy transparent stuff also and i'm wondering if Apple is gonna try something different with the gui when Leopard's final release comes.
iTunes 7 is actually rather ugly. it's dark and flat, with more of a classic Mac Os 7 flatness to it mixed with Windows 98.
Its not thaaat bad, I prefer OS X UI way more than Vista's let me tell ya..but your UI assumptions are probably correct on making the UI more res ind and scalable.
One would hope that Aperture is the way Leopard is going to look.
iTunes 7 has some nice things (CoverFlow, which they uh... bought from someone else), and some incredibly horrible things that demand to be banished to hell (scroll bars).
But all in all I would either prefer some consistency (seriously there are what? 7 different looks at the moment - 2 or 3 I could live with), or the Aperture look, or ideally both. Except for Garageband, because we all know that sucker is never going to change.
One would hope that Aperture is the way Leopard is going to look.
iTunes 7 has some nice things (CoverFlow, which they uh... bought from someone else), and some incredibly horrible things that demand to be banished to hell (scroll bars).
But all in all I would either prefer some consistency (seriously there are what? 7 different looks at the moment - 2 or 3 I could live with), or the Aperture look, or ideally both. Except for Garageband, because we all know that sucker is never going to change.
- iTunes doesnt behave like a MacOSX app (the top buttons should be configurable and contain specific general actions for example)
Apple...back to basic plz!
One thing that might be useful, and it's clear they're going for it in the professional apps, is that a somewhat uniform look is good, but clear divisions between different application categories might be helpful. Even aesthetic conceits, like the one help clarify the complexities of a GUI, and distinguish one program from one another.
What really matters is that the functionality of programs is consistent across the UI. This is why they have UI guidelines. iTunes, is really a Windows-ish app, so perhaps a slightly different version should be available to OS X users. Even if it has the Platinum-redux look of Leopard, or at least a test of it, it still does not work the same. Better to have the ridiculous wood look of GarageBand than an awkward app.
All of the Adobe programs have a similar look as well as a function philosophy. Same with Macromedia ones, and the same with Office:mac. It seems they design them this way, to demonstrate the unity and brand of the products. Therefor, I think it is dangerous to suggest that the system should look the same as iLife or professional programs. Similar schemes, for sure, but putting up a clear line between them might make the whole UI work better. For example, the light silver of system preferences might make a great finder look, while keeping iLife (as well as other consumer-level programs) platinum and pro apps generally dark gray.
I think, however, that iTunes is not necessarily the future, because it is more than likely a test to see how the changes work with consumers over time. We'll see what happens.
Ok, so if 10.5 is rumored to res independant, how will it fair in the responsiveness with window resizing when dragging the corners to resize etc.. right now even with my dual core G5 2.3 with 4 gb ram and the 7800 GT card, windows still lag slightly behind my cursor, when resizing . Granted some apps fair better than others. Like for example, Firefox seems to be snappier than safari when resizing the app window I have noticed..
No one knows. New technology that isn't really out for any platform, so no meaningful comparisons can be made.
The window resizing is completely up to the app - most apps do live resizing, where the contents of the window are re-laid-out as you go -> 'lag'. Some apps just throw their hands up in the air and let the window contents be indeterminate until you stop resizing. Faster, but not nearly as nice for when you want to get the window to show a certain content. Then you have to resize, guess, resize, guess, etc. Windows does that, btw, which is why it feels so much faster - it's simply doing a lot less.
Comments
I think the biggest thing to notice about the new iTunes UI is that it would be very easy to create this look and feel using vector data. I think this will help when Leopard goes live with resolution independence.
I can't decide whether I like it...just hope Apple soon decides on a look and sticks to it!
That's what my thoughts were - maybe they were having difficult getting the Aqua elements to scale nicely with a vector / resolution-independent UI and hence they are going for a simpler look and de-aquafying the OS.
My fear is that Core Animation make Apple go crazy. As cool, in some ways, as the TimeMachine interface looked, it has absolutely nothing to do with the look of anything else, which is alarming. Given that Dashboard has already broken new ground in the "stuff you couldn't do before should have its own interface" sweepstakes, the trend is not good.
Amen! I completely agree. From Apple, we should expect consistent, great UI design, no less. But lately they have been creating an UI mess.
- Dashboard. Close button only appears when you click the "+" icon on the left bottom of the screen, looks different and is in its whole unneccessary.
- Pro apps have a different look
- Garageband has its own look
- iTunes doesnt behave like a MacOSX app (the top buttons should be configurable and contain specific general actions for example)
Apple...back to basic plz!
Amen! I completely agree. From Apple, we should expect consistent, great UI design, no less. But lately they have been creating an UI mess.
- Dashboard. Close button only appears when you click the "+" icon on the left bottom of the screen, looks different and is in its whole unneccessary.
Hold down the option key and rollover a widget. The closebox will appear without having to go down to the bottom.
Hold down the option key and rollover a widget. The closebox will appear without having to go down to the bottom.
Endymion; thanks for the tip! Handy!
But it doesn't change the fact it's inconsistent with normal Mac windows.
But it doesn't change the fact it's inconsistent with normal Mac windows.
I would say that's because Widgets are not meant to be normal Mac windows. I think the closebox is hidden by default to make it much easier to not accidently close a widget especially when you have many placed together in close quarters.
iTunes has always been the bastard child of Apple. The UI facelift does not necessarily forebode things to come. In fact, I think the iTunes team* is kept locked in a dark and damp basement at 1 Infinite Loop and they never have any contact with the outside world or the rest of Apple (which explains why the UI is always so far-fetched and never resembles anything like the other Apple apps.)
...
Thank you for the laugh, i thought the very same. I think the iTunes team
occasionally brings some very intriguing proposals off their sheltered ivory tower
(which is translated fairly good into dark and damp basement).
But all they ever hear from Apple staff is: Come on guys, do you mean that for real?
But! Once in a month they have to report Jobs itself all their efforts. And this is the
hour they all stand bold up.
And Jobs is just listening for a couple of minutes, than he leaves the room with a
very straight face, knocking three times on a mighty imaginary oak table, whispering:
"You are the good guys of my company and you know that. So take it for granted i will
listen to you any time soon, ever. Damsels, hear that?"
After Jobs has departed and the door is closed again, they wait a safety minute,
than they all burst into a fierce, hysterical laugh...
...
*also, the Finder team is in that same dark and damp basement
Same with the Finder team, except Jobs doesn't knock three times on
the oak, instead he air pulls his curled midfinger three times accompanied with a
imaginary bizz bizz bizz fizzling. More, he calls that particular Finder team
"his boom boys" instead of "the good guys".
Also, in a corner you'll see a I-want-to-believe-poster carefully covered
by a shelf full of assorted Macs from all ages. That corner The Finder team is
referring as the Dead Zone to.
Suni, what do you think?
That's what my thoughts were - maybe they were having difficult getting the Aqua elements to scale nicely with a vector / resolution-independent UI and hence they are going for a simpler look and de-aquafying the OS.
de-Aquifying or de-Vistifying? Vista has all the glassy transparent stuff also and i'm wondering if Apple is gonna try something different with the gui when Leopard's final release comes.
iTunes 7 is actually rather ugly. it's dark and flat, with more of a classic Mac Os 7 flatness to it mixed with Windows 98.
de-Aquifying or de-Vistifying? Vista has all the glassy transparent stuff also and i'm wondering if Apple is gonna try something different with the gui when Leopard's final release comes.
iTunes 7 is actually rather ugly. it's dark and flat, with more of a classic Mac Os 7 flatness to it mixed with Windows 98.
Its not thaaat bad, I prefer OS X UI way more than Vista's let me tell ya..but your UI assumptions are probably correct on making the UI more res ind and scalable.
iTunes 7 has some nice things (CoverFlow, which they uh... bought from someone else), and some incredibly horrible things that demand to be banished to hell (scroll bars).
But all in all I would either prefer some consistency (seriously there are what? 7 different looks at the moment - 2 or 3 I could live with), or the Aperture look, or ideally both. Except for Garageband, because we all know that sucker is never going to change.
One would hope that Aperture is the way Leopard is going to look.
iTunes 7 has some nice things (CoverFlow, which they uh... bought from someone else), and some incredibly horrible things that demand to be banished to hell (scroll bars).
But all in all I would either prefer some consistency (seriously there are what? 7 different looks at the moment - 2 or 3 I could live with), or the Aperture look, or ideally both. Except for Garageband, because we all know that sucker is never going to change.
Have you used Aperture? It's pretty fuckin' ugly.
Especially the "file import screen."
- Garageband has its own look
- iTunes doesnt behave like a MacOSX app (the top buttons should be configurable and contain specific general actions for example)
Apple...back to basic plz!
One thing that might be useful, and it's clear they're going for it in the professional apps, is that a somewhat uniform look is good, but clear divisions between different application categories might be helpful. Even aesthetic conceits, like the one help clarify the complexities of a GUI, and distinguish one program from one another.
What really matters is that the functionality of programs is consistent across the UI. This is why they have UI guidelines. iTunes, is really a Windows-ish app, so perhaps a slightly different version should be available to OS X users. Even if it has the Platinum-redux look of Leopard, or at least a test of it, it still does not work the same. Better to have the ridiculous wood look of GarageBand than an awkward app.
All of the Adobe programs have a similar look as well as a function philosophy. Same with Macromedia ones, and the same with Office:mac. It seems they design them this way, to demonstrate the unity and brand of the products. Therefor, I think it is dangerous to suggest that the system should look the same as iLife or professional programs. Similar schemes, for sure, but putting up a clear line between them might make the whole UI work better. For example, the light silver of system preferences might make a great finder look, while keeping iLife (as well as other consumer-level programs) platinum and pro apps generally dark gray.
I think, however, that iTunes is not necessarily the future, because it is more than likely a test to see how the changes work with consumers over time. We'll see what happens.
Have you used Aperture? It's pretty fuckin' ugly.
Especially the "file import screen."
For what it does, the aperture UI is perfect IMHO.
But to each their own, I guess
The window resizing is completely up to the app - most apps do live resizing, where the contents of the window are re-laid-out as you go -> 'lag'. Some apps just throw their hands up in the air and let the window contents be indeterminate until you stop resizing. Faster, but not nearly as nice for when you want to get the window to show a certain content. Then you have to resize, guess, resize, guess, etc. Windows does that, btw, which is why it feels so much faster - it's simply doing a lot less.
Too many variables to be making generalizations, IMO.