Apple freezes Snow Leopard APIs as software nears final stretch

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,737member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadow View Post


    I guess you are right regarding the developer laziness but I still believe RI is tied to the new interface. If it comes with 10.6, it will be RI ready. Otherwise Apple is not going to patch the aging Aqua. And when Apple is ready they will not wait a minute for the developers. They were warned! The most it will do is to put a check box in the Get Info panel 'Run in native resolution' or something. May be not even this. It will be possible to change the scaling for an individual app from the terminal (this is possible now).



    There were threads on the subject few years ago. I am not a developer but I am too lazy to search as well I remember there was a report stating that at WWDC 2006 or 2007 Apple said to developers: "Get ready with RI for 2008".



    If they have smaller screen form-factor in the works they will want to use RI as well. Also, RI will finaly get them an option to use higher-res LCD panels. I don't believe they abandoned the idea.



    The fact that they are suddenly mum on the issue could lead to two opposite directions:



    - They are late with it for SL and left it out.

    - It is coming in SL with Marble. Apple can not trumpet it yet, because the obvious question from developers "where is it?" can not be answered until Marble is shown. Also, if Marble rumors are correct, SL will turn out to be the most significant update (in terms of user-related features) since 10.0. Quite the opposite of what was claimed a year ago. And Apple will want to make as much big surprises as they can get.



    What is it with you guys about hi rez panels for RI? You don't need higher rez panels. Almost everyone who will be using RI will be wanting to make items on the screen appear LARGER, not smaller. higher rez does nothing for that. Only if someone were going to go the opposite way, which doesn't even make sense, would it be needed. You're always running at the higher resolution with LCDs. That's why RI is wanted. When you increase the size of an object, having a higher rez does nothing at all for it. You already have more pixels representing the object than before.



    If you take a typeface, and a letter is 6 pixels high, and use RI to increase the size of the GUI, then that letter might now be 8 or even 10 pixels high. You're already getting far more detail in that letter than before. It's only when objects are very small that you want, and need higher rez screens so that that small letter will have more pixels representing it.
  • Reply 62 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,737member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by skittlebrau79 View Post


    It has nothing to do with Carbon. And it has nothing to do with CPU. It has everything to do with indifference.



    Apple doesn't care about RI, which you can verify by looking at Apple's own applications on Leopard (not much is different on Snow Leopard). Most of them look terrible when RI is turned on, which you can turn on RI with developer tools (same on Leopard and Snow Leopard). The APIs are there for both Carbon and Cocoa, but it takes significant amount of effort to adopt them. Not to mention the graphics effort required to create new graphics for every single UI element.



    The other factor is application support. Apple values the user experience a lot, and they need to make sure the major 3rd party applications and their own applications like iLife are ready before allowing RI. Right now most of their own applications look terrible when you turn on RI because they make heavy use of custom controls which take a lot of work to make RI aware.



    This is exactly right.
  • Reply 63 of 78
    joindupjoindup Posts: 80member
    Snow Leopard could be Apple's most important version of OS X. If we assume, for a moment, that the future of (domestic) computing is a landscape made up of iPhone-OS X style touch based device(s) and Android Netbooks, then Snow Leopard could well become the last 'proper' Apple desktop OS version. As such, it will be Apple's legacy, for ever compared to Windows 7 (or whatever comes after that). Therefore it is absolutely important that the usability, tone and performance of Snow Leopard are absolutely outstanding. I would like to see an OS that is responsive, light and has UI refinements that embody Apple's minimalist aesthetic. The UI needs refinement so that it feels more up to date, less cute, more stylish, clean and sharp, in a way that is hinted at in iTunes and taken a step farther in applications such as Tweetie. Microsoft have upped their game (it seems) with Windows 7 and Apple needs to deliver a knockout blow that leaves historians in no doubt which of the last great desktop OSes was, indeed, the best. Safari 4 does not bode well, being sluggish and delivering some decidedly un-Apple UI features in the browser chrome. Hopefully this is just an experiment that will be rectified with a nice dark minimalist Quicktime X-esque UI for the full release, and hopefully Snow Leopard will be equally refined. Price? $50 sounds fair, if it gives me the experience I'm looking for. It would be amusing to release Snow Leopard just after Windows 7 as well, forcing Redmond to reveal the true extent of its (non) innovation before Apple give them the answers, as it has in the past. Don't rush it Apple - get it right. Get it PERFECT.
  • Reply 64 of 78
    abundanceabundance Posts: 14member
    for those who fear issues with resolution independence: erm, guys, Quartz 2D is postscript based...
  • Reply 65 of 78
    m2002brianm2002brian Posts: 258member
    How are things getting smaller? Do people realize that higher resolution allows you to sit closer to the screen? In fact HDTV was invented in Japan because people had to sit closer to their tvs due to house sizes there. For that fact they increased resolution. So to sum it up. How far you sit from your monitor depends on pixel size NOT screen size. If you can't read something cause you put your monitor at native resolution, maybe you should try sitting closer. I have a 100" 1280x720 screen and I sit 8 feet away. I also have a 1280x800 13.3" screen and I sit 2.5' away. At work I have 20" Cinema Display at 1680 x 1050 I sit 3' away. I have never had an issue with anything being too small to read. We aren't working with CRT monitors here boys and girls. You can get a little closer and not be radiated to death.
  • Reply 66 of 78
    shadowshadow Posts: 373member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    What is it with you guys about hi rez panels for RI? You don't need higher rez panels. Almost everyone who will be using RI will be wanting to make items on the screen appear LARGER, not smaller. higher rez does nothing for that. Only if someone were going to go the opposite way, which doesn't even make sense, would it be needed. You're always running at the higher resolution with LCDs. That's why RI is wanted. When you increase the size of an object, having a higher rez does nothing at all for it. You already have more pixels representing the object than before.



    If you take a typeface, and a letter is 6 pixels high, and use RI to increase the size of the GUI, then that letter might now be 8 or even 10 pixels high. You're already getting far more detail in that letter than before. It's only when objects are very small that you want, and need higher rez screens so that that small letter will have more pixels representing it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post


    How are things getting smaller? Do people realize that higher resolution allows you to sit closer to the screen? In fact HDTV was invented in Japan because people had to sit closer to their tvs due to house sizes there. For that fact they increased resolution. So to sum it up. How far you sit from your monitor depends on pixel size NOT screen size. If you can't read something cause you put your monitor at native resolution, maybe you should try sitting closer. I have a 100" 1280x720 screen and I sit 8 feet away. I also have a 1280x800 13.3" screen and I sit 2.5' away. At work I have 20" Cinema Display at 1680 x 1050 I sit 3' away. I have never had an issue with anything being too small to read. We aren't working with CRT monitors here boys and girls. You can get a little closer and not be radiated to death.



    Will you please come back when Apple does release notebooks with hi-res panels.

    Oh, wait, they have an iPhone and iPod touch! Does it makes a difference?



    If you have a printer capable of printing at 300 dpi, please print some text at 10pt at 300 dpi and at 600/1200 dpi. If you are not visually impaired you should see the difference. If you are looking at pages printed at 300 dpi at twise the distance than those printed at 600/1200 dpi then you are not visually impaired but otherwise need medical assistance
  • Reply 67 of 78
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.



    What other APIs are needed?



    (And as noted, the seed note does not say anything about APIs being frozen - only for GC)
  • Reply 68 of 78
    m2002brianm2002brian Posts: 258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadow View Post


    Will you please come back when Apple does release notebooks with hi-res panels.

    Oh, wait, they have an iPhone and iPod touch! Does it makes a difference?



    If you have a printer capable of printing at 300 dpi, please print some text at 10pt at 300 dpi and at 600/1200 dpi. If you are not visually impaired you should see the difference. If you are looking at pages printed at 300 dpi at twise the distance than those printed at 600/1200 dpi then you are not visually impaired but otherwise need medical assistance



    actually it would make sense to view a 300 dpi from further away. Much like having a lower resolution screen, or a painting for that matter. Unless you like to stand right in front of artwork and count brush strokes.

    So really a higher dpi would be for closer viewing, maybe you just like wasting that cheap cheap ink.
  • Reply 69 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,737member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post


    How are things getting smaller? Do people realize that higher resolution allows you to sit closer to the screen? In fact HDTV was invented in Japan because people had to sit closer to their tvs due to house sizes there. For that fact they increased resolution. So to sum it up. How far you sit from your monitor depends on pixel size NOT screen size. If you can't read something cause you put your monitor at native resolution, maybe you should try sitting closer. I have a 100" 1280x720 screen and I sit 8 feet away. I also have a 1280x800 13.3" screen and I sit 2.5' away. At work I have 20" Cinema Display at 1680 x 1050 I sit 3' away. I have never had an issue with anything being too small to read. We aren't working with CRT monitors here boys and girls. You can get a little closer and not be radiated to death.



    Higher resolution doesn't allow you to sit closer to the screen, it REQUIRES you to sit closer to the screen.



    But many of us don't have perfect eyesight. Even sitting at a proper position, the screen isn't being seen correctly. So it's either sit even closer, which isn't comfortable at all, and may even require someone to move their head back and forth, which isn't considered to be a good thing from an ergonomic perspective, or use RI to enlarge everything on the screen.
  • Reply 70 of 78
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Higher resolution doesn't allow you to sit closer to the screen, it REQUIRES you to sit closer to the screen.



    But many of us don't have perfect eyesight. Even sitting at a proper position, the screen isn't being seen correctly. So it's either sit even closer, which isn't comfortable at all, and may even require someone to move their head back and forth, which isn't considered to be a good thing from an ergonomic perspective, or use RI to enlarge everything on the screen.



    I would have loved an intermediary system more inline with WIndows that allows for more options in altering the size of screen elements. I hate to say it, but Windows does allow for better scaling.



    I am doubtful because I think it will require a lot of developer notice, but I still hope that Apple will announce RI next month.
  • Reply 71 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,737member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadow View Post


    Will you please come back when Apple does release notebooks with hi-res panels.

    Oh, wait, they have an iPhone and iPod touch! Does it makes a difference?



    If you have a printer capable of printing at 300 dpi, please print some text at 10pt at 300 dpi and at 600/1200 dpi. If you are not visually impaired you should see the difference. If you are looking at pages printed at 300 dpi at twise the distance than those printed at 600/1200 dpi then you are not visually impaired but otherwise need medical assistance



    Right now, Apple has a 17" with 1920 x 1200 display, which I think is too high.



    We can easily hold our phones close to our face when we look at the screen, but we don't hold our laptops that close. If someone does, they have some problem that needs correction.



    So I can easily hold my iPhone a foot away, or even a bit closer if I have to read the 2 point type thats sometimes used.



    But I doubt that someone will be using their 17" at that distance for more than a few seconds at a time.



    The iPhone is 160 ppi. That's pretty high. but for that small, closely held phone, 200 ppi would be just barely more useful. For a laptop, 160 ppi is awfully high density.



    This was my business for more years than I care to look back on, and I can tell you that what you see in a magazine or book has no relation to what you see on the screen of a monitor, no matter what kind or size.
  • Reply 72 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,737member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JLL View Post


    What other APIs are needed?



    (And as noted, the seed note does not say anything about APIs being frozen - only for GC)



    I don't know the APIs Apple wrote for this, only that they said that they had, and that has been verified. We do know that they aren't in 10.5, but rather have to be added via the developer tools on the DVD. We also know that if they are, everything looks awful.
  • Reply 73 of 78
    shadowshadow Posts: 373member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post


    actually it would make sense to view a 300 dpi from further away. Much like having a lower resolution screen, or a painting for that matter. Unless you like to stand right in front of artwork and count brush strokes.

    So really a higher dpi would be for closer viewing, maybe you just like wasting that cheap cheap ink.



    Are you telling me that you view Letter-sized documents from different distance depending on the dpi used when printed!? BS.



    The viewing distance depends on the diagonal size of the document/screen in the first place. The size of the type plays a secondary role. The resolution does not affect the viewing distance in a meaningful way. There is also a minimal distance. You don't put the iPhone on your nose because of the small screen or the high resolution display.
  • Reply 74 of 78
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadow View Post


    Are you telling me that you view Letter-sized documents from different distance depending on the dpi used when printed!? BS.



    As it's been discussed, that is RI. The image will be the same size regardless of the dpi of the printer. This is what we'd like OS X to finally have.



    Quote:

    The resolution does not affect the viewing distance in a meaningful way. [...] You don't put the iPhone on your nose because of the small screen or the high resolution display.



    The interface was designed for that display size so we would not have to. The reason for all these iPhone optimized sites that popped was because the screen size was not ideal for viewing a website, despite it being the best phone in which to view websites. Desktop OSes are designed differently. If you were to run Mac OS X on the iPhone you'd have a touch time with it, which is the reason for the development of iPhone OS X.
  • Reply 75 of 78
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I don't know the APIs Apple wrote for this, only that they said that they had, and that has been verified. We do know that they aren't in 10.5, but rather have to be added via the developer tools on the DVD. We also know that if they are, everything looks awful.



    The developer tools only install an app where you can set the scaling factor, but that's not an API, and the app is not necessary to change the scaling factory.



    So there are not any missing APIs - only a SysPref.
  • Reply 76 of 78
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,737member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JLL View Post


    The developer tools only install an app where you can set the scaling factor, but that's not an API, and the app is not necessary to change the scaling factory.



    So there are not any missing APIs - only a SysPref.



    Then I suppose you know more than Apple.
  • Reply 77 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Then I suppose you know more than Apple.



    You're not understanding. The scaling is done in Quartz. The Quartz Debug application just gives developers the ability to tell Quartz which scaling factor to use. App writers don't need to use an API, just test their UIs with various scaling factors.
  • Reply 78 of 78
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Then I suppose you know more than Apple.



    Where's the statement from Apple saying that APIs are missing to offer RI?



    You can change the scaling factor in Leopard (and Tiger btw.) by using the following command:



    Code:


    defaults write NSGlobalDomain AppleDisplayScaleFactor x.x







    x.x = the scaling factor. 1.0 is the default.



    That does not require the developer tools to be installed. The RI "APIs" are in the system today.



    I still can't see where you got the "APIs are missing to support RI" from.



    What's missing are updated versions of various graphic elements in various apps - and a system preference to enable the scaling.



    At WWDC 2007 developers were told to get the elements ready by the end of 2008 - some probably forgot that and will complain when Apple at WWDC 2009 introduces RI in 10.6 (hopefully).
Sign In or Register to comment.