# platinum vs aqua



## Scott_Bernard (Apr 11, 2003)

i'll try to make me understand because my english skills are basic.
after mousing arround in X about 3 hours, restarted my system in 9...
WOW!!! I couldn't believe my eyes... the screen was very very VERY clear
and easy to read... I know Aqua is cute, but is so heavy to use for long time.
As a graphic designer, all I need is have all in the right place and so unobstructive (i dont know if this word is right) as possible. So I can focuse in my work...
Yeah... Aqua is beautifull but in my 17" monitor at 1152x870 screen resolution it looks smaller than platinum in 1024x768...
Is Aqua a GUI for home use? browse the net, play games etc...
I'm not shure if I'm right, but the fact is that for work in photoshop (especially), illustrator etc... platinum is my choice...

what do you think?


----------



## abyard (Apr 11, 2003)

Platinum gets my vote

I use a lot of Java applications and "Swing" (the GUI toolkit) lets you choose a look and feel, you can have the Aqua look (Mac) the Windows look (PC) or one of their own (Metal, Motif) or even third party ones (kunstoff <- excuse spelling).

It would be great if Apple implemented plugable look and feel's and let us swap between them:
  Aqua when showing off the Mac
  Platinum when doing some work

Ab


----------



## dlloyd (Apr 11, 2003)

I used Platinum for about four years (prior to that, it wasn't really Platinum, it was whatever System 7 had), and when I saw OS X, I couldn't _wait_ to get in on it.
For me it isn't just the look and feel (although I really like that too), it is the whole UI interface. For example, having the Save sheets attached to the document window. And the Drawers are a stroke of genius! And I'm not sure how I would do without the Column view now.
Truth is, I booted into OS 9 on my computer exactly _once_, to test it, and I have had my iBook for four months. I haven't actually used Classic for weeks either.
I guess I am just X-addicted!


----------



## Jason (Apr 11, 2003)

http://homepage.mac.com/max_08/themes/classicplatinum.htm

this is a pretty good theme actually


----------



## phatcactus (Apr 11, 2003)

Platinum is far more usable than Aqu, no doubt in my mind.  I'm surrently using Max Rudberg's Rhapsodized, which is a nice X-friendly version of Platinum, But it's just not the same.

Ever since around the time the iMac rolled around, Apple has been slacking somewhat in developing for people who actualy work with their Macs, and focusing more on selling computers to people who simply need email, web, and chat access and are attracted to shiny things.

Kinda sad, really, but I suppose you do what you must to stay in business.


----------



## monktus (Apr 17, 2003)

I got into osx last summer once I got 10.1 and I haven't looked back. I don't agree about the cutesyness of it - I just think osx looks nicer, and more importantly its whats underneath aqua. It is more memory intensive than os9 of course and needs a faster machine relatively but I think its worth it for the majority of users, whether at home or for design work. Especially now that nearly all the industry standard apps are out for osx now (I'm sure I don't have to mention a certain DTP program  ) 

I think that Apple have been pushing consumer sales but they have done a lot of work to get pro users converted too (Buying emagic for example). And since we're on UNIX now, it gives Mac users another advantage over windows for web development.

I'm probably not being very articulate since I haven't been to bed yet but hopefully you get my point!


----------



## phatcactus (Apr 17, 2003)

I see your point, especially about the new super-high-end apps they're buying and releasing, but I still say that the Aqua UI itself was designed more to draw attention to themselves than fade into the background.  More attention = more sales.

Am I the only one who believes that the OS's UI elements should be as unobtrusive and efficient as possible?  I mean, this is something that is ALWAYS present, regardless of what you do with your computer or what app you're using.  It's there, and if it's so slow that you have to specifically put its burden on extra hardware (Quarts Extreme) just to make the computer usable, shouldn't some kind of logical "overkill" siren go off in the mind of whoever designed it?

As someone who uses his computer for design work, I'm peeved as hell that my OS is more graphics-intensive than my graphics programs...

</rant>


----------



## Scott_Bernard (Apr 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by phatcactus _
> *
> 1 Aqua UI itself was designed more to draw attention to themselves than fade into the background.
> 
> ...



I'm 100% agree with you, specially on ponit 2


----------



## Giaguara (Apr 17, 2003)

I would like to have more styles in the system built-in to swithc between (from sys prefs, not with external hacks). I like aqua, .. even the metal looks are nice but I don't like Classic or anything that looks like Classic.


----------



## ApeintheShell (Apr 19, 2003)

i think if we still had the classic compatibility mode the rhapsody theme would work out perfectly. It could be an option for designers i guess and at the same time wouldn't carry the horrid appearance of classic. I always used the dsx theme instead of platinum anyway.


----------



## Scott_Bernard (Apr 19, 2003)

ok... we are loosing the point of this thread...
yes Aqua is nice
yes OS X is stable, robust, unix based, etc...
Now... we are talking about the GUI... 
what are you using your mac for?
if you are browsing the net, sending mails, use your usb camera, etc... you will be more than satisfied with X... but if your are a graphic profesional, are you happy with Aqua? Does Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark etc work nice in X?
Try opening 15 documents in photoshop and work with them at 1024x768...
I don't tink that OS X's GUI is being designed for profesionals
OS 9 is ten times more simple... I think that Platinum is the perfect GUI...
Mac OS has the ferfect GUI (yet before platinum...) so Aqua is make me feel that the difference between Windows and Aqua is more blured...
I hope you understand me...


----------



## phatcactus (Apr 19, 2003)

I think you summed it up quite well in your first post:  Aqua is a GUI for home use.


----------



## RacerX (Apr 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by phatcactus _
> *I think you summed it up quite well in your first post:  Aqua is a GUI for home use. *



... because all of us who use Mac OS X to make a living work at home?

I think it is best put this way: some people like it  and some people don't. When you try to add any other qualifiers you are on the road to offending others.

Just state why you like it or dislike it. But don't try to say that your feelings reflect more than your own feelings on the subject, because they don't.



> _Originally posted by Scott_Bernard _
> *if you are browsing the net, sending mails, use your usb camera, etc... you will be more than satisfied with X... but if your are a graphic profesional, are you happy with Aqua? Does Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark etc work nice in X? *



I am a professional, my rent is paid with work I do in Photoshop, ImageReady, Illustrator, Acrobat and GoLive in Mac OS X. I provide support for people who use Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat and InDesign in Mac OS X.

And yes, I do understand you. Your experiences are your own and do not reflect the experiences of other professionals. Your feelings on the subject reflect your own feelings and not that of all other professionals.

As a professional I recommend that you (as a professional) should use what ever you want. Your opinions are quite valid for you, but they do not represent all members of the group of _graphics professionals_.

And to answer your question: Yes, as a graphics professional who works on four different magazines and six different web sites and does all my work in Mac OS X, I am happy with Aqua. As a support professional who works with four other designers who have switch to Mac OS X, I can say that they are happy with Aqua (actually they are so in love with InDesign that they can't see anything else at this point, but they are *not* unhappy with Aqua). As a support professional who works with thirty-five other designers who are currently using Mac OS 9.x, I can say that more than half are looking forward to the release of QuarkXPress 6 and moving to Mac OS X (as it is the only way it can be run) and at least ten of those people are already using an Aqua theme on their systems in Mac OS 9.x.

*Far more importantly,* my answer doesn't make your preference any less valid and doesn't try to say that because you don't have the same answer as me that you are of the same level as a *home user*.

All you guys may want to try and keep that in mind when providing your answers here. Just because you are *a* professional doesn't mean that others are any less of *a* professional if they don't have the same opinions as you.


----------



## Scott_Bernard (Apr 19, 2003)

wow!!! I'm very sorry...
I didnt want to be offensive
but is just the fact that i don't feel that Aqua reflect the simplicity and easy of use of Mac OS... thats all


----------



## phatcactus (Apr 19, 2003)

Hm.  I think by "home user" I meant average email-checking web-reading AIM-chatting people.  My bad.

I do see your point though.  it is, indeed, a matter of personal preference, but do you agree that a simpler, less "loud" GUI would be both faster and easier to look at for long periods of time?


----------



## Scott_Bernard (Apr 19, 2003)

yes, of course... it is a matter of personal preference...
and sorry by use the home user label...
I think that in a future we will be using Aqua in our future generation of Macs...
Apologize me : )


----------



## RacerX (Apr 19, 2003)

> _by phatcactus:_
> *I do see your point though.  it is, indeed, a matter of personal preference, but do you agree that a simpler, less "loud" GUI would be both faster and easier to look at for long periods of time?*



Actually considering the amount of time I spend on my systems (14 plus hours on some days) I find that I can't agree. 

One year ago my two main systems were running Mac OS 9.2 (with Mac OS X v10.1.x on it, but not used much) and Rhapsody 5.6 (my desktop and laptop systems respectively). Actually Mac OS 9.2 was running with an Aqua theme and Rhapsody was using a Platinum theme (there wasn't any choice) as was Mac OS 8.6 in Blue Box on that system. I was happy with those systems as they were, no need to change as they did all that I wanted from them at the time.

Last August Apple released Mac OS X v.10.2. As a person who must also support other people's systems, I bought and test installed 10.2 five times on the first day on my PowerBook using a spare drive I had (setting the Rhapsody drive off to the side to reinstall it at the end of the day). I was surprised at the performance and wanted to see if it could handle a real world test for a period of time (I was thinking two weeks).

I left the spare drive in and finished installing all my apps and basically said to myself that if at any point during that time it got slow or crashed or needed to be restarted (I wasn't going to turn it off at all during the period) I would pull that drive and put the Rhapsody drive back in.

A friend of mine was in town to interview with a local TV station and he needed to use my PowerBook for a couple days to demo his work on. I told him that he could use it if he didn't turn it off or restart it while using it. It ran everything great (he had quite a few quicktime movies of his work).

After three weeks of testing (yes I check the uptime to make sure that it had not been restarted while in use by my friend or my wife at any point) I pulled the spare drive, put the Rhapsody drive back in, backed up all the information off it and reformatted and installed Mac OS X v.10.2 again on that system.

A short time later I upgraded my desktop to 10.2 and now both spend all there time running 10.2. If at any point I was unhappy I would just go back to using what worked before for me.

So again, I can not agree. If I did, I wouldn't be using Mac OS X now. No one was making me use it, it was my choice. No one is stopping me from going back to what I was doing before, again, it is my choice. The only thing I agree with is that *you* feel that _a simpler, less "loud" GUI would be both faster and easier to look at for long periods of time_.

Actually as I have been doing more and more work on web sites, I had planned on upgrading to GoLive 6 from GoLive 5 which was painfully slow in 8.6 and 9.x (and almost unusable in _Classic_). I was looking at the fact that both of my systems are displaying 1024x768 and thinking that I would need both a faster system and more display space. I started saving up to be able to upgrade my hardware shortly after getting GoLive 6. 

About 3 weeks ago I got GoLive 6 from Adobe. I now have no plans for new hardware in the near future. It runs better in Mac OS X then GoLive 5 ever did in Mac OS 8.6/9.x.



> *Hm.  I think by "home user" I meant average email-checking web-reading AIM-chatting people.  My bad.*



I think by "professional" I mean some one whose livelihood is completely dependent on the functions of their systems and can not afford to use sub-par software just because it looks nice in a screenshot. If "home users" find it nice, good for them. If they don't, that is fine too. I just don't think that people should take the position that because they have a preference it makes others any less _professional_.

Besides who would a _simpler GUI_ really be better for? Sounds like a _home user_ to me.


----------



## Decado (Apr 20, 2003)

I think that if you work with your computer, you would want it to be beautiful to look at (the GUI), or you would be bored to oblivion.
The dock, par exemple, makes me happy, and makes it fun to work!
I get the creeps from OS9. it feels so sterile. One of the best things with OSX when looking at a picture you have made is the borderless windows and the shadows. Gives a great preview of how the printed end result will look.


----------



## phatcactus (Apr 20, 2003)

See, I actually liked the window borders in OS 9; if there's one thing I would add to Aqua, it would be that, no doubt.  It seems to me like removing them was a step back to the system 7 days.

Strictly my opinion though, of course.


----------



## Inline_guy (Apr 20, 2003)

I used to hate macs in OS 9.  When I went to art school I used to dread having to use the macs, and would never think of buying one for myself.  I thought, and still do think, that the "old" finder in the upper right hand conner was the least intuitive thing I had ever seen.  Until someone told me I had no idea what that was up there.  It was small, didn't know what it meant.  I never could find applications.  I had to go scouring the hard-drive and in applications go through folder after folder.

Flash to the day I wanted a new MP3 player.  I went to look at an iPod to see if I could use it with my PC.  Got there and was told that I could not.  :'(  Thought to myself well... while I am here I will take a look at those new pretty macs.  Went over to it and....

What is this.....

This is not the OS I remember.  This is one sexy look.  And what is that.  All my apps I run often?  And it tells me which ones are on!

Needless to say I was in love.  On the spot I ordered my first mac.  A 15in with Superdrive (months before the 17in came out) and an iPod.  Never looked back, and have no interest in the "old" stuff.  I have since becoming a mac user tried to like the old OS too.  Still no go.  Just so blah.  Not easy for an outsider to use, and  just not my bag.
But to each his own!

Matthew


----------



## wiz (Apr 20, 2003)

i like aqua!


----------



## Androo (Apr 24, 2003)

i miss platinum... it was so plain and just there. Aqua is something you look at, and enjoy it. Aqua is like art, platinum is just something you don't notice much,.


----------



## abyard (Apr 25, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Androo _
> *i miss platinum... it was so plain and just there. Aqua is something you look at, and enjoy it. Aqua is like art, platinum is just something you don't notice much,. *



totally agree, i like 'playing' (browsing, iTunes etc) in aqua but i prefer working with platinum cos it's just there and i can get on and do what i do.

Checkout http://www.asktog.com/columns/044top10docksucks.html

Apple should get this guy back.


----------



## Decado (Apr 25, 2003)

>Apple should get this guy back.

He is a conservative idiot. His arguments are childish and he seem to think that everyone else is as stupid.


----------



## abyard (Apr 25, 2003)

we're heading off the thread but...

Think 'conservative idiot' is a bit strong, have you read any of his other Mac related articals? he does make some good points regarding usability.

which args do you think childish?


----------



## Decado (Apr 25, 2003)

Yeah, i know i might have sounded a bit too hard on him. And maybe it was unfair, since i have not read any of his other articles.
Childish: he is bitching about everything about the dock just to argue about it. Like the trash-can. He does not highlight the good thing about it, that it never gets behind any windows etc. he just says that it should be in the right corner, and it isnt if you get dual monitors.
And he says you cant see the the difference between folders in the dock. Well use different icons for them for heavens sake 
He just sees problem cuz he likes to see problems.


----------



## abyard (Apr 25, 2003)

I think he had a lot to do with the old UI so i admit some of his args sound a bit like "X isn't my party, so i'm going to slag it off".

How do you change folder icons? this would help me no end.

Do check out his other articals though, there's a great one about how the M$ UI gets everythink wrong... hangon, "Windows isn't my party......." lol - seeing a pattern here


----------



## dlloyd (Apr 25, 2003)

> _Originally posted by abyard _
> *totally agree, i like 'playing' (browsing, iTunes etc) in aqua but i prefer working with platinum cos it's just there and i can get on and do what i do.
> 
> Checkout http://www.asktog.com/columns/044top10docksucks.html
> ...



Man, that guy is _really_ out of it.
One of my biggest things about getting X on my computer was for the dock, I think it is a brilliant idea.
However, I think the dock still needs much more customization options. For examples: I think you should be able to pin the dock to one corner in System Preferences, not have to use a hack.
It would also be nice to have the option do have several docks.
Another thing I was just thinking about would be to split the dock into two parts, one pinned to the right corner and one pinned to the left corner. The left one would be for the icons that you keep in the dock, and the right one for minimized windows, open applications, the trash, and any folders you keep in the dock.


----------



## toast (Apr 25, 2003)

I personnally like Aqua, its general feel. I do not find it obstrusive, even though I think it's a shame my system UI eats so much of my CPU.

I often work either in OS 9.2.2, either in Classic, using QuarkXPress 4.11 Passport, Microsoft Word 98, Distiller 5. I have a little preference for working with OS9 applications like that booted in Classic, in such a way I have, on the one hand, fast and powerful Classic programs, and my OSX elegant Safari/Mail/iTunes programs beside, on the other one.

Hence what I prefer is a mix of Platinum and Aqua


----------



## Scott_Bernard (Apr 25, 2003)

check this site...

http://www.mackido.com/Interface/


----------



## crarko (Apr 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by serpicolugnut _
> *Well, it's a fact. Many freelancers are kids either in/just out college, and as a result, don't have a lot of money.  *



Not in my experience, sir. Most of the independent contractors I know are people like myself, professionals in their 30's - 50's and making use of their talents and experience on their own behalf, after having grown sick of playing in the corporate Ziegfeld Follies.

Admittedly we tend to be systems/software engineers and not graphics designers. Thank goodness. But I expect you'll be like us in another 10 years. At least, those who can survive as business people, too.

Good luck.


----------



## Jason (Apr 26, 2003)

as a graphic design major, i know ALOT of college age freelancers... and even if we can get academic prices, we arent allowed to use educational versions of software for business uses anyways according to EULA.

----

and with that.. you guys need to calm down, i know im not a mod in this forum, but please guys play nice


----------



## crarko (Apr 26, 2003)

Ah, see, this must be a generation and/or profession 'gap' kind of thing.

They just called us 'students' or perhaps 'interns*' back in the Mesozoic Era.  



* this was obviously way before Dell gave the term a bad name...


----------



## phatcactus (Apr 26, 2003)

So uh, how about that Aqua...?


----------



## phatcactus (Apr 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by serpicolugnut _
> *Does anyone else wonder where Apple is going with Brushed Metal?*



I don't mind brushed metal so much, I just wish that it would be used consistently, both throughout the system (since having two GUI styles in the same OS just doesn't seem quite right), and between different apps...

Safari has no window borders, like Aqua.  iChat has thin, Platinum-esque window borders.  iCal has big fat window borders.

I think I prefer iChat's border style.


----------



## fryke (Apr 27, 2003)

I think the question whether Aqua or Platinum are better are not that easily answered... Aqua hasn't only added 'weight' to the UI, it has also added features. They started 'somewhere else' when doing it.

I think both UIs have their pros and cons, and the best thing for Apple to do would be to - at one point - take their (and our) experiences with both and create one new theme (to rule them all, couldn't resist...).


----------



## chevy (Apr 27, 2003)

Wooden GUI ? Bio-compatible GUI !


----------



## serpicolugnut (Apr 27, 2003)

phatacus bring up some interesting points about aqua v. brushed, and consistency.

All the brushed apps have Window borders, allowing for resizing from any of the lower 3 quadrants - except Safari...

All Brushed apps allow you to grab the top area or a window border and drag the entire interface. Aqua doesn't allow you to drag a window unless you grab it's top bar.

If Apple is going to continue with using Brushed and Aqua in the same OS in different apps, it would be nice if at least they acted the same way, preferrably the brushed style where you can drag from any window chrome.

Who knows...at WWDC we might see a whole new evolution of both themes in to something new...


----------



## Scott_Bernard (Apr 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *Aqua hasn't only added 'weight' to the UI, it has also added features. *



suddenly I think...
Do we need those added features? 
or they are just adding weight?
I dont believe just adding buttons or commands Aqua will be more easy to use...
I love simplicity...


----------



## Arden (May 3, 2003)

Personally, I enjoy using Aqua because I like eye candy, but I really don't mind using Platinum.  Considering only my iMac has X and most of the stuff on it runs better in 9 anyway (plus the hole in my Classic environment), I rarely boot into X anymore.  However, I still enjoy all the gadgets, widgets, and the power and scalability of the new OS.  I do think the Dock has some good uses, but it needs serious improvements before it becomes fully mature, like a way to determine what application is currently active.

I believe Apple should add something to their X installer: an option to install a basic GUI or a more powerful, resource-consuming one.  My little iMac feels like The Little Engine That Could trying to pull an 80-car freight train through the Rockies; we should give it a little caboose instead, and give those freight cars to a big engine that can handle them, in other words make a version of X that works quickly and efficiently on systems with less than X Mhz, Y MB RAM and Z MB video memory, and splurge on extras for the big guns.

What Apple should really do is open up a forum for their Loyal Devoted Power Users, etc. to submit ideas for a new look (much like Renderosity is doing right now) and let people vote on what they like best.  If we the people vote for the faux wood panels and gold trim, then that's what the new UI (no longer to be called Aqua after that, for obvious reasons) will look like.  If we vote for the science-project-gone-awry with roaches and critters in every corner, widget and desktop, so be it.  Apple should do what Microsoft never will: allow its reason for existence to have a hand in its evolution.


----------



## phatcactus (May 3, 2003)

What I like to keep in mind is that OS X is still technically a 1.X release (though Apple would like to disagree) and it has lots and lots of catching up to do in every area.  Apple has plenty of experience in building a nice system, and I'm sure it'll come into play sooner or later.

I'm just impatient.


----------



## Scott_Bernard (May 3, 2003)

I'm 100% with arden and phatcactus...


----------



## Doxology (May 19, 2003)

We're all different people, and we all use our computers differently.

I see no need for a perfect universal theme, but rather a burning need for native moddability!  Why can't Apple just open Aqua's gui format and create a first-party theme changer?  Maybe Apple could include three basic themes with it: Aqua standard, Aqua lite, and Neo-Platinum.  AS for the eye-candy junkies, AL for those of us who would like a more minimalistic Aqua, and NP for the power users (and graphic designers) who want a lower system overhead.


----------



## Arden (May 19, 2003)

I think an Apple-created Platinum theme in OS X would take up as many resources as Aqua based on the way it operates.  You can make themes that look as pretty as Aqua in 9, but they function the same way as Platinum.  With Aqua, you have the power, versatility and capability of the Quartz (and sometimes Extreme) engine behind it, and Apple has built into the UI features that take advantage of that.  With a Platinum theme, I don't think you would lose features like the genie effect, the puffs of smoke, or sliding dialog boxes, so I think Platinum would only be cosmetic in X.

We will have to wait for Panther to see what Apple has up its sleeves.  One clip I saw for Longhorn showed someone moving a window, and it bent and rippled like a piece of paper... very cool.  Click the first movie to see it.


----------

