# Dear Apple, please unify interfaces



## chevy (Sep 18, 2004)

I compare 
iTunes (best interface)
Safari (ok, but I miss a good bookmark browser, that could be on side of the page, like the folders in Thunderbird)
Mail (nice Aqua, but really too old now, needs to be updated to brushed metal)
Finder (I just miss the hierarchical thread, like in Path Finder)


----------



## Gnomo (Sep 18, 2004)

I agree.  I've been saying this since I started using OSX... course it was the other way around (get rid of the brushed metal and go with aqua), but the brushed metal apps are growing on me.  It would be nice if Apple had one interface design and allowed for easy skinning (maybe not actually releasing a skinning application, but at least releasing a "Do it yourself" guide or SDK)


----------



## Viro (Sep 18, 2004)

I like brushed metal now more than Aqua. The apps I use daily like Safari, iTunes and iChat are all brushed metal and I like them! I wish Apple would just standardize on one look and make all apps brushed metal (or at least have the option of configuring them).


----------



## chevy (Sep 18, 2004)

The other point is that I paid to have a 17" display. I don't want all the real estate being wasted by funny but useless white area. I prefer the more dense brushed metal look.


----------



## texanpenguin (Sep 19, 2004)

Whitespace is necessary for ease of use, and comfortable reading. The Aqua interface is very good at blending into the background, for heavily content-based programs (like Mail, TextEdit). The Brushed Metal textured interface is purposefully distracting. No element is given precedence over others - data, interface widgets, titles - all arranged amid the interface. Safari is an exception, because, unless (like me) you have the Status Bar enabled (off by default), the only brushed metal is concentrated at the top, where the sheer number of elements demands something less spaced out and separated than the Aqua toolbars (see Jaguar Finder).

I love how the OS X interfaces are sorted out. There's a nice balance of white and grey, both of which go brilliantly with the blue widgets (like the scrollbars), and in the end, the whole interface fits together very nicely.
Compared to how Windows gives their developers more control over the way their windows look (easily), Apple's Interface Builder allows developers to, intuitively, develop windows that follow Apple's Human Interface Guidelines.

I can't complain at ALL with the way Apple produces its products, although I would like Mail to be updated a little bit, functionality-wise, I don't feel it needs ANY modification interface-wise (short of the Dock-context menu, which is woefully understocked).

If people don't like Aqua applications, I'm sure there's a program which does the opposite of DeMetalifizer.


----------



## chevy (Sep 19, 2004)

Hi TexanPingu,

I like your answer very much because you differentiate two things: white vs metal and small vs large interface.

And indeed, I have nothing against the white itself. But I have something about the interface being bigger that the content. The status bar is Safari as an example should be smart like the dock and appear only when I howe over the bottom of the window.

Mail interface could remain white, but icons should be more compact (like Safari icons) and I don't like the side panes (that's true for all software with side panes), I largely prefer to have an additional column in the window (like iTunes and Finder do) than this pane on the side of the window.... windows are no elephants  .


----------



## Lycander (Sep 19, 2004)

I can't read the black text on top of the brush metal, so I'm in the Aqua camp. Unless they allow us to change system font settings, and especially color.


----------



## texanpenguin (Sep 22, 2004)

I do acknowledge that Mail could live with a Source pane instead of a drawer for Mailboxes, as it would be more consistent, but then it'd have to be brushed metal like other Sourced windows, and that would change the whole interface completely. I just wish that the integration with Address Book took nicknames into account.

Lycander - you're the first person I've ever known to not like the colours in relation to one another. I can see that that MIGHT be a problem if you have poor eyesight, so maybe DeMetalifizer is for you?


----------



## bonaccij (Sep 22, 2004)

Do you know what I would really like to see? I would like to see the use of a more sleek metal look instead of the brushed metal that Apple is currently using. If any of you use Camino, you know what I am talking about. The default interface for Camino's top bar, where the widgets are, is a very sleek metalic-looking surface, and I simply love it. It isn't white - it isn't grey - it is somewhere in between. I think THAT should be the next incarnation of brushed metal. I think if it were, there would be a lot less "controversy" over the whole brushed metal ordeal.

I do agree, however, that the Mail.app should be brought up to date to match the rest of the iApps - if for nothing else than consistency.


----------



## jonparadise (Sep 26, 2004)

All very valid points, just showing how much peoples tastes vary.

I was only thinking this morning, how I would like Mail.app to be in brushed metal, with smaller buttons like in Safari, I feel it would give mail a more 'professional' look.

However, the simplest thing Apple could do is include a 'Switch Brushed Metal on  and off' pane in preferences, for all Apps.

Then we could all pick and choose.

Saying that, I haven't got a clue when it comes to programming, so it could be a huge job for them to undertake.


----------



## jego (Sep 26, 2004)

Well, I don't like the way iTunes looks, but not cause of the brushed or what ever, just because its too big and ugly for a music player 

I now have a brushed theme, so all apps are tottaly brushed out and I like that.


----------



## chevy (Sep 26, 2004)

The brushed base is smaller... and that's its main advantage !


----------



## Gnomo (Sep 26, 2004)

I can never really make up my mind in regards to the brushed metal vs aqua debate.  I liked the brushed metal apps because they are small and they apps that use it look funny when demetalized.  But, I like the aqua apps because they have more color and don't give my computer a 'sterile environment' look.   <rant>I mean come on, it's a computer not a hospital for crying out loud~!</rant>

Anywho, *If* apple were to make mail brushed metal, I hope they would (at least, have an option to) continue to use the same icons that mail currently has, only slightly smaller, and they same goes for any app the has a toolbar.


----------



## smithy (Sep 27, 2004)

I think i would really like if most of the apps were brushed metal, i suppose the white stripes with aqua icons is sorta going out the door. I dont really like it that much. I really like the brushed metal in finder, safari, and itunes. However i really wish that itunes was skinable cause to my knowledge it isnt but i know its got skins on the dashboard in tiger. I really would like an extra button in safari meaning a stop button because like i dont like it how the refresh button and the stop button are the same button but change - Just old IE ways i guess.


----------



## Browni (Sep 27, 2004)

Gnomo: do you mean like this : 


Id like to see what it looks like with safari like buttons


----------



## Gnomo (Sep 27, 2004)

Browni said:
			
		

> Gnomo: do you mean like this


Yep.  Looks pretty good.  I still think the brushed metal looks a little sterile, but the color buttons help.  Perphaps Apple will adjust the brushed metal over time (like they did with Aqua) :shrug:


----------



## RGrphc2 (Sep 27, 2004)

what apple should do is have a skinable/theme manager like in OS 9, where u can change the color of pretty much everything.  Maybe for Tiger?


----------



## Browni (Sep 28, 2004)

isnt that called shapeshifter?


----------



## Pengu (Sep 28, 2004)

You are all aware you can tell any app with a "customize toolbar" menu item to use SMALL icons with or without text, right??


----------



## chevy (Sep 28, 2004)

Yop, but it doesn't change that http://www.macosx.com/forums/showpost.php?p=330422&postcount=12


----------



## fryke (Oct 7, 2004)

And then there's this new Susan look in Tiger coming up (probably). I wonder whether Apple will actually break down the looks and make it all Susan (and just forget about Aqua and Brushed Metal altogether), or we'll have _three_ different looks at the end of the day (when Tiger's released in 2005). But I agree that Apple should get its act together and unify in one or the other way. I'm all _against_ giving the user total control over the interface. If you look at what people did with Kaleidoscope (or just MS Windows)... Free control for the user over system fonts and their _colour_? Argh! Nah!


----------



## Jeffo (Oct 7, 2004)

I like both aqua and brushed metal.  if i had to pick one i would like the metal better.  I just wish that apple would stick to it's own rules for when to use each window style and then also not come up with one of a kind windows like in garageband.


----------



## MBHockey (Oct 8, 2004)

fryke said:
			
		

> And then there's this new Susan look in Tiger coming up (probably). I wonder whether Apple will actually break down the looks and make it all Susan (and just forget about Aqua and Brushed Metal altogether), or we'll have _three_ different looks at the end of the day (when Tiger's released in 2005). But I agree that Apple should get its act together and unify in one or the other way. I'm all _against_ giving the user total control over the interface. If you look at what people did with Kaleidoscope (or just MS Windows)... Free control for the user over system fonts and their _colour_? Argh! Nah!



Hopefully they will just stick with that new look in Tiger, the blend of aqua and metal.  Having two different window textures is annoying enough...


----------

