# Apple: Lose the Brushed Metal



## MacLuv (Jan 8, 2003)

I think Apple is really going overboard with its brushed metal applications. The future of computing is synonymous with "lite", not "heavy". Yet Apple continues to release applications with a texture that is sterile, unimaginative, bulky, and boring to look at. Furthermore, it seems to complicate the design process as applications are designed around the texture, working within the same constraints it seems as if one were working with actual hardware. 

The whole purpose of software is to have a flexible design environment--a virtual environment not bound to real-world restraints. Although "skinning" is a popular way to customize the GUI, Apple is abusing the technique. 

Aqua already stretches many boundaries of intuitive GUI design, and now the brushed metal appearance only hinders GUI deisign further, as more empashis is put on style rather than function. It seems as if a feature can't be incoporated seemlessly into the brushed interface, it won't be incorporated into the application. iPhoto is a good example of this.

Small utillities such as iTunes or QuickTime that use this "skin" approach are fun, but to design an entire suite of applications with this bogus texture is not the kind of innovative approach I expect from a company like Apple. I would like to see a more "transparent" approach to GUI design, so that I am removed from the "how" of the design, much like how an accomplished author removes himself from the narrative of a book, rather than drawing attention to his writing style.

 Regards.


----------



## edX (Jan 8, 2003)

mark the calender - i am in agreement with macluv here. i also think that brshed metal somehow looks right for itunes and nasty on everything else. i mean brushed metal was os 9. and many of us switched from os 9 to os x in part because it looked so much better. is apple now catering to the comfort zone of those who have been afraid to upgrade until now while ignoring the devotion of those of us who loved aqua and were early adopters? shame, shame, shame.

btw, iraised this point with one of the safari developers and his response was "talk to steve". so, if you're reading this steve, i'm talking. or at least as close to talking to you as i'm likely to get.


----------



## MacLuv (Jan 8, 2003)

Wow, I will mark my calendar, but it will have to be in Entourage.  lol

Was the developer somewhat sarcastic when he said "talk to Steve?" Obviously we're not the only ones with this opinion. Is Steve the factor behind this brushed metal bologna?

*on a side note--not trying to start flame wars*

If Apple continues to release applications with this appearance I don't see the difference between this and the criticisms behind XP. In other words, I'd much rather have XP than brushed metal. Perhaps Apple should offer users a choice--that is the whole point of having a computer, after all.


----------



## gatorparrots (Jan 8, 2003)

Thankfully we have Metallifizer (which i use as De-metallizer) and the Developer Tools, with which we can do some extensive resource hacking, beginning with the removal of the brushed metal texture. Both are free and readily available enough, but I agree that the metal appearance should either be a preference or more easily removed (a la LifTP).


----------



## Inline_guy (Jan 8, 2003)

I like the brush metal.

Matthew


----------



## dlloyd (Jan 8, 2003)

Well, it does make a nice contrast with the 'Glass'.


----------



## xaqintosh (Jan 8, 2003)

I'm in complete agreement with ed on this one, brushed metal looks good on iTunes, and pretty much nothing else. Although its not bad on iCal  everything else would be better in standard Aqua, IMO.


----------



## symphonix (Jan 9, 2003)

To quote the Apple Human Interface Guidelines:

_Consistency

Consistency in the interface allows people to transfer their knowledge and skills from one application to any other. Use the standard elements of the Aqua interface to ensure consistency within your application and to benefit from consistency across applications. Ask yourself the following questions when thinking about consistency in your product.

- Is your product consistent
- within itself?
- with earlier versions of your product?
- with Mac OS standards? For example, does your application use the reserved and recommended keyboard equivalents? (See  "Reserved and Recommended Keyboard Equivalents".)
- in its use of metaphors?
- with people's expectations?

Matching everyone's expectations is the most difficult kind of consistency to achieve, since your product is likely used by an audience with a wide range of expertise. You can address this problem by carefully weighing the consistency issues in the context of your target audience and their needs._

(You will find this document in the Apple Developers Tools in /Developer/Documentation/Essentials/AquaHIGuidelines/)


----------



## MacLuv (Jan 9, 2003)

Oh no... don't start with the HIG... 

It's not the bible, and Apple is pretty hypocritical when it comes to following them (dock vs. menubar).

Apple's own HIG used to mean something about interface design, now it seems to be used more as a manifesto. New interface guidelines have emerged without documentation--they're written on the menu-driven interfaces created all over the internet. As far as native applications are concerned, guidelines need to be split into two camps: one for workflow, the other for entertainment. Again I use two primary examples: the menubar vs. the dock. The menubar is great for getting work done, the dock is not. The dock is great eye-candy, but terrible as a tool to complete routine mechanical tasks associated with creative production.


----------



## MacLuv (Jan 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by symphonix _
> *Matching everyone's expectations is the most difficult kind of consistency to achieve, since your product is likely used by an audience with a wide range of expertise. You can address this problem by carefully weighing the consistency issues in the context of your target audience and their needs.[/I]
> *



According to the programmer Ed talked to, he said to "talk to Steve about it."

I didn't realize that Steve Jobs = everyone.


----------



## fryke (Jan 9, 2003)

I don't think Apple will move away from Aqua & Brushed Metal anytime soon. Thus: Why not use a theme that replaces both Aqua AND Brushed metal with something more sleek?

Rhapsodized is now 10.2.3 compatible, as well as SmoothStripes. Both of them make all the apps look really toned down and ... useful.

http://homepage.mac.com/max_08/index_themes.htm


----------



## Inline_guy (Jan 9, 2003)

I think the reason I like the metal and the "plastic" white looking stuff is that to me, it matched the hardware.

The hardware has three things (normally) white'ish plastic, metal, and a transparent layer to them.

This is not exact and varies a bit, but for the most part I feel the brushed metal and the white OS go well with the metal and white computer!

Matthew


----------



## MacLuv (Jan 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *I don't think Apple will move away from Aqua & Brushed Metal anytime soon. Thus: Why not use a theme that replaces both Aqua AND Brushed metal with something more sleek?
> 
> Rhapsodized is now 10.2.3 compatible, as well as SmoothStripes. Both of them make all the apps look really toned down and ... useful.
> ...



Fryke, thanks for the link. Have you tried this on your system? Is it "safe"?


----------



## phatsharpie (Jan 10, 2003)

I actually don't mind the metal look. I think it's great on Safari because the UI is so minimal, it actually grounds the webpage - especially considering that Safari windows have no left and right borders.

I guess if it took over EVERYTHING it'll look awful, but in the mean time, I think it's fine.


----------



## ~~NeYo~~ (Jan 12, 2003)

Fryke, or anybody ...

Know any themes without transparency! ... i'm always looking for performance increases!


----------



## ~~NeYo~~ (Jan 12, 2003)

Or ... Does anyone know of someway i can run a GUI Benchmark?! I can then judge which theme is best for my computer! 

thats one thing cool with XP tho, you can choose Classic! ... it don't look much, but you can feel the difference on a slow computer or if u're RDC an XP machine etc...


----------



## evildan (Jan 13, 2003)

I for two like the the brushed metal as well. It's clean and minimalist approach fit nicely on my desktop. I think the brushed metal effect has been successfully toned down so it hardly looks as distracting as some of the early iTunes versions. Brushed metal provides a sense of credibility to the OS for those of us who get to use it at the office. Aqua, in it's purest form, needs the contrast of metal to give the UI balance.

Also, another bonus of the metal is that it provides a consistently pleasing UI which goes quite nicely with my TiBook.


----------



## ApeintheShell (Feb 2, 2003)

I think people have been taking this subject out of hand for a while. 
Brushed metal provides a shell for aqua, like a turtle. I used APE for awhile to take it out of Safari, iChat and iCal. But when i would use the applications for a couple of hours i would revert them back. 
Why?
They stand out and make my mac more individual.
Obviously we use themes so we don't have to use aqua. So since brushed metal doesn't control the whole UI like a theme would than what is the disadvantage to having brushed metal?
None. 
Last question, would you rather have people that don't know anything about design make your OS (ex. windows)?


----------



## fryke (Feb 2, 2003)

Above mentioned Rhapsodized, SmoothStripes etc. Themes (Max) are almost without transparency. Very clean and nice. And they work well with 10.2.3 and up.


----------



## fryke (Feb 3, 2003)

Oh, and MacLuv (this is a LATE answer, too...)

Yes, the themes are safe. Of course, there's always risks if you replace system files, but I haven't had a system crash because of those themes since the themes were updated to 10.2 compatibility.


----------



## Arden (Feb 10, 2003)

I think the best thing brushed metal has going for it is that it's draggable no matter where you click on it.  One of the features of Classic windows I like that Aqua dropped is the thick border that you can use to drag a window around (to, say, make it bigger than your resolution-or vice versa).  Other than that, though, I think the metal should at least be optional, especially in the program that started it-Quicktime Player.  An application like Quicktime Player that runs movie media should be much more minimalist, like DVD Player, essentially a borderless window and a remote.  IMO, Quicktime Player looks and has always looked somewhat unnecessarily bloated with its interface.  Wouldn't you like a borderless movie that you can drag around?

Soon, I will be posting a number of changes I feel should be implemented in OS X, this issue being one of them.  Everyone will be welcome to comment on my suggestions and make new ones.


----------

