Brushed metal initiative

It's a pity, because the 'new Aqua' is a really professional looking theme I can work with. BM in Finder makes me avoid it, which it obviously shouldn't, because the Finder is an integral part of my workflow.
Click to expand...

I agree - I really like the toned down aqua a LOT. It's much less garish and "in-your-face".

For me, I've been using Path Finder as my Finder for ages, so the BM finder isn't the end of the world... but I really wish Apple would stop forcing basic UI decisions on users - if they had used the textured window preference in Interface builder like everyone else, they could have at least given power-users an "out".

Again, that's why I started this initiative. Who knows - Apple sometimes listens to their users.
 
When is Apple going to learn that The Function of an OS is not defined by the look.
The visual aspects of the OS should all be customizable so that each user can create their own experience. Afterall, you already bought the OS, you must be a user, why now give that user choice so they can add their own personaity into the look of the OS. Noone wants to live in a house which is painted by the realestate company to look like their company colors.
I for one like Brushed Metal, but would also like the option to change it.
 
I hate to sound like a weiner-necked businessman, but... "it's all about the branding".

Apple has grabbed onto branding with both hands recently, and are seemingly convinced that the aqua / brushed metal look is part of their overall branding strategy. They want people, when they see either the brushed metal or the aqua interface, to think "Apple".

I guess with OS 9 and earlier, part of their branding strategy was that you could make the OS look the way you wanted (I mean, they included appearances, for goodness sakes)... but along the line I guess someone decided that it was more valuable for them to have an immovable look.

I think this makes perfect business sense, and normally I wouldn't complain as much if Apple followed their own rules (read: Aqua Human Interface Guidelines)... but the seemingly random implementation of brushed metal, toolbars (why is the Safari toolbar not a "true" toolbar?), and other niggling details tells me that all bets are off.

If Apple isn't going to eat their own dog food, they should at least give users the ability to do so.
 
I sympatasize with all of you about the fact that at Apple they seem to change the look of OS X more often than their t-shirts but I would hate right now to see one more programming hour spent on yet another looks tweaking. I would say let them release a fast responsive mature OS in Panther and the looks tweaking can wait for a patch or a future update. It does not bother me nearly as much as the slow respnsiveness of it.
 
I don't have a problem with Apple trying to make their brand visible, but why is brushed metal so different than Aqua? It's the exact opposite of branding, it's confusing.

Ever watched a new wouldbe switcher? They will show you a lot of insight about what works and what doesn't. The thing he noticed most was being able to drag itunes around from any edge and not being able to expand the itunes window like every other window (green zoom button). To us it's taken for granted but to them they need consistency. I would argue that the brushed metal vs. aqua is the same way. It's just confusing.

No I don't think there should be a choice, because you sit at two computers and they act differently on either one. I abhor brushed metal but I would live with it if it followed Apple's rules, and the rules all other applications follow.
 
Many of the choices Apple makes seem to be influenced by the Next people. Next wanted OS X to be their brainchild OS, which was way different than the "old" Mac OS, so Apple removed many features and put in many different features (Dock in place of Applications & Apple menu, etc.). The brushed metal look, while not part of Next, seems to be following the same stubborn lines of "This is what we think is cool and what people want, so we're going to shove it down everyone's throats." Annoying, isn't it?
 
I agree with the branding comments. People who see my computers who are seeing OS X for the first time take the look of the OS as the visual representation of a Macintosh. It should be obvious that Apple is a very image conscious company. (and rightly so, their sucky marketing has to be compensated somehow ;) ) If I were in Apple's shoes, I would do the same thing they are doing. Your look is the most powerful aspect of your identity, it's the user's first impression and you would want it to be consistent.

On a side note, I've been programming some apps, and I looked into iTunes, iChat, etc. and Apple has some very underhanded ways of making certain widgets very proprietary to Apple software. A lot of image files, hard code, etc. rather than freeze-dried nibs. It's quite obvious why switching many of Apple's apps to Aqua would be a little more complicated than turing a switch on or off. A lot of the widgets will still look the same (brushed metal).
 
While I like the new Aqua style, the grey of the Menu Bar etc. is just terrible. In my view it makes the whole thing look dreary and dirty. I would be content if that alone could be changed. I posted a new thread on that. If you like, opine there.
 
Why should we go to a new thread when this one already has our opinions on it? No offense, but having multiple threads of the same topic can get confusing, and they often get merged if they get big enough.

I hope the brushed metal theme works well enough that you can ignore it. Apple really shouldn't have changed everything, but what are you to do.
 
Hi!
I wonder why Apple dont implement it in OS X?
Now if ever would be nice,especially when the G5´s are out.
It would look really good to have a complete metal in OS X.I hope that Apple will consider it.We should do something about this :)

M
 
to the dude that said that finder is a cocoa app now:
LIES! The finder is not a cocoa app, ie it still swallows your clicks on buttons and such when it is in your background (doesn't register them) you don't get spell check for basic text entry, command-click doesn't let you operate it while in the background and when you drag it to the dock the title bar (top of the window now :p) stays above the dock, as opposed to cocoa apps which can be dragged past the dock. It is not a cocoa app.
 
MacFeel, 10.3 is completely brushed metal. The point of this thread is that many of us feel we should at least have an Apple-endorsed option of using Aqua or brushed metal, me included. Brushed metal, while matching the G5, is more cumbersome and thicker than Aqua, and it doesn't have the niceties like transparent title bars for inactive windows and such.

And the Finder should be Cocoa. Apple has no reason not to make it such.
 
im no huge fan of finder in brushed metal, i dont mind a couple small apps such as itunes or quicktime being brushed metal... but the whole system being half metal, half aqua is a little disturbing...

make it one or the other apple, and let us choose system wide... PLEASE
 
just a point, seeing as the 10.3 aqua theme is "metal fusion" the title bars are no longer transparent in the back ground. Just go look at some screens. Personally i didn't like the transparent title bars anyways.
 
Originally posted by arden
And the Finder should be Cocoa. Apple has no reason not to make it such.
Click to expand...

Uhm, at the risk of starting another Carbon vs Cocoa war... why?
 
Because I think Carbon is more of an intermediary between OS 9 and full OS X compatibility, and Cocoa has numerous extras built right in that would be useful in the Finder. Cocoa is more elegant than Carbon. And it tastes better, too. ;)
 
I heard somewhere that Apple said that brushed metal was only supposed to be used in Apps that were "a link between a hardware digital device and the computer". iTunes fits this nicely (iPod), as well as iPhoto (Camera), and iMovie (Video Cam), and iChat (YOU, and/or iSight), and of course iSync. But the Finder? Ehh....
 
Link? That's an interesting hypothesis, but brushed metal was around long before any of those iGadgets, starting in Quicktime Player 4. And I don't know what hardware QT is a bridge for.
 
Actually, Apple does state in the revised HIG for MacOS 10.2 (Human Interface Guidelines... there for developers to use to guide UI creation) what Link says, mostly...

Not so much that it must be an interface to a digital hub device, but that it must be an interface, or simulation of a digital hub device... Safari and Finder don't match that criteria (IMO).

On the topic of Cocoa over Carbon... I feel that Carbon is still a valid API, but that it requires more work to get all the features that Cocoa gives you 'for free'. It also allows you to get code tweaking done that Cocoa doesn't quite allow for. Just because Cocoa makes UI-oriented apps easy to write doesn't mean it is the final solution for every piece of MacOS X code. Plus, Carbon has grown quite a bit beyond that 'intermediary' porting library for OS X, so I would hardly discredit apps for being Carbon, but rather discredit apps for being poorly written in a particular API.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top