So... Oh Ess Ten Ten Point Ten? Is that how it's pronounced? I suppose it's better than OS X X.X.
Oh Ess Ex Ten Point Ten?
OS X Yosemite
81–90 of 307 posts
Re: OS X Yosemite
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple people like to mock Aero's translucency, but I... always liked it. Anyone else? Anyone?
The first release of OS X had translucent title bars for inactive windows[0] as well as a lot of transparency in sheets, menus and other UI elements. A lot off this was to show off the compositing available in the window manager. I was disappointed when more and more became opaque over time and am glad to see the return of translucency. 0 - http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/dec00/images/appleosx.l.gi...
A lot of it still is translucent, just not a lot. The menus, in-app sheets (save dialog, go-to-path in Finder, etc), Spotlight results panel, the Dock…
Re: OS X Yosemite
#83I wonder how legacy apps will look? I'm assuming it will work the same was as iOS 6 apps do on iOS 7, where they just run the same as they did before and look like older apps.
That's going to be a confusing transition. Although it might shame app developers into updating their apps.
Re: OS X Yosemite
#84HandOff is the kind of thing I'm surprised took so long. Honestly, I was expecting MS to get something like it first. After all, your Windows Phone already runs Windows, right?
There's something kinda similar for KDE, KDE Connect, it sends notifications to your PC from your phone, but you can not reply. http://community.kde.org/KDEConnect
And they're working on more communication the other direction. I use it — it's nice to have.
Re: OS X Yosemite
#85Yawn Come on Apple, you can do better. Innovate!
Re: OS X Yosemite
#86This is awesome, but can we talk about the very scary looking folder icons?
Re: OS X Yosemite
#87Ironic that the official apple page for Yosemite shows it running a macbook air, which hasn't seen a cosmetic or design update in ... 6 years ? 2009 was when they removed the physical mouse button...
Re: OS X Yosemite
#88I don't care about flat or transparent. I just hope they effing fix windowing and multi-monitor support. ⌘+` is ridiculously buggy.
I left OSX for Linux 5 years ago primarily due to the unbelievably lacking window management. Having come from Windoze land with the then, and perhaps still, excellent UltraMon, I could never adapt to manually reizing app windows side by side into grids, or context switching between layers expose-style. The tiling window manager options on Linux are so good that I've dropped the desktop environment entirely (Gnome, K…
What tiling manage, theme and icon package do you use to get a GTK3 look? I currently use Awesome WM and Gnome 2.X.
Re: OS X Yosemite
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
What issue do you usually have when you use ⌘+`? I haven't had any problems.
Use 2+ monitors and 2+ desktops ('Spaces' or whatever they're called). When you're expecting to go from app A to app B, instead you're taken to app C. Or, you're taken to an unexpected window of App B on a different desktop. Also, the Z-ordering of windows seems really odd. If you have multiple windows open from two apps, and you ⌘+` between them, sometimes all of App A windows are brought to the front and App B wind…
Oh I see. I frequently use a second monitor and there are times when some app will open or show that really had no reason to. This tends to happen when I do ⌘+tab. On the other hand, window navigation for me has been fairly decent.
Re: OS X Yosemite
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
That does seem to be a bit of a jumble. I think what they're trying to convey is that although it uses flat design like iOS 7, on the desktop it has a feeling of depth due to the layering of translucent UI elements. Maybe.
That's what they're doing on iOS7 also.
Not really. On iOS you can't/don't overlap windows, so its design language never had to describe this relationship.
One of the questions floating around for the past few months was whether the next OSX would go in a flatter direction, and if so how they would cue window overlaps. It looks like the answers are (a) yes and (b) using roughly the same shadowing as before, plus translucence.