301–310 of 514 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As in they're integrating Swift into the WebKit project, or exposing Swift-y wrappers over WebKit itself?
There is probably going to be a session later this week, the reference seemed to imply they are integrating Swift into Webkit project for new development.
Will they ever update Terminal.app?
Will they ever update Terminal.app?
They did!!! At least color options. Just announced at platform state of the union
edit: For those curious, https://youtu.be/51iONeETSng?t=3368.
- New theme inspired by Liquid Glass
- 24-bit colour
- Powerline fonts
> New Design with Liquid Glass Looks like software UI design – just like fashion, film, architecture and many other fields I'm sure – has now officially entered the "nothing new under the sun" / "let's recycle ideas from xx years ago" stage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_%28user_interface%29 To be clear, this is just an observation, not a judgment of that change or the quality of the design by itself. I was gett…
I kind of hate it. Every use of it in the videos shown so far has moments where it's so transparent as to have borderline unreadable contrast.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me it looks more like Windows Vista's "Aero" than OS X's "Aqua".
And I couldnt be happier to see it back. I have not been a fan of the flattening of UI design over the last 15 years.
This was posted in another HN thread about Liquid Glass: https://imgur.com/a/6ZTCStC . I'm sure Apple will tweak the opacity before it goes live, but this looks horribly insane to me.
> New Design with Liquid Glass Looks like software UI design – just like fashion, film, architecture and many other fields I'm sure – has now officially entered the "nothing new under the sun" / "let's recycle ideas from xx years ago" stage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_%28user_interface%29 To be clear, this is just an observation, not a judgment of that change or the quality of the design by itself. I was gett…
To me it looks more like Windows Vista's "Aero" than OS X's "Aqua".
Don’t use macOS but had just kinda assumed it would by virtue of shared unixy background with Linux
> including over 250,000 APIs that enable developers to integrate their apps with Apple’s hardware and software features. This doesn’t sound impressive, it sounds insane.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When they figure out how to make it not dent sales of individual devices. If you and your spouse could easily share one around the house for different purposes but still having each of your personal apps and settings, you might not buy two!
> If you and your spouse could easily share one around the house for different purposes but still having each of your personal apps and settings, you might not buy two! I get it, but an iPad starts at $349; often available for less. At this point, an iPad is no different than a phone—most people wouldn't share a single tablet. Laptops and desktops that run macOS, Linux, Windows which are multiuser operating systems h…
It's less about the cost and more about having to have another stupid device to charge, update, and keep track of, when a tablet is not a device that gets used enough by any one person to be worth all that. It would be much more convenient to have a single device on a coffee or end table which all family members could use when they need to do more than you can do on a phone.
> Laptops and desktops that run macOS, Linux, Windows which are multiuser operating systems have largely become single-user devices.
Maybe. Probably 90% of work laptops are single-user, I'm sure. But for home computers, multi-user can be very useful. And it's better than ever to use laptops as dumb terminals, since all most people's stuff is in the cloud. It's not nearly as much trouble to get your secondary user account on a spare laptop in the living room to be useful as it was in the Windows XP days. Just having a browser that's signed into your stuff, plus Messages or Whatsapp, and maybe Slack/Discord/etc. is enough.
> most people wouldn't share a single tablet.
Since iPads have never supported doing so in a sane way, that unfounded assertion is just as likely due to the fact that it's a terrible experience today, since if you share one today, someone else will be accidentally marking your messages as read, you'll be polluting their browser or YouTube history, etc.
It's also the kind of dismissive claim true Apple believers tend to trot out when someone points out a shortcoming: "Nobody wants to use a touchscreen laptop!" "Nobody wants USB-C on an iPhone when Lightning is slightly smaller!" "Nobody needs an HDMI port or SD slot on a MacBook Pro!" "Nobody needs a second port on the 12-inch MacBook!" Most of the above things have come true except the touch laptop, and somehow it hasn't hurt anyone, but the "nobody wants..." crew immediately stops when Apple finally [re-]embraces something
> Every Apple Developer Program membership includes 200GB of Apple hosting capacity for the App Store. Apple-Hosted Background Assets can be submitted separately from an app build. Is this the first time Apple has offered something substantial for the App store fees beyond the SDK/Xcode and basic app distribution? Is it a way to give developers a reason to limit distribution to only the official App Store, or will th…