“There is a lot of buzz and speculation floating around as to what we’ll see in the Mac OS X 10.5 update that will be previewed (and I suspect released) at this August’s World Wide Developer’s Conference,” David Chartier writes for The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW). “One exciting ‘fundamental feature’ John Gruber hinted at last November has been mentioned again by a developer named Dustin MacDonald: resolution independence… This idea of resolution independence, as you might glean from the name, is a new concept (as far as I know) that restructures how element sizes are defined in Mac OS X, ideally making it possible for higher resolutions without forcing users to squint at everything they do on-screen. This also could usher in much higher ppi resolutions which could bring computer displays that much closer to properly displaying high-detail objects.”
Chartier writes, “The reason I’m mentioning all this is that Dustin MacDonald, the aforementioned developer, has echoed Gruber’s sentiment that evidence of Apple’s move to resolution independence is already present in 10.4, and he goes a little further to explain some of these elements for those who really wanna get their nerd on.”
Full article here.
Dustin MacDonald has more about “resolution independence” in Mac OS X Leopard here.
Info about 512×512 pixel Mac OS X icons (Portuguese to English Google translation) here.
MacDailyNews Take: Take it from us, Apple’s 17-inch MacBook Pro’s 1680×1050 resolution screens cry for a Mac OS X that’s capable of “resolution independence.” Let’s hope Leopard delivers just such a capability.
Advertisements:
• Introducing the super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook. Starting at just $1099
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
would be about time haha, feels like this next osx release (especially if it has a new kernal / finder) is worthy of being os XI – im sure they wanna keep the X as branding though at the moment.
Hopefully the elements will be adjustable, like how the Dock and Finder icon sizes already are.
I’m not sure how “exciting” this feature is, but it would be welcome.
feels like this next osx release (especially if it has a new kernal / finder) is worthy of being os XI
IMO they should keep the “Mac OS X 10.x” naming until 10.9. By then OS naming & branding will need to be freshened up anyway.
“Let’s hope Leopard delivers just such a capability.”
It will, and it is truly needed! Have you ever looked at text on a 30 inch monitor? It looks like complete shit on a Mac. And I am one of the most die-hard MacAddicts on this site. Go to an Apple store and launch iTunes on either a Mac connected to a 30 inch monitor, a 23 inch monitor, or even the new 20 inch iMac. Run the visualizer in full screen. Look at how crappy the text is (song title and artist). It’s horrible and hopefully will be fixed in Leopard.
“IMO they should keep the “Mac OS X 10.x” naming until 10.9. By then OS naming & branding will need to be freshened up anyway.”
They may run out of cat names! What’s next after Lion? Ocelot? Most people forget that Puma and Cheetah were taken by OS 10.0 and 10.1.
Although, I’d like to see Lynx, despite the problems with the grandfather of web-browsers for Unix – Lynx.
Get their Nerd on. What a great line.
How about “Kitty” or “Pussy” or “Frisky” (my personal favorite). And don’t forget about “Tabby”, “Mr. Jinx” and “Princess”.
Or the next generation Mac OS could rely entirely on prominent bookmarks and glowing rectangular placeholders throughout. Then, Apple could name it . . . wait for it . . .
MAC OS TABBY!
MW: rather, but not Dan.
Apple could switch to naming the OS after primates finally sending Ballmer over the edge. A rain of flying chairs and feces before a total meltdown.
Product Namer:
People like you fail to understand or appreciate that the functionality, elegance, and performance of the OS define the product, not the name. Your futile attempt to be witty only emphasizes your pathetic lack of imagination and intelligence. However, I’ll call you my little pussy any day of the week.
Ay caramba!: Which is it?
Is it “my failure to understand or appreciate that the functionality, elegance, and performance of the OS define the product, not the name,” or is it my “futile attempt to be witty”?
Your comments seem so much more intelligent, insightful and mature than mine, that I’m truly humbled to be in your presence.
MW: theory, as in your attempt at being superior is just a theory.
Resolution independence is a superb goal. Coupled with some very high resolution displays, it’ll make that Vista crap look horribly old before it’s even released.
It’s maybe not so easy to combine raster and vector elements in a scalable display, but that will just make it all the more impressive when they achieve it.
Product Namer:
You damn well better be humbled, pussy.
Actually, it’s both, you dumbass.
Ay caramba! – Why on earth did you attack Product namer for his comments? STFU
Resolution independence is hardly a new idea. Even the original MacOS has hints of it. It’s just never been properly implemented because programmer’s have been lazy and have just assumed 72dpi for displays.
Ay caramba!
I too, am humbled to be in your presence.
Nice try at intelligence. You dildo.
People have been wanting screen resolution independence since the RadiUS screens with 120 ppi back in the late 80s (think of 10 point type the size of 6 point type). We’ve been screaming for it for years. The excuse has always been that it would take way too much CPU and GPU processing power to do without drastically impaciting performance. It is much, much eaiser and computationally less intensive to just hard code everything to 72 ppi (which approximates the 72.023 pixels per inch in classic type definitions and was the approximate screen resolution of the first Macs).
There were some specialized systems (based upon SGI boxes with special graphics cards and 300 ppi grayscale, 21 inch screens) shipped back in the late 80s that had screen resolution independence, but I know of no consumer system or OS which has supported this. It’s about time.
Now we can have 100, 120, 200, even 300 ppi on screen and tell the OS what that is. Then an 11 x 17 inch sheet of paper on a 30 inch monitor will actually show up at 11 x 17 inches even if the ppi is 150!
Think of the reduction in eye strain. People can buy super high resoution monitors (200+ ppi) and still have items show up at the proper size — just in much, much crisper detail.
As an aside, I got into a rather intense discussion with a Windows fanatic a month or so ago who claimed resolution independence is going to be a cornerstone of the new Vista interface. I’ll believe it when I see it.
Product Namer, Ay caramba!, Librium, and others…
I’m holding out for SaberTooth — the biggest, baddest cat of them all.
Are these your best shots? I laugh at you, you pale panting pathetic paltry pack of pandering pussies.
Let’s hope Leopard delivers just such a capability.
Heck, I’m just praying the damm operating system is secure.
If not I’m going to make it my mission in life to feed pidgeons near the new “glass cube” Apple Store in NYC.
Muhhahahalalalala!!!
Ay caramba!:
You misinterpreted Product Namer’s comments assuming that he was being derogatory toward OS X. Really, he was just joking around. You responded to him inappropriately (hostile) because you failed to grasp what was going on. That is something that idiot’s do. You are an idiot. Also, you come off very insecure.
“Ay caramba! – Why on earth did you attack Product namer for his comments? STFU”
A typically brainless comment from another dimwitted pussy sympathizer. Brian gallantly asks for an answer, then, immediately reverses himself and boldly tells me to SFTU. Well, I can’t do both and satisfy your dauntless instructions. So, which is it, dumbass?
Brian:
Please inform Product Namer that his attempts at humour were neither obvious nor clever. I hope that this clarfies things.
Whew! Good thing we have Ay Caramba here to tell us all what is appropriate or funny. Where would we be without his/her/or likely it’s insight into what is humorous and clever. When I first read Product Namer’s post, I was unsure of what to do or how to respond, but thanks to Ay Caramba’s patented insult barrage, I can act confident in feeling disdain toward Product Namer’s remarks! Thank you, Ay Caramba…. you have truly been an asset to this forum! I salute you! And anyone who ever disagrees with you ever again from this moment on deserves a thorough butt raping.
This would be a very good and needed feature. I’m glad to see that it is already in the OS, in development mode. It will be yet another OS capability that will distance Mac OS X Leopard from Windows Vista (when it finally appears).
I was playing with the 17-inch MacBook Pro at the local Apple Store the other day, and I could not believe how small the menu bar looked on the screen. The 15-inch MacBook Pro was a bit better (not so tiny), but it was still pretty small. It would be great if interface features like the menu bar can be scaled, like the Dock and icons can be today. If individual apps (and their interfaces) can be scaled independently, that would be even better…
One other thing that needs to be addressed at some point is the Menu Bar itself. Perhaps when Mac OS X does become XI, it would be good to provide a built-in alternative program interface for people with really large or really high-pixel-density displays. Even with today’s 30-inch displays, it becomes taxing to move the mouse to the top-left of the huge display to access the menu. Yes, I’m sure “power users” have keyboard shortcuts, and I can probably use a contextual menu (right click) feature, but those are not the “default” method of operation on a Mac. Apple should come up with something clever to address this issue. and I hope it’s not to put the menu bar in every window (as in Windows and the Linux/Unix interfaces I’ve seen).