“The latest development build of Mac OS X Leopard [build 9A410] finally tackles issues with consistent style that many say have plagued the Apple software for years,” Aidan Malley reports for AppleInsider.
Malley reports, “While most of the test versions of the future operating system have so far handled only the many bugs still left in its code, this week’s edition allegedly contains the first signs of obvious visual differences between itself and 2005’s Mac OS X Tiger.”
“The brushed-metal look that first appeared in earnest with Panther has almost completely faded away, according to reports. Well-known holdouts for the style, including Finder, Photo Booth, and Safari, have purportedly abandoned the metallic sheen in favor of the simpler, gradiated style that first appeared in Apple Mail 2.0 and later transferred to Leopard’s version of iChat and the more widely available iTunes 7,” Malley reports.
Full article with screenshots and links to more images here.
Related articles:
eWeek’s Morgenstern: Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard delay is no big whoop – April 13, 2007
InformationWeek blows it again: reports second delay of Leopard this year due to Vista compatibility – April 13, 2007
Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Piper Jaffray: Use Apple’s Leopard delay as buying opportunity – April 13, 2007
Analysts unconcerned over Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard delay – April 13, 2007
Apple delays Mac OS X Leopard until October 2007, blames iPhone – April 12, 2007
Latest Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard build still accompanied by lengthy bug list – April 12, 2007
RUMOR: Apple to release Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard in June – April 02, 2007
Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard to feature ZFS? – March 29, 2007
Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard’s top secret ingredient: 3D everywhere, including new 3D Finder? – March 27, 2007
Apple to delay Leopard? Digitimes.com’s poor Apple rumor accuracy – March 23, 2007
Apple to postpone Mac OS X Leopard until October in order to support Windows Vista? – March 23, 2007
RUMOR: Some Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard ‘top secret’ features leak out – January 26, 2007
RUMOR: Apple Mac OS X Leopard to replace ‘Aqua’ with ‘Illuminous’ – December 11, 2006
Apple confirms ‘resolution independence’ and more coming in Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard – October 23, 2006
@”Simple and honest”
“Actually Wendy, Apple is just being honest and showing your windoze people what OS X is really like, i.e. it is slow compared to what you are used to.”
Are you friggin’ kidding me? OS X SLOWER than Windows? Umm… NO.
Wendy, window. Window, Wendy. You know what to do…
If I owned an iMac I’d be less worried about changes to the GUI, more worried that I owned a computer which looked like my Mother’s 1970s bathroom mirror.
@ Wendy
Your mother must have been way ahead of her time.
I switched from a Sony Core Duo laptop with Windows XP to a 20-inch C2D iMac in February. Love the screen and tiny space this sleek machine takes up on the desktop. Also love the speed with which it works compared to Windows XP.
I recently reinstalled the operating system on the laptop after cleaning the drive of my stuff to prepare it for sale, and was stuck by how kludgey Windows XP looks compared to OS X Tiger.
I’ve used Windows all my working life, but I’d never want go back.
@Edhy: You said “Are you friggin’ kidding me? OS X SLOWER than Windows? Umm… NO.” – if you compare Windows and MacOS on the same platform, then Windows XP is far more responsive (I haven’t tried Vista) – you also rarely see the hourglass compared with the spinning beachball on MacOS. However, is it nicer to use? No. But the original poster was accurate – MacOS X is slower to use, but nicer. At a technical level, it also has by far the worst multithreading performance out of MacOS, Linux and Windows – I think ArsTechnica has a good detailed article on that. There’s a reason why Apple manages to make MacOS faster with every point release … there remain many areas for improvement!
If your mother would stop look looking into mirrors, you could stop sweeping up broken glass.
@Edhy: you must reinstall windows a lot, because that is the only way Windows can be faster then Mac. It only takes a couple months for the registry to get clogged, then their is the spyware, and then slowly but surely the OS just destroys itself (rather quickly actually if you use one of the less stable versions like 95, 2000, ME.) Slowly destroying itself… reinstall and it runs fast! Slowly destroying itself …. wtf is rtqwif.dll? …. Yeah, I’m never switching back.
@Wendy: If you look back, Quicktime was at one point a truly amazing and breakthrough technology, being the first to bring quality video onto the computer screen, and is still one of the best today. Many people in the industry have a lot of respect for Quicktime. But I can understand your complaints about how poorly it seems implemented in Windows, it is a rather big program piled on top of the Windows heap. Yes, it definitely runs smoother on the Mac. A little Windows tip for you: download VLC player for windows, it’s a lightweight open-source player that can handle Quicktime, Windows Media, and just about any other video or audio file under the sun. It’s very smooth, doesn’t have that bulky after taste.
Sorry Edhy, I misdirected that comment. I was referring to the various blokes claiming windows is faster, over looking the hours they waste dealing with malware.
I was a Wendy once.
Please note that this fool by the name of “Cuber” who keeps posting stupid links to shady software sites is not me!
Blaspheming the name, he is.
I have the misfortune of using Winblows every day at work. It is XP SP2 on a 2.4 GHz. P4 HP machine. Tiger on my 450 MHz G4 Cube is noticably faster than XP! The difference is even greater on my Powerbook. My only complaint is that Winblows web browsers render faster than any Mac web browser does. Otherwise, XP chokes all the time.
I have to say I don’t understand what the gripe is with Windows users and QuickTime…to me Real Player is much worst in every respect…
Anyway, I have never had the issues that most Windows users complain about with QuickTime, but I have seen their issues first-hand…and as such don’t discredit their claims. Luckily, I just never have had to experience them…
Apple is now kicking butt at NAB. Like I said a while back and was knocked down for, they have a new format to deal with hi-res video. Hm. Such satisfaction.
Peterson, I’ll go for that back rub now.
–r
I think we can all agree that Real Player sucks
I prefer the combed-metal interface. With Brylcreem…..
Yes I understand brushed metal eats more space on iTunes and iPhoto, but hey, it didn’t eat screen space on Safari!! (compare the 2 screenshots yourself, it’s exactly the same).
Why do they have to remove it? I personally think Safari is soo identical with brushed metal. It’s cooler than cheap gay plastic.
Anyway.. hurry up, Apple!
the metal look is so dated. no doubt about it. i think the unified look is better slightly lighter than the latest leopard builds, such as you get with UNO. i think mail is one of the best loking apps in my opinion that shows this infied look, it doesnt look bland at all.
…and yea as if windows media player isnt an absolute dog. its one of the mosy unreliable, frustrating, badly designed examples of software ive ever seen implemented, who designed it again?
Finally. It took them much longer than I thought it would…maybe they couldn’t decided which style they liked the best…
I like the brushed metal look. Is there any way to return iTunes to the brushed metal look like Safari still has?
Shapeshifter does not change iTunes.
Any suggestions?
I still cannot understand what you like about the new iTunes texture. Because, to me it just looks like plain cardboard. Are you people homeless or something? Do you live in a cardboard boxes?
I always liked the brushed metal look. Not just in iTunes, but in certain pieces I decorate my house with. I do not decorate my house with CARDBOARD BOXES.
And, I certainly don’t live in one. Do you?