A tangent I know, but looking at those old screenshots really made me miss that era of OS X. The first versions of Aqua with pinstripes were a bit busy for my liking, but by the Mountain Lion time frame it was just lovely. Actual buttons! Soft gradients! Icons that had colour!
deergomoo|1 year ago
Maybe it was on purpose? Those fancy textures and icons are probably a lot more expensive to produce when they have to look good with 4x the pixels.
iOS 4 on an iPhone 4 and OS X whatever-it-was that was on the initial retina MacBook Pros are still very clear in my memory. Everything looked so good it made you want to use the device just for the hell of it.
mattkevan|1 year ago
At low resolutions you need quite heavy-handed effects to provide enough contrast between elements, but on better displays you can be much more subtle.
It’s also why fonts like Verdana, which were designed to be legible on low resolution displays, don’t look great in print and aren’t used much on retina interfaces.
cesarb|1 year ago
I might have an alternative explanation.
I often think about something I saw, a long time ago, on one of those print magazines about house decoration, which also featured sample house blueprints. That particular issue had a blueprint for a house which would be built on a terrain which already had a large boulder. Instead of removing the boulder, the house was built around it; it became part of the house, and guided its layout.
In the same way, the restrictions we had back then (lower display resolutions, reduced color palette, pointing device optional) helped guide the UI design. Once these restrictions were lifted, we lost that guidance.
rubymamis|1 year ago
That's an interesting observation. If it was indeed on purpose, I wonder whether they were weighting it based on the effort on Apple's designers/developers/battery usage or the effort it would have drawn from 3rd party developers.
cosmic_cheese|1 year ago
2OEH8eoCRo0|1 year ago
rrr_oh_man|1 year ago
All flat boxes is easier to do with 1,000+ different screen resolutions.
itomato|1 year ago
https://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=26300
keyle|1 year ago
PittleyDunkin|1 year ago
themadturk|1 year ago
vintagedave|1 year ago
It’s hard to say why. Clarity in the UI is a big one (placement and interaction, not the theme, ie what we’d call UX today). But the look of the UI (colour, depth) really adds something too. Seeing a blue gel button sparks a sense of joy.
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
markus_zhang|1 year ago
I don't know who the hell had the original idea to do that, but I'll curse in my head for eternity.
wpm|1 year ago
lapcat|1 year ago
You may be thinking of Tiger, because Apple already started removing color from Finder icons and such in Leopard.
Leopard also introduced a transparent menu bar and 3D Dock.
recursivedoubts|1 year ago
mycall|1 year ago
threeseed|1 year ago
https://lowendmac.com/2005/apples-copland-project
spiderfarmer|1 year ago
Maybe I'm a bit too negative but for example when people romanticise stuff from the middle ages I can't help but think of how it must have smelled.
II2II|1 year ago
It's also worth noting that some points mentioned either didn't matter as much, or aren't true in an absolute stuff. Slow networking wasn't as much of an issue since computers as a whole didn't have the capacity to handle huge amounts of data, while limited functionality depends upon the software being used. On the last point, I find a lot of modern consumer applications far more limiting than older consumer applications.
wpm|1 year ago
lapcat|1 year ago
Apple's software today is poorly optimized. They're depending on hardware to do all the work.