Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Software Businesses Apple

Apple's Illuminous (Aqua v2) to Compete with Aero 377

Posted by Hemos
from the the-rumour-mill-starts-twitching dept.
tovarish writes "According to Apple Gazette Apple will replace Aqua with a new name (and hopefully looks) called Illuminous. Is Jobs scared of Aero?, does it make sense to go for a new UI now?, has Aqua run out of steam? The answers will probably come later next month(year)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple's Illuminous (Aqua v2) to Compete with Aero

Comments Filter:
  • scared? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by toQDuj (806112) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:21AM (#17194526) Homepage Journal
    I've never really considered Steve Jobs to be fazed by anything really.

    He knows he has a decent group of followers, ever growing in these times, and he must bless his decision to stick with providing a complete solution instead of just an OS, every day.

    All in all, I don't think he should be scared of this, because it is not only about the looks of the interface. It also depends on whether operations will continue to produce the desired result fast and reliable. Mac OS has the advantage there.

    B.
    • by Kadin2048 (468275) <[slashdot.kadin] [at] [xoxy.net]> on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:33AM (#17195716) Homepage Journal
      The really odd thing I find about this article in general, is that I had always assumed -- and I don't think I was alone here -- that Aero was really Microsoft's response and attempt to leapfrog Aqua.

      Every screenshot I've seen of Aero looks remarkably...Aqua-ish. Not in the details, but I can't help thinking that someone at Microsoft took a look at Aqua, and decided that it was probably time to overhaul Windows' interface as well; not to mention doing the same sort of graphics-card offloading that Apple did with Quartz Extreme.

      I suppose claiming that Apple's "Illuminous" is a response to Microsoft's Aero, and Aero is itself at least partially response to Aqua, are not necessarily mutually exclusive. It's sort of the way of these things to respond to each other, back and forth, over and over.
      • by EvilTwinSkippy (112490) <yoda&etoyoc,com> on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:36PM (#17197578) Homepage Journal
        I agree, Illuminous is not an answer to Aero. It's Apple using a page out of Disney's playbook: The best way to predict the future is to create it.
      • by yasth (203461)
        As to the ideas being the same, eh they all look like some of the product demos various companies (including microsoft research) were putting out in the mid-late 90s, not in detail but in the general glitz and glamour. There are a lot of things that people have wanted to do for a while, but the hardware wasn't there. Apple decided to press forth ahead of the hardware (there was a fair bit of complaining at the time) so they go the prettiness first. Microsoft on the other hand had to make even their flagship
      • by diegocgteleline.es (653730) on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:56PM (#17197856)
        No, what is really odd is that people thinks that people is "scared" of Aero. Mac OS X was released on 2000, in 2001 the interface got hardware acceleration. Vista is being released....NOW.

        In other words, while MS has player catch up, Apple has had plenty of time to think on the "Next big thing". Why wouldn't they improve Aqua? They've the lead for years so if someone can do it, that's apple.

        It's a interesting thing that they're doing it but saying that they're "scared" is stupid. It's microsoft who should be scared of needing to play catch up with the next Mac OS interfaces.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          I agree. I think Microsoft is scared of Apple's dominance in the "public image" department as being cool. They may still have market share but that is mostly in the Business space. Apple is creeping up on the consumer space largely through the iPod and their recent marketing campaigns (the television commercials are really good). Aero definitely was in response to Aqua and I think the announcement today that Office won't support VBA on OS X definitely is a flag from Microsoft they're going to start to p
        • by kimvette (919543) on Monday December 11, 2006 @03:16PM (#17198992) Homepage Journal
          In addition, Vista is a "major upgrade" which is several years late, with Microsoft's yanking features left and right, and pulling out a LOT of code changes to meet their 200th or so delayed date, while Apple has:

            - Introduced a brand-new OS
            - (as you mentioned) Accelerated their GUI
            - Refreshed the look and feel several times
            - Kept up with security patches (and no, not rushing just the DRM patches like Microsoft does)
            - Migrated to a new platform (PPC -> x86) while maintaining backwards compatibility
            - Introduced two new video NLE suites
            - Introduced an office suite
            - Introduced an IDE rivaling that of Microsoft's
            - Introduced a new method of file browsing (love it or hate it, Finder is unique and interesting)

          During that same time period, while Microsoft's upgrades to office suites have consisted largely of upgrading the GUI (ooooh, new screen-estate sucking toolbars renamed to Ribbons) while yanking key selling features (VBA).

          Microsoft is innovating how, exactly?
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          And if you follow Groklaw, you'd laugh at the fact that lead Windows guy Allchin wrote an email to Gates and Ballmer in 2004 explaining that if he didn't work at Microsoft, he'd be using a Mac...
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Honestly, why does it need to be a response? Aqua's great, but it's a few years old at this point. Is there any evidence that this isn't just a v2 with new features for Leopard? Seriously, Apple can do something without it being a response. I mean, we're not saying that Photoshop CS3 is a response to GIMP (which personally I think is a valid comparison for Aqua/Aero (no offense to GIMP, it's good for what it is, it just isn't there yet)), so why does Illuminous have to be anything other than an upgrade to a
  • It helps (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mwvdlee (775178) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:22AM (#17194548) Homepage
    If you're a computer newbee, the only thing you can judge a computer on is how it looks.
    So just like with the iMac craze a number of years back, updating the look and feel of an OS every now and then, is a good idea from a commercial point of view.
    • Re:It helps (Score:4, Insightful)

      by prodangle (552537) <matheson@NOSPaM.gmail.com> on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:07PM (#17198024) Homepage Journal
      If you're a computer newbee, the only thing you can judge a computer on is how it looks. So just like with the iMac craze a number of years back, updating the look and feel of an OS every now and then, is a good idea from a commercial point of view.
      Looks aren't only important for newbies. I've using computers for many years, but I prefer a user interface which feels modern and fresh, as well as one which takes advantage of the computer's graphic capabilities. Just as I feel happier working in an bright office environment in an interesting building. Aesthetics aren't important for everyone - as many sysadmins working on command lines in dingy basements will attest to - but to many others, visual aesthetics are vital for a good user experience.
  • New Name (Score:4, Funny)

    by DLG (14172) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:22AM (#17194550)
    I believe the new name is really going to be Nullity.

    Or maybe Aquality.

    Or Aquainess.

    This could be the least content of any story I have read.
  • Pinstripes (Score:5, Funny)

    by ahknight (128958) * on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:23AM (#17194564)
    NO MORE PINSTRIPES!!! For the love of Steve, PLEASE kill them. And brushed metal. Dead, dead, dead.

    Oh, how I hope it's true...
  • Aqua (2001-???) (Score:5, Insightful)

    by richdun (672214) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:23AM (#17194580)

    Is Jobs scared of Aero?, does it make sense to go for a new UI now?, has Aqua run out of steam?

    How old is Aqua? Perhaps they're just wanting to update it to add new features, take advantage of dual/quad/bajillion core CPUs, etc., etc. A lot has happened since Aqua debuted, and Apple has rarely been one to simply sit on a good product and not try to continue to make it better/newer.

    • Re:Aqua (2001-???) (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Bastian (66383) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:50AM (#17195042)
      Indeed, Aqua has been tweaked at least a little bit in every release of OS X since 10.1. As you mentioned, Quartz has gone through some major overhauls. Apple tweaking Aqua yet again is not news. It doesn't indicate a response to Aero, it just indicates that Apple is doing what Apple always does.
    • Re:Aqua (2001-???) (Score:5, Insightful)

      by squiggleslash (241428) on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:01AM (#17195216) Homepage Journal

      I don't know about that, but I do know that Aqua has been undergoing a lot of "enhancements" that, over time, have detracted quite a bit from the look.

      Jaguar had the first "Brushed metal" windows. This looked "ok", but still a little strange. Panther then downplayed a lot of the pin-striped look, which helped make the UI a little less distracting, but at the same time also made the look rather less attractive. Tiger has gone further, with squared off windows and the (non-brushed) metal look.

      Each iteration has undermined the over-all elegance of the visuals (though in Jaguar's defense, they did make the buttons look more elegant.) That's not to say they weren't necessary, early Mac OS X was so full of stripes and other distractions that it was even more horrible to use than the poor graphics accelleration resulted in. But there's little doubt that a simple comparison of Jaguar, sans-metal, and Tiger, shows the former with a much more attractive looking (whether usable or not) UI than the latter.

      This rumour doesn't surprise me really. What'll be interesting is to see whether it's a complete break with Aqua, or just an upgrade. I seriously doubt this has anything to do with Aero though: Steve Jobs is going to be concerned with the look of Mac OS X regardless of whether they have ten competitors or none.

      • by ElephanTS (624421)
        I agree with you that OSX has lost a little of the elegance - there seems to be some quite deep confusion about how the apps look now. I don't much like the new darker metal windows like iPhoto but thank god the pinstripes are fading away. If you look at 10.0 it was ludicrous how heavy they were. However, I do think it's to do with Aero, there's no point standing still waiting for Windows to catch up again. This way just as Windows is looking 21stC Apple will move it on again showing the market they're stil
    • by ElephanTS (624421)
      Apple has rarely been one to simply sit on a good product and not try to continue to make it better/newer.

      You weren't around in the 89-95 period then. Apple rested on it's System7 laurels as it was so far ahead for years. By about 98 even Widows had caught up. Just sayin'.
      • Re:Aqua (2001-???) (Score:4, Insightful)

        by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Monday December 11, 2006 @12:53PM (#17196946) Homepage Journal
        You weren't around in the 89-95 period then. Apple rested on it's System7 laurels as it was so far ahead for years. By about 98 even Widows had caught up. Just sayin'.

        Those of us who are not complete macintosh fanboys will have noticed that this is the time at which Apple dropped from having something like 11% market share to having about 3% market share. There were two reasons. One is that Apple computers were still running on 68k processors well into the age when the intel chips were whipping Motorola's ass. The other is that System 7 was a festering piece of shit. No Apple operating system has ever been as unreliable as System 7. While Windows was going towards protected mode all the time (NT did it already; ME doesn't use real mode, which is why compatibility was hurt; Windows 98 is MOSTLY 32 bit) Apple was still using their MMU (when present, which was not always) for virtual memory, and virtual memory alone. A lack of memory protection made MacOS as unreliable as AmigaDOS, with applications stepping on each other constantly. The difference is that AmigaDOS can be rebooted in just a few seconds, even from floppies.

        If you remember Mac OS 7 with nostalgia then you clearly have some sort of memory disability.

      • by richdun (672214)
        True - the NES was my home computer of choice during those years. :) Wasn't paying attention to much else.
  • Please (Score:3, Interesting)

    by captnitro (160231) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:24AM (#17194592)
    Let's do away with the files/folders/desktop/dialogs metaphor and system. It's served us well, but I'd really like to see a groundbreaking way to work with my data. One with an abstracted view system that could, as an example, bridge desktop and network applications, or let me perform actions via the mouse or via speech, or gestures, etc., without having to put any more work into the controller code. ::from back of room:: X11!

    Shut up already! :)
    • Re:Please (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ceoyoyo (59147) on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:25AM (#17195586)
      I don't want anyone trying to implement a revolutionary new interface metaphor in my daily OS until someone demonstrates one that's actually useful in a research setting somewhere. It's easy to talk about abstracted views and bridging desktop and network applications, but what does that mean?

      As for gestures and speech, OS X has had speech from day one (I don't know anyone who uses it, except one guy who turned it on then tried to give a presentation that way -- hilarious). You can have gestures too, but they don't seem to be very practical. They usually get turned off after the initial wow factor wears off as well.
    • by westlake (615356)
      Let's do away with the files/folders/desktop/dialogs metaphor and system. It's served us well, but I'd really like to see a groundbreaking way to work with my data.

      if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        Let's do away with the files/folders/desktop/dialogs metaphor and system. It's served us well, but I'd really like to see a groundbreaking way to work with my data.

        if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

        Well, throwing it away completely would be a bad idea. There are many ideas there that work well and discarding them would be stupid. At the same time, I think it is long past time to do away with a hierarchical file system.

        It's not that it shouldn't allow you to define hierarchies, but that shouldn't be

    • Isn't that kind of what they're trying to do with Spotlight? No more need to organize your files, just keyword them all and use the magic search?

      I've used Spotlight once or twice, but only when I would normally have used Sherlock - when something accidentally got saved to some unknown place. I *like* my neatly-organized heirarchical folders, thank you very much. The reason the metaphor has lived for so long is that it's one that makes sense to many people. If they do try something "revolutionary", I hope

  • by jZnat (793348) * on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:24AM (#17194602) Homepage Journal
    Since iTunes 7 doesn't follow the rest of the Tiger application themes, this might have something to do with that theme. Maybe they're going to make all the apps consistent regardless of use? Or maybe they're going to introduce even more categories to use when designing the UI for your app so that you Windows themers can't copy the OS X theme? :P
    • by FFFish (7567)
      Maybe they're going to make all the apps consistent regardless of use?

      God, I hope so. I *hate* the inconsistencies.

      Or maybe they're going to introduce even more categories to use when designing the UI for your app so that you Windows themers can't copy the OS X theme?

      Vista is going all Aqua, so it makes perfect sense to upgrade OSX to a new look. Vista has many features first implemented in OS X; the new Leopard release of OS X will have a ton of stuff Vista lacks. The Aqua UI is the "old" look for the "
  • Aqua (Score:2, Insightful)

    by El Lobo (994537)
    Aqua is not a perfect UI even if some rabid mac fans would say so. The Mac Os has always had a very elegant UI and UI components. This is the strong point of the system, but the usability of it left much to be desired. MacOS is a pointer oriented system , even if you can use shortcuts for almost everything, it doesn't feel "native".

    The single main menu at the top is a thing that you love or hate, but it can feel very strange to change the focus of the application to just access a menu. Yes, I'm aware of t

    • The single main menu at the top is a thing that you love or hate, but it can feel very strange to change the focus of the application to just access a menu.

      You have to do this on Windows too, you know. Even though you can see the menu of another application, when you try to click on it the first time it focuses the app rather than accessing the menu. Now, some Unix window managers (with focus-follows-mouse), on the other hand...

      • Re:Aqua (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ceoyoyo (59147) on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:15AM (#17195422)
        ... also focus on the window, they just focus on it before you click the button.

        I do wish they'd have an option to duplicate the menu on multiple monitors, but other than that I like it MUCH better than every window having it's own menu.
      • by amliebsch (724858)
        You have to do this on Windows too, you know. Even though you can see the menu of another application, when you try to click on it the first time it focuses the app rather than accessing the menu.

        Did you actually try this before you posted that "fact?" Unless the app was specifically designed to capture the focus click (e.g., MS Office and Visual Studio, for reasons unknown), it will focus the window AND drop the menu with one click. That's the standard default behavior.

    • by Bastian (66383)
      The single main menu at the top is a thing that you love or hate, but it can feel very strange to change the focus of the application to just access a menu.

      I haven't actually had this problem. On virtually every Mac app I've used, the menubar is global for the whole application, so the only thing you're changing when you switch windows is the document you'll be modifying from that window. Big whoop, I can't think of a single case where the document I want to be working with has not been the document I'm c
    • The thing I really like about the single menu bar is not so much that it's always in the same place (which is handy) but that you conserve a lot of screen estate when every window an app has open does not have to make room for a whole menubar.

      This is especially annoying with browser windows, which you tend to have a lot of. But many applications are prone to having multiple documents open at once and it helps there as well.

      Another problem it helps solve is visual menu clutter - sometimes in Windows when I
      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        The thing I really like about the single menu bar is not so much that it's always in the same place (which is handy) but that you conserve a lot of screen estate when every window an app has open does not have to make room for a whole menubar.

        Well, that's really the debate, isn't it? Do you want to save a few pixels, or save a few mouse movements? Neither one is all that arduous really. My only problem is that I find it confusing to have to pick an application to get the menu right. If I have two versio

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by porcupine8 (816071)
        This is why I like it, as well. Not everyone has a nice 30" widescreen monitor - or even a 17". I was working on a 15" monitor using Windows at my last job, and there was just no room, especially since I often had 5-6 Word documents open as well as a couple browser windows and 1-2 excel files. The tiny bit of space a shared menubar would have saved would have been much appreciated. Even if it wouldn't have given me enough space for a whole additional window, making things a bit less cluttered would have
    • by Mononoke (88668)

      Hell even the single fact that when you are presented the logon screen, the pointer is on 10,10 and not at screencenter as on Windows, KDE or Gnome is an inconvenient. A little one but just a little thing here and a little thing there does a lot.

      I've never ever used my "pointer" at the logon screen. Simply type the first letter of the user name and hit return. If a password is required the text entry box appears, empty and focused. Enter password, hit return again, and you're logged in.

    • by Trillan (597339)
      What I find funny about this is that I have seen dozens of requests for a top menu bar option in Gnome. I've even seen patches to implement it. We're not talking a period of months, either, but years and years. If the menu bar location really is a "love it or hate it" thing (and keeping it attached to windows is not a pseudo-religious FUD "we're not Apple!" thing), where's that option? It's probably the most requested feature for Gnome. I'm sure KDE is the same.
    • by SuperBanana (662181) on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:31PM (#17197516)

      Hell even the single fact that when you are presented the logon screen, the pointer is on 10,10 and not at screencenter as on Windows, KDE or Gnome is an inconvenient. A little one but just a little thing here and a little thing there does a lot.

      Why does this matter, when at the text login page, you can type your username, hit tab, enter your password, hit enter, and be looking at a desktop seconds later? And actually launch programs, not have those programs cancel mouse actions (I love how Windows repeatedly cancels menus you're trying to navigate. When the entire OS revolves around a giant heirarchial menu. For fuck's sake, a program loading itself into the toolbar causes this!)

      In fact, I can then hit apple-space and type "Mail", use the down arrow and enter key to select it and launch Mail.app, and read+respond to email in my inbox. Still haven't touched my (multibutton) mouse. How about that...

    • by iroll (717924)
      If I had points, I'd mod you down for the snide comment at the end. You turned an otherwise excellent post into a whine.

      Well-thought criticism is frequently modded up, regardless of how cliched the "apple fanbois" are supposed to be here.
  • by Otter (3800) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:25AM (#17194616) Journal
    Is Jobs scared of Aero?, does it make sense to go for a new UI now?, has Aqua run out of steam?

    Faced with the prospect of being "boring and unoriginal" compared to OLPC vaporware, Steve has decided to one-up the "View Source" button and make XCode the new interface.

  • There has been way, way too much work poured into Aqua to rip it out from underneath everyone right now.

    Subtle (and not-so-subtle) tweaks I can see, but actual honest-to-goodness UI replacement? That I doubt.

    Now, the Finder on the other hand .... -that- I can see a wholesale replacement of. It needs it.
  • Illuminous (Score:5, Funny)

    by jimmichie (993747) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:32AM (#17194730)
    Surely you mean iLuminous.

    Anyway, how about a weekly round-up of Apple rumours rather than individual stories?
  • Blind guess (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hcdejong (561314) <hobbes&xmsnet,nl> on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:37AM (#17194818)
    Given that the job posting talks about nothing more than 'enhancements' to Aqua, we seem to have basically no data to go by.

    Apart from that, I do think it's time for Apple to revisit Aqua. Not for a pointless 'replace it with another theme to keep up with Aero' exercise, though. The OS X UI needs a more fundamental redesign, to improve the way we interact with our data. The Finder is one app in dire need of an update.
  • by pubjames (468013) on Monday December 11, 2006 @10:54AM (#17195126)
    Is Jobs scared of Aero?

    From what I can see, quite the opposite.

    Apple is I believe going to launch the next version of OSX at the same time as the public starts to get its hands on Vista. Vista is just catching up with OSX in terms of interface. It will really piss on Microsoft's fire if the "Joe Public" press review the next version of OSX at the same time as Vista and conclude that OSX is better - from a PR perspective that will be a disaster for Microsoft because it will make their claims about how Vista is the greatest OS ever much weaker. (Keep in mind that Microsoft has not yet started its marketing bandwagon rolling for Vista).
    • by cowscows (103644)
      That's exactly it. Apple definitely sets the bar in regards to style and computers. MS is just making a serious effort to catch up with OSX in terms of visuals, is anyone surprised that Steve Jobs is going to move the bar again?

      And although Apple has moved on from the "Think Different" campaign, they still want to be easily distinguishable from Windows. I expect that this next update will have some significant functional UI changes, but even if they didn't have any of those ready to go, it'd probably benefi
  • by Midnight Thunder (17205) on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:00AM (#17195208) Homepage Journal
    The Finder is the one thing I would like to see improvements in. For example rewriting it to be a Cocoa app and actually being smarter at noticing file changes, especially with SMB volumes. There is no f5 (refresh key on Windows), so I don't want to have to wait a minute until it notices.

    One other thing I would love to see, related to AppleShare volumes: server side folder size calculation, since it would be easier to cache and reduce unecessary network traffic because the client wouldn't be interogating each and every file.
    • by megabulk3000 (305530) on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:58AM (#17196100) Homepage
      Here's an AppleScript which acts like a "refresh" button:

      try
          tell application "Finder" to update items of front window
      end try
      compile it, save it in one of your Scripts folders, and make the AppleScript menulet visible. You could probably also use Butler or QuickKeys or Quicksilver to assign a keyboard shortcut to it.

      HTH
    • Agreed on the Finder. I wouldn't hold my breath on a Cocoa port for Leopard, given that they just got the Quartz API's to a stable state in Tiger. I don't think they'll be able to get Cocoa-based performance near enough to the current Carbon-based one in one release. I'd love to be wrong, though.
    • by drinkypoo (153816)

      The Finder is the one thing I would like to see improvements in. For example rewriting it to be a Cocoa app and actually being smarter at noticing file changes, especially with SMB volumes. There is no f5 (refresh key on Windows), so I don't want to have to wait a minute until it notices.

      Maybe this is better on 10.4 but I have 10.3 and it never updates the desktop unless it thinks I am watching. When I create a PDF with acrobat, which causes it to be saved on my desktop by default, it will not appear un

  • Competing with XGL (Score:5, Insightful)

    by miyako (632510) <miyako AT gmail DOT com> on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:03AM (#17195234) Homepage Journal
    I realize that for the majority of the market, apple is competing with Vista and Aeroglass, but I think that Aqua also needs to start competing with XGL and Compiz/Beryl.
    The primary desktop in my house runs Linux, but I also have an iBook running Tiger. For a long time OS X was a lot prettier than either KDE or Gnome, and people were forever trying to emulate the Aqua look and feel on Linux. A lot of stuff like web browsing and stuff I used to do on my iBook, simply because the GUI was nicer to look at.
    Lately though, I'd say for the last year or 18 months, I've been running XGL and Beryl (and compiz before Beryl forked off) and I would say that my desktop now running XGL and Beryl looks much nicer than my iBook running Aqua.
    • by Stormwatch (703920) <rodrigogirao&hotmail,com> on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:25AM (#17195594) Homepage
      Eye candy alone, a good interface does not make. It has to work well too. Position of elements, system-wide consistency, clarity of function: are you taking these in account?
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by drinkypoo (153816)

        Eye candy alone, a good interface does not make. It has to work well too. Position of elements, system-wide consistency, clarity of function: are you taking these in account?

        sure, is apple?

        In case you need the answer spelled out for you, the answer is no. Let me give you some examples.

        One quicky example of how Apple's logic is poor slapped me in the face when I turned on my system. Apple is constantly giving me offers to install an iSight update. I don't have an iSight. I tried to install it once

  • As a Vista user... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by moracity (925736) on Monday December 11, 2006 @11:26AM (#17195600)
    I think Jobs has nothing to worry about. Aero is utter crap. I've been using Vista for the past week or so and the entire interface seems "incomplete" somehow. The learning curve for Vista is pretty steep. Everything is awkward and MS has actually made Windows harder to use. Just navigating the ile system is bizarre. There are more steps to get to anything. Don't even get me started on Office 2007. My wife is a pretty skilled Office user and she couldn't do anything with Word 2007. I've been looking for a setting to get the 2003 interface back, but I don't see one. You can't make this kind of drastic change to the interface of the most widely used office suite in the world. It's absurd.

    There is no way we will be deploying either product to our users at the office anytime soon. It would kill the productivity of our company immediately. There are some cool IT management features in Vista, but the change in the interface negates all of them.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by cmorriss (471077)
      You can't make this kind of drastic change to the interface of the most widely used office suite in the world. It's absurd.

      OMFG!!! The interface changed!! You've got to feel a little for Microsoft sometimes. One of the few times they try to truly innovate and they get slammed because the interface actually changed. How can you innovate without changing interface at least some? If it's worse than the old interface, ok. But that's not even the complaint from a lot of people. They just don't like the f

  • Now Apple can have a *NEW* UI "standard" competing with the other 6 floating around in the same UI, and perhaps even further bastardize their own usability standards...

    What is wrong with Aqua? It still looks better than Aero, and much better than the Vista UI that people not running a $6k box. If it ain't broke... (yes, it is... but the cure is bringing all the iCrap software into one unified look, like UNO [interacto.net] does.)
  • So now we finally realize why we have to have 2,4,6,8 CPU cores in a home machine that is used to surf the web and send/receive email.

    More Eye Candy.

    I need spinning cursors, zooming window boxes, document previews in every icon, 3D graphics on document to be printed on a 2D paper. All you software vendors do is force me to buy new hardware or you won't support me.

    I remember a cartoon that was published in the paper when Windows95 came out, it was a guy tossing his computer out of a window and the caption w
  • DZ (Score:3, Funny)

    by ElephanTS (624421) on Monday December 11, 2006 @12:19PM (#17196422)
    Yep, Blue Steel is just one look. Where's Magnum?
  • No (Score:3, Insightful)

    by iangoldby (552781) on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:10PM (#17197228) Homepage
    I think the name gives it away. "Illuminous." That's a word that people sometimes mistakenly use when they mean "luminous."

    I don't think Steve Jobs would want a word that in many people's mind would have connotations of ignorance.
  • by Builder (103701) on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:05PM (#17197996)
    Apple have had their developer community working on Leopard for about 3 months now. It is very unlikely that they would rip the work these guys have been doing out from under them with just 2 - 4 months to the launch of the next OS.

    Major developers like Adobe and Microsoft may have even been working to this platform for longer.

    So if there is a new UI coming, it won't be for 10.5
  • by Prototerm (762512) on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:23PM (#17198254)
    WTF, I've been wondering where those guys have been hiding all this time. I've got this mental image of guys in hooded robes fighting a bunch wearing Buck Rogers rocket packs.
  • by LKM (227954) on Tuesday December 12, 2006 @05:57AM (#17205916) Homepage
    Now that Microsoft has copied Aqua, it's time for Apple to make Aqua look old. Simple as that.

It's a poor workman who blames his tools.

Working...