ThinkSecret covers the new MacOSX version, codenamed Jaguar, by publishing an article on what is new and on the kind of updates are to be expected at the end of this summer. There are also a bunch of screenshots included in the article. Part I and Part II.
Inside Jaguar: A Sneak-Peek at New Updates, Part I and II
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Apple has been criticized for coming out with a 10.2 version number so quickly, but this is a huge update!
This Mac stuff seems more and more compelling.. i mean.. Windows is still going backwards for every new release.. they’re basically forcing people away.. ofcourse i could just replace my Gaming Rig with a Console and go BeOS full time..
but seriously folks.. OSX kicks ass.. and Jaguar improves on this on almost every front.. speedwise and featurewise..
lucky Mac bastards!
10.2 should rock. However, I wish Apple would change the candyish looking Aqua interface into something that either looked somewhat like OS 9 or something that an engineer (or scientist) would like to look at.
– Mark
Yes… Aqua is all nice and such but don’t think I could enjoy this all the time. But that’s probably because I’m a programmer by heart.
I like sharp and clean looking interfaces like this one (be aware, it’s 1,4 megs):
http://server204.serverflex.de/download/Screenshot-1.png
Hey,
Check out MetamorpX – it’s a theming engine that works very well. I found out about it a few days ago from the comments in the Haxies article (thanks, Eugenia – the forums are almost as useful as the articles)… I’ve changed my theme back to Aqua, but you can get others to your liking. There’s even an (*shudder*) OS 9 theme.
Peace,
‘Rithm
Who ever published that info is going to be banned by Steve, better watch out!!!!
LOL Mark…yes, I suppose many of them don’t think too highly of the eye candy. One of the interesting things about this update though is that it is not just adding applications or features like InkWell, but there are an amazing amount of actual interface changes too. That’s another reason why it’s such a huge update.
Spark, I really want that setup, but I cant stand how visually slow and unresponsive gnome/x was.
Is there some hardware configuration that will make it more visually responsive then my current athlon 1900, with a gf2 on an nforce board?
Maybe there are distros that are already optimized for athlon XPs, or I could try out one of those compile for hardware distros?
sorry for being offtopic, but Ive always wanted to ask someone who has a desktop setup so similiar to exactly what I want how to do it and possibly get answers on why X seems so slow.
does that theme app slow down or make osx less stable at all?
“Maybe there are distros that are already optimized for athlon XPs, or I could try out one of those compile for hardware distros?”
Why not.
Gentoo is very good at optimising and it’s a breeze to install (if you have some experience). They have a step by step guide and a precompiled binary package compiled for i686 so you don’t have to do that yourself (this could take a few days). It still takes long enough to compile XFree, Gnome and Mozilla and it’s a pain to wait for them while you can’t even browse the net. 
But then you get a highly optimised system (-O3) for your architecture (i686 instead of i386). Gentoo also has two interesting kernel patches applied by default, one beeing the low latency patch and the other the preemtible kernel patch. You just have to enable them when doing the kernel config (part of the installation).
This still won’t make X as fast as for example Windows, especially redrawing while moving windows is a little bit on the slow side (but then again I’m talking about large Mozilla windows in 1600×1200 and I “only” got a P3-1000) but the responsiveness is definetly there, in everything I do.
It’s the reason why I can enjoy X again.
I ended up using Windows 2000 again just because of X’s bad performance (I used Debian and none of those kernel patches) but now it’s fine with me.
About the looks of the screenshot, I have to admit that I have cheated a little bit though. The shadow of the menubar is part of the background image, that was quite easy to do with the shadow filter of gimp thought.
But everything else is “real” (the windowmanager theme is not yet available though, because I did it).
So my recommendation would be to try it.
It’s always a lot of fun to discover a new system IMO and Gentoo makes it really easy.
Almost forgot: I just remembered that Debian also set the priority (nice value) of X to -10 by default (which means very high priority) because they claimed this would improve performance. But I guess this only makes the difference when the system is under high load. I will try this… because currently when my system is under very high load, sometimes I can barely move the mouse pointer anymore, only the mp3’s are playing without choking the slightest (probably a result of the preemptible patch). =) This sometimes happen when compiling but it’s very rare.
And don’t forget to use a fast Windowmanager. Metacity (Gnome) and KWin (KDE) are IMO the best compromises between beeing fast and stable and not looking or acting retarded/outdated (of course fluxbox, windowmaker, etc are also good but those are quite different).
On the screenshot you can see my Metacity theme (creating or adjusting your own theme for Metacity is a piece of cake).
ROFL, Bill! Yes, only Steve’s themes are permitted <g>.
I’m betting Jaguar will be 10.5, and expect to pay a little.
I know 7.5 was released like 2.5 years after 7, but this upgrade seems so huge that Apple is going to want a little extra money for it.
the shadow was not important, but the whole simplistic and powerful setup was.
Task bar at the bottom, and menu bar at the top, best of both worlds
I clicked on the link expecting something truly new and I get a Windows clone. Macos X is silly for its jelly beans, transparencies and other funky effects but you certainly can’t counter it with Windows 95.
It’s certainly not Windows 95. Rather Windows 2000.
Just slightly better. It might sound silly, but I really liked the Windows 2000 look. After having used so many fancy themes, I came to Win 2k and thought… “damn, Windows doesn’t look as bad as I thought”. It is more a kind of elegance, than a kind of beauty.
Just how much do we trust thinksecret.com ? I’m curious, because on the screenshot for Part II, under the heading of “Windows File Sharing”, there’s a picture of a new preference pane titled “Sharing”. One of the tabs on this is “Firewal” [sic]. Now, are we to believe that Apple really can’t spell Firewall?
As an aside, I’ve looked around and asked around, and have yet to get an answer: DVD playback for Lombards? DVD PC Card Decoder support? And is out-of-the-box support there for non-AirPort 802.11b cards (like Orinocos)?
— Rob
but seriously folks.. OSX kicks ass.. and Jaguar improves on this on almost every front.. speedwise and featurewise..
Yes, if they continue at this pace they might have all the features of MacOS 9 implemented within five years. Great. And they only need 84000 files in a standard install for this, just noticed when I emptied my trash in MacOS 9.
Apple has been criticized for coming out with a 10.2 version number so quickly, but this is a huge update!
I thought everyone was criticizing Apple for coming out so late with Jaguar, especially Carbon programmers?
Task bar at the bottom, and menu bar at the top, best of both worlds
I wouldn’t call the top panel the menubar. The reason why it resembles the menubar is the menus Applications and Actions, as well as the foot and the clock. But the real menubar sticks within the window.
I clicked on the link expecting something truly new and I get a Windows clone. Macos X is silly for its jelly beans, transparencies and other funky effects but you certainly can’t counter it with Windows 95.
Wow, suddenly in favour of some Mac OS fans, Windows users shouldn’t have personal preferences? Sure, OS X looks nice, but after awhile, it dulls out and using it becomes extremely painful. Windows 95 is legions ahead of OS X in terms of crispness, in my opinion, because, stablity and features aside, it is easier to use.
Besides, the link doesn’t look like a Windows clone at all. The shadow looks nifty, but fake, and everything else on the screenshot doesn’t look like Windows, especially Windows 95. Except maybe the titlebar, but then again, it looks different enough for me.
It’s certainly not Windows 95. Rather Windows 2000.
Just slightly better. It might sound silly, but I really liked the Windows 2000 look. After having used so many fancy themes, I came to Win 2k and thought… “damn, Windows doesn’t look as bad as I thought”. It is more a kind of elegance, than a kind of beauty.
Personally, I would prefer Windows 9x/2000/NT4 over OS X any day (the looks I mean). But Windows XP beats them all… well, there is a certain level of crispness and also beauty. Though my favourite is BeOS… I can’t find one theme that does it justice. So, for me, looks wise, first place goes to BeOS, second goes to Photon and third to Windows XP. Stuff like Keramik, Aqua and so on looks great, but isn’t crisp and it is painful to use after awhile.
So go check it out.
Welcome to *candy* bloatworld, Marteen.
😉
Aqua is really not *all that* as a UI folks.
If you look at the fundamentals of UI elements of Aqua, it’s really Motif with candy coating. (Which is not bad… but…)
I would still prefer the OS 9 UI + some BeOS UI features!
ciao
yc
No, using a Duality or MetamorphX theme in OS X does not slow down your system or make less stable. The themes in OS X are *real* themes that hook into Aqua- it just replaces various resources that make up the Aqua look/theme. AFAIK, there is no code in most themes, just pixmaps pretty much (please correct me if I’m wrong).
This is to contrast with theming Mac OS 9 (with Kaleidescope, not Appearances) or Win98, where a third party theme program replaces various drawing routines with its own to create the theming engine on top. Therefore, if Kaleidescope or Object Desktop has bugs, your OS suffers for it. Not the case with themes in OS X. I ran a couple different themes (Sosumi and Unlined Aqua) with no stability problems- to date, never had a crash in OS X, using a theme most of the time.
I’m a biologist, and Aqua doesn’t bother me. With the choice of themes, I prefer an unlined version of Aqua, but had I not had the choice I don’t think I’d be annoyed. I don’t think being a scientist or an engineer has anything to do whether or not Aqua is tolerable. Aqua works, and as a scientist, that’s what I care about. Perhaps scientists that are used to looking at CDE or Windows are a little jolted by Aqua at first, but relax, you’ll get used to it.
Just how much do we trust thinksecret.com ? I’m curious, because on the screenshot for Part II, under the heading of “Windows File Sharing”, there’s a picture of a new preference pane titled “Sharing”. One of the tabs on this is “Firewal” [sic]. Now, are we to believe that Apple really can’t spell Firewall?
I also found that strange, but what would they gain by putting fakes up there? Jaguar isnt vaporware, it will come out sooner or later, at which point if they were showing fakes they’d get nailed by users wouldnt they?
Personally, I would prefer Windows 9x/2000/NT4 over OS X any day (the looks I mean). But Windows XP beats them all… well, there is a certain level of crispness and also beauty. Though my favourite is BeOS… I can’t find one theme that does it justice. So, for me, looks wise, first place goes to BeOS, second goes to Photon and third to Windows XP. Stuff like Keramik, Aqua and so on looks great, but isn’t crisp and it is painful to use after awhile.
Ok. I’m a BeOS lover, but now a Mac user. I happen to personally love Aqua but I can see a preferance for a more plain design. But then you go and claim that Windows XP beats out the 9x UI? With it’s soft and fluffy/round edges, and shadows and transparencies (albeit not as many), it’s just bad as Aqua most of the time and a blatant ripoff.
This is to contrast with theming Mac OS 9 (with Kaleidescope, not Appearances) or Win98, where a third party theme program replaces various drawing routines with its own to create the theming engine on top. Therefore, if Kaleidescope or Object Desktop has bugs, your OS suffers for it. Not the case with themes in OS X.
Wrong. There’s a theme for MacOS 9 called Blue and this one doesn’t use Kaleidoscope. If you use it you will get occasional QuickDraw errors crashing your system. Too bad, since it was a nice theme.
And watch out for Duality. I managed to ruin my MacOS X installation with it. It warned it couldn’t restore Aqua and then it was all over.
And they only need 84000 files in a standard install for this, just noticed when I emptied my trash in MacOS 9.
See – that’s a sure sign of the Unix underneath *g*
So many files and still no decent and fast UI.
Well, there’s a difference between themes and “schemes” in classic MacOS. With OS 8.x came the Copland ability to have themes. These were native and managed by the Appearance control panel. Apple, however, nixed them early on, so there were very few developed.
Kaleidoscope schemes are another thing altogether.
Wrong. There’s a theme for MacOS 9 called Blue and this one doesn’t use Kaleidoscope. If you use it you will get occasional QuickDraw errors crashing your system. Too bad, since it was a nice theme.
Why on earth would you want to get rid of the OS 9 Platinum look&feel? Sorry, but Platinum is the best OS UI design I know. Functional, non-disctracting and out of your way, yet pleasant looking.
What I personally hope is that the “Brushed Metal” UI of Quicktime and its cousins doesn’t catch on too much. it bugs me for reasons I can’t quite place…
I mean, if the whole OS went brushed metal I’d have to dump it.
–JM
Aqua is really not *all that* as a UI folks.
If you look at the fundamentals of UI elements of Aqua, it’s really Motif with candy coating. (Which is not bad… but…)
Motif? Motif is a toolkit, an API. You are best comparing it with Carbon/Cocoa/whatever-else-is-there. But I’ll take it you mean CDE :-D.
Before I begin my ranting, just to remind you that I used CDE in Solaris for a few minutes only, and use OS X for an hour or so. But I have used XFce and Window Maker which copy a lot from CDE and OpenStep respectively – both WMs I have used for hours and hours.
The only similarities between CDE and Aqua is the Dock/panel. But in CDE, the panel is very different from the Dock in Aqua. The panel are a bunch of links, and perhaps have a window list, but unlike the Dock, each application doesn’t occupy one spot. The Dock in Aqua is nothing more than OpenStep’s Dock joined up and placed in the bottom/left/right.
Therefore, if Kaleidescope or Object Desktop has bugs, your OS suffers for it. Not the case with themes in OS X.
I never used Object Desktop, but I have used Windows Blinds, which does the same job as Duality, just changing the look and feel (Object Desktop changes the entire UI). I never once seen it crash, though some elaborate themes do slow down the computer. Also, on login, things are slower because Windows Blinds has to launch, I expect the same thing to happen with Duality.
Ok. I’m a BeOS lover, but now a Mac user. I happen to personally love Aqua but I can see a preferance for a more plain design. But then you go and claim that Windows XP beats out the 9x UI? With it’s soft and fluffy/round edges, and shadows and transparencies (albeit not as many), it’s just bad as Aqua most of the time and a blatant ripoff.
Firstly, I switch off all shadows, they are annoying (especially the one on the mouse pointer. Secondly I see no similarities in look and feel between Aqua and Windows XP, except maybe the start button’s background. Other than that: the buttons are mostly like QNX’s with an coloured outline, and the same goes for many parts of the OS. The only ripoff I see is the duck icon as one of the login icons
Everything from icons to menus look different.
Well, I can’t blame you, I held that same opinion way before I started using Windows XP
If it helps, I still think BeOS has the best UI. But my distaste for Aqua is merely because I find it hard to read and gives me a migrain after an hour. 
What I personally hope is that the “Brushed Metal” UI of Quicktime and its cousins doesn’t catch on too much. it bugs me for reasons I can’t quite place…
You aren’t the only one there :-).
As I seem to recall, Apple will be giving the ability to use the brushed metal appearance to third party applications when 10.2 rolls out.
Any 10.2 beta testers out there want to tell me if I’m right or not?
For what it’s worth, I really am not bugged tha much by the brushed metal look. The basic controls remain consistent. One wonders if some clever hacker will come up with a way for applications to switch appearance on the fly.