2 ms·
The design and usability history of OS X is actually a bit more diverse. The first iterations ("lickable" Aqua) had serious issues, favoring buyability and wow-
by masswerk 7y ago
The design and usability history of OS X is actually a bit more diverse. The first iterations ("lickable" Aqua) had serious issues, favoring buyability and wow-effects over everyday usability. (E.g., as Doc icons increased in shape on pointer proximity, they also dodged the pointer as the intended drop target in default settings.) This consolidated with 10.3 and 10.4 was the first real usable version of OS X, leading to 10.6, Snow Leopard (2009), Apple's study in excellence. From there on things come a bit more in flux however, with increasing inconsistencies, until the Jony Ive era gradually introduced what may be considered a new interface. (If you compare the current UI to early iterations of OS X side by side, they are probably further apart than these earlier revisions from the Classic UI, which were at least sharing the same Hunan interface guidelines.)
- dredmorbius 7y agoApple's interfaces have definitely evolved, but the changes have tended to be, compared to other platforms, minor and reserved. The overall motif of menu fixed to the display (rather than windows), three window buttons, hotkeys, etc., haven't changed, though colous, styling, and some features (multiple desktops, dark mode) have come and gone. My preferred desktop, Windowmaker, is even more conservative, as it's seeking to emulate the 1980s NextStep desktop, though there have been a few changes, and I noticed many of them sharply. But contrast Microsoft, which had fairly sharp changes from the Windows 1 days to present, or the gratuitous changes tossed out by the major Linux desktops (GNOME and KDE), and it's no contest. Mac has an incredibly stable GUI. I don't much care for it but it's stable.