TigerPRO said:
Maybe for you seasoned old Mac users who came from OS 9 the aqua seems horrible. But when I first started looking a Mac OS X, the interface was something I immidiately fell in love with. The beautiful colors and textures where a welcome enhancement to the slop and blah of windows. I think they are loosing that by moving to a generic, less accentuate look.
You see, I came on board with Apple when OS X was in full swing. So seeing them demolish the interface that brought me in is very dissapointing. While windows seems to be stuborn with it's styles and appearances from the 90s, Apple was moving on to more bold, modern styles. It was really ostentatious of OS X's superior technology to have an advanced, more modern look to match the technology in the OS.
Actually, I agree with you entirely. Like you, my first Mac was running Jaguar, and then I upgraded to Panther. I've never used Mac OS 9 and hated that look. I too loved the stripes, textures and colours of OS X that were also, in my opinion, more stylish than Windows XP's Fisher Price look (which incidentally must have been hastily added to Windows before the launch of XP, as this came out about 6 months after Mac OS X 10.0.)
I know that Mac OS X is evolving, and now I much prefer Panther's look to Jaguars. But Tiger seems like a massive leap towards flatter, greyer, more untextured looks. It's like Mac OS 9 and Windows 95 all over again...
Not to mention, we're getting all inconsistent again. The iTunes shot in question below just highlights one such inconsistency in the OS. We have two types of drop-down menu styles in the same window! (Admittedly, this was also the case when they were the old Aqua style party shuffle mixes, but it still illustrates the inconsistencies!)
