Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #61161 > unrolled thread

Yosemite Test Release

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Yosemite Test Release TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> - 2014-06-19 20:08 -0500
    Re: Yosemite Test Release billy@MIX.COM - 2014-06-20 02:12 +0000
      Re: Yosemite Test Release Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-20 03:18 +0000
    Re: Yosemite Test Release Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-20 03:17 +0000
    Re: Yosemite Test Release Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-06-20 18:40 +1200
      Re: Yosemite Test Release dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-06-20 20:59 +1200
        Re: Yosemite Test Release Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-20 10:46 +0100
          Re: Yosemite Test Release Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-06-20 06:57 -0700
            Re: Yosemite Test Release Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-20 17:59 +0100
              Re: Yosemite Test Release Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-06-20 10:07 -0700
                Re: Yosemite Test Release Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2014-06-20 17:47 +0000
                Re: Yosemite Test Release Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 09:44 +0200
                  Re: Yosemite Test Release Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-21 09:13 -0400
                    Re: Yosemite Test Release JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-21 15:18 -0400
            Re: Yosemite Test Release nathalie_n <news@junk.com.invalid> - 2014-06-21 08:42 +0200
            Re: Yosemite Test Release Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-21 08:18 +0100
              Re: Yosemite Test Release Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-06-21 01:57 -0700
          Re: Yosemite Test Release Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-20 19:24 +0000
            Re: Yosemite Test Release JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-06-20 16:30 -0400
              Re: Yosemite Test Release Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-06-20 14:31 -0700
              Re: Yosemite Test Release Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-20 22:08 +0000
            Re: Yosemite Test Release Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-20 22:27 +0100
              Re: Yosemite Test Release Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-06-20 14:46 -0700
                Re: Yosemite Test Release Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-20 22:56 +0100
                  Re: Yosemite Test Release Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-06-20 18:38 -0700
                Re: Yosemite Test Release Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-06-21 12:18 +1200
              Re: Yosemite Test Release Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-06-20 22:15 +0000
                Re: Yosemite Test Release Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-20 23:22 +0100
              Re: Yosemite Test Release Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 09:50 +0200
                Re: Yosemite Test Release Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-21 09:14 -0400
            Re: Yosemite Test Release Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-21 09:00 -0400
          Re: Yosemite Test Release Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 09:35 +0200
            Re: Yosemite Test Release Philip Shaw <jnufcvyvuc@tznvy.pbz> - 2014-07-02 11:36 +0000
    Re: Yosemite Test Release Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-06-20 07:55 -0400
    Re: Yosemite Test Release Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 09:16 +0200
      Re: Yosemite Test Release Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-21 19:27 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#61249

In message <53a499ef$0$47963$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com> 
  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 14-06-20 15:24, Lewis wrote:

>> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
>> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
>> EXCELLENT on a retina display.

> Incredible. I don't think most Apple employees are convinced of this
> translucency lunacy, yet, you manage to find some way to spin this as a
> good thing.

I'm not spinning it. I am describing my experience.

> Are you related to Jony Ive per chance ? Seems to me it would be the
> only explanation for you defending a feature that is not only unwanted,
> but which actually hinders readability.

Are you running 10.10? If not, you don't know what the fuck you are
talking about, do you?

-- 
Why is it so damn hot in here, and why are we all in a handbasket?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61237

In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net> 
>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
> > distraction.
> 
> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
> EXCELLENT on a retina display.

No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
wish I could turn it off for the Duck.

-- 
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61245

On 2014-06-20 21:27:55 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:

> In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
>> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net>   Tim Streater 
>> <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
>> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
>> > distraction.
>> 
>> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
>> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
>> EXCELLENT on a retina display.
> 
> No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
> wish I could turn it off for the Duck.

I appreciate your concern, but I hope you aren't referring to me. I 
have had *Translucent menu bar* unchecked in Sys Prefs since updating 
to OSX 10.9 from 10.6.8.

Perhaps you spelt "Dock" with a "U"?

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61247

In article <20140620144654560-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> On 2014-06-20 21:27:55 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:
> 
> > In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
> > <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > 
> >> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net>   Tim Streater 
> >> <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
> >> > distraction.
> >> 
> >> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
> >> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
> >> EXCELLENT on a retina display.
> > 
> > No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
> > wish I could turn it off for the Duck.
> 
> I appreciate your concern, but I hope you aren't referring to me. I 
> have had *Translucent menu bar* unchecked in Sys Prefs since updating 
> to OSX 10.9 from 10.6.8.
> 
> Perhaps you spelt "Dock" with a "U"?

:-)

Nah, with a "u".

-- 
"Once you adopt the unix paradigm, the variants cease to be a problem - you
bitch, of course, but that's because bitching is fun, unlike M$ OS's, where 
bitching is required to keep your head from exploding." - S Stremler in afc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61277

On 2014-06-20 21:56:33 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:

> In article <20140620144654560-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2014-06-20 21:27:55 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:
>> 
>> > In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
>> > <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> > >> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net>   Tim 
>> Streater >> <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> > >> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
>> >> > distraction.
>> >> >> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
>> >> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
>> >> EXCELLENT on a retina display.
>> > > No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
>> > wish I could turn it off for the Duck.
>> 
>> I appreciate your concern, but I hope you aren't referring to me. I 
>> have had *Translucent menu bar* unchecked in Sys Prefs since updating 
>> to OSX 10.9 from 10.6.8.
>> 
>> Perhaps you spelt "Dock" with a "U"?
> 
> :-)
> 
> Nah, with a "u".

Alright then. I guess that gives me fair warning for whatever.

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61269

In article <20140620144654560-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> On 2014-06-20 21:27:55 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:
> 
> > In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
> > <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > 
> >> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net>   Tim Streater 
> >> <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
> >> > distraction.
> >> 
> >> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
> >> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
> >> EXCELLENT on a retina display.
> > 
> > No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
> > wish I could turn it off for the Duck.
> 
> I appreciate your concern, but I hope you aren't referring to me. I 
> have had *Translucent menu bar* unchecked in Sys Prefs since updating 
> to OSX 10.9 from 10.6.8.
> 
> Perhaps you spelt "Dock" with a "U"?

Nope, it is "Duck" ... but only when it's at the bottom of the screen
and set to auto-hide.  ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61250

In message <200620142227554040%timstreater@greenbee.net> 
  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net> 
>>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

>> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
>> > distraction.
>> 
>> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
>> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
>> EXCELLENT on a retina display.

> No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
> wish I could turn it off for the Duck.

I agree with it in the menu bar, and I don't use the dock. What we are
talking about is the new translucency in 10.10 Yosemite for sidebars in
windows.

-- 
CURSIVE WRITING DOES NOT MEAN WHAT I THINK IT DOES Bart chalkboard Ep.
2F11

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61253

In article <slrnlq9ck8.o58.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <200620142227554040%timstreater@greenbee.net> 
>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
> > <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> 
> >> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net> 
> >>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> >> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
> >> > distraction.
> >> 
> >> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
> >> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
> >> EXCELLENT on a retina display.
> 
> > No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
> > wish I could turn it off for the Duck.
> 
> I agree with it in the menu bar, and I don't use the dock. What we are
> talking about is the new translucency in 10.10 Yosemite for sidebars in
> windows.

OK. Well, I'll reserve judgement on that. If one can set the *level* of
transparency, then no problem.

-- 
"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61298

On 2014-06-20, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
><g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net> 
>>   Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>
>> > I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
>> > distraction.
>> 
>> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
>> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
>> EXCELLENT on a retina display.
>
> No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
> wish I could turn it off for the Duck.

With the default desktop image in Mavericks, the translucent menu bar
actually makes me feel nauseous.

Even when switched off it makes a brief appearance when switching an app
to full screen or back, though thankfully without the text and icons.

-- 
You can't look at a glass as half full or half empty if it's overflowing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61311

On 2014.06.21, 03:50 , Paul Sture wrote:
> On 2014-06-20, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> In article <slrnlq92iu.kdq.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net>
>>>    Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
>>>> distraction.
>>>
>>> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
>>> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
>>> EXCELLENT on a retina display.
>>
>> No, it's shite. I already have it turned off for the menu bar, and I
>> wish I could turn it off for the Duck.
>
> With the default desktop image in Mavericks, the translucent menu bar
> actually makes me feel nauseous.
>
> Even when switched off it makes a brief appearance when switching an app
> to full screen or back, though thankfully without the text and icons.

Just kicked a new MBA to life.  With the Mavericks splash screen in BG 
the menu bar was as nauseating as could be ... remedied.

-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61308

On 2014.06.20, 15:24 , Lewis wrote:
> In message <200620141046268728%timstreater@greenbee.net>
>    Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

>> I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
>> distraction.
>
> Actually, it is not. It is 1) subtle 2) distinguishes active and
> inactive windows 3) highlights content areas. It's good. It'll be
> EXCELLENT on a retina display.

There are variations of this idiocy in some Linux desktops such as KDE. 
  It sucks.

-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61296

On 2014-06-20, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>
> I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's just a
> distraction.

As I mentioned here some months ago, the Windows 7 implementation of
translucency deliberately blurred text in windows underneath.  That really
messes with my eyesight because my brain tries to decipher it.

IOW Apple is likely to find itself at the end of a class action if they
don't provide a means of switching it off.

> I also note that the bloke who wrote Eudora should be
> happy now: with the new, flat, look, he can now remove the option to
> "Waste CPU cycles with trendy 3D junk".

Some people clearly have too much time on their hands.  The "wobbly windows"
feature as seen in KDE is a prime example of this.

> Still, one plus is that they've at last defined what the green traffic
> light does.

I've always found it useful in Preview for resizing the window after
zooming in on a PDF document written in an uncomfortably small font.

It's a shame if that goes, but a keyboard shortcut "Resize to fit width"
would be fine as a replacement.

-- 
You can't look at a glass as half full or half empty if it's overflowing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61686

On 2014-06-21, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> On 2014-06-20, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>
>> I hope there's a way to turn off this blasted translucency; it's
>> just a distraction.
>
> As I mentioned here some months ago, the Windows 7 implementation of
> translucency deliberately blurred text in windows underneath.  That
> really messes with my eyesight because my brain tries to decipher
> it.
>
> IOW Apple is likely to find itself at the end of a class action if
> they don't provide a means of switching it off.
>
>> I also note that the bloke who wrote Eudora should be happy now:
>> with the new, flat, look, he can now remove the option to "Waste
>> CPU cycles with trendy 3D junk".
>
> Some people clearly have too much time on their hands.  The "wobbly
> windows" feature as seen in KDE is a prime example of this.

KDE needed it for marketing reasons, to ensure that tis prettiness
matched the Compiz-* toys, which played better with Gnome.

>> Still, one plus is that they've at last defined what the green
>> traffic light does.
>
> I've always found it useful in Preview for resizing the window after
> zooming in on a PDF document written in an uncomfortably small font.
>
> It's a shame if that goes, but a keyboard shortcut "Resize to fit
> width" would be fine as a replacement.

It is useful in safari as well, where it means roughly the same.

Pretty much the only other use I have for it is shrinking large
windows when I unplug my external monitor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61189

On 2014.06.19, 21:08 , TaliesinSoft wrote:
> On the day Yosemite was announced by Apple I signed up to be one who
> tested beta releases. Since then I haven't had any indication from Apple
> as to when such a release for testing would be available. Is there
> anyone out there that perhaps knows when such a release will be made?

If they could tell you then they couldn't tell you.


-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61294

On 2014-06-20, TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> wrote:
> On the day Yosemite was announced by Apple I signed up to be one who 
> tested beta releases. Since then I haven't had any indication from 
> Apple as to when such a release for testing would be available. Is 
> there anyone out there that perhaps knows when such a release will be 
> made?

Where does one sign up?  I looked when this was announced but couldn't
actually find a relevant link.

-- 
You can't look at a glass as half full or half empty if it's overflowing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#61347

On 2014-06-21, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> On 2014-06-20, TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> wrote:
>> On the day Yosemite was announced by Apple I signed up to be one who 
>> tested beta releases. Since then I haven't had any indication from 
>> Apple as to when such a release for testing would be available. Is 
>> there anyone out there that perhaps knows when such a release will be 
>> made?
>
> Where does one sign up?  I looked when this was announced but couldn't
> actually find a relevant link.

Ah, found it.


-- 
You can't look at a glass as half full or half empty if it's overflowing.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web