Comments on: Apple’s Gravity Lessons – Learning from Warner Bros.?

By: pbear

pbear — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:54:28 +0000

I don’t think this discussion is complete without a mention of Gravité (OS 9):

http://www.wildbits.com/gravite/

While I liked Gravite, oddly I dislike a 3D Dock. Then again I dislike the 2D Dock.

By: Carl Jonard

Carl Jonard — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:11:00 +0000

Icon angles have never been consistent. Look at the icons from the very first version of the Macintosh OS: You have floppy disks & documents laying "flat" on the desktop, the Finder, hard drive & trash can icons resting on an invisible surface perpendicular to the desktop, and font suitcases sitting on an isometric grid. I'd love everything to be consistent (in theory), but in practice, a consistent top-down view would look ridiculous and boring.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 02:04:37 +0000

Even if it is an inconsistency, does it effect functionality at all?

By: Chris Kerins

Chris Kerins — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 15:05:31 +0000

3D? Of course it’s not in 3D. As far as I can tell, they just beveled the edges of the dock and added some Core Image effects to icons. I agree that it’s just lame. It’s very Vista-esque in it’s change-but-nothing-improved quality.

I wrote a bit more about it at My First Mac here:

http://www.myfirstmac.com/index.php/mac/articles/keynote-sucked

By: iNuron

iNuron — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 16:11:35 +0000

On first view I was disturbed by the 3D dock. Something just didn’t feel right so I take a closer look. None of the details follow any rules of perspective or reality. The reflections aren’t 3D (just upside down, transparrent) the shadows arent right (when an object jumps, its shadow doesn’t move upwards with it in reality).

Let’s make things even more complex:
What will happen with the perspective if you put the dock on a side. Icons built following apples rules are designed with the icon about 35° under you line of sight (so you see the top) If you place the dock with it’s diverging lines on the side, it looks as if the center is equaly high as your line of sight

I’m not saying they should build a perfect 3d simulation of reality but this is just 3D effect on top of 3D effect on top of 3D effect untill you get dizzy.

By: Raven

Raven — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 03:17:26 +0000

A better argument for why this dock sucks is … seeing that dock on the right and left sides … looks like everything is about to slip off.

By: admin

admin — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 20:09:43 +0000

Craig, I agree that it seems inconsistent and that you tend to think of the Desktop as a vertical surface. In the very early days of the Mac, the notion of “the desktop” was strongly reinforced by Desk Accessories and the Trash. These days, those associations have been gradually weakened until all that’s really left is the name “Desktop”.

Still, I disagree with Jeff that you can juxtapose 2D and 3D without some cognitive friction and user confusion. But we’ll see.

By: ginjg

ginjg — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:12:17 +0000

of course, they could be slowly and subtly training users in the visual dexterity we’ll for the true 3d that will be used the holodisplays they’re developing for OS11 that will make M$’s surface into a coaster holder

By: Craig

Craig — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:22:53 +0000

Maybe it’s just me, but I never thought of the “desktop” as a horizontal surface. It is located in front of me on a vertical plane. I always perceived it as “wall” that icons cling to. To me, the inconsistency is looking at a vertical surface and translating that in a horizontal plane.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:16:52 +0000

Actually, if you think about, this particular inconsistency has been part of the Mac OS from the beginning. Gravity on the Desktop itself and the Finder’s windows has always been perpendicular to the screen. BUT, there is a part of the Mac interface that has always been a parts of all Mac OSes and has a “gravity orientation” in the same direction as the new Dock: Menus! (If you really want to get into interface inconsistencies, try Windows: Gravity on window menus goes down; gravity on the Start Menu goes up!)

They ain’t called “Drop down menus” for noth’in!.

By: Robert

Robert — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:37:46 +0000

Apple hopes you won’t clutter the desktop with icons, just windows. The difference, 3D for the dock vs. flat desktop elements distinguishes the functionality, while being subtley confusing. Moving the dock to a vertical side orientation may please Wile E. Coyote.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:20:54 +0000

The desktop and the dock are separate areas with different properties. While they can interact with each other, just because one has properties that another doesn’t, there isn’t an inconsistency. It’s just a difference. They don’t have to be consistent with each other, because their in different spaces. The dock has 3D properties and perspective, but the desktop doesn’t…the desktop is purely 2D.

By: Pointy Eared Vulcan

Pointy Eared Vulcan — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:48:02 +0000

I heard the same stuff about the widgets’ water ripple effect. “There’s no water…Arrrggghhhh!”
We will all get use to the 3d perspective of the dock and won’t care in the end.

By: admin

admin — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:07:26 +0000

Trevor, the term “wallpaper” is more of a Windows convention, isn’t it? On the Mac, it’s called a “desktop picture”.

But I think you’re right that something like that may have influenced and confused the Apple designers, who were thinking horizontally (like wallpaper) rather than vertically (like a desktop).

By: Trevor

Trevor — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 07:38:22 +0000

Maybe the icons on the desktop are now hanging like picture frames on a wall. After all, that is a “wallpaper” on the desktop.