One feature to expect in Leopard


What will we see in Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard? Windows Virtualization? Full Screen Applications? Don't count your chickens, but I do want to point out one subject that apparently a lot of rumor sites have overlooked: resolution independence. Now, before I go into detail, I want to clarify that this is not a rumor site, and thus this is a rare occasion of me posting anything to do with Apple rumors. I do, however, want to spell out the blatantly obvious for people.

It shouldn't be a secret that Apple quietly integrated a "Resolution Scaling" feature into 10.4 for developers. (For those who aren't aware, if you have the Developer Tools installed, simply go to Developer/Applications/Performance Tools/Quartz Debug.app). On the basis that "Apple may use a similar feature in future releases of Mac OS X," it gave us developers a chance to prepare for the vague future Apple has described to us. However, toying with the tools provided, this stuff is actually in the OS already. It showed that this "resolution independent" stuff won't necessarily be all vector. Yes, NSBezierPaths and fonts automatically scale correctly, but what about graphics? Although Apple hasn't said anything yet, it only makes sense that they would further the use of .icns files, letting you have different graphics for multiple sizes, scaling near perfectly. This is already the case with all application icons in Mac OS X.




In addition, take a look at recent posts to the Surfin' Safari blog. There have been multiple posts in the past few months regarding, surprise surprise... how to properly scale websites! And we're not just talking about good CSS manners here, these guys are talking about implementing W3C's vector-based SVG as a first-class image format in WebKit, and most likely OS X. Holy shitz. Obviously, no one is simply joking around here. This is going to happen.

One area of Web design that is going to become more important in the coming years is high DPI. For those of us working on WebKit, this will also become an issue for WebKit applications and for Dashboard widgets.
- Dave Hyatt

And finally, there's the smaller little hints that people dismissed. Some graphic designer a while ago accidently spilled the beans that they were privately contracted by Apple to make icons for the system. Except, these icons weren't 128x128px, no, they were a whopping 512x512px. I'd say that these kinds of icons would be big enough to be scaled down a fair bit.

With larger resolutions on new Macs lately, it makes sense that Apple would do something like this. Even I find myself squinting sometimes when using my 23" Cinema Display at a far distance. Mark my words, this is going to be huge - WWDC can't come soon enough.
I filed a Radar bug (rdar://4458698) that goes to this issue: I suggested that OS X should allow the use of TIFF files instead of .icns files, because TIFF files can contain one or more images at any size(s).

Vector icons would be nice, but I wonder how practical, considering how much work it is to render vector graphics as compared to raster graphics.
 
That probably will replace the huge icons I collected:
http://www.mac4ever.net
 
Rendering vectors should not be that much of an issue provided the system dedicates a raster cache for that.  
Wow, Dustin, nice working on Digg.... Lucky you!  
Vector icons can only be so complex. I think we will definitely see more vector graphics in the system, but not for application or toolbar icons.  
SVG belongs to Adobe in the same way that HTML belongs to Microsoft. That is, "not at all." Note the W3C spec.  
Great post and info, thanks.  
You can see a preview of how this works already in 10.4

it's a bit buggy, but you can clearly see how it works:

http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20060119152725322
 
if apple is seriously going to do this then it is not for the benefit of your 23" monitor, but for people with a 60" 1080p tv. this is one more step towards a mac media center, i hope.  
there's no need for full screen applications in mac os x, and we are better off without windows.  
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.  
Does this mean I'll be able to run my mac mini through my HDTV using an DVI->HDMI Cable without crappy resolution options? The resolution options in 10.4 are either too small or too big and the software I've found to fix this are not really that easy to use.  
catachresoid: My bad, fixed. :)

Wyatt: Yeah, that was supposed to be a bit of a joke. I don't think we will see either.
 
It's a must for a media center Mac. My G4 Mac Mini looks like crap on my 32" HDTV. None of the available resolutions are really usable, either too tiny to read from across the room or too big to fit EyeTV's window on screen.  
You guys are forgetting that SVG icons can be pre-rendered into bitmaps, kept in a special cache directory. This eliminates the performance issue completely, and the icons will surely look amazing. I have seen some incredible looking stuff done with SVG in the last 2 years.

And by the way your blog theme does not properly scale up ;-)
 
The thing about the 512px icons is that they may only be being produced at that size to be used large in an Application installer. You know - the big knocked-back image you get as you walk through the installation process...  
The images in the background of the installer and in some windows are just that: images. It's easy to do. Granted, having 512x512 icons would reduce the need for extra files to use as the background images... Allow for some sort of opacity or color-coating (0-100% overlay of a color on top of the icon/image) and you could have all sorts of pointless fun. I love it!  
Post a Comment
January 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
July 2007
August 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2004
March 2004
April 2004
September 2004
December 2004