- HOW TO DOWNGRADE MAC OS LION TO SNOW LEOPARD SOFTWARE
- HOW TO DOWNGRADE MAC OS LION TO SNOW LEOPARD WINDOWS
My mom is in her 70s and uses her iPhone 7 for all her computing needs. Keep in mind that even 60, 70, 80 and 90 year old users who never could deal with computers in the past are able to work iPads and iPhones now. But I also dont think we should stop at what we all think was the best and never change. I dont think that we should stray from concise, clear, and discoverable UI/UX. Compared to say, Snapchat, (which seems to build functionality only to befuddle non teens so that they can hide their activity) Big Sur is downright amazing. The UI is more consistent, if not more friendly. It was a very solid release where everyone was doing good to great work.īig Sur, while not perfect, is damn good to me.
Snow Leopard was built when Apple was firing on all cylinders. I don't disagree with many of his points. Mail doesn't randomly make itself the frontmost window, and random Apple processes don't start suddenly consuming CPU. And day-to-day, I just encounter a lot less general glitchiness. I can activate the Dashboard from anywhere, to check my calendar, notes, etc without breaking my flow. I can also use Applescript and Automator without being interrupted by incessant permission prompts.
HOW TO DOWNGRADE MAC OS LION TO SNOW LEOPARD WINDOWS
I can't quite explain it, but Mavericks's higher contrast UI keeps the windows separated, so I'm able to track them with less brain power. In Mojave, application windows would blur together somewhat, becoming messy and hard to work with. Mavericks's UI uses a wide variety of lights and darks grays, which I find both easier on my eyes and more comfortable to use. But on the whole, it's been a huge improvement.
HOW TO DOWNGRADE MAC OS LION TO SNOW LEOPARD SOFTWARE
As you might imagine, I've run into many software compatibility issues, and I need to be extra cautious about security.
It's a tad newer than Snow Leopard, but not by much, and I've modified it to be even more Snow Leopard-like. I've been using Mavericks as my main OS since March. There is not much difference between those changes and any Apple “design” from one year to the next. prefer to auto-update more at the lower layers and auto-update less or never at the GUI scale.Īnd, any “correct” application is somewhat layout-agnostic anyway: technically with various Accessibility settings you can already change the look and feel and behavior a lot, and apps will not work quite right if they don’t respect these settings. It also means you could have different security policies, e.g. To a large extent, nothing ought to break if you simply allow users to choose from any of the “looks and feels” of the past few years while updating the lower-level OS to be the latest. Why can’t we have OSes layered better so that the “core” can evolve but these “design”-of-the-week changes can remain compartmentalized and potentially ignored from one release to the next? the idea of adding gradient blurs everywhere), the vast majority do not. While some elements of new UI definitely require improvements to OS underpinnings (e.g. You can imagine an alternate universe where Steve Jobs walked on stage and announced "Snow Leopard comes with a brand new Finder, and it's better than ever!" The roadmap was probably planned early on, but the narrative could have been chosen later. I hadn't heard this story, but I wonder if both could be true. Not something decided early in the dev cycle. > I heard a story of some meeting where "no new features" was branded close to release. Every OS since Lion has been replaced within a year. Tiger, Leopard and Snow Leopard had several years of life before they were replaced. I have another theory though, and it's not the price-Apple has plenty of money-it's the development cycle. Adding QuickLook to Finder doesn't do any of those things, it just allows you to use QuickLook. Rewriting Finder is huge and risky! When they replaced mDNSResponder with discoveryd it caused problems they eventually reverted it when Vint Cerf called Tim Cook to complain.īut it's not the size, it's the focus, right? Rewriting Finder, without adding any additional capabilities, reduces technical debt and makes Finder faster and more stable.
0 kommentar(er)
