Not Platinum
Has anyone else noticed how applications like QuarkXPress and Flash (newest versions of each) don’t use the Platinum interface inside their preference panels and menu selections? What’s up with that? Like, if you click ‘View’ in the top menu in Flash 5, all the options are in black text, with the highlighted selection having a black selection bar instead of the color you’ve chosen in the Apperance control panel. Also, everything looks very flat and System 7-ish. Weird. I wonder why Macromedia / Quark / Netscape would just simply not invoke the Apperances settings along with the Platinum interface elements. Funky-monkey. Hopefully 10.1 will fix all that.
Reader interactions
22 Replies to “Not Platinum”
Comments are closed.
Funny, now that you mention it. I’m hoping 10.1/Macromedia address the frame rate issue in Flash. Please no one flame me for using Flash, my clients make me do it…..
While we are on the Mac X thing. I plugged in my digital camera and there was this wonder download tool. Very cool. I never even had to install the Sony software. Very cool
wonderful tool…not wonder…..too many Red Bulls
It’s called cross-platform (non Mac-specific) programming. Netscape 6 uses XML interface elements for its entire UI, circumventing the need to make platform specific calls. I imagine Macromedia (though not sure with those laggards at Quark who kept System 7 UI elements during the entire System 8 era) are doing something similar — relying on as little platform-specific code as they can.
Basically Macromedia, Quark and Netscape/AOL cannot program for shit. If they used Apples provided API’s it wouldnt be an issue.
Yeah.. I wasn’t talking about Netscape 6, I was talking about 4.whatever. Netscape 6 has its OWN interface problems to deal with.
Well, take Netscape 6 out of my comment and I think the reasoning still stands — these folks try to recycle as much as humanly possible and they get *far* more cash for their Windows applications. And as far as Netscape engineers not being able to program for shit, when was the last time anyone in this microcosmic blogland in which we live created an open source, standards-compliant web browser? Or an oft-maligned but still favored page layout application? A Mac-compliant UI does not a better application (necessarily) make. It’s icing.
No matter what anyone says, I will never believe Netscape is a good program (especially 6.x) …. and especially under OS X. Netscape 6 doesnt even fucking run on over half our macs at work… open sourced? bah…. open my ass. Open for AOL/Netscapes own desperate need for programmers. ****KEEP in mind, Mozilla is a different beast. Someday it *MIGHT* be useable. (ALSO, I am completely aware that “Netscape” and “Mozilla” are almost the same thing…. almost being the key word)
At least on OS9, Mozilla 0.9.4 is pretty good (but not entirely stable).
You said it yourself perfectly… “pretty good”, “not entirely stable”.
🙂
If only OmniWeb 4.1 would arrive and make IE and Mozilla basically irrelevent on OSX… If only they had a good JavaScript engine.
Funny, now that you mention it. I’m hoping 10.1/Macromedia address the frame rate issue in Flash. Please no one flame me for using Flash, my clients make me do it…..
While we are on the Mac X thing. I plugged in my digital camera and there was this wonder download tool. Very cool. I never even had to install the Sony software. Very cool
wonderful tool…not wonder…..too many Red Bulls
It’s called cross-platform (non Mac-specific) programming. Netscape 6 uses XML interface elements for its entire UI, circumventing the need to make platform specific calls. I imagine Macromedia (though not sure with those laggards at Quark who kept System 7 UI elements during the entire System 8 era) are doing something similar — relying on as little platform-specific code as they can.
Basically Macromedia, Quark and Netscape/AOL cannot program for shit. If they used Apples provided API’s it wouldnt be an issue.
Yeah.. I wasn’t talking about Netscape 6, I was talking about 4.whatever. Netscape 6 has its OWN interface problems to deal with.
Well, take Netscape 6 out of my comment and I think the reasoning still stands — these folks try to recycle as much as humanly possible and they get *far* more cash for their Windows applications. And as far as Netscape engineers not being able to program for shit, when was the last time anyone in this microcosmic blogland in which we live created an open source, standards-compliant web browser? Or an oft-maligned but still favored page layout application? A Mac-compliant UI does not a better application (necessarily) make. It’s icing.
No matter what anyone says, I will never believe Netscape is a good program (especially 6.x) …. and especially under OS X. Netscape 6 doesnt even fucking run on over half our macs at work… open sourced? bah…. open my ass. Open for AOL/Netscapes own desperate need for programmers. ****KEEP in mind, Mozilla is a different beast. Someday it *MIGHT* be useable. (ALSO, I am completely aware that “Netscape” and “Mozilla” are almost the same thing…. almost being the key word)
At least on OS9, Mozilla 0.9.4 is pretty good (but not entirely stable).
You said it yourself perfectly… “pretty good”, “not entirely stable”.
🙂
If only OmniWeb 4.1 would arrive and make IE and Mozilla basically irrelevent on OSX… If only they had a good JavaScript engine.