Here is a simple and fast way to play Among Us with your friends on a Mac!I can make money from my content if I hit 1000 subscribers, please subscribe:)Down. Hi thanks for the Q another person I can’t tag for some reason. NOTE: This is only a simulation, and it shows a similar process to how I draw, however my digital art usual progress is more complicated and messy.

• Mac Os Versions
• Uwus Mac Os Catalina
• Uwus Mac Os 11
• Uwus Mac Os Catalina
• Mac Os Mojave

© Provided by Windows Central

Microsoft has promised a new Windows UI for three years, yet Apple is able to deliver its update in just one.

Yesterday at WWDC, Apple unveiled its brand new version of macOS, known as 'Big Sur,' which is coming later this year to a plethora of Macs. Its most significant new addition is a complete redesign of the OS, adopting the same aesthetic Apple has been pushing on iOS and iPadOS for some time. This is a comprehensive cosmetic update from the ground up that's consistent across apps and icons, and it puts Windows' cosmetic update efforts to shame.

I am jealous that Apple can deliver a complete cosmetic redesign of macOS, that touches everything from the 'shell' to in-box apps, in just one year. Meanwhile, I'm on year three of waiting for Fluent Design to 'come to life' on Windows 10 in a clear and consistent manner.

— Zac Bowden (@zacbowden) June 23, 2020

For over three years, Microsoft has promised a consistent and modern UI update for Windows 10. It announced Fluent Design in 2017 and subsequently unveiled what Windows would soon look like with its new Fluent Design language. At the time, Microsoft called the move to Fluent Design a journey, and that it would take some time to show up. But, three years later, and it feels like that journey hasn't even started.

We're a far cry away from what Microsoft said Windows 10 would look like with Fluent Design, that's for sure. What doesn't help is that mid-way through this Fluent Design journey, Fluent Design itself changed quite significantly. It's no longer all about modernizing Windows design, but rather, it's finding a cross-platform design that works no matter the capability of a platform.

© Provided by Windows Central

The other key issue is that there's no universal push to adopt Fluent Design across all the teams that work on Windows or apps for Windows. Since Windows is split up into so many teams, a lot of those teams just don't adopt it, and those that do, have their own spin on what Fluent Design is. This creates an inconsistent UI across the different apps and shell elements found in Windows 10 and just makes everything feel disjointed.

Windows 10X is a significant step forward in the journey to creating a consistent, clean, minimalist, and modern UI for Windows 10. But the apps and their inconsistent adaptation of Fluent Design is still a problem on Windows 10X. What's more, Windows 10X isn't coming to Windows 10, so all that work means nothing to the billion users who are running Windows 10 today. Microsoft needs to figure out a way to modernize Windows 10 cosmetically because other platforms are putting it to shame.

Apple can do it, but Microsoft can't?

The fact that Apple can show up with an entire cosmetic redesign that not only updates shell elements but all the in-box apps, too, all in just one release is insanity to me as a Windows user. It's certainly not out of the ordinary for Apple; they did the same with iOS 7 back in 2013. Microsoft is a mammoth that cannot move that fast. The idea that Microsoft could implement a complete OS redesign, which includes all the in-box apps is essentially impossible given how that would require collaboration between all the different teams that work on Windows. And it seems that just doesn't happen internally at Microsoft.

© Provided by Windows Central

You'd have to get not only the in-box system app teams to cooperate, but you'd also have to get the different teams that work on the Windows Shell, the Skype team, the Office team, and the Xbox team to cooperate too, as they all have built-in products and ship on Windows 10. Don't get me wrong, it isn't impossible, but everyone at Microsoft would have to muck in if this were to happen. And I'm afraid these other teams reckon they have more important things to be doing instead.

I know Windows has the issue of supporting legacy apps and features, and I get that. But, just because Microsoft needs to support legacy programs doesn't give it the excuse of not updating the modern in-box apps or the Windows Shell with a consistent Fluent Design experience, those things don't rely on whether or not the legacy apps are supported.

One of the biggest contributors to the current state of Windows is ironically the versatility. There are so many frameworks one can pick up and make a Windows app with, which is not bad. What's bad is that unlike Apple, Microsoft doesn't swear by a specific combo for system apps. https://t.co/8w8cfLIG5J

— Albacore (@thebookisclosed) June 23, 2020

There has been a lot of comparison between how Microsoft handles OS updates and how Apple handles OS updates on Twitter in the last 24 hours, and those comparisons are deserved. It's true; Apple can pull things off when it comes to OS design of which Microsoft can only dream. Apple is consistent, daring, and 'all-in' on its efforts. Microsoft just isn't. Microsoft was burned with Windows 8, but that doesn't mean it should stop trying to push UI updates when necessary.

Perhaps now that Panos Panay oversees the Windows client, we'll start to see this change. Panos Panay did post a video showcasing a new UI for Windows 10, but we're yet to see any of that make an appearance in the product. Windows 10X is on the way, and there's at least some attempt at a minimalist, clean OS design there. I just hope we see that work come to not only legacy Windows 10 but all the in-box apps as well.

What are your thoughts on the new redesign for macOS and Microsoft's inability to deliver something similar? Let us know in the comments.

From UO Evolution

1Ultima Online on a Mac

Ultima Online on a Mac

So you have a Mac and you want to play Ultima Online? Not a problem!

First, Does Ultima Online Even Run on Macs?

The answer is yes. It runs quite well in fact, but how well it runs depends on what method you use, and just as with running

Ultima Online under Windows on a PC, it depends on your hardware.

Ultima Online, Macs, and Intel and PowerPC

This article is only going to cover running Ultima Online on an Intel-based Mac (Macintosh) from Apple. It's not going to cover the older pre-2006 PowerPC Macs, as the hardware/system architecture is quite a bit different, and it's not very playable. If you are on a PowerPC Mac, you are better off spending a small amount of money on a dual-core 'netbook'. Most

of the software covered below are either not available for Intel Macs, or will not handle running a game like UO under a

PowerPC system.

Hardware Requirements for UO on a Mac

For the most part, the requirements are the same as on a Windows/PC, but do take into account the three main ways of running

UO under Mac OS X (listed below). It is recommended you have 4GB of Memory, 2GB at the very least.

It is also recommended that you are running on at least a dual-core Mac. There are no more single-core Macs being made, and

Mac Os Versions

later versions of the some of the software listed below do not support the single-core Macs anyways.

Classic Client or Enhanced Client?

Actually, it doesn't matter too much whether you run the Classic Client or Enhanced Client. Both run quite well,

provided you have decent hardware. Those who prefer the Classic Client may want to run Ultima Online in a virtualized

environment, especially if they are using one or more add-ons together with UO.

Methods for Running UO on a Mac

There are three main methods for running Ultima Online under Mac OS X:

• Using Apple's Boot Camp
• Using some form of virtualization (Parallels Desktop, VMWare Fusion, or VirtualBox)
• Using a 'compatibility layer' such as WINE or CrossOver

Apple's Boot Camp and Ultima Online

What is Boot Camp? It's a feature of Intel-based Macs that basically allows dual-install of Windows Vista or Windows 7 and Mac OS X. You can only do one or the other, depending on which you've booted into.

Pros:

• Best performance you'll get - it's the same as running it on a Windows/PC from Dell, HP, Acer, etc.
• Requires you to dedicate 20GB or more of your hard drive to Windows and UO
• Requires the purchase of a Windows license.
• Installing UO under Boot Camp is the same as installing UO on any Windows PC.

Cons:

• You have to reboot into Windows to run, and cannot use Mac OS X until you reboot into OS X.
• You need to purchase a separate Windows license.

Installing UO Under Boot Camp

Once Boot Camp is installed, installing Ultima Online under Boot Camp is the same as installing UO on a PC. For instructions

on installing Boot Camp as well as system requirements, please see Apple's Boot Camp page

Virtualization, Macs, and Ultima Online

Pros:

• You get a full install of Windows in a self-contained environment.
• It's easy to run UO add-ons alongside UO
• You are running UO under OS X (unlike Boot Camp), even if it's within a Windows environment.

Cons:

• It places more of a demand on the hardware/system itself since you are running UO and Windows at the same time.
• Requires the purchase of a separate Windows license, and possibly the virtualization software depending on which software

you select.

• Requires 16GB or more of hard drive space just for the Windows install, on top of what UO requires.

Virtualization Software to Run UO and Windows on a Mac

There are three main virtualization products:

• VirtualBox - Free, developed by Oracle
• VMWare Fusion (Commercial)
• Parallels Desktop (Commercial)

Which is the best option for virtualization?

If you are on a tight budget, VirtualBox will do just fine, and it's free. Parallels Desktop and VMWare Fusion are

commercial products that have some features not available in VirtualBox, and also tend to have better performance. All three

are very mature products, and if you are choosing between Parallels Desktop and VMWare Fusion, in many cases, you could go

with whatever is on sale at the moment, and will not have any problems.

Compatibility Layers

A compatibility layer is what it sounds like - it's software that creates a compatible layer of drivers/libraries/etc. in

Uwus Mac Os Catalina

between UO and OS X. It does NOT require an install of Windows, unlike the two options mentioned above.

Pros:

• The most 'seamless' way to run Ultima Online under a Mac
• Does not require a separate purchase and install of Microsoft Windows
• Can have better performance than a virtualized Windows session
• Requires less hard drive space than virtualization or Boot Camp

Cons:

• Can be trickier to run add-ons such as UOAssist or Pinco's UI due to install and permission issues

Compatibility Layer Software

Uwus Mac Os 11

• Wine - Free
• CrossOver from CodeWeavers] - Commercial

Uwus Mac Os Catalina

Other Information About Running UO on a Mac

www.uoguide.com/Ultima_Online_on_a_Mac

Mac Os Mojave