I've got to disagree here. Touches like this are what elevate software from merely functional to great.
Maniacal attention to detail is what separates the great from the merely good enough. Examples? Dyson vacuum cleaners, the original Macintosh, the iPod, probably any product you really like.
The thing about effort like this is that the few days of extra time invested will be shared by every user of the finished product.
I'm not saying it's a bad idea because it's too much attention to detail. I'm saying it's a bad idea because it's misplaced. They're talking about taking considerable effort to reskin a standard OS GUI component here - they are standard for a _reason_. I would consider this not just wasted effort, but a negative, if I found it in any of the applications I use day to day.
I'm 100% for maniacal devotion to attention to detail. I live it and breathe it in the games I make. I don't tolerate a single frame of object behaviour being out of place. But you've got to focus it in the right place, and that's what I'm saying is the problem with doing something like this - there are just too many improvements that you could be working on that your users will find much more helpful. I've definitely been too fanatical about what I wanted versus what my users have wanted in the past.
That said, the app in question won a user experience award at the Apple Design Awards, so maybe they're right and I'm wrong. They can certainly make amazing software. But even with that in mind, I stand by what I'm saying.
Maniacal attention to detail is what separates the great from the merely good enough. Examples? Dyson vacuum cleaners, the original Macintosh, the iPod, probably any product you really like.
The thing about effort like this is that the few days of extra time invested will be shared by every user of the finished product.