![Technology (Apple) Technology (Apple)](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicaptech2.gif)
![Businesses Businesses](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/business_64.png)
![OS X OS X](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/macosx_64.png)
![Operating Systems Operating Systems](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/os_64.png)
![Apple Apple](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/apple_64.png)
![Technology Technology](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/technology_64.png)
Jobs Previews Displays, Tiger at WWDC 832
DonaldGelman writes "Apple has just announced a 30-inch Studio Display capable of displaying a resolution of 2560x1600. The display requires a new Nvidia card with 2 parallel DVI connections. The display is going to retail for $3299 in August, and the Nvidia card for around $599." Jobs also announced new 20- and 23-inch displays, for $1299 and $1999 in July. All three feature a new aluminum enclosure, and DVI. Also from WWDC...
Jobs also previewed Tiger, with Spotlight (fast iTunes-like searching in all apps, and systemwide), Dashboard (Konfabulator-like widgets combined with Exposé for fast showing/hiding), Automator (visual AppleScript, combining prewritten actions into scripts), H.264 code for QuickTime (high definition scalable video from MPEG), iChat AV conferencing (up to 10 for audio, four for video), RSS reading in Safari, Core Image and Core Video (realtime filters at the core OS level), and system-wide Sync Services. All of this is extensible (except for iChat conferencing), with SDKs available for developers.
There's a lot here, and a more detailed description is forthcoming. Tiger will be available in the first half of 2005.
iPod SDK! (Score:5, Interesting)
Could you give us an SDK for the iPod? We've been very good boys and girls this year, and we promise to be nice with it.
Thank you,
AAiP
P.S.: It'd be really cool if you could make it your "Oh, and one more thing..." We love it when you do that.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:4, Interesting)
I think it would be much much cooler to be able to write my own conduits to keep the information on my palm in sync with all the apple applications (iCal, Address Book, Mail, a bunch of others)
please, please, pleasepleaseplease! open up the iSync SDK!!!!
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Insightful)
I wrote a set of C++ classes for dealing with the iPod's data files, and with the help of Aero, we've refined it to cover just about everything in a plug-in for foobar 2000 called foo_pod [hydrogenaudio.org].
We're almost there with real, live updating, smart playlist support now (which no other third party iPod-capable app has yet, that I know of). Just a few minor things left to be done on the back end, and the interface sounds like it is coming along nicely.
There's very little an actual SDK could add at this point. When the iPod is connected to the computer, it just appears to be a hard drive to the computer. No special communication channels we can find at all.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is because Slashdot is a community for people who don't realize that "doing something nobody else does" is worth it to many consumers.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry man, but in a capitalist society, the "true value of things" is set by how much people will pay for them. People will pay more than the selling price to get their hands on an iPod Mini. Most people won't even pay MSRP for a Creative Zen. This is because the iPod Mini is not, as you suggest, "worse" than most major mp3 players, but because it is better in every way the counts for a consumer device. It is easy and quick to learn, load and use. It has sufficiently long life and sufficiently good sound quality. It is small but sturdy and controllable with one hand. There are only two connectors to hook up and few external controls to break. It looks clean and nice(and isn't the least bit shiny, mind you). And it has a great warranty.
How is it worse than other players? Each of its competitors fails in one or more of the above strengths. Some have more features but a hideous interface. Some have a nice interface, but are too delicate. Only the cost, which enough people seem willing to pay to make it foolish for them to charge less, is consistantly "worse" than its competitors...but if you care so much about cost that you're willing to buy inferior goods, go get whatever RCA device they're selling at WalMart and give up the pretense that you want a hi-tech device. Price and quality are, aside from some really good deals, mutually exclusive -- because any company that cares enough to make real quality gear should be smart enough to charge for it.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Informative)
Video editors and - especially - motion graphics designers use every pixel of those huge screens. And they have the bucks to buy them, too.
The Cinema Display started at $3,999 in its time and it was a bestselling product. This display is actually cheaper than the original!
D
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Interesting)
Or maybe not. Here's a 30" flat panel TV [epinions.com] that runs for $3,500 and has pretty low resolution. The Apple display makes that unit look like a joke, at least in resolution terms.
D
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Informative)
Absolutely. The 30" display is big enough to have a full-size HD window with plenty of round around it for UI stuff like your timeline.
On a 1920x1200 monitor, you either have to work in proxy view (ugh) or you have to live with a tiny strip of UI at the very bottom. The 30" screen fixes this.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:4, Insightful)
A.) It'll drive down the price of current LCD's.
B.) It's not for you Mr. Sixpack, it's for us artists. We plunk down $3000 -- $4000 once in a while for stuff like this.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Informative)
Just wanted to apologize to everybody. That sounded elitist. I didn't mean for it to.
I'll add a lil more info here: The ability to see that many pixels on the screen is VERY important. Imagine trying to work at theater resolution (>2,000 pixels...) and only seeing a small chunk at a time, or seeing it downsized to where some of the detail is lost. That's problematic. Monitors that can run at >1,600 pixels are hard to come by. So if Apple is successful here, it'll drive prices down. Either we snag the Apple monitor, or the lower budget places get more bang for their buck.
That's why I was offended at the previous poster's comment. I wasn't trying to say "Im better than you", but rather "you're not the only person in the world". Sorry I didn't communicate that more clearly the first time.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Editing
2. Digital imaging studios
3. Medical imaging
And incidently, those are markets where people (or companies) are likely to spend $3500 in big screens.
It looks like M. Jobs is not that stupid after all. It looks like it's a good think he is leading Apple and not you.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Insightful)
After all these years, Macs still run that industry. Sure, there are people that use PC's in the industry, but they are very few and far between.
But, from what I've seen in my travels around printing, it's dying a slow death thanks to online content. Packaging is the place to be in printing/graphic arts now adays...just FYI for you youngsters out there looking to get into the industry.
Re:iPod SDK! (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot?
Microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
yes I'm trying to be funny/sarcastic().
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, Longhorn's implementation of this by filesystem is completely different from Apple's implementation of it (creation of XML files which are then compiled into a fast, easy to read database)...but the end result will be transparent to the user. It's a chicken-and-egg thing. Apple started indexing content by metadata in Sherlock and the iLife apps. Microsoft says, "yeah, well we're gonna build it into our OS!" So Apple breaks out the Sherlock system and integrates it into the GUI...thus making it LOOK like an OS.
Off topic, check out which site they chose for the screenshot of RSS in Safari [apple.com]. Cowboy Neal is famous once again!
Re:I think the important part (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Microsoft... (Score:4, Informative)
SCSI was adopted in 1985 for the Mac Plus. ATA was just being developed at about that time, and certainly was no standard (nor all that good).
The single mouse button was settled on sometime prior to mid-1981. The reasoning was basically that the three button mouse on the Xerox Alto had been confusing -- none of the buttons had any standard uses, apparently, and they were called the Red, Yellow, and Blue buttons, but the mouse had black buttons. A one button mouse simplified use and documentation.
As for multitasking, the Mac was never really designed to do that to begin with. So it was always something of a hack. That being said, most personal computers didn't multitask, or likewise had cooperative models, at the time these decisions were made.
You youngsters -- you don't realize that a lot of important things happened in the 70's and 80's that still strongly influence what we've got now.
Re:Microsoft... (Score:4, Interesting)
You may joke... (Score:4, Interesting)
Although ironically, Steve Jobs noted in the keynote speech that he "ran into Bill Gates a few weeks ago and his company
feels that their relationship with Apple is better than ever."
I think there's some pics of the banners at macrumors.com...
Re:Microsoft... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Microsoft... (Score:4, Informative)
Slashdot and CowboyNeal on the Apple site! (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/safari.html [apple.com]
Also, those who are FIREFLY fans will note the movie is mentioned in the post...
Spotlight != LaunchBar (Score:4, Informative)
One difference from Konfabulator (Score:5, Interesting)
In Apple's version, the widgets are hidden until the dashboard is activated, at which time they slide to the foreground.
In my opinion, Apple's solution is a lot more elegant, and one I'd actually use. It's a subtle difference, but it's different. I also applaud the addition of the widget launcher... much better than having all widgets running at all times.
The argument is really about whether this is a rebirth of Apple's old Desk Accessory application type or just a ripoff of the Konfabulator widget idea, or some hybrid of the two.
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like menubar clock. It's a great idea, almost natural. But does that mean it's worth a ton of money? No.
The real money is, and should be, in real user-centric applications, like spreadsheets, word processing, graphics processing, etc. Typically OS vendors move into "utility" space, but NOT into application space. The exception is Microsoft, which dominates both. Apple only dominates when there is a "missing or poorly supported piece", such as Keynote and Safari.
Re:Microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
Konfabulator is just desk accessories, using Javascript instad of C. Sorry, that refinement is not worth a wheelbarrow of cash. I have every sympathy for Arlo and Perry, but it just isn't that unique an idea. I mean, Mac has provided desk "widgets" without Javascript in 1984... and Windows did it with Javascript in 1998.
On the other hand, Spotlight sounds nothing like Launchbar. TFG. Have you actually tried Launchbar?
Wheel Barrel of Money? (Score:5, Interesting)
For what? For writing some cool widgets that acess interfaces Apple published allowing for that functionality to be capitalized on by themselves and any one else?
You're acting like this Service is something that would take years of design/development to produce when these add-ons were sitting around Apple Engineering for years as fun experiments for core engineers. How do I know this? When I worked there they had plenty of 'cool' prototype ideas just waiting to be added into the OS. How do you think they are able to always add 150 new features with each new full version?
What's next? Pay everyone who contributed to the development of XML now that Apple is integrating it into their OS? That seems to be a bit more impressive, just like the new MPEG-4, Part 10 Codecs.
To those who ask "What's WWDC?"... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:To those who ask "What's WWDC?"... (Score:5, Funny)
SHHHH.... (Score:5, Funny)
"Peter, did you copy all that down?"
"I got only the first half before I fainted. You?"
"I got most of it. Ok, the Longhorn features spec meeting is Wednesday morning, we have two days to put all that new Tiger stuff in!"
Re:SHHHH.... (Score:5, Funny)
"Peter, did you copy all that down?"
"I got only the first half before I fainted. You?"
"I got most of it. Ok, the Longhorn features spec meeting is Wednesday morning, we have two days to put all that new Tiger stuff in!"
Wow, it's going to be such a long time before Microsoft copies OSX Tiger, and Linux gets around to copying Microsoft Longhorn. Attention Linux developers: cut out the middle-man and start copying Tiger directly.
Re:SHHHH.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Screen Shots on Cinema Displays (Score:5, Informative)
Safari RSS Screenshot (Score:5, Informative)
Yum (Score:5, Funny)
Can you say "purchase order?" I'll take five.
Good move to DVI (Score:4, Insightful)
I've been contemplating one of these screens, but never wanted to commit because I couldn't just slap in a KVM for my other machines (mainly the Windows 98 Box fo' Games and my wife's Windows 98 Box fo' Work Crap). Now, I don't have any excuse!
(Looks at price tag.)
Well, I guess I still have one....
Re:Good move to DVI (Score:4, Informative)
Not to be nit-picky, but Firewire doesn't really illustrate your point. Apple didn't adopt Firewire. Apple invented Firewire instead of using the standard (USB).
Re:Good move to DVI (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Good move to DVI (Score:4, Insightful)
You can chain four ATA-100 drives in firewire enclosures into one daisy-chain running into a single firewire jack and you'll barely saturate the bus. Compare to USB, which can't be chained.
Re:Good move to DVI (Score:4, Informative)
right-on rumor [thinksecret.com]
Longhorn like requirements! (Score:4, Insightful)
ATI Radeon 9800 XT
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
ATI Radeon 9600 XT
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
ATI Mobility Radeon 9700
ATI Mobility Radeon 9600
NVIDIA GeForceFX Go 5200
NVIDIA GeForceFX 5200 Ultra
Seems some current Mac models will not support this! You can bet there will now be users who think that 10.4 will not run on their machine just because core image/video does not. They just won't get the advanced new graphics.
Re:Longhorn like requirements! (Score:5, Informative)
Speed (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm hoping that the "instant search of everything" feature, which I'll almost never use if my current searching is any indication, won't bog down the system while indexing everything.
All in all, not too revolutionary. Which is just fine with me. I think Panther is damn nice and would rather they spent time cleaning up and helping developers make their apps more reliable than anything else.
10.4 Server (Score:5, Informative)
Not announced on stage, but previewed off, is 10.4 Server [apple.com]: includes 100% 64bit libs, ACLs, iChat server, SUS. Also includes NT migration tool, improved email, and a one-click SOHO setup. Nice bump.
Jabber based iChat server (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/tiger/
Apple Did It Again! (Score:4, Insightful)
Uh-Oh - Konfabulator (Score:4, Informative)
Remember Konfabulator [konfabulator.com] with all of its widgets? Well, now Tiger's going to have Dashboard [apple.com]. I wonder if it will accept Konfabulator widgets (which I've been using) or if there will be an "import" program? And Konfabulator 1.7 just added Expose-like features (press F8 to get your Widgets in front - useful).
Granted, Apple had something like this back in the older Mac days (or so I've read here and there), so it's kind of like they're "bringing back" something old into the new - but if you're an Apple developer, it seems as though there's always the fear that your favorite app will get assimilated into the next version of OS X.
Granted, I like OS X (my work is buying me a new Powerbook in about a week - yay me), but it does kind of make you go "Hm".
Most important: 64-bit (Score:4, Interesting)
I've been waiting for that feature for a while now and to me that's the most valuable thing, along with Xcode being updated to take advantage of the LP64 model.
Up until now, the 64-bit G5 processor was rather wasted.
HFS+ support, SQLite, etc. (Score:5, Interesting)
What would Tony say? (Score:5, Funny)
Apple has just announced a 30-inch Studio Display capable of displaying a resolution of 2560x1600
Jobs also previewed Tiger
There Grrrrrrreaat!
Geezus, people... (Score:5, Funny)
Sheesh!
nVidia SLI (Score:4, Insightful)
Aha! So this is why nVidia has been working on the 2 card video load balancing system.
Fortunately... (Score:5, Funny)
In other news, starbucks stores around the Apple campus are open 24 hours a day over this summer...
-Adam
Apple drops MSFT stock price (Score:5, Interesting)
Hey, check out the Dashboard page here:
On the simulated Dashboard you can have all sorts of nifty mini-programs called Widgets. One of Apple's sample programs is a stock price table, and they're up 7.36 percent. Microsoft is the only stock on the fictional list that's down. Direct link to the image here [apple.com].
Nice to see Apple's sense of humor. And in fact this sort of functionality is a real smack in the face to Redmond, who have updated little on their desktop (XP) in three years, while Apple has had three release cycles that have been better each time.
Metadata (Score:4, Informative)
still no virtual desktops? (Score:4, Interesting)
Seems like a no-brainer to at least include an option for virtual desktops if you would like to use them.
Oh well, at least there's Desktop manager [sourceforge.net]. Still it would be great if this were built-in.
Re:still no virtual desktops? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is 1337! (Score:5, Funny)
If you look at the calculator in the Dashboard demo [apple.com], you'll notice it says 1.337!
I love a company with a sexy UNIX based OS and a sense of humor.
8 million pixels? Chump.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Hell, if you want to spend some real money, buy one of these babies [viewsonic.com].
3840 x 2400. 9,216,000 pixels for about $6,300. Per pixel, that's cheaper than buying two 30" Cinema displays.
Re:8 million pixels? Chump.... (Score:5, Interesting)
It was originally designed to have the resolution and quality needed for certain xray diagnostics and other image-sensitive telemedicine applications as a primary market (thus the Roentgen name -- the discoverer of X-Rays). One of the demos I saw used a modified version of (IIRC) Framemaker to display a document with footnotes with a 4pt physical size. The serifs on the font were clearly visible, with no eyestrain (due to the monitor, anyways
HOWEVER, this is roughly a 200dpi display -- current operating systems simply aren't designed for screens with pixel density this high. GUI widgets and text are often ridiculously small.
That, plus the original display required a four-head graphics card (or cards w/ four total outputs) to drive it. Looks like the newer Viewsonic uses four separate DVI-D connections.
Gotta Love Wall Streets Reaction (Score:5, Interesting)
Most people up on stocks knows that Merrill Lynch was predicting new iMac announcements at WWDC.
They don't announce them and like pouting children Wall Street responds by punishing the stock down nearly $1.25.
I personally think Steve loves to poke at them once in a while.I expect the iMac to be announced closer to August in time to hit a big splash with the Education sector once again.
Am I the only one... (Score:5, Interesting)
Two words, one hyphenated:
auto-vectorizing compiler.
For those wondering what this is
Intel CPU's do have this technology as well, although it's half the width (64-bits at a time, rather than 128-bit).
When Apple posts benchmarks showing their machines to be faster than x86 machines, the benchmarks almost always make heavy use of these SIMD instructions... and rightly so. A vectorized application can be enormously fast compared to it's analog floating point/integer application.
The problem is that the SIMD instructions are relatively tough to use... you have to be very careful when taking advantage of them, otherwise your applications could actually run -slower-.
With the auto-vectorizing version of GCC included with XCode 2, we could start to see see some very respectable performance coming out of Macintosh applications in the future. Obviously you probably won't be able to simply recompile your application, but surely taking advantage of the auto-vectorization will be far easier than writing to the standard vec_x functions.
Re:Am I the only one... (Score:5, Informative)
Altivec has another problem. The data structures *have* to be aligned on a 16 byte boundary. Note that this is not a "runs really slowly if it's misaligned" thing, this is a "comes to a complete screeching halt" thing. Moving between Altivec and scalar registers is also incredibly slow - it's necessary to write the data to memory then read it back in, meaning you need to move at least one cacheline in the process.
On the plus side, when you do get it right, Altivec f'kin screams along. You can do almost anything with it and be bandwidth limited on a G4. Dunno about a G5 - there are some _more_ limitations to using altivec on a G5 too.
Look into the gcc primitives, it's surprisingly easy.
Dave
Re:Am I the only one... (Score:5, Informative)
The MMX registers are 64 bit, although they're not the main limitation of the MMX implementation. For some inane reason, Intel decided to use the floating point registers for integer data (namely, MMX registers) and so MMX doesn't require additional registers to be added. However, since you're absconding with the floating-point hardware, you can't do floating point math at the same time, and you have to save the state of the floating point hardware before you switch to MMX. In other words, MMX was... "interesting", but in the end, not that useful. After all, for one thing, it eliminated your floating point capability unless you wanted to context-switch out. (AMD's 'improvement' to that was 3DNow! which was basically "MMX that you can use for floating point as well!" - okay, better, but
AltiVec didn't have those limitations - it was very, very improved over MMX.
SSE, however, *did* add 8 new registers, and 128-bit wide objects, for floating point. So an x86 processor with SSE extensions does have 128-bit vector abilities, albeit in floating point. Vectorized integer math is a little rare (hence why MMX isn't that useful anyway) so AltiVec and SSE are actually pretty comparable. AltiVec does have 32 registers (which makes sense, of course, given PPC's 32 register scheme), whereas SSE only has 8 registers. I'm sure some comp. eng. person can come along and tell me why it's efficient to have vector hardware that's the same depth as your register hardware (as x86 has 8 registers and 8 SSE registers, and x86-64 has 16 SSE registers, and 16 normal registers)
(SSE2 basically said "OK, MMX really blew - now you can just use the SSE registers for integer as well.")
When Apple posts benchmarks showing their machines to be faster than x86 machines, the benchmarks almost always make heavy use of these SIMD instructions... and rightly so.
When Apple used to post benchmarks. A modern G5 can keep pace with top end Athlons and P4s anyday, without any specialized benchmarks. Be nice to Apple - the days of the "G3 is 50% faster than a Pentium II using Photoshop's 'G3K1ckZA$$' filter on a mostly-red image of a cow... on Tuesdays!" are over, thank God. And if you had vectorized code on the x86 (using SSE), the comparison wouldn't be that unequal, unless it was heavily biased towards the PPC's obvious strengths (high register count). Then again, it's not like the x86 has any real strengths anyway...
But anyway, my point was that the SIMD implementation on x86 isn't really very different than on the PPC, once you count SSE. SSE is register-starved compared to PPC, sure, but so is x86 in general. x86-64 removes that last limitation (mostly, 16 registers is still starved compared to 32, I guess) but I doubt there would be a big performance jump going from 16 128-bit registers to 32 128-bit registers. There's not a ton of code that could efficiently utilize that. There is *some*, sure, but not a lot.
Re:Now this is exciting... (Score:5, Funny)
I knew I picked a bad week to not be rich.
Re:Now this is exciting... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is about as insightful as saying BMW can't compete with a used Hyundai.
To lessen the Flamebait aspect, quality costs money or time. If you want to build your own hot-rod in the back yard over a year that's great, but don't go pooh-poohing my brand new Corvette over it.
Re:Now this is exciting... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Now this is exciting... (Score:4, Insightful)
Take the hook off a Mac desktop and compare the internals to any PC desktop. Looks the same -- from three feet away. Get any closer and you realize how different the "commodities" really are.
If you don't care about such things, fine. Use what you want to use. Just realize that you can throw together eggs, ham and butter and still make a shitty omelette.
Re:Okay (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Okay (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
If Apple wants the developers code, it will purchase. Its done so with Soundjam (which became iTunes) and other applications. If your idea just furthered their idea, then obviously they just go with theirs. According to the preview Dashboard will have its on SDK kit. That said, it may be possible for people to develop simultaneously for both Dashboard and Konfabulator, but that depends more on the backend engine.
I really LOVE Konfabulator, but that said, Apple has already addressed the one biggest issue I have with it--desktop clutter. Sure its cool to have the weather, newsfeeds, post-its, etc. all providing you continous data on your desktop, but they also just clutter up your desktop, having them exist off-screen and come on with a function key is a perfect idea. A bring the widgets out to play, now put your toys away concept.
:| Damn it Apple. (Score:4, Insightful)
Dashboard is practically a direct rip-off of Konfabulator. It comes with similar default "widgets," widgets are transparent and glossy, and new widgets can be developed with JS.
Moreover, Apparently Konfabulator is very popular at Apple and Pixar (lots of registered Apple and Pixar users). Schiller supposedly loves the damn thing.
I have no problems with Apple adding something like this into MacOS. However, once they start stomping on the rights of small developers, that's fucking low. This is the second time they've done this, and this time it's an even more blatant case of copyright infringement.
If Apple had developed Konfabulator, and Arlo had developed dashboard 1 year later, Arlo would've been nailed by Apple's legal department.
Why should we even attempt to develop platform specific utilities and software for OS X? If it becomes popular, Apple is going to snag it, make money off of it, and not compensate the original authors.
Re::| Damn it Apple. (Score:5, Funny)
Re::| Damn it Apple. (Score:5, Insightful)
ControlStrip on the classic Mac OS, DesktopX, and many other projects have provided lightweight "applets" in various ways for years. In fact, these are also quite similar to the menu bar applets on OSX, though now liberated from the cramped menu bar.
What are the "rights of small developers"? Which aspect of Konfab is unique in the scope of computing? This reeks of the Watson/Sherlock "controversy", but only in that a developer creates a relatively sexy but not novel UI, and Apple eventually adopts a similar approach to solve the same problems for its users.
It's hard to define where Apple should stop and third-party tools should begin. I see people confusing superficial similarities for innovation being crushed - at what point does Apple stop improving OSX and require its users to buy third-party products?
There will no doubt be others crying about the RSS aggregator, but again these are similar solutions because they are solving the same problems for users. Should Apple just stick to the desktop and the Dock and leave all future goodness to shareware authors?
I love shareware on OSX, I support it religiously, but at some point there has to be an acknowledgement that OS vendors will encroach as user needs are identified. I would love to see Apple develop a grant program or something similar, to honor those developers who lead the way, but I don't think it's an option to just hold back the OS.
Not original at all (Score:5, Insightful)
Konfabulator is not an original idea at all, sorry. Classic Mac OS had desk accessories since 1984, Windows 98 had its Active Desktop (which nobody ever used because it was too unstable, but did much the same thing). The only thing new here is using Javascript, and Windows did that almost a decade ago.
I have sympathy for Perry and Arlo, but I'm not about to vilify Apple over bringing DAs into the 21st century.
Re:Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it's such a shame that Apple "ripped off" an idea that they developed in the first place! Talk about bad apples on the part of the Konfabulator folks. They rip off Apple, hope no-one calls them on it, then flip out when Apple puts the functionality back into their OS because they discovered that people found it useful.
To the Konfabulator folks: deal. Or innovate. Don't rip off an idea a company implemented over ten years ago and complain when they implement it again.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macint
So yes, it's a rip off of Konfabulator. But Konfabulator was a rip off of Apple's original. Sort of like how Apple did labels in pre-OS X and Unsanity provided them as an APE module. Then Apple re-integrated them in OS X.
What matters here is it's still an opportunity for 3rd parties to provide a superior alternative to a basic function provided by Apple. Watson is better than Sherlock. xPad is better than stickies. Camino is better than Safari. ( of course, these are all arguable )
Ho hum. I don't really care. But from a usability standpoint it's a *great* idea to have my sticky notes *appear* ( rather than fly away ) when I move my mouse cursor to a certain corner. I like the sound of that, since I use stickies all the time.
Re:see konfabulator (Score:4, Insightful)
Now on the other hand all this looks surprisingly similar to my own application Watch It. [verticaleye.net] But I'm just going to rewrite it-- no bitching here. I was even thinking about writing a calculator using the same basic design, transparent and resizable. But I thought no one would use it so I haven't created the application which would be trivial. Now, however, I might reconsider writing it, because there are going to be a lot of users still using Panther and earlier after this comes out.
You missed the important part. (Score:5, Informative)
1. Larger
2. Use DVI instead of ADC, so you don't have to have mac hardware to use them.
Re:You missed the important part. (Score:5, Informative)
The dual-port DVI card lets you connect two 30-inch displays to one machine. The 30-inch display doesn't use both DVI ports on the card.
Re:Why do they keep doing this. (Score:5, Informative)
I really hate reading this panic "they're stealing!" attitude every time.
Let's do a review here, okay?"
Frankly, Konfabulator was a low hanging fruit. It didn't really introduce anything except using Javascript, it just tied together a batch of old technology with a very old Apple idea. It's common sense to realize that Apple would move widgets back onto the desktop and add Javascript support once they realized how well it would work out. About the only thing you can really take issue with is Apple's decision to use Javascript.
Re:Why do they keep doing this. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why do they keep doing this. (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Konfabulator costs money. It's a nice app, it really is. I used it for a while, but it's not to me, worth the $25 they want for it.
2) Konfabulator doesn't hide itself until I need it. It's always there, sitting on the desktop or flaoting above everything else. Dashboard appears only when I want it to and then goes away.
Well that is the problem when you make OS Tools. (Score:4, Insightful)
So if you want to make a living off your tools you better copyright or paten it, so Apple will need to pay for it to put it in their next OS.
Well (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is it just me... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a pretty neat innovation, in my book. Is it major? Well, no, probably not. But it doesn't take a whole lot of stand-alone "hey, neat!" innovations before they start to add up to something substantial.
Re:Sent to Apple Feedback (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know where you get the idea that Apple is replacing these programs. When they released Safari, did everybody stop using other web browsers? Does nobody use Entorage or MailSmith or Eudora just because Apple includes Mail? Are people going to stop using NetNewsWire just because you can read RSS feeds in Safari now? Don't people use VLC dispite QuickTime?
crushing the very developers that make people switch to the Mac because of the cool things that shareware developers do.
I don't know about you, but I switched because of the things that Apple had developed.
Re:A suggestion (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Problem with nVidia dual-channel DVI (Score:5, Informative)
They are using Dual-link DVI.
Go to the web page Apple.com [apple.com]
They are using a special NVIDIA card:
" The groundbreaking new NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra delivers the industry's first 16-pipe superscalar architecture and support for the world's fastest DDR3 memory to raise the bar for 3D graphics performance. The specifications of the GeForce 6800 Ultra GPU, are stunning: Using over 220 million transistors it supports a 256-bit interface for an effective memory bandwidth of 35.2 GB per second which delivers 600 million vertices, 6.4 billion textured pixels per second. The GPU is built on an AGP 8X board and includes 256MB of DDR3 memory for use in the most demanding graphics applications. It is the first card available to support the DVI standard dual link digital signal specification from the two DVI ports it features . This capability is required to drive the new 30-inch LCD, high resolution Apple Cinema HD display. The combination of a GeForce 6800 Ultra with a dual processor Power Mac G5 driving two 30-inch Apple Cinema HD Displays is the definitive tool for the creative professional. "
It uses the DVI standard.
Re:dpi? (Score:4, Informative)
It's a similar rationale for having the Amiga's clock rate as the NTSC clock.
Re:Core Image... (Score:4, Funny)
Sounds like Sun and Apple are finally taking computer users to the next level with 3D interfaces. It'll be interesting to see what Microsoft comes up with.
Microsoft has this idea covered already. Each copy of Longhorn will come with a colorful selection of Post-It notes that can be affixed onto the back of your monitor. I think they already have the pattent application in the works too. Admit it... the people at Microsoft are just too smart for the rest of us.
Re:but but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple doesn't include any activation or copy protection system in OS X, so it just takes one alpha geek to buy a copy and then it filters down when people see something cool and ask them to install it on their Mac, usually proffering beer and liasons with loose women in gratitude. Remember, most Mac users, like most Windows users, don't have much idea what version of the OS they're using.
I suspect this is part of Apple's distribution strategy, otherwise they'd at least ask for a serial number or something.
Re:Cost too dam much. (Score:5, Interesting)