or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple reinventing file access, wireless sharing for iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple reinventing file access, wireless sharing for iPad - Page 5

post #161 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thartist View Post

I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night. :-P

The app is ScreenPlay. I can screen write while driving in the car (that is until the federal government or Apple rule the app to be illegal).

Hey man - way to go - Don't tell Mel, but I was trolling

Great effort in not taking the bait - More power to ya
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #162 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thartist View Post

EXACTLY! The iPhone OS is the FUTURE of all Apple computers. Steve Jobs is saying that everybody's kid is stupid and dull. They aren't organized, nor can they handle simple file operations like Open and Save (even though they seem to upload FLICKR and Facebook pictures just fine).

Why is the iPhone OS the future of all Apple computers? Didn't you see the slide with three platforms? - iPhone. iPad. Mac. Did you even watch the event? Like the Mac GUI and iPhone GUI were paradigm shifts for desktop computers and smartphones, the iPad GUI and product size is a paradigm shift for a lower-powered more mobile computer for whole classes of people that have been ignored and neglected by computer/OS/software companies for decades.

Why bother with nonproductive extraneous computerese actions when one doesn't need to? Only the stupid and dull want to waste their lives doing that. Most people just want to upload FLICKR and Facebook pictures without all the extra steps.

Again, since you mentioned Facebook, you really should read: http://joehewitt.com/post/ipad
He's certainly no Apple fanboy but he fully gets what the iPad is all about. If other developers have the same response (and we're hearing lots of similar cases), new software innovation will be happening on the iPad, not on the PC or the Mac. By the way, how much user-impacting innovation has there really been on the PC in the last 9 years?
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #163 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

Ok, great; but just how do you propose tagging the files and, more importantly, viewing the collection of files you tagged with that project? You'd need an app to allow you to identify the files you want to tag and then view the related files the way you've organized them.

Guess what, you just reinvented the Finder, the Mac's file management application. Granted, you may not be navigating according to the actual file structure of the operating system, but you've still created a virtual file structure the user needs to be able to navigate.

This new file management system will work fine when you have a relatively small number of file types and limited interaction between apps (what would you break if you deleted an app and all it's related documents and other apps were referencing those documents?).

Files could be tagged at the time of creation. Files included into said project file such as an image in Pages could have automatic tags added at the time of usage. Granted there are a lot of things to work out and multi-tasking is almost a pre-requisite for auto tagging to work with different file types, but it could be possible.

Spotlight, not the Finder, becomes the way to look at these files that have been tagged. It's a different way to think. I don't think Spotlight has ever been just about search. Anyway, just my two cents.
post #164 of 508
This just sucks. And if you cant tag them or name them, it sucks even further.Its like saying that on the PC, every single Microsoft Word document you ever create, be it personal or for whatever project, is going to be stuffed into one single humongous Microsoft Word folder with every other Microsoft Word file youve ever created. Same for Excel files. And same for you get the idea.

No organization at all. None.

Really, its as bad as the lame bookshelf metaphor in the iBooks app. Steve says that even a 16GB baseline iPad will let you carry thousands of ebooks.

Cool. But now picture this: You take him at his word, and youve now purchased thousands of ebooks and downloaded them to your iPad only to find all of them stuffed at random onto dozens upon dozens upon dozens of seemingly identical virtual shelves.

Check out photos of the interface. Theres no apparent way to sort by title or author. No way to group those thousands of books by author or subject or genre. No Dewey Decimal System. No way to keep related books (or documents) together. You can probably quit the app and do a spotlight search if you remember at least part of the title.

Otherwise its page, page, page, swipe, swipe, swipe, bitch, bitch, bitch. Where in the hell is that book on

Heck, I have a mere fifty books in the Kindle app on my iPhone, and the lack of organizational tools there is ALREADY driving me insane.

Come on. This is progress? This the reinvention were looking for?

Even the ancient floppy disk, thirty years old, had folders for grouping related files. Take away the ability to create user-defined organizational schemas, and even something as storage poor as a 128K floppy disk rapidly becomes little more than a mess of intermingled files with cryptic file names.

128K. And the biggest iPad is 64 gigabytes.

Even the venerable iPhoto is starting to show just how unworkable it is to only have a single library of photos. It wasnt too bad when it first appeared and it only had to manage a few photos, but people have been stuffing their libraries with photos for years now. Outings. Vacations. Birthdays. Anniversaries. Graduations. Day trips. Hiking photos, skiing photos, party photos

And iPhoto is bursting at the seams. Without multiple libraries, theres no good way to keep work photos from personal photos. No good way to archive seconds and rejects. No easy way to separate photos by years or even decades. No obvious way to manage things when the hard disk containing your one and only photo library begins to fill up to the brim.

Paradoxically, by reducing complexity, by leaving behind the jumbled file system, theyve made things that much harder for us all.

Of course, in the demo, Apple showed Keynote for the iPad with three previously created documents, and now that I think about it, didnt Pages have just three documents shown as full sized full screen icons that the user paged through?

Maybe thats the secret.

Never use the iPad to make more than three of anything, and youll do just fine
post #165 of 508
delete
post #166 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thartist View Post

The app exports to Final Draft, but I use ScreenWriter 6. Final Draft crashes too much on Apple machines. The app also exports straight to a txt file which is already formatted if you currently are currently using netbooks that do not have a license.

Just FYI about the slate. It doesn't have a keyboard. And if you have used a WACOM tablet before, there is already a keyboard for you to use ON screen just like this Apple device. But hey, if you want an Apple device, go Apple.

No, I don't work on set. I don't need to. I create comics which have far less overhead. ;-P

Weird, I've never had a crash on my MBP in Final Draft. Ever. And I've done, lemme see, five feature scripts on it (my latest MBP that is), and 27 TV scripts (that's in the last 1 1/2 years). Weird.

Does it export to Final Draft format, hopefully (.fdr)? That's the key. Can't use .txt or even .rtf (as no one wants that format).

I understand a slate/tablet computer has no keyboard. I'm saying I don't need it for writing a script on.

What comics do you do? Many of my friends are comic book artists and comic creators, as well as artists I've worked with on many animated shows and features. Perhaps I know your work.
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
"I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused."
Macbook Pro 2.2
Reply
post #167 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thartist View Post

Sorry. I guess I'm not used to such restrictions.

He said guidelines and you re-characterize them as restrictions. Do you note more than a semantic difference in play here that places your comments in conflict with others'.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #168 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thartist View Post

True, but notice the FREEDOM you had to install another OS, to test out other applications,etc? I can tell you that the iPad will not handle a one-tenth of what a Slate device will be able to handle due to its 1ghz processor. MIght run X-com though. OOOO. Can I install Steam on the iPad? Wait. I can't. The iPAD is sandboxed. :-(

Stop hiding behind an abstract notion of nerdly "freedom". You beleaguered point is argued like a politician at war. We get you want to be "FREE!"

First of all, if you're as old as you claim, you should remember all of the wonderful things we were able to do with 1ghz desktops. I don't remember any of my 1ghz machines having problems with email, word processing, multitasking etc.

You're saying that, just as we are able squeeze a 1GHZ chip into a tablet and make it affordable it's not enough for the more common lighter tasks a computer does?

Further, what do you mean by a slate device? The current "slates" by companies like HP? Not a chance is the Ipad less capable than those devices and certainly not less capable than any netbook I've seen.

You're attempting to argue that it would be better to have the "freedom" to run a desktop OS on a mobile device and to be "free" to install whatever App you want, regardless of whether or not the OS or Apps are optimized for a more agile and accessible mobile device ? Well , if you believe that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Do you work for MSFT?

LOL Troll elsewhere and check in with us in about a year and we'll see who's happier. I Just wanted to add that I found it hilarious that you first claimed to be a screen writer, but then you clarified that you don't actually work on set, but work in comics??????
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #169 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by thartist View Post

1. Because you have the freedom to hack other computers if you would like to.
2. Because sometimes Apple doesn't GET IT RIGHT.
3. Because games during the golden age are clearly better than the buggy crap EA puts out now.
4. I had a sandbox too.

I can't hack with an iPad. I can't run Wireshark with an iPad. I can't play quality strategy games with an iPad (just imagine how big games are going to be that take full advantage of the screen resolution!)

Those good reasons to hate the iPad

Big games require a full PC or laptop, can you play 'BIG' games on a netbook, very much doubt it, but Steve Jobs should provide laptop hidden in tablet struture and damage is revenue stream from iMacs or Macbook Pros.

I see this thread has crazies out again!
post #170 of 508
............... and this just in ........................

"4 hours ago
We can also confirm that iPhone OS 3.2 supports file downloads and local storage in the browser, which means you'll be able to pull files off the web and use them in other apps, and there's at least the beginnings of SMS support buried within the code"


http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/29/c...ling-file-dow/
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #171 of 508

"P.S.- chpwn was also able to port iPhone multitasking hacks ProSwitcher and Backgrounder to the iPad simulator, which is certainly going to be useful if an iPad jailbreak exploit is eventually discovered. Check out a shot of it going in the gallery below, along with some other settings panels the coder dug up."


and more for the "IT DOESN"T MULTITASK!" crowd.......... BTW who cares? - OK I care a little bit

"That means you'll be able to chat and do other things at the same time, which could mean there's at least some type of multitasking going on here."
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #172 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmlco View Post

This just… sucks. And if you can’t tag them or name them, it sucks even further.It’s like saying that on the PC, every single Microsoft Word document you ever create, be it personal or for whatever project, is going to be stuffed into one single humongous Microsoft Word folder with every other Microsoft Word file you’ve ever created. Same for Excel files. And same for… you get the idea.

No organization at all. None.

Yes but I don't think it's intended as a standalone device. Your Mac or PC is still your hub, with everything organised on there and safely Time Machined, and you just sync to the iPad the files you're working on today, or this week.

Edit: I actually think Prince is wrong to interpret this as a grand scheme to do away with the filesystem. It is just a reflection of the iPad's role as a sync device. And Prince has done articles in the past on Apple's idea of PC-as-hub so I don't know why he doesn't see it this way.
post #173 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzExige View Post

............... and this just in ........................

"4 hours ago
We can also confirm that iPhone OS 3.2 supports file downloads and local storage in the browser, which means you'll be able to pull files off the web and use them in other apps, and there's at least the beginnings of SMS support buried within the code"


http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/29/c...ling-file-dow/

SMS support on a phone? No way!
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #174 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

SMS support on a phone? No way!

Would I lie to you?

ummmm BTW Engadget is talking about the iPad - SMS AND Video calling
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #175 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by stumbleone View Post

This mangles the concept of “projects.” When I’m doing video work I’ll have files from a variety of applications collocated in a centralized directory: DV/AVCHD/mov video; FCE/FCP sequences; jpg/TIF/PSD images; PDF; AIFF/MP3 audio; etc.

Now I realize that the iPad does not currently support video creation at all. But other kinds of projects can also require files from various apps.

I don’t see how the app=file type library or file system can make this work. So is the iPad truly not to be compatible with or usable for content creation, and is just to be a viewer? Maybe so. Have to think about that.

Other than iPhone/iPod touch-level creative apps, iPad seems to be aimed at consuming, rather than producing content.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #176 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Borgo View Post

I agree, after a while you let iTunes and iPhoto organize your file, but let's say I have 64GB of iBooks or simple text file on my iPad, using the bookshelf might not be the fastest route to select a book.

I guessing but I think Apple and most of its consumers who buy the iPad see it only as a mobile device. It's not positioned to be the only place you keep your files. As when the iPod first was introduced, you added the playlist etc that you were planning to use.

Yes many people could put their entire music collection on the iPod but that wasn't its intended use. The iPad has limited storage for everything it can do. I doubt its meant to be your computer. I can see desktop Macs or laptops with iLife type programs syncing with their iPad mobile counterparts. Just like iTunes does with iPhones and iPods. That's probably why they don't have a USB port.

As for the graphic interface of iBooks they may have view options but iPhoto managed to works with a lot of images. As icons they aren't too power hungry. As Steve said, it's not a laptop or an iPhone/iPod touch, it's something to fill the product gap between them.
post #177 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Other than simple creative apps, iPad seems to be aimed at consuming, rather than producing content.

Maybe - but naturally Steve disagrees - he said as much to Mossberg in an off-the-cuff interview at the 'EVENT'.
When told that his (Mossberg's) Editor only read Word docs, 'no problem' said Steve, "write it up in Pages (on your new iPad), export as a 'doc' and email it to him"

Steve-baby wants us to create 'content'. (bless his little creative heart)

I'd post a link - but it's 'FLASH' video
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #178 of 508
This makes so much sense that I'm surprised it hasn't been done long ago. My guess is that Apple didn't want to over-simplify Mac OS X, since many advanced users are already very familiar with the FInder, files, folders, etc.

But to really crack the consumer market, simpler is always better. Lots of whiners are saying that iPad is too simple. I disagree. If it's too simple, just buy a MacBook or iMacs or Mac mini or Mac Pro.

There's a huge untapped market of people who have either avoided buying a computer altogether, because it was too complex or overkill for browsing an email, or who have bought one and can't stand its 1980s office-productivity desktop metaphor.

I think Apple will take two huge chunks out of the netbook market. The first chunk will be market share: at $499, iPad will be within reach of casual consumer users who were thinking about buying a stripped down netbook. Burdened with the irrelevant complexity of a that clunky full blown OS.

The second chunk will be profitability. That same $499 for the low end model will squeeze the netbook makers to lower their prices. They're already at the proverbial "razor thin profit" level already, so they'll be pushing each other off that low-price cliff like it's going out of style.

So the cheapo e-waste netbook makers will be losing market share and forced to accept lower margins. They'll still need to sell netbooks because they're so popular. And the bigger companies will also need to spend R & D money on developing their own iPad clones. That means hardware + software at the very minimum. Another hit to the bottom line.

What they'll never be able to do, no matter how much money they throw at the problem, is to replicate the success of iTunes. The breadth, depth, and ease of use took Apple at least 8 years to develop. It's the reason why the iPod became so successful.

And then there's the App Store. 140K+ apps, most of which will run on iPad. Each one of those apps was written for iPhone/iPod touch, and each developer who has an app will be scrambling to write an iPad version.

And now there's the iBook Store. Apple has so much leverage in popular culture now that the book publishers have no choice but to ride Apple's coattails. The newspaper and magazine publishers, as we keep hearing, are so desperate that they're probably looking at iPad like it's the Messiah. It could be their last hope.

All of these relationships took Apple years to develop. Apple had to build mindshare and leverage before lots of the bigger companies would even pay attention to them. Now they're jumping through hoops to work with Apple.

And, finally, the iPad will fit perfectly into Apple's ecosystem. It will not only appeal to casual first-time Apple customers. It'll work seamlessly with any existing Apple network. This kind of interoperability also took years of planning and development.

Good luck trying to copy that before next year's CES. 11 months and counting...

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #179 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmlco View Post

This just sucks. And if you cant tag them or name them, it sucks even further.Its like saying that on the PC, every single Microsoft Word document you ever create, be it personal or for whatever project, is going to be stuffed into one single humongous Microsoft Word folder with every other Microsoft Word file youve ever created. Same for Excel files. And same for you get the idea.

No organization at all. None.

Really, its as bad as the lame bookshelf metaphor in the iBooks app. Steve says that even a 16GB baseline iPad will let you carry thousands of ebooks.

Cool. But now picture this: You take him at his word, and youve now purchased thousands of ebooks and downloaded them to your iPad only to find all of them stuffed at random onto dozens upon dozens upon dozens of seemingly identical virtual shelves.

Check out photos of the interface. Theres no apparent way to sort by title or author. No way to group those thousands of books by author or subject or genre. No Dewey Decimal System. No way to keep related books (or documents) together. You can probably quit the app and do a spotlight search if you remember at least part of the title.

Otherwise its page, page, page, swipe, swipe, swipe, bitch, bitch, bitch. Where in the hell is that book on

Heck, I have a mere fifty books in the Kindle app on my iPhone, and the lack of organizational tools there is ALREADY driving me insane.

Come on. This is progress? This the reinvention were looking for?

Even the ancient floppy disk, thirty years old, had folders for grouping related files. Take away the ability to create user-defined organizational schemas, and even something as storage poor as a 128K floppy disk rapidly becomes little more than a mess of intermingled files with cryptic file names.

128K. And the biggest iPad is 64 gigabytes.

Even the venerable iPhoto is starting to show just how unworkable it is to only have a single library of photos. It wasnt too bad when it first appeared and it only had to manage a few photos, but people have been stuffing their libraries with photos for years now. Outings. Vacations. Birthdays. Anniversaries. Graduations. Day trips. Hiking photos, skiing photos, party photos

And iPhoto is bursting at the seams. Without multiple libraries, theres no good way to keep work photos from personal photos. No good way to archive seconds and rejects. No easy way to separate photos by years or even decades. No obvious way to manage things when the hard disk containing your one and only photo library begins to fill up to the brim.

Paradoxically, by reducing complexity, by leaving behind the jumbled file system, theyve made things that much harder for us all.

Of course, in the demo, Apple showed Keynote for the iPad with three previously created documents, and now that I think about it, didnt Pages have just three documents shown as full sized full screen icons that the user paged through?

Maybe thats the secret.

Never use the iPad to make more than three of anything, and youll do just fine

You're exaggerating. Right now, most people keep all their documents, no matter what OS or programs they may be using, in one folder, called "documents". The important thing is in finding them, which doesn't seem as though it will be a problem.

We also don't know how the book program will work. What we saw on the screen isn't necessarily how it works. I would also imagine that if you're looking for a specific book, you would type part of the name in Spotlight, and it would show up.

64 GB Flash now, 128 next year. So, for that, wait until next year, and you'll also get OS 5 vs 3.2 now, and 4.0 later in june.

You, like a few others here, are assuming that nothing advances.
post #180 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It's being booked to cash. Remember that this has been changed in the regulations. Besides, you're being fatuous, Apple never charged every three months.

You might say it was a literary device. It's a touchy subject, I know, but given the clear desire for this to be an appliance which just, DOES (vacant stare),

is that approach consistent with charging end-users for updates to its core. I don't mean to bring up MS, but even MS provide updates, and significant ones, at no extra cost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You're exaggerating. Right now, most people keep all their documents, no matter what OS or programs they may be using, in one folder, called "documents". The important thing is in finding them, which doesn't seem as though it will be a problem.

I would say that nearly all people keep their documents in a folder called documents. But I think that's a little simplistic. Nearly everyone I know has some kind of organisation system within that documents folder to provide some context. For most, it's a folder structure. Some might code file names in a way. Rarely have I found that people merely dump everything flat into one folder. I would be inclined to agree more with the person to whom you responded to than simply dismiss the idea that the people who create their own content must in some small way be responsible for its categorisation.
post #181 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBreen View Post

MobileMe has been around (under other names) for years. I've been a member since Feb 23, 2000 according to my System Preference panel for MobileMe.

Typically applications that store things using your MobileMe account use the "iDisk" feature to do so. The iDisk mounts as a network volume under both MacOS and Windows, so you can download/edit/upload files at any time. On the Mac, there's a preference to always sync your iDisk to your computer whenever you're connected to the Internet (though I don't bother with it).

*However,* if your MobileMe account expires, your files *are* deleted rather than being held "hostage" until/unless you renew. (To stretch the analogy, the hostages are killed when the time expires. ;o) There is an option to auto-renew, billing the renewal to your credit card, but if you think you may not be renewing it's definitely important to download anything you want to keep (and you CAN download everything) before your subscription expires.

I hope that helps!

Thanks. Good explanation.
post #182 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

You might say it was a literary device. It's a touchy subject, I know, but given the clear desire for this to be an appliance which just, DOES (vacant stare), is that approach consistent with charging end-users for updates to its core. I don't mean to bring up MS, but even MS provide updates, and significant ones, at no extra cost.

Not sure what you're getting at here. Are you saying that you don't think Apple will provide free software updates to the OS? Because of course they will. Are you saying that Apple should never charge for any software dates ever? Because Microsoft of course does do that.

And what does any of that have to do "just does"?


Quote:
I would say that nearly all people keep their documents in a folder called documents. But I think that's a little simplistic. Nearly everyone I know has some kind of organisation system within that documents folder to provide some context. For most, it's a folder structure. Some might code file names in a way. Rarely have I found that people merely dump everything flat into one folder. I would be inclined to agree more with the person to whom you responded to than simply dismiss the idea that the people who create their own content must in some small way be responsible for its categorisation.

Most of the people I know dump most of their stuff flat, with a few cursory efforts to make a folder here and there with the broadest possible categories. They rarely go more than one level deep.

I suspect the future belongs to flat, metadata and search programs like Spotlight, particularly given that those "folders" are strung across multiple volumes on multiple machines. People can still be responsible for categorization, it just involves tagging.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #183 of 508
Plain HORRIBLE. Apple, please bring back the great Mac OS X file system! If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!
post #184 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Not sure what you're getting at here. Are you saying that you don't think Apple will provide free software updates to the OS? Because of course they will. Are you saying that Apple should never charge for any software dates ever? Because Microsoft of course does do that.

And what does any of that have to do "just does"?

You might remind ipod touch users how free their software updates were (without the SOX/GAAP BS which has been shown to be just that). FWIW, MS sold XP, then provided three significant service packs over its lifetime for exactly zero dollars.

It has everything to do with "just does". You might say Apple is pitching this as an alternative to cruddy desktop OS cast into a small form factor. That it's computing with an automatic transmission (thanks daringfireball). Many people on Apple fora are saying this. I don't doubt for a second that on the face of it that it's a compelling proposition, but as a box that just does, should it not continue to "just do" for at least as long as the device is expect to perform the function?

Quote:
Most of the people I know dump most of their stuff flat, with a few cursory efforts to make a folder here and there with the broadest possible categories. They rarely go more than one level deep.

I guess the stereotype of Mac users being design conscious, skivvy wearing, democratic, OCD types is only skin deep. Please don't take offence. On lifehacker, they do galleries of mac users' work environments. If what you say is true, everything under the minimalistic, calm facade is an absolute shitstorm.

Quote:
I suspect the future belongs to flat, metadata and search programs like Spotlight, particularly given that those "folders" are strung across multiple volumes on multiple machines. People can still be responsible for categorization, it just involves tagging.

As an honest question, does any of what has been discussed address any attempt to categorise a users data on the iPad?
post #185 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzExige View Post

............... and this just in ........................

"4 hours ago
We can also confirm that iPhone OS 3.2 supports file downloads and local storage in the browser, which means you'll be able to pull files off the web and use them in other apps, and there's at least the beginnings of SMS support buried within the code"


http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/29/c...ling-file-dow/

I like where this is going. I bet lots of applications are going to be talking to Safari.

Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

You might remind ipod touch users how free their software updates were (without the SOX/GAAP BS which has been shown to be just that). FWIW, MS sold XP, then provided three significant service packs over its lifetime for exactly zero dollars.

Lemme point out that Mac OS X sucked as bad as the iPad's pre-release reputation. There first upgrade, codenamed Puma, was free but it was still criticized so they continued with Jaguar, Panther, Tiger, Leopard, and Snow Leopard. In between they have released service packs in the form of combo updates such as 10.3.5, for example. Five being the fifth service pack but 10.3 had nine. Now that there happy with there OS, there focusing on other devices more. The way Apple upgrades OS X these days has become a tradition due to its original release, however new versions of hardware have been this way.

Simple as that.

HP Omni 100-5100z, 500GB HDD, 4GB RAM; ASUS Transformer, 16GB, Android 4.0 ICS
Although I no longer own Apple products like I did before, I'll continue to post my opinions.

Reply

HP Omni 100-5100z, 500GB HDD, 4GB RAM; ASUS Transformer, 16GB, Android 4.0 ICS
Although I no longer own Apple products like I did before, I'll continue to post my opinions.

Reply
post #186 of 508
Sounds decent enough for the devices uses. It's not meant to be used for complex stuff so that's fair enough. I have to agree with the murmurings that this is the future of OSX as we know it. More accessible to first time computer users, but unfortunately, locked down and tied to the iTunes store. Well, that isn't what bothers me - more the fact it seems like a "slave device" in a similar way to the iPods, Touch and iPhone. If I want to rename a music file on my iPhone... well I can't!
post #187 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

I wish they'd fix Quicktime first.

Yeah, quicktime x for mac osx needs badly to be fixed. It's a downright crisis. And it IS related, cuz I suspect the whole elite team within Apple has been gathering the last year around making the iPad. Now that it's done I expect a HUGE snow leopard update in march-april or something.

However, this file thing seems great, BUT - 2 years from now, when you've been using your iPad to write 300 documents in pages, 120 spreadsheets, 80 keynotes etc... you HAVE to be able to categorize or tag the documents by project or something. There's gotta be a way to organize your documents. Perhaps there's a spotlight search in all the apps and searching a keyword will filter out most of the unrelated... but, it'll be a mess. Maybe it's fine.

Another thing is: how do I take a PNG giraffe from the computer and make it available to put into my iWork document? The same way as with sharing documents? Or does this magically happen by syncing media via iPhoto?
post #188 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmlco View Post


iPhoto is bursting at the seams. Without multiple libraries, theres no good way to keep work photos from personal photos. No good way to archive seconds and rejects. No easy way to separate photos by years or even decades. No obvious way to manage things when the hard disk containing your one and only photo library begins to fill up to the brim.

Paradoxically, by reducing complexity, by leaving behind the jumbled file system, theyve made things that much harder for us all.

You seem to misunderstand the paradigm. If you use the application to do all of your organizing (creating subcategories etc) there's no need to do any organizing at the system level beyond what the application automatically takes care of. I would recommend backing up the database along with the data itself but time machine takes of of that automatically as well.

If you need to fit a specific saving scheme you can option click on the app when you launch and create or open a new library. Years ago I would have said the same thing but surrendering my some of my needs to organize music and photos to itunes and Iphoto has truly made my life easier.
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #189 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

You might say it was a literary device. It's a touchy subject, I know, but given the clear desire for this to be an appliance which just, DOES (vacant stare),

is that approach consistent with charging end-users for updates to its core. I don't mean to bring up MS, but even MS provide updates, and significant ones, at no extra cost.

It depends on what that item is. It must be done with some things, but not with others. It's also a matter how Apple charges for it.

We've had some big discussions over this. Now that it's pretty much over, unless they have to do it one more time as a carry over, I'd just rather let it drop.

Quote:
I would say that nearly all people keep their documents in a folder called documents. But I think that's a little simplistic. Nearly everyone I know has some kind of organisation system within that documents folder to provide some context. For most, it's a folder structure. Some might code file names in a way. Rarely have I found that people merely dump everything flat into one folder. I would be inclined to agree more with the person to whom you responded to than simply dismiss the idea that the people who create their own content must in some small way be responsible for its categorisation.

I doubt that most people really organize it. I do, and I didn't used to keep any of my documents there. I've always used several HDDs, with the programs in a certain category in a specific drive. So I had publishing, Photo, Video, etc. All docs for those areas got saved to those drives. For me, that worked well, as I backed each drive up separately.

Now, because OS X almost forces it upon you, most of my apps are in the app folder, and most of my docs are in the Doc folder, and I do what you do. But I've got a very complex system.

Most people have the one HDD, few programs, and don't bother to organize at all.

We always have to distinguish between more sophisticated users such as ourselves, and certain co-workers, friends and such, and the greater public out there, who never backs up.

It's that public that doesn't organize, and that's the large majority.

In the beginning, this device will be mostly sold to that large majority. They won't know what's going on inside, and they wouldn't care if they did.

All they want, is to have their stuff when they need it. It doesn't matter where it really is.
post #190 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

You might remind ipod touch users how free their software updates were (without the SOX/GAAP BS which has been shown to be just that). FWIW, MS sold XP, then provided three significant service packs over its lifetime for exactly zero dollars.

That's different. That's software, and this is hardware with software. Updates are ok, and a service pack goes as an update, not an upgrade.

When has MS EVER given out a major upgrade to its OS for free?

Look, even Ballmer said publicly, that Win 7 was "Vista done right". According to that, Win 7 was just another service pack, and should have been free as well. But they're charging full price for everything.

Quote:
I guess the stereotype of Mac users being design conscious, skivvy wearing, democratic, OCD types is only skin deep. Please don't take offence. On lifehacker, they do galleries of mac users' work environments. If what you say is true, everything under the minimalistic, calm facade is an absolute shitstorm.

You know, that's always been more of what others have called Mac users than what Mac users have called themselves. We just think of ourselves as computer users who use what we think as the best computing platform. PC users think of themselves the same way, though Linux users are admittedly more geeky.

Quote:
As an honest question, does any of what has been discussed address any attempt to categorise a users data on the iPad?

Does it matter what we say, really? We're just speculating on how it works as none of us really knows yet, except for the two quotes from the developers guide.

We'll find out, and then we can argue from some area of knowledge.
post #191 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

In the beginning, this device will be mostly sold to that large majority. They won't know what's going on inside, and they wouldn't care if they did.

All they want, is to have their stuff when they need it. It doesn't matter where it really is.

This reminds me of the early days of the car. My father has told me stories about the early cars, people laughing and teasing "BUY A HORSE!" because at the time a horse could still do some things better than a car and you didn't have to be a mechanic to own a horse.

The early cars were meant for "enthusiasts". Most early devices are for "enthusiasts". Time passes, improvements to the car were made and when it got to the point that it didn't matter how it worked, so long as it worked, cars really took off, especially once they were fitted for features with women in mind. Auto transmission, power steering, automatic starters etc.

I suppose some people like to argue about the control they've lost with auto transmissions to this day, but the vast majority of cars are auto transmission and the car never would have been as popular if it weren't for them and similar refinements that make the technology vanish from your perceptions. This is a big achievement and a real shift in the computing paradigm and in the end it's better for the consumer. I don't think we'd all own cars if we had to be mechanics as well.
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #192 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

You might remind ipod touch users how free their software updates were (without the SOX/GAAP BS which has been shown to be just that). FWIW, MS sold XP, then provided three significant service packs over its lifetime for exactly zero dollars.

Uh huh. And Apple has provided countless free updates for OS X. Is there a point to this?

Quote:
It has everything to do with "just does". You might say Apple is pitching this as an alternative to cruddy desktop OS cast into a small form factor. That it's computing with an automatic transmission (thanks daringfireball). Many people on Apple fora are saying this. I don't doubt for a second that on the face of it that it's a compelling proposition, but as a box that just does, should it not continue to "just do" for at least as long as the device is expect to perform the function?

Yeah. If you have to get that convoluted to ding Apple for doing something wrong, it's probably not worth the effort.

Quote:
I guess the stereotype of Mac users being design conscious, skivvy wearing, democratic, OCD types is only skin deep. Please don't take offence. On lifehacker, they do galleries of mac users' work environments. If what you say is true, everything under the minimalistic, calm facade is an absolute shitstorm.

Please don't take offense, but can you send someone over from where you come from that isn't, you know, kind of a twat?

Quote:
As an honest question, does any of what has been discussed address any attempt to categorise a users data on the iPad?

That's what some of us have been trying to do, but are being sort of drowned out by a lot douchbaggery about "Mac people" and "fan boys" and whatnot.

You might reread the thread, because that's what people are talking about.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #193 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by themeperks View Post

This works well for a small number of documents, as on the iPhone, but it becomes a problem when working on, say , a project, where it might be desirable to keep all the different document types for the project grouped together. With a conventional file structure it's easy, when the project is done, to archive all the related documents and remove them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stumbleone View Post

This mangles the concept of projects. When Im doing video work Ill have files from a variety of applications collocated in a centralized directory: DV/AVCHD/mov video; FCE/FCP sequences; jpg/TIF/PSD images; PDF; AIFF/MP3 audio; etc.

Now I realize that the iPad does not currently support video creation at all. But other kinds of projects can also require files from various apps.

I dont see how the app=file type library or file system can make this work. So is the iPad truly not to be compatible with or usable for content creation, and is just to be a viewer? Maybe so. Have to think about that.

Yes, because this device isn't designed as a high end work horse, it's designed for light/occasional use. NO serious professional is going to use the iPad in its current form for content creation or serious work, let alone video editing.

It's a great solution for a non-tech user to understand, it's not meant to replace the work flows of high end professionals - that's not where this device is aimed.
post #194 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post

This reminds me of the early days of the car. My father has told me stories about the early cars, people laughing and teasing "BUY A HORSE!" because at the time a horse could still do some things better than a car and you didn't have to be a mechanic to own a horse.

The early cars were meant for "enthusiasts". Most early devices are for "enthusiasts". Time passes, improvements to the car were made and when it got to the point that it didn't matter how it worked, so long as it worked, cars really took off, especially once they were fitted for features with women in mind. Auto transmission, power steering, automatic starters etc.

I suppose some people like to argue about the control they've lost with auto transmissions to this day, but the vast majority of cars are auto transmission and the car never would have been as popular if it weren't for them and similar refinements that make the technology vanish from your perceptions. This is a big achievement and a real shift in the computing paradigm and in the end it's better for the consumer. I don't think we'd all own cars if we had to be mechanics as well.

Of course. It's a known paradigm. The more sophisticated things get, the simpler the interface. The device does the work for you. Apple's Mac OS was always like that. It did the down and dirty work for us.

This takes it another step. Newton was doing some of that as well. It was described as the "sea of data". This was the idea, it still is. All of this gets abstracted out.
post #195 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzaslove View Post

And of course, if there were a way to stream my DP's feed to the Touch, there's no way I'd use that to look at a scene in that I was directing. Waaaay too small. (And even the iPad might be too small.)

I'm only going to say this because I have no idea who you are and I will never work with you, but honestly if I was your DP and you asked me to send the camera feed to the Ipad, I'd smack you in the face because you obviously have no idea how making Film or TV really works. I can only recommend that you not waste your crews time with inane technical details. Time-wasters like that are the reason I won't work with people like you.
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #196 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Yes, because this device isn't designed as a high end work horse, it's designed for light/occasional use. NO serious professional is going to use the iPad in its current form for content creation or serious work, let alone video editing.

It's a great solution for a non-tech user to understand, it's not meant to replace the work flows of high end professionals - that's not where this device is aimed.

I think that characterization is too broad. For starters, the iPad doesn't have a "current form" in that we've only been shown a brief demo of the highlights. Even within the last few days information has trickled out that suggests some depths and capacities not mentioned in the keynote, I don't see any reason not to imagine that there will be more surprised in the next few months.

There will also be apps. Are you saying that no one will write any apps that "serious professionals" would deign to use? It kind of depends on what kind of work is being done, surely?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #197 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

Plain HORRIBLE. Apple, please bring back the great Mac OS X file system! If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!

Nothing is broken, this is a new/additional system for a new platform, not a replacement for the desktop/laptop operating system. Why can't people understand that. It's not a computer replacement, it's a portable device for consuming information and occasional/light content creation for consumers.

ps. re. the unrelated quicktime noise - i'm running snow leopard, with quicktime X and have yet to experience a single issue, nor have any of my friends or colleagues. I love these cries of "fix it!" with no explanation of the problem you're having.
post #198 of 508
Didn't really want to start a new thread about this so I guess here's as good as any: what do folks think about a version of iMovie for the iPad?

I ask because a while back I was commenting that the last revision to iMovie seemed suspiciously touch friendly (even to the point of kind of screwing it up, although they've improved things subsequently).

I suspect that the UI would work, but that the transcoding necessary for cutting popular consumer HD formats would be too much for the hardware. Or maybe not? Any guesses?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #199 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Yes, because this device isn't designed as a high end work horse, it's designed for light/occasional use. NO serious professional is going to use the iPad in its current form for content creation or serious work, let alone video editing.

It's a great solution for a non-tech user to understand, it's not meant to replace the work flows of high end professionals - that's not where this device is aimed.

Overall you are correct but, your assumptions are flawed. I have friends that have done instrumentation on the iphone for commercials. So to say that professional content isn't going to be created on the tablet is a little bit off the mark. While true you can't edit, effect, title, transcode blah blah blah there will be some things that this device can do for a Pro such as synths, instruments and virtual consoles and mixers. There's already a killer app for the protools on the iphone that is going to be "titts" on the Ipad. Look it up.
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #200 of 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think that characterization is too broad. For starters, the iPad doesn't have a "current form" in that we've only been shown a brief demo of the highlights. Even within the last few days information has trickled out that suggests some depths and capacities not mentioned in the keynote, I don't see any reason not to imagine that there will be more surprised in the next few months.

There will also be apps. Are you saying that no one will write any apps that "serious professionals" would deign to use? It kind of depends on what kind of work is being done, surely?

Well, that's the characterisation that the owner of this company used to describe his own product.

Of course it will have professional uses, but given the screen real estate it will never be used for high end video or graphics design work - an A4/US Letter spread plus interface? A HD content window for video plus interface? A 1 Ghz Processor and no 'real' multitasking make this clear.

This thing is intended to go into every home, be on every couch, in every man bag. It's a kindle meets the iPod touch, it's a new category of device. Apple already make phones, laptops, desktops, this is intended to replace NONE of those, Apple will not damage sales of their own higher end devices.

So yes, there will be apps for this thing which assist professionals day to day, but it will NEVER be a high end content creation tool in the form in which it is currently being sold. And don't say there is no 'current form' - go look at apple.com/ipad - it's very clearly expressed right there.

What is with people wanting this to be something it is not designed to be?

There's no phone functionality. Fail. Well, it's not a phone...
There's no camera. Fail. Well, it's not a camera...
There's no USB/SD Card on board. Fail. There are accessories to do that, making clear that this isn't primary function territory.

It's wi-fi, it's 3g, it reads books, plays music and browses the web. Home users can use iWork to write newsletters and doing domestic level accounting. That is a great set of functions.

The ONLY criticism to be levelled is the lack of flash, and it's for Adobe to sort that mess, not Apple - unless Adobe make flash Opensource and let others fix it for them.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple reinventing file access, wireless sharing for iPad