Apple reinventing file access, wireless sharing for iPad - Page 7

Actually, I think it's you that misunderstand. I do photography, and have done plenty of professional studio work.

As to software, I use Photoshop, Aperture, Lightroom, and iPhoto.

And Aperture and iPhoto persist in their single-library single-mindedness, to the point of distraction. Have you shot RAW off a Canon 1DS? Those suckers burn through HD space faster than does a bit-torrent fiend.

As I said, you begin to reach a point where you absolutely, positively need multiple libraries (or collections) on multiple drives. I have 2 and 4GB drives, and I still bounce off the wall in Aperture, in iPhoto, and even with movies and TV shows in iTunes. Download a single TV season off iTunes and bam, 20 gig is gone, just like that.

You might say, well "pros" sure, but "normal" people don't need better tools.

Yes, they do. I have a friend that, as I also said before, has been pouring photos into iPhoto ever since version one. And life (iPhoto life, anyway) sucks. She's long past keeping her library on her 128GB MB Air, finally got a genius to tell her how to move it off to an external drive, and now that drive is running out of room.

She'd love it if she could keep her best photos on the Air, the rest on the external drive, and manage them all through a single interface, but Apple doesn't roll that way.

Read my lips: If you restrict people to a single library on a single drive, at some point that drive is going to get full.

And then you're screwed.

And as we collect more and more digital media: books, movies, shows, games, apps, photos, music, video...

It's only going to get worse.

I have learned that the hard way when I, upon problems synching applications ('Your computer is not authorized'), uninstalled all apps, de-authorized and re-authorized the computer, and re-installed the apps. Problem solved, well, but all Shazam data was lost in the process (and to my knowledge there is no way to back them up, outside of doing screenshots).
Compare that to the Mac, yesterday my Fusion threw errors after a hard reset of the computer. A quick uninstall and re-install and it was working again. Since the data, the virtual machine, is separate from the app, I lost nothing.

With the iPhone OS model, each app has to implement its own backup (and a lot already do). Yes, there is a global backup of the iPhone but it is the OS, the apps and the user data together and one cannot selectively restore parts of it.

Yes, the idea is to relieve the user of having to think about the file systems and where what is stored and that works fine until something does not work. I really think what is missing is that the backup that has to be implemented for each individual app separately should be institutionalised.

OMG! I just looked up my invoice for the Mac 8100/80 and the 21"-24bit Supermac CRT... it was not $10k... but roughly $20k (38k Deutschmarks)!!!! I must have been high or overly optimistic. No wonder my GF had a freak! You could buy houses (small) at the time here for that amount! Boy am I glad it all "just worked"..

Sorry I've clarified/edited my post now. I meant there is no need for 2 ways on MacOSX in general - AND I think the iPad system is very simple - but that's not necessarily an advancement. Simple works great for a limited number of files.


Prince McClean stated it in the original article. As the guy above me quoted (thanks noirdesir!).

Far be it from me to say he's correct though. He may, he may not.
He has interesting insights but he doesn't judge objectively when it's Mac stuff, and I disagree the removal of folders solves all our filesystem problems (nor does deleting all our data when we delete the app!).

A 77 year old colleague of mine wants to buy a computer. She's wondering if she could get an iPad + keyboard. I think, in general, it's a good idea.

But I'm worried about her data. Principally all her photos, there's probably not much else.
1) will she be able to backup somehow?
2) if I set her up using my mac, but in a year her grandson tries to help her by syncing it to his machine.... she'll be back to square #1, a blank slate so to speak.

This is certainly capable of being her main machine. If she was my grandmother I would just keep a dormant login on my Mac for her and occasionally sync.

Well this thing has a USB adapter, SD card adapter and blue tooth, so I think that should be pretty easy. Just connect an external hard drive, or drag all the docs to an SD card.

My parents will each be getting one of these for christmas with no existing computer to sync to. With wi-fi and 3g, they can access their content without a desktop computer, and neither are going to have enough data to fill 64gigs.

Hopefully there will be the option of syncing to the device, or syncing to the computer - deciding which data to erase and replace from which end, so as to speak.

Steve demonstrated this in the keynote by opening a PDF attached to an email. You tap the document icon and it opens. It's not hard to grasp.

No, because a device is restricted by it's storage capacity and processor power. If you need more storage, buy a bigger device, if you want more power, buy a more powerful device.

If a macbook Air isn't large enough for your friends needs, then it's time for a bigger computer, simple as. This level of data storage is the realm of external hard drives and libraries. The iPad doesn't seem to be aimed at a user requiring massive storage, I guess the macbook line up are the next step up from this platform.

I'd like to drive at 125 miles an hour, my current car can't do that. I'd like a bigger trunk to store stuff in, but the trunk is only so big. I bought my current car knowing it's top speed, if i want more speed, I have to pay for it, i knew the size of the trunk. Easy really. If you want more than this device offers, then don't buy it.

This device is meant to be simple and intuitive to use. Having multiple libraries for the one application is neither intuitive or simple to grasp for the average non-tech home user. It is possble to have applications with multiple libraries, high end/pro apps do this. iLife/iWork is not aimed to be a replacement for these pro apps, and never will be. The hard drive gets full, it's time to archive and clear out.

I remember way back when, when there was a program called LivePicture that used low-res proxies to achieve non-destructive editing. Something on that order could be used today, I'll agree.

Also I think the "alias-paradigm" needs some work... or is this possibly better achieved with the metadata-database structure proposed here?

What would be thoroughly cool is if Apple decided to add a consumer-friendly Media Server... or CF-branch to Leopard server to be used on a MacMini with multi-gig stackable FW drives. Those are available now (OWT I think)... but I think Apple showing the way at their stores would be better for the average consumer.

I'm thinking automated "optimization" scripts for folders and different types of content. Then accessing it over WLAN... (which I do right now with my MBP, MacPro, and Airport setup.)

Taking "everything and the sink" with you at all times, is not what the iPad is about anyway. That's why there're MacBooks and iMacs. And as you said, they are not nearly enough.

I helped a friend install a new 27" iMac last week (what a sinfully gorgeous beast!)... and first thing I made him buy was 2 external FW drives... 1x-2GB and 1x4GB.. one as a data disk, the other that TMs the smaller drive and the iMac. Next step, a small 500Gb just for an exact duplicate of the iMac using SuperDuper.


Is this not possible by only syncing specific Albums back to the Air? I don't have iPhoto or LR in my immediate work flow, so I'm curious for a friend of mine. Anyone?

I was just thinking about how I believe LR and iPhoto "could" (or does?) work.

When you make edits, don't they both hold those edits in script-form? Why couldn't you edit a proxi or an optimized lo-res movie or photo, and then only need to sync the proxi and the scripts? Or do they both do, just that, now?

And when you categorize, rate, make Albums etc.... that is only a text-based (XML I think) database. Why is that hard to sync across devices?

Oh yeah, holding up frames to a light box, pawing through trims, just the way an edit point was a literal butting up of two images and made that chunk as it passed through the gate. Such a different feel, and it made for a different style of edit. More....... architectural.

I used to do a little optical printing, as well, and that was freaking illuminated manuscripts compared to mouse click away motion graphics I can do on the laptop I'm writing this on.

Exactly my point, they are confusing the the iPad and the iPhone on the same SDK. Besides, there's no need to even allow the option of sending texts on this thing as that's what phones are for.

Optical printing???? That's so Starwars. Did you work with one of the Burbank Labs?

I cherish the "old school", dailies, cut, conform, time, print. I haven't had too many people ask me for 35mm in a while. Everyone wants to use the RED these days.

The older technology made it just hard enough that you had to think before you acted. Nowadays you can fudge it a bit and people like to fudge; especially producers with ridiculous schedules and dwindling budgets. I have this joke that I believe that technology didn't really save us any time though, it just made a thousand more changes possible in the same amount of time. Here's to the concept of a new interface that we may enjoy our craft in a new way that harkens back to the old way.

BLAH BLAH BLAH, I don't know but for some reason it sounds like you have no idea what you are talking about or how to use the software afforded to you.

I had the same experience, spending a great deal of time searching for the actual location of my music and photos. I admit I am now used to it and don't give it a second thought. I still like to know where my files are though, and enjoy organizes them in a way that works for me. This is a fine option for the iphone and ipad, but not for OSX.

but will you be able to simply hook up a usb drive to the iPad?
I'm still not sure how you will get data onto the pad when you are away from home. At home should be no problems - wifi, usb to main computer etc, but when you are travelling light ie iPad + what accessories?

How can I get a file from a friend to look at/work with when I am away. He may have it on his USB stick - will I be able to read that?
Even at 64gb, that means just a small subset of my music, books, docs, videos,photos etc. I have all of these on a 500gb WD usb disc - will I be able to use that with the iPad when I need a file that is on the disc but not on the pad?

Method 1
I'm hoping for a way to read usb drives by a connecting wire to the pad with transfer of data - but if it is locked down like the iPhone, then this will not be the case.

Method 2
Transfer by wifi. Fine at my house, but what if I am in a hotel - how do I get at my files on my usb drive?
I did think that I could use my airport express and hook up the usb drive to that, and use the airport express to set up my own personal wifi network - hence access to the usb drive. However, the airport express does not support attached hard drives - only the extreme does so. Are we therefore looking at an upgrade to the airport express so it has this function. More money to Apple and a bit more kit to carry around and of course, access to a power supply. Sort of semi mobile really.

I wonder if the iPad will have Time Machine support. I can understand syncing with a Mac, but if there is a category of consumers that would consider buying this thing as the only computer (Liberal Arts students, for instance), and getting a couple of accessories, such as the keyboard dock so that they can type their papers on the iPad, I believe having Time Machine support is crucial.

Remember the 2008 WWDC!? The image that was shown, that was signaling that Apple now has given developers two paths to build applications on. One being Mac OS X the other being the iPhone.

Well the iPad would be that 3rd final development platform. I think that Apple will make an even more clear differentiation of the SDK for iPhone and iPad.

Another point to bring attention also is that Apple is preparing consumers for the cloud, us prosumers understand (to some degree) of what's needed or would be needed for cloud computing to become mainstream, and it looks like a tightly integrated ecosystem is one important ingredient. Only time will tell though.


THIRD BRIDGE COMING SOON

gee I don't think so - there's dozens of ways to manage multiple iPhoto libraries - and no, I'm not saying this works on the iPad. I don't know what works on the iPad (neither do you), but I can't wait to find out

http://www.fatcatsoftware.com/iplm/ iPhoto Library Manager

Marketing is promise to no one.

The concept of a simplified, abstract filing system sounds great at first, until you actually try to get some serious work done with one. Forcing all files to be managed in a proprietary database, grouped according to their respective applications and barring the use of nested folder structures doesn't work so well in real life. A few common scenarios come to mind...

File Associations
What happens when you have more than one app capable of viewing and editing the same file type? Obvious example: image files. Imagine your iPad is loaded with iPhoto, Brushes, and a couple of other apps - each capable of viewing and editing image files. Theoretically, each app's files will be stored separately. So that means that when you want to browse for an image, you have to browse across multiple file stores in search of just the right one. Not so simple and elegant anymore.

Projects
These demos always look great with modest file libraries that have been automatically organized for the user. But this is not how real life works. For example, when I'm working on a big Keynote presentation, I need to collect, create, and edit a variety of files from various sources. These will include photos, screenshots, tables, graphs, video clips, etc. At this point, I couldn't care less which application was used to create or edit each file. The only thing I care about is the subject matter. With the large number and variety of files involved, it makes sense to group those files together in a working project folder, away from unrelated files. But with a "simplified" file system, I'd be forced to continuously hop around various application file stores and wade through thousands of unrelated files in search of what I need. Needless to say, this is completely unworkable.

Data Migration (A horror story)
Let's step away from the iPad for a moment, and examine how well managed file systems work on a real computer. I am reminded of the time when I bought my first Mac, and the first thing I wanted to do was to browse my photo collection with iPhoto. This collection consists of tens of thousands of photos, all nicely organized into file folders according to date and event.

My first shock came when I discovered that iPhoto was incapable of simply browsing my existing image collection. My photos first had to be "imported". My second shock came when I realized that importing all my photos would take many hours. Third shock was the realization that iPhoto didn't do a very good job of recognizing and preserving my simple and straightforward folder system. iPhoto organizes images by "Events", and it treats each imported batch of files as a single event. This means that in order to keep my existing photo collection intact, I had to import them one event at a time. Nice. Additionally, iPhoto only displays events as a collection of thumbnail tiles, without a "list view" option. If you want to view your events as a list - you guessed it - you now have to create an "album" for each event and view & sort the albums separately.

At this point I am so overwhelmed by iPhoto's "simplicity" that I'm tempted to hurl my Macbook Pro towards a fast moving freight train.

Now some of you might think that these hassles are a worthwhile, one-time task justified by the advantages of using iPhoto. I thought so too. And I kinda liked how iPhoto allowed me to import and browse my camera's pictures and video clips together. That is, until the release of Aperture - a better, more powerful image management and editing application.

And then I found myself right back in square one. Aperture, like iPhoto, manages images in a proprietary database structure. This means that in order to reap its benefits I needed to (you guessed it) import my iPhoto library into Aperture. But wait, it gets better. Turns out that Aperture, unlike iPhoto, does NOT support viewing of video clips. So if I migrate my photos to Aperture, I lose the ability to group related pictures and video clips together. Oh joy!

The moral of the story is that so-called simplified file systems are anything but simple. They're inflexible, impractical, and in the long run will cause far more aggravation and wasted time then can be justified by the initial illusion of simplicity.

We already have iPhoto. iDVD is obviously out. I can't see iWeb coming to the iPad but I can see iMovie (which already looks pretty good for finger-sized controls in many ways) and Garageband may be iPad App Store apps.

I say that because they could be powerful tools for those that need it but aren't something that the average person needs. Despite coming with a Mac I know very few that regularly use them. Most that have video just store them in iPhoto per the default without ever editing.

I really like the slide-out containers of iMovie. I hope that becomes more popular on this device.



That sounds like a good idea. Apple clearly wants this to be an accessory device but they included some HW and OS features in clearly prevent that from being the absolute case so I hope they do allow this to be wirelessly backed up.



I would have thought so but they kept the iPhone name. Surely it was going to be closer to the iPhone OS than the Mac OS, but there are more than a few elements that make this a unique OS. Ireland has pointed out examples that there is already confusion about the functionality of this device because it has the same name as the smaller handheld device. Seems remise to me.

Were you underwhelmed about that event? (Meaning WWDC 2008) The sessions were very informative.

In many ways it was a landmark event.

I'm somewhat flummoxed by your response

I guess, that's when you'd want a laptop or desktop computer. This device is designed as neither. My smart phone can't run photoshop CS4, I'm not saying the smartphone is flawed.

Then you better talk to the Library of Congress or the National Library of Medicine,

At some point in time, all libraries get full. And when they do, they build extra rooms. Sometimes even buildings. Sometimes even on the same land. Sometimes even in the same city or state.

The iPad has Wi-Fi and the USB-Adapter will allow you to archive your files to an external media or via cloud. Perhaps that is one reason why Apple is building their billion dollar server farm.

I don't know about you, but I don't keep all my iPhone/iPod touch apps on my iPhone or iPhone touch. I create specific sets depending on where, when and how I am using my iPhone or iPod touch.

I connect via USB to my computer daily. Syncing all and sometimes only specific files, but more important as they are being synced my iPhone/iPod touch are being backed up to my computer and consequently to an external hard drive or MobileMe via Time Machine and even MacBackup.

I will be no different with the iPad. Apple if anybody has been a leading pioneer in creating and supporting backup strategies. You will be able to connect via the 30-pin connector on the bottom of the iPad to dock, charge sync and backup to you base computers, directly connect to an external drive or Wi-Fi to an on-line backup server/network. You may be in a cloud, but you won't be in the dark so to speak.

For me, I use MobileMe for my Address Book/iCal/Mail/ and a couple of major programming projects, two other online backup servers for my current project files, two Gb external hard drives on site, one off site and a library of over 2,000 CD/DVDs. And that service my home office only.

As we all know, never, never, never, keep all your eggs in one basket. The Apple iPad, like the iPods, iPhone or Macs are not a 'closed' device. Never have or never will be.

And by the way, read my lips,
"your girlfriend can keep her best photos on the Air, the rest on the external drive, and manage them all through a single interface," especially since she using a Mac. She can make as many libraries she wants.

I feel behind the scenes, Apple had to rush this device, and the OS it stands on.

I think with the MacBook Pros/Air coming out soon (Feb/Mar), the Mac Pro's, a possible inclusion of a new GPU for the iMacs since the issues with them seem to be GPU related. On top of that Mac OS 10.7 preview for WWDC X, then new iphone/iphone OS, then finally the iPods.

Apple may have had intentions to make a hybird OS between Mac OS X & iPhone OS, but simply weren't able to meet the "deadline" internally, and plus it's much easier to add onto the iPhone OS, then to scale down Mac OS X (again).

I think alot of developers for the iPhone were introduced to the Mac Platform this way. I think their is a small percentage of developers that were building Apps for Mac Os X and were easily able to migrate to both iPhone & Mac OS. This also puts Apple in a decent position to scale these "new" developers up to the "hybird" OS they'll later develop for the iPad, since they have familiarity with the iPhone OS which much of the iPads' OS is based on at the moment.

Just attach the USB or SD adapters. Simples. There's no way there won't be an app to read these just like external drives.

I wasn't commenting about the iPad specifically, but rather about Apple's philosophy of simplified file management, which they practice across their desktop and laptop applications.

You're talking about free/inexpensive amateur level software that is bundled with these devices. If you want pro functinality, but professional software. iLife/iWork aren't aimed at tech prosumers, they're aimed at people who want to work in a simplified way. If you want more than this, then find the right solution for you - there are plenty availabe.

Does the finder in mac work any differently in principle to that in windows? Is it somehow 'simplified', am I Missing something?

There's no way this was rushed by Apple, they've been toying with these concepts for over twenty years. The time spent on iWork alone is proof this. Apple created this hype in their own time, to their own schedule. NO pressure, no rush, this device goes as far as Jobs wanted the first version to go.

For starters, don't try to paint me as an Apple basher or Windows fanboy - I'm quite the opposite.

My point is that a conventional file management system (i.e OS X's Finder or Windows Explorer) provides the simplest and most flexible method for organizing files, provided that people use some common sense in managing those files.

Forcing people to manage their immense and rapidly growing image libraries in application-specific databases is a deeply flawed strategy, for reasons I've already illustrated.

Aperture is a professional level application, but it still has fatal flaws. it doesn't support movie clips, so I can't use it to browse related photos and movie clips together, as I can in iPhoto. Additionally, it has the same obstacles to browsing existing image collections as iPhoto - requiring me to IMPORT images into its database rather than giving me the option to simply BROWSE them. And again, by forcing me to manage files in a proprietary database structure, they prevent me from organizing and manipulating those files using anything other than Aperture.

For this system to work, the database system needs to be integrated into the operating system itself, and shared across all applications including the Finder. THAT is the proper way to handle this. until something like that is feasible, using Finder remains the best way to manage large file libraries.

The software (not the hardware) was yes.............. rushed IMO. Though you make a valid point (Being this is up to JOBS).


Besides this is only Version 1, Apple will soon show devs where this device is going. Version 2 of this device will be completely different.

I'm not painting you as anything, stop being paranoiid.

my point is that if you don't like the way that apple's software handles files, then use different software, no one is forcing you.

You're wrong about aperture btw, when migrating images from iPhoto, it doesn't have to import them all, it can manage images outside of it's own directory structure. Apart from iTunes, none of the other iWork/iLife apps handle your documents and media in this way, so I think you're making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill.

And a photographic management/editing tool not supporting video is not a 'fatal flaw'. Aperture doesn't handle audio either - is this another flaw?

That version of iWork, completely thought through for the device - that was rushed? iBooks - rushed? (albeit a rip off of delicious) I see nothing that looks rushed.

If you wait until every function, every capability can be acheived, the device is never released. You have to start somewhere.

So has his namesake.

And therefore the confusion has led to chaos, wars, and death. Perhaps it would have been better if one of the sides used a different name. But undoubtedly it wouldn't have mattered as most of us looks at it as due to ignorance, greed and selfishness. And the degree is dependent on which side you are on.

For many, they don't give a damn. But then that may also be due to ignorance, greed and selfishness.

For others, we grow up and live with it. And are happy to be on the other side of the world. Literally and figuratively.

....

The iPad. It is what you make it. Like a computer, it has no real purpose until you give it one.

AND .................................

all this (from Giz)

New features I've uncovered:
CoreGraphics to PDF API for sure, printer API is being prototyped
Spell checker in text fields and web views using AppleSpell
- multiple languages
- grammar checking (English-only so far)
- address book integration
- user added words
- SDK access
- Included dictionaries: Apple Dictionary, New Oxford American Dictionary, Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus, Shogakukan Daijisen, Shogakukan Progressive English-Japanese Japanese-English Dictionary, and Shogakukan Ruigo Reikai Jiten (may also be used for a Dictionary app perhaps?)
USB Host support or expanded Bluetooth support
- PTP support for transferring images
- MobileStorageMounter (perhaps used for PTP; perhaps used to mount external USB storage?)
- Hardware keyboard: USBKeyboardLayouts.plist
Much richer text API including low-level access to font data and highlevel support for drawing formatted text
Support for querying attached screens and choosing which screen a window draws on (App Store approved?)
The beginnings of file upload in Safari
Location-sensitive ads are being prototyped in integrated Maps application (and applications that use the maps framework)
Ability for applications to modify the standard cut/copy/paste menu
"Handwriting keyboard" is being prototyped.

I'm sorry, how are features that you want as opposed to 90% of the public "restrictions"?


Forget it don't answer. I'm tired of this crap. You're the one thats right, Apple should have crammed the entire history of computing and the next 20 years as well into this device, with LESs bezelzes, and it should be even cheaper!

I really don't get how this makes things better or what was so complicated before. You still have folders in all these file systems local to apps right? Once you hide all the system files and just have user files left, whats wrong with these all being in the same place?

The notion that it will be good to have files associated with apps seems really confusing. My iPhone has Camera, Photos, Quick Office, PS Mobile, Mobile Me Gallery, so under this new idea I have to remember which one has a particular photo in it to find it. Rather than just having 1 common file system with a Photo's folder that I know isn't going to get deleted when I remove an app without think about what files are in it.

Does this also mean in an app when you go to open a file your also going to get a list of every single app you have in order to access those file? That could be a long list!

Can safari save photo's from the web, in which case does that always go in a Safari file system but you then wouldn't ever want to open it in Safari?

Whoever came up with this idea, needs to be removed from Apple as soon as possible along with whoever there agreed it would be a good idea. Searching makes things easy, Apps ising meta data to sort files within themselves makes things easy. Multiple file systems just makes something that was never particularly hard awfaul!