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'm with you now!
I'm sick of this BULLcrap
All these turkeys complaining about virtually everything and making no effort whatsoever to check out what's really going on BY READING THE F......KG POSTS that explain as much as we know, to date!
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.
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.
I think the only thing we can conclude is that iWork wasn't rushed. I can't say the same for the OS. Maybe they simply don't want to spoil the iPhone OS v4.0 demo and SDK coming in March(?) but I thinknit simply wasn't ready to make It for this event.
There are a lot of odd things at this event that make it seem poorly researched like it was altered at the last minute or perhaps Jobs is losing it. For instance, he mentions the ability to rotate the device at least a half dozen times in the span of a couple minutes. Welcome to MacWorld San Francisco 2007!
I have to wonder if this was just an "out the door" OS for the March release with the finished 'ipad' specific apps and hardware.
But I don't even think that is true with complete certainly. Was McGraw-Hill invited? If so, where is the "killer app" that will make buying electronic textbooks a a must have. Perhaps I'm jumping a few years ahead of what I possible but I was fully expecting a annotation and notes layover for books. You simply can't replace textbooks unless you can hit a higjlighter, underline, strikerhrough, etc. button and drag your finger or capacitance stylus (very natural and better for certain tasks) over a section of text, a well as have the ability to type crib notes and draw diagrams on each page abd have it all instantly searchable. Is that asking fo too much (rethorical)?
PS: I'm just noticing that vBulletin markup works with the iPhone OS' text highlighting feature. Sweet!
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?
You're still missing the point...
It took me days to painstakingly import 10 years' worth of photos into iPhoto. This would have taken minutes if iPhoto could simply browse file folders instead of depending on a proprietary database structure.
Yes, I know that Aperture can manage images outside of its own directory structure. But if you then use Finder or another application to move, rename, or edit any of those files, you risk messing up the Aperture database. This is not an acceptable restriction.
Only after a tidal wave of complaints did Aperture finally gain the ability to import files while leaving them in their existing locations. That was not an original feature. But even then users face two flawed options:
1) Import all future photo sets directly into Aperture for pro-level editing features, but lose the ability to store movie clips together with related images
2) Import future photo sets into iPhoto to keep pictures and movie clips together, but be forced to import them again into Aperture each time for photo editing
How is this helpful or efficient?
Of course Aperture doesn't support audio. People don't come back from vacations with memory cards filled with pictures and audio clips. They come back with pictures and movie clips taken with the same camera. This applies to $99 entry levels cameras just as it does to $2500 DSLRs with HD video capabilities.
Some of you guys are taking this a little too serious - it's just a computer. Tripper and thartist seem like the kind of guys who would try to beat you up if they saw you using an iPad.
Man... if you had it strapped to your crotch...I most certainly would.
I think the only thing we can conclude is that iWork wasn't rushed. I can't say the same for the OS. Maybe they simply don't want to spoil the iPhone OS v4.0 demo and SDK coming in March(?) but I thinknit simply wasn't ready to make It for this event.
But I don't even think that is true with complete certainly. Was McGraw-Hill invited? If so, where is the "killer app" that will make buying electronic textbooks a a must have. Perhaps I'm jumping a few years ahead of what I possible but I was fully expecting a annotation and notes layover for books. You simply can't replace textbooks unless you can hit a higjlighter, underline, strikerhrough, etc. button and drag your finger or capacitance stylus (very natural and better for certain tasks) over a section of text, a well as have the ability to type crib notes and draw diagrams on each page abd have it all instantly searchable. Is that asking fo too much (rethorical)?
PS: I'm just noticing that vBulletin markup works with the iPhone OS' text highlighting feature. Sweet!
Sent from iPhone... There will be errors.
Well, preview currently allows markup, highlighting etc of PDFs, so apple already have the technology.
Re. The operating system being rushed, I haven't used it yet, so I can't say. But thinking of this as an enlarged iPod Touch, the core OS has been in the wild for two years and constantly improved and added to - so what's rushed? But i'll reserve judgement until i've played with one.
Just because apple didn't bore the general public with every feature, ever inner working of the device, every detail, it doesn't mean it's not ready for release, just that the keynote was intended to create headlines that consumers understoon. Simple, Beautiful, Inexpensive - web, email, music, iWork. Nice clean message I thought?
I'm excited to see what we discover between now and the product release in March, I think a lot is still to appear.
Why does everyone need a computer, where by computer I assume you mean one that runs OS X, Windows, or Linux?
If I use my computer to surf the web, buy and read books, buy and listen to music/movies, send emails and IM, store and view photos, maintain a calendar, run well-crafted apps to buy/sell stuff or play games or write short documents or create presentations or tables or charts, why do I need an OS X, Windows or Linux-based computer? Seriously, why?
What if somebody decided for you that computers were only good for spreadsheets and made a closed device and didn't allow any innovation?
Or worse, if somebody did come up with a great idea, like Google Voice, and then the keeper of the device, through their App Store, decided to kick the new innovation off the platform?
It took me days to painstakingly import 10 years' worth of photos into iPhoto. This would have taken minutes if iPhoto could simply browse file folders instead of depending on a proprietary database structure.
And if you'd read the instructions in Aperture, they'd still be there. It took me a few minutes, my photo's were arranged in folders, I dragged the folders into the iPhoto library window and each folder became it's own event. Couldn't have been any easier. The files were copied to the iPhoto database, but still remain in their folders, untouched.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx
Yes, I know that Aperture can manage images outside of its own directory structure. But if you then use Finder or another application to move, rename, or edit any of those files, you risk messing up the Aperture database. This is not an acceptable restriction.
How on earth is this a restriction - either have the software manage it's resources, or choose do it manually - you can't have it both ways, how on earth can an application that isn't running know that you've moved files around - this is the very reason for this software operating as it does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx
Only after a tidal wave of complaints did Aperture finally gain the ability to import files while leaving them in their existing locations. That was not an original feature. But even then users face two flawed options:
1) Import all future photo sets directly into Aperture for pro-level editing features, but lose the ability to store movie clips together with related images
2) Import future photo sets into iPhoto to keep pictures and movie clips together, but be forced to import them again into Aperture each time for photo editing
How is this helpful or efficient?
Of course Aperture doesn't support audio. People don't come back from vacations with memory cards filled with pictures and audio clips. They come back with pictures and movie clips taken with the same camera. This applies to $99 entry levels cameras just as it does to $2500 DSLRs with HD video capabilities.
Right, so Apple have listened and changed the software, and still you're complaining? Tidal wave of complaints? Overstating things a little? There aren't that many aperture users, and many of them are happy to let aperture do it's job.
Aperture is not for editing video, therefore aperture doesn't import the video. This isn't a hobbyist tool, it's designed to be a focussed, professional application.
What if somebody decided for you that computers were only good for spreadsheets and made a closed device and didn't allow any innovation?
Then I wouldn't buy it. But someone who wanted a device to do spreadsheets on would.
Apple have filled each sector of the market place - iPod, iPod Touch, macbook, macbook air, macbook pro, iMac, Mac Pro - now they need to fill the rest of the market, those for whom none of that list fills their need. Each of these has their target audience(s), so does the 'tab.
I absolutely hate the approach Apple has taken on files.
To tie songs to iTunes, pictures to iPhoto, word processing docs to Pages, etc. seems logical on the surface. That's where they were created? Right?
But that is not the way people work. Let's say you write a script, do some graphics, take some pictures, and record some music all in service of your new movie. How would you like to store it? By creator application? Or by project name?
If you are like me, (or any Apple user back in system 7) you would create a folder called "Spring 2010" and perhaps subfolders for pictures, songs, web pages, text documents, fonts, images, etc. Especially in a work environment, when projects have to be revisited/modified at a later date.
So, while I see the logic in having an endless library of every piece of photoshop art, every bit of footage, every sound effect and song, every text document you've ever written; I also would like to organize, backup, and store data by project. In other words, it's not that I totally disagree with the iTunes/iMovie organizational scheme, but I feel a little hampered by the "protect the dumb user" mindset. Why is "Export" called "Share?"
Big bro may want me to save all my clips in an endless library of video, but I would like to store each project (video, graphics, music, etc.) in its own project folder. To not allow me to store this data together is not "simplifying" at all. There should be, perhaps a "simple finder" for people who want to store things the way Steve would, and then an old-school, folders and files, finder for the rest of us.
There are allot of Apps that already synch without itunes to servers & desktops. Generally those developers that have clients with data to back up they provide a method. Photos, drawings, sales records, it's already there. In your photo example. Most photo Apps use the Iphone library. So no your photos won't be removed with the App. If the app does not save photos to the default library then yes the photos would be deleted, if the developer did not provide another way of "backing up" or synchronizing the data.
Well as we have seen many times, developers don't plan on people ditching their application for another so they don't plan that in their software.
Also if the app fails and needs to be reinstalled, the method of deleting the files created or stored in it are also deleted.
Still dumb. It's like Apple is reinventing the OS all over again.
I absolutely hate the approach Apple has taken on files.
To tie songs to iTunes, pictures to iPhoto, word processing docs to Pages, etc. seems logical on the surface. That's where they were created? Right?
But that is not the way people work. Let's say you write a script, do some graphics, take some pictures, and record some music all in service of your new movie. How would you like to store it? By creator application? Or by project name?
If you are like me, (or any Apple user back in system 7) you would create a folder called "Spring 2010" and perhaps subfolders for pictures, songs, web pages, text documents, fonts, images, etc. Especially in a work environment, when projects have to be revisited/modified at a later date.
So, while I see the logic in having an endless library of every piece of photoshop art, every bit of footage, every sound effect and song, every text document you've ever written; I also would like to organize, backup, and store data by project. In other words, it's not that I totally disagree with the iTunes/iMovie organizational scheme, but I feel a little hampered by the "protect the dumb user" mindset. Why is "Export" called "Share?"
Big bro may want me to save all my clips in an endless library of video, but I would like to store each project (video, graphics, music, etc.) in its own project folder. To not allow me to store this data together is not "simplifying" at all. There should be, perhaps a "simple finder" for people who want to store things the way Steve would, and then an old-school, folders and files, finder for the rest of us.
How about if you don't like the way that this (free) software operates, you use an alternative? The style of work you describe is not what the iLife suite is there for, it's to store and manage your media, and to have easy access to it from the other iLife applications, via the media browser.
It's not "steve's" way of working, it's just one, relatively simple way of working that no one forces you to use.
PS. If you're creating a movie in iMovie, or a site in iWeb, it's all there at your fingertips anyway via the media browser, you can work in this fashion with a little imagination (albums/playlists in each app specific to this project)
PPS. There is a menu option "share", there is also an export option under the file menu, as you'd expect to find it any application. The word share means more to iLife's target audience than "Export". It's not dumbing down/protecting the dumb, it's making the process as easy to understand as possible for the layman consumer.
Why is the iPhone OS the future of all Apple computers? Didn't you see the slide with three platforms? - iPhone. iPad. Mac.
And don't you see that two of the platforms you mentioned run a UI alternate than the OS X UI?
Ahhh!!
If your trying to push OS X UI and people to buy Mac's, you certainly don't use a iPhone OS UI on a new device like a tablet.
Apple is not pushing OS X UI, they are pushing a closed concept using the iPhone UI and the App Store, which means eventually all Apple's computers will have this new UI.
Apple's computers will eventually just be dumb terminals, with all the processing and storage done on the "cloud".
Programs and data to be used on the "cloud" will be subject to Apple's whims and desires.
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.
That is pretty heavy for a Saturday morning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zc456
The iPad. It is what you make it. Like a computer, it has no real purpose until you give it one.
That sounds a lot like life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84
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?
Perhaps we're over thinking this a bit. On the iPhone, when you press and hold on an image it allows you to save it into the Photos app. On the iPad this would obviously be iPhoto. I see no reason why they'd make Safari a default app for this after the fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm
Well, preview currently allows markup, highlighting etc of PDFs, so apple already have the technology.
That is the best example of what I'd expect to see but that is rudimentary and clumsy while not allowing for the overlay needed to keep the textbook "pristine" while always being able to recall your annotations and notes. If that isn't their goal then that isn't their goal, but I'd think that would be required to be a replacement to textbooks.
Funny thing about life is that computers are in there to. I just wouldn't know where to begin because there everywhere. The only thing the Apple is trying to do is fix a niche market. Laptops was once a niche market to, although who knows when they became highly in demand.
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.
Really, it?s 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.
128K.
....And the biggest iPad is 64? gigabytes....
Never use the iPad to make more than three of anything, and you?ll do just fine?
The other "shoe" hasn't dropped yet and that's Apple's "cloud" storage and extra processing system for the iPad.
Got a film to render or ray tracing to process?, just let the cloud do it. Probably be integrated into all of Apple's new software so it's automatic.
Bet Hollywood is laughing their asses off at the pirates right now.
Comments
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
Ha! That invite image is done like that for marketing purposes. Even if it "vaguely" "metaphorically" makes sense.
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'm with you now!
I'm sick of this BULLcrap
All these turkeys complaining about virtually everything and making no effort whatsoever to check out what's really going on BY READING THE F......KG POSTS that explain as much as we know, to date!
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.
Point Made.
Ha! That invite image is done like that for marketing purposes. Even if it "vaguely" "metaphorically" makes sense.
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.
I think the only thing we can conclude is that iWork wasn't rushed. I can't say the same for the OS. Maybe they simply don't want to spoil the iPhone OS v4.0 demo and SDK coming in March(?) but I thinknit simply wasn't ready to make It for this event.
There are a lot of odd things at this event that make it seem poorly researched like it was altered at the last minute or perhaps Jobs is losing it. For instance, he mentions the ability to rotate the device at least a half dozen times in the span of a couple minutes. Welcome to MacWorld San Francisco 2007!
I have to wonder if this was just an "out the door" OS for the March release with the finished 'ipad' specific apps and hardware.
But I don't even think that is true with complete certainly. Was McGraw-Hill invited? If so, where is the "killer app" that will make buying electronic textbooks a a must have. Perhaps I'm jumping a few years ahead of what I possible but I was fully expecting a annotation and notes layover for books. You simply can't replace textbooks unless you can hit a higjlighter, underline, strikerhrough, etc. button and drag your finger or capacitance stylus (very natural and better for certain tasks) over a section of text, a well as have the ability to type crib notes and draw diagrams on each page abd have it all instantly searchable. Is that asking fo too much (rethorical)?
PS: I'm just noticing that vBulletin markup works with the iPhone OS' text highlighting feature. Sweet!
Sent from iPhone... There will be errors.
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?
You're still missing the point...
It took me days to painstakingly import 10 years' worth of photos into iPhoto. This would have taken minutes if iPhoto could simply browse file folders instead of depending on a proprietary database structure.
Yes, I know that Aperture can manage images outside of its own directory structure. But if you then use Finder or another application to move, rename, or edit any of those files, you risk messing up the Aperture database. This is not an acceptable restriction.
Only after a tidal wave of complaints did Aperture finally gain the ability to import files while leaving them in their existing locations. That was not an original feature. But even then users face two flawed options:
1) Import all future photo sets directly into Aperture for pro-level editing features, but lose the ability to store movie clips together with related images
2) Import future photo sets into iPhoto to keep pictures and movie clips together, but be forced to import them again into Aperture each time for photo editing
How is this helpful or efficient?
Of course Aperture doesn't support audio. People don't come back from vacations with memory cards filled with pictures and audio clips. They come back with pictures and movie clips taken with the same camera. This applies to $99 entry levels cameras just as it does to $2500 DSLRs with HD video capabilities.
I'm with you now!
I'm sick of this BULLcrap
That's too bad, you've added a look of good in your few posts. Welcome to the forum.
Some of you guys are taking this a little too serious - it's just a computer. Tripper and thartist seem like the kind of guys who would try to beat you up if they saw you using an iPad.
Man... if you had it strapped to your crotch...I most certainly would.
I think the only thing we can conclude is that iWork wasn't rushed. I can't say the same for the OS. Maybe they simply don't want to spoil the iPhone OS v4.0 demo and SDK coming in March(?) but I thinknit simply wasn't ready to make It for this event.
But I don't even think that is true with complete certainly. Was McGraw-Hill invited? If so, where is the "killer app" that will make buying electronic textbooks a a must have. Perhaps I'm jumping a few years ahead of what I possible but I was fully expecting a annotation and notes layover for books. You simply can't replace textbooks unless you can hit a higjlighter, underline, strikerhrough, etc. button and drag your finger or capacitance stylus (very natural and better for certain tasks) over a section of text, a well as have the ability to type crib notes and draw diagrams on each page abd have it all instantly searchable. Is that asking fo too much (rethorical)?
PS: I'm just noticing that vBulletin markup works with the iPhone OS' text highlighting feature. Sweet!
Sent from iPhone... There will be errors.
Well, preview currently allows markup, highlighting etc of PDFs, so apple already have the technology.
Re. The operating system being rushed, I haven't used it yet, so I can't say. But thinking of this as an enlarged iPod Touch, the core OS has been in the wild for two years and constantly improved and added to - so what's rushed? But i'll reserve judgement until i've played with one.
Just because apple didn't bore the general public with every feature, ever inner working of the device, every detail, it doesn't mean it's not ready for release, just that the keynote was intended to create headlines that consumers understoon. Simple, Beautiful, Inexpensive - web, email, music, iWork. Nice clean message I thought?
I'm excited to see what we discover between now and the product release in March, I think a lot is still to appear.
Why does everyone need a computer, where by computer I assume you mean one that runs OS X, Windows, or Linux?
If I use my computer to surf the web, buy and read books, buy and listen to music/movies, send emails and IM, store and view photos, maintain a calendar, run well-crafted apps to buy/sell stuff or play games or write short documents or create presentations or tables or charts, why do I need an OS X, Windows or Linux-based computer? Seriously, why?
What if somebody decided for you that computers were only good for spreadsheets and made a closed device and didn't allow any innovation?
Or worse, if somebody did come up with a great idea, like Google Voice, and then the keeper of the device, through their App Store, decided to kick the new innovation off the platform?
You're still missing the point...
It took me days to painstakingly import 10 years' worth of photos into iPhoto. This would have taken minutes if iPhoto could simply browse file folders instead of depending on a proprietary database structure.
And if you'd read the instructions in Aperture, they'd still be there. It took me a few minutes, my photo's were arranged in folders, I dragged the folders into the iPhoto library window and each folder became it's own event. Couldn't have been any easier. The files were copied to the iPhoto database, but still remain in their folders, untouched.
Yes, I know that Aperture can manage images outside of its own directory structure. But if you then use Finder or another application to move, rename, or edit any of those files, you risk messing up the Aperture database. This is not an acceptable restriction.
How on earth is this a restriction - either have the software manage it's resources, or choose do it manually - you can't have it both ways, how on earth can an application that isn't running know that you've moved files around - this is the very reason for this software operating as it does.
Only after a tidal wave of complaints did Aperture finally gain the ability to import files while leaving them in their existing locations. That was not an original feature. But even then users face two flawed options:
1) Import all future photo sets directly into Aperture for pro-level editing features, but lose the ability to store movie clips together with related images
2) Import future photo sets into iPhoto to keep pictures and movie clips together, but be forced to import them again into Aperture each time for photo editing
How is this helpful or efficient?
Of course Aperture doesn't support audio. People don't come back from vacations with memory cards filled with pictures and audio clips. They come back with pictures and movie clips taken with the same camera. This applies to $99 entry levels cameras just as it does to $2500 DSLRs with HD video capabilities.
Right, so Apple have listened and changed the software, and still you're complaining? Tidal wave of complaints? Overstating things a little? There aren't that many aperture users, and many of them are happy to let aperture do it's job.
Aperture is not for editing video, therefore aperture doesn't import the video. This isn't a hobbyist tool, it's designed to be a focussed, professional application.
What if somebody decided for you that computers were only good for spreadsheets and made a closed device and didn't allow any innovation?
Then I wouldn't buy it. But someone who wanted a device to do spreadsheets on would.
Apple have filled each sector of the market place - iPod, iPod Touch, macbook, macbook air, macbook pro, iMac, Mac Pro - now they need to fill the rest of the market, those for whom none of that list fills their need. Each of these has their target audience(s), so does the 'tab.
To tie songs to iTunes, pictures to iPhoto, word processing docs to Pages, etc. seems logical on the surface. That's where they were created? Right?
But that is not the way people work. Let's say you write a script, do some graphics, take some pictures, and record some music all in service of your new movie. How would you like to store it? By creator application? Or by project name?
If you are like me, (or any Apple user back in system 7) you would create a folder called "Spring 2010" and perhaps subfolders for pictures, songs, web pages, text documents, fonts, images, etc. Especially in a work environment, when projects have to be revisited/modified at a later date.
So, while I see the logic in having an endless library of every piece of photoshop art, every bit of footage, every sound effect and song, every text document you've ever written; I also would like to organize, backup, and store data by project. In other words, it's not that I totally disagree with the iTunes/iMovie organizational scheme, but I feel a little hampered by the "protect the dumb user" mindset. Why is "Export" called "Share?"
Big bro may want me to save all my clips in an endless library of video, but I would like to store each project (video, graphics, music, etc.) in its own project folder. To not allow me to store this data together is not "simplifying" at all. There should be, perhaps a "simple finder" for people who want to store things the way Steve would, and then an old-school, folders and files, finder for the rest of us.
There are allot of Apps that already synch without itunes to servers & desktops. Generally those developers that have clients with data to back up they provide a method. Photos, drawings, sales records, it's already there. In your photo example. Most photo Apps use the Iphone library. So no your photos won't be removed with the App. If the app does not save photos to the default library then yes the photos would be deleted, if the developer did not provide another way of "backing up" or synchronizing the data.
Well as we have seen many times, developers don't plan on people ditching their application for another so they don't plan that in their software.
Also if the app fails and needs to be reinstalled, the method of deleting the files created or stored in it are also deleted.
Still dumb. It's like Apple is reinventing the OS all over again.
I absolutely hate the approach Apple has taken on files.
To tie songs to iTunes, pictures to iPhoto, word processing docs to Pages, etc. seems logical on the surface. That's where they were created? Right?
But that is not the way people work. Let's say you write a script, do some graphics, take some pictures, and record some music all in service of your new movie. How would you like to store it? By creator application? Or by project name?
If you are like me, (or any Apple user back in system 7) you would create a folder called "Spring 2010" and perhaps subfolders for pictures, songs, web pages, text documents, fonts, images, etc. Especially in a work environment, when projects have to be revisited/modified at a later date.
So, while I see the logic in having an endless library of every piece of photoshop art, every bit of footage, every sound effect and song, every text document you've ever written; I also would like to organize, backup, and store data by project. In other words, it's not that I totally disagree with the iTunes/iMovie organizational scheme, but I feel a little hampered by the "protect the dumb user" mindset. Why is "Export" called "Share?"
Big bro may want me to save all my clips in an endless library of video, but I would like to store each project (video, graphics, music, etc.) in its own project folder. To not allow me to store this data together is not "simplifying" at all. There should be, perhaps a "simple finder" for people who want to store things the way Steve would, and then an old-school, folders and files, finder for the rest of us.
How about if you don't like the way that this (free) software operates, you use an alternative? The style of work you describe is not what the iLife suite is there for, it's to store and manage your media, and to have easy access to it from the other iLife applications, via the media browser.
It's not "steve's" way of working, it's just one, relatively simple way of working that no one forces you to use.
PS. If you're creating a movie in iMovie, or a site in iWeb, it's all there at your fingertips anyway via the media browser, you can work in this fashion with a little imagination (albums/playlists in each app specific to this project)
PPS. There is a menu option "share", there is also an export option under the file menu, as you'd expect to find it any application. The word share means more to iLife's target audience than "Export". It's not dumbing down/protecting the dumb, it's making the process as easy to understand as possible for the layman consumer.
Why is the iPhone OS the future of all Apple computers? Didn't you see the slide with three platforms? - iPhone. iPad. Mac.
And don't you see that two of the platforms you mentioned run a UI alternate than the OS X UI?
Ahhh!!
If your trying to push OS X UI and people to buy Mac's, you certainly don't use a iPhone OS UI on a new device like a tablet.
Apple is not pushing OS X UI, they are pushing a closed concept using the iPhone UI and the App Store, which means eventually all Apple's computers will have this new UI.
Apple's computers will eventually just be dumb terminals, with all the processing and storage done on the "cloud".
Programs and data to be used on the "cloud" will be subject to Apple's whims and desires.
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.
That is pretty heavy for a Saturday morning.
The iPad. It is what you make it. Like a computer, it has no real purpose until you give it one.
That sounds a lot like life.
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?
Perhaps we're over thinking this a bit. On the iPhone, when you press and hold on an image it allows you to save it into the Photos app. On the iPad this would obviously be iPhoto. I see no reason why they'd make Safari a default app for this after the fact.
Well, preview currently allows markup, highlighting etc of PDFs, so apple already have the technology.
That is the best example of what I'd expect to see but that is rudimentary and clumsy while not allowing for the overlay needed to keep the textbook "pristine" while always being able to recall your annotations and notes. If that isn't their goal then that isn't their goal, but I'd think that would be required to be a replacement to textbooks.
That sounds a lot like life.
Funny thing about life is that computers are in there to. I just wouldn't know where to begin because there everywhere. The only thing the Apple is trying to do is fix a niche market. Laptops was once a niche market to, although who knows when they became highly in demand.
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.
Really, it?s 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.
128K.
....And the biggest iPad is 64? gigabytes....
Never use the iPad to make more than three of anything, and you?ll do just fine?
The other "shoe" hasn't dropped yet and that's Apple's "cloud" storage and extra processing system for the iPad.
Got a film to render or ray tracing to process?, just let the cloud do it. Probably be integrated into all of Apple's new software so it's automatic.
Bet Hollywood is laughing their asses off at the pirates right now.