And it's amazing that the Saturn 5 blueprints were thrown away by the contractor because they needed more room! Without ever asking NASA.
Rocketdyne claims to have most of it stashed some where, but there was definitely a one-off mentality at work-- the tools and dies all got scrapped.
There is a full Saturn 5 lying in state in Huntsville, now, on it's side in a kind of big outdoor barn thing, at the Space and Rocket center. It's a pretty remarkable sight.
Rocketdyne claims to have most of it stashed some where, but there was definitely a one-off mentality at work-- the tools and dies all got scrapped.
There is a full Saturn 5 lying in state in Huntsville, now, on it's side in a kind of big outdoor barn thing, at the Space and Rocket center. It's a pretty remarkable sight.
I remember the claim, but it's been years since they found out, and still nothing.
"Outside of savvy computer users, the idea of opening a file by searching through hierarchical paths in the file system is a bit of a mystery."
A new low in Appleinsider 'journalism' ... You mean a mystery for 5-year-olds?
You are mistaken.
Speaking as someone who does a lot of tech support for a lot of very intelligent people, lots and lots of folks don't understand file systems at all. IMO it has very little to do with IQ or level of education.
Macs even have highly simplified logical file systems and a lot of idiot proof stuff to keep the complexity out of the way, but I still have to explain on a fairly regular basis "where your file went" to PhD's. Very few users really even understand the concept of the "User" folder hierarchy on the Mac which is as simple as file systems get. They might not admit it to you but it's fairly obvious that this is the case when you support them.
Most of the people I support see the HD on the desktop, understand that as a "file receptacle" of some kind and throw stuff in there willy nilly (absolutely the wrong thing to do on a Mac). Most use the trash as a kind of "pile of forgotten stuff" (secondary receptacle), and most store pretty much every single thing they really want to hang onto, on the desktop itself.
It's getting better now there is a Documents folder and a Downloads folder accessible to the user from the desktop, but the number of folks that immediately changed the downloads back to the desktop upon installing Leopard is quite high also.
The majority of users want all their files in a big pile in front of them, or perhaps organised into folders, (but still in front of them). Digging around in the file system makes them immediately nervous in most cases.
The majority of users want all their files in a big pile in front of them, or perhaps organised into folders, (but still in front of them). Digging around in the file system makes them immediately nervous in most cases.
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. The folders in the dock in SL mitigates that problem for most, but they're still in trouble if that folder gets removed from the dock. My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
its all eye candy... drop down to a terminal or ssh into the device and you will still find good old unix file structures. Not that this is a bad thing. It does make it easier to manage your files, no need to worry where everything is. Unless of course you are limited by the associated application on what you can do with the file. For example, say you wanted to copy the file over to your dropbox application so its accessible.... then what. I wonder how they are going to handle printing these documents (without syncing to a host itunes computer)
Speaking as someone who does a lot of tech support for a lot of very intelligent people, lots and lots of folks don't understand file systems at all. IMO it has very little to do with IQ or level of education.
Macs even have highly simplified logical file systems and a lot of idiot proof stuff to keep the complexity out of the way, but I still have to explain on a fairly regular basis "where your file went" to PhD's. Very few users really even understand the concept of the "User" folder hierarchy on the Mac which is as simple as file systems get. They might not admit it to you but it's fairly obvious that this is the case when you support them.
Most of the people I support see the HD on the desktop, understand that as a "file receptacle" of some kind and throw stuff in there willy nilly (absolutely the wrong thing to do on a Mac). Most use the trash as a kind of "pile of forgotten stuff" (secondary receptacle), and most store pretty much every single thing they really want to hang onto, on the desktop itself.
It's getting better now there is a Documents folder and a Downloads folder accessible to the user from the desktop, but the number of folks that immediately changed the downloads back to the desktop upon installing Leopard is quite high also.
The majority of users want all their files in a big pile in front of them, or perhaps organised into folders, (but still in front of them). Digging around in the file system makes them immediately nervous in most cases.
Honestly, using a folder structure is no more complex than using a filing cabinet. Frankly, I think you're overplaying the complexity involved here. It's a problem that isn't broken on the desktop. It's a challenge on the ipad where content creation is going to occur because the filesystem is hidden from the user.
I'm sure apple will work it out (agreeing with melgross here). They realised that 9 5x4 grids of apps is information assault and solved it by implementing a search pane.
As it stands though, anything more than a few dozens of docs and flat is going to look painful.
Apple is dramatically rethinking how applications organize their documents on iPad, leaving behind the jumbled file system and making file access between the iPad and desktop computers seamless.
In a move foreshadowed by the Newton Message Pad fifteen years ago, Apple's new iPad jettisons the conventional shared file system and introduces a new, streamlined convention for working with document files that ordinary users should find much more understandable.
Outside of savvy computer users, the idea of opening a file by searching through hierarchical paths in the file system is a bit of a mystery. Add in the concept of local and cloud file servers and things really get confusing.
Apple has already taken some steps to hide complexity in the file system in Mac OS X; Spotlight search was supposed to make a file's location almost irrelevant, while apps such as iTunes, iPhoto, and Photo Booth now present their databases of content in media folders within the open file panel rather that forcing users to slog through the underlying file system.
The Finder, iTunes and iPhoto also allow users to wirelessly share content between different systems via Bonjour-discovered file shares that pop up automatically whenever another system sharing files is sensed on the network.
The iPhone similarly abstracts away the file system entirely; there is no concept of opening or saving files, just a media library of Photos and file attachments that stay connected to their mailbox items. But the iPhone currently isn't designed to do much more than view files.
iPad's new document sharing model
With the iPad, Apple demonstrated new multitouch versions of desktop-class iWorks apps with user interfaces that need to open and save documents. There's still no file system browser with open and save panels. Instead, each app displays the files it knows about at launch for the user to navigate through directly.
An iPad developer has revealed to AppleInsider how this new mechanism works, without also requiring that users learn about the complexity of the underlying file system. Rather than iPad apps saving their documents into a wide open file system, apps on iPad save all their documents within their own installation directory. Delete the app and you'll clean out all of its related files. This is how the iPhone OS already works.
Additionally, iPad apps can now specify that their documents be shared wirelessly. With that configuration, the iPad will make available each apps' documents, allowing the user to wirelessly mount their iPad via WiFi and simply drag and drop files back and forth between it and their desktop computer.
On the desktop system, the iPad will show up as a share containing a documents folder for each app that enables sharing. For example, a user with iWork apps will be able to wirelessly connect to their iPad as if it were a directly connected drive, and simply drag spreadsheet, presentation, or word processing files between their local system and the mobile device as desired.
Documents copied to the app's shared folder will be graphically presented by the app when it launches, sparing users from having to figure out where to look for their document files and avoiding any need to sort through different kinds of documents. The document listing also presents each file as a large preview akin to Quick View on the Mac OS X desktop.
And iPad app's documents can be presented in any way that makes sense, depending on how many and what kind of documents the individual iPad app uses. Apple demonstrated its Work apps scrolling through a quick list of documents, while its iBooks app presents its various digital books as titles in a virtual bookshelf.
Just like the iPhone, the iPad will sync some apps' documents via either iTunes or MobileMe, including photos, music, movies, TV shows, contacts, calendars, and bookmarks.
Apple has for a long time been running .Mac or Mobile Me or whatever it is called. My year long experience with .mac sucked (it was overpriced, syncing took forever if it worked at all). And judging by the complaints of recent Mobile Me customers, the experience has not changed.
Don't be swayed by fluff pieces like this. Apple's online "Cloud" or whatever bu!!shi! experience will not differ from years gone by...
This philosophy is flawed in so many ways. Apple is not giving the end user MORE freedom, but less! Filetypes should act independent to programs for one reason only. LICENSING! Let's apply Apple's logic to the way my computer works now. Being a graphic guy, I switch between Photoshop and Fireworks all the time. Why would I want Photoshop to open and save graphic files when both applications treat the same file totally differently! I also script! There are some things Pages sucks at (script writing development). Why would I want to be in Pages only to write my scripts when scriptwriter pro does it much better?
Who says that a document that you wrote in Pages on the iPad (which can read/write Word docs and more, don't forget) *must* be worked on in Pages on your laptop or desktop or PC?
Maybe you should wait to have a stroke until after some more information is available.
Quote:
PDFs is another great example. I want to open PDFs in Acrobat, not PREVIEW!
So how is that going to change from current usage? You set Acrobat to be your default PDF application and you're off. iPad isn't going to change this.
The docs you swap to/from the iPad don't *have* to be limited to the iPad app's equivalent on your computer, no more than you're currently limited.
Quote:
I also want to put files on my thumb drive to send to clients, or upload them to box.net for review. Now what? I have to say to the client, "sorry. That thumbnail I rendered on my iPhone can only be used with this application software of which you have to buy..."
Yea, right.
So who said that was the case? Apps on the iPad expecting documents to be in their respective subdirectories says *nothing* about where you can put/take them on your computer.
Quote:
Why is Apple giving me a reason to move over to the upcoming slate or a netbook running Linux? WHY! What's next Apple? Are you going to tell me that I have to put ice cream in a cone instead of a cup?
Maybe they're not telling you anything; it's just the voices in your head.
(Why is it that the voices never tell you to anything nice?)
I don't remember saying the iPhone wasn't a computer.
But we're splitting hairs. In an earlier post today, I explained my thoughts on this. I don't want to get into semantics.
But ask yourself what you think of if someone asks you what computing is, vs reading e-mail, writing a letter, looking at photos, etc.
We may have to stop thinking about devices such as an iPhone, Touch or iPad as being computers, even though inside they are.
The face they present to use isn't that of a computer, which when we think of one, we think of Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, etc.
This is different enough so that even though it does computing, we aren't doing computing when we're using it.
Get what I mean?
yes i do
months ago i said that if you count NETBOOKS AS a computer to give apple a low 5% market share i said iphones and i touches were also computers and should count in apple market share
i was the told i guess by jeff alone that iphones are not computers
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. The folders in the dock in SL mitigates that problem for most, but they're still in trouble if that folder gets removed from the dock. My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
you can tell each file where to go
you can tell each folder where to live
i made an alias of my whole file system and the put the whole thing inside one folder
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
I don't think the idea of people thinking they want things organised "their way" really conflicts with what I said, just that the way most people seem to want to organise is to organise things in piles on the desktop. Also, of course most people understand the concept of folders within folders, but they still mostly like to put those folders al lover their desktop. This is exactly the same as the real world fear of filing in general that most people also seem to have. Highly organised business environments may be an exception here, but everywhere I've ever worked, things get filed in the cabinet when they are no longer needed and all the reports are done. Until that time they are on the (physical) desktop. It's not that people don't understand organisation, just that many if not most, like to have instant access to the stuff they are actually working on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
... Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. ...
Here, you are just completely mistaken. The user folder file system in OS-X is one of the simplest systems there is and it is actually *not* "deeply nested" at all. User folders are top level, and all the main folders are in underneath your user name. You just can't get any simpler than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
... My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
Based on my experience, this puts you in a very unique and small-ish category among users, so maybe your experience doesn't really translate to what others do. You not only eschew the organisational structure of the OS, (which of course puts you in the category of those that actually know its there and understand it already), you have your own ideas about organisational structures that you intentionally implement.
IMO this is great, and it's something I do myself to a degree. My point is though that from what I've seen over the years, most folks just aren't like this, and don't do this.
Apple is right. When people are making a document, they just want to see a list of the pictures they can pick to drop into it. When they are making a sideshow, they just want to see a list of music that they can pick for it. People actually seem to like "libraries" of media as presented to them by iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes, etc. The recent removal of the HD from the desktop in OS-X 10.6 has actually been a bit of a boon for me and has lowered the support threshold a bit.
The age has passed when people need to know about the physical devices connected to their "computer system" or know anything about their computer at all. No one cares about storage media and how to manage them anymore, they want a "magic file-cabinet" and Apple is giving them what they want. this is not necessarily a bad thing.
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. The folders in the dock in SL mitigates that problem for most, but they're still in trouble if that folder gets removed from the dock. My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
Considering that you almost never have to go directly into a folder, it's not such a big deal if you know how it works. If you don't, it's another story.
Very few people have a second HDD, even for backups.
Honestly, using a folder structure is no more complex than using a filing cabinet. Frankly, I think you're overplaying the complexity involved here. It's a problem that isn't broken on the desktop. It's a challenge on the ipad where content creation is going to occur because the filesystem is hidden from the user.
I'm sure apple will work it out (agreeing with melgross here). They realised that 9 5x4 grids of apps is information assault and solved it by implementing a search pane.
As it stands though, anything more than a few dozens of docs and flat is going to look painful.
Studies and interviews have shown that people leave files on the desktop in both Mac and Windows PCs precisely because they don't want to bother with looking for files in the folder structure. Spotlight was supposed to cure that on the Mac side, but this behavior persists. (Look it up on Google.)
By the way, my Mac desktop is empty (other than the drives), and my Windows desktop has a few application shortcuts on it.
Honestly, using a folder structure is no more complex than using a filing cabinet. Frankly, I think you're overplaying the complexity involved here. It's a problem that isn't broken on the desktop. It's a challenge on the ipad where content creation is going to occur because the filesystem is hidden from the user.
I'm sure apple will work it out (agreeing with melgross here). They realised that 9 5x4 grids of apps is information assault and solved it by implementing a search pane.
As it stands though, anything more than a few dozens of docs and flat is going to look painful.
Yes, the search pane is very good as long as you know part of the name.
Conventional computers are way too complex for the average person, no matter what someone may say.
It's like changing spark plugs in a car. It's really easy, with a couple of tools, if you know what you're doing, and are interested enough to want to do it. But most people wouldn't even know where to look, and that includes most guys nowadays.
After reading this thread I have doubts that I'll get my user created app folders on the iPhone OS Home Screens, which would be a shame considering how unorganized pages of apps can get. Maybe they'll at least offer a solution based on app type.
Apple has for a long time been running .Mac or Mobile Me or whatever it is called. My year long experience with .mac sucked (it was overpriced, syncing took forever if it worked at all). And judging by the complaints of recent Mobile Me customers, the experience has not changed.
Don't be swayed by fluff pieces like this. Apple's online "Cloud" or whatever bu!!shi! experience will not differ from years gone by...
Hype. This is nothing but hype...
That's likely what some of those server farms are for. Now, Apple relies on two third parties. They obviously feel that if they control it themselves, it will run better.
I'm not an enthusiast of the cloud yet, but at some point it will work really well. Right now, it's just too slow. I've got a 1 Gb/s network at home, and even "n" seems slow when passing large files around. So the typical broadband connection of 3.9 Mb/s is glacial. That's not Apple's fault. It's only about 400 KB/s. That's nothing.
months ago i said that if you count NETBOOKS AS a computer to give apple a low 5% market share i said iphones and i touches were also computers and should count in apple market share
i was the told i guess by jeff alone that iphones are not computers
they are
i guess i do agree it you facts as you state them
how did your appointments go ??
peace 9
What I meant was that they use a phone OS, and aren't counted in with desktop and laptops as a computer OS. They're a mobile platform. I didn't mean that they're not computers.
I was going to visit you, but the doctor did some laser surgery when I went in tuesday, so I was back home that day, and only went to the other doctor on Wednesday, then back home again.
Apple has for a long time been running .Mac or Mobile Me or whatever it is called. My year long experience with .mac sucked (it was overpriced, syncing took forever if it worked at all). And judging by the complaints of recent Mobile Me customers, the experience has not changed.
Don't be swayed by fluff pieces like this. Apple's online "Cloud" or whatever bu!!shi! experience will not differ from years gone by...
Hype. This is nothing but hype...
I'm not here to argue, just to present an alternative point of view. My syncing via mobileme has run flawlessly and push is synced very, very quickly. I don't wonder whether a calendar entry or contact edit on my iPhone will appear on my laptop--or even whether it'll be there quickly. It just is. I sync photos and music when i connect my devices, and i use the "cloud" to sync bookmarks, contacts (700+), calendar entries...not sure whether i'm forgetting anything. From what i read, the iPad'll do all that AND docs (wirelessly? dunno). I'm looking forward to it without doubts or fears, based on my past experience.
From my pov, I think you had an atypical experience.
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?
Unfortunately not.
You can have separate albums - one for when you're on the move, the other back home on your main hard disk. There are apps for managing/moving photos between libraries but not seamless.
It would be brilliant to have a master library with ALL your photos - either stored on an external disk at home, or on your other home/work Mac - and select a subset to sync to the smaller Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
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.
Do we know that their iPad photo app actually allows any manipulation of photos? Like crop, rotate, change brightness, create album, name faces?
If so (that's great.. and) it would be important to only have a subset of photos. I can see having the last 3 months automatically on my iPad, plus selected events or albums as per the iPhone/AppleTV. The ability to look at them, delete some, fix some would be great... then have the smaller subset sync back up to the master library COMPLETE WITH CHANGES.
I know it's not a simple need, but it is an incredibly useful one...
Comments
And it's amazing that the Saturn 5 blueprints were thrown away by the contractor because they needed more room! Without ever asking NASA.
Rocketdyne claims to have most of it stashed some where, but there was definitely a one-off mentality at work-- the tools and dies all got scrapped.
There is a full Saturn 5 lying in state in Huntsville, now, on it's side in a kind of big outdoor barn thing, at the Space and Rocket center. It's a pretty remarkable sight.
Rocketdyne claims to have most of it stashed some where, but there was definitely a one-off mentality at work-- the tools and dies all got scrapped.
There is a full Saturn 5 lying in state in Huntsville, now, on it's side in a kind of big outdoor barn thing, at the Space and Rocket center. It's a pretty remarkable sight.
I remember the claim, but it's been years since they found out, and still nothing.
A new low in Appleinsider 'journalism' ... You mean a mystery for 5-year-olds?
"Outside of savvy computer users, the idea of opening a file by searching through hierarchical paths in the file system is a bit of a mystery."
A new low in Appleinsider 'journalism' ... You mean a mystery for 5-year-olds?
You are mistaken.
Speaking as someone who does a lot of tech support for a lot of very intelligent people, lots and lots of folks don't understand file systems at all. IMO it has very little to do with IQ or level of education.
Macs even have highly simplified logical file systems and a lot of idiot proof stuff to keep the complexity out of the way, but I still have to explain on a fairly regular basis "where your file went" to PhD's. Very few users really even understand the concept of the "User" folder hierarchy on the Mac which is as simple as file systems get. They might not admit it to you but it's fairly obvious that this is the case when you support them.
Most of the people I support see the HD on the desktop, understand that as a "file receptacle" of some kind and throw stuff in there willy nilly (absolutely the wrong thing to do on a Mac). Most use the trash as a kind of "pile of forgotten stuff" (secondary receptacle), and most store pretty much every single thing they really want to hang onto, on the desktop itself.
It's getting better now there is a Documents folder and a Downloads folder accessible to the user from the desktop, but the number of folks that immediately changed the downloads back to the desktop upon installing Leopard is quite high also.
The majority of users want all their files in a big pile in front of them, or perhaps organised into folders, (but still in front of them). Digging around in the file system makes them immediately nervous in most cases.
The majority of users want all their files in a big pile in front of them, or perhaps organised into folders, (but still in front of them). Digging around in the file system makes them immediately nervous in most cases.
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. The folders in the dock in SL mitigates that problem for most, but they're still in trouble if that folder gets removed from the dock. My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
You are mistaken.
Speaking as someone who does a lot of tech support for a lot of very intelligent people, lots and lots of folks don't understand file systems at all. IMO it has very little to do with IQ or level of education.
Macs even have highly simplified logical file systems and a lot of idiot proof stuff to keep the complexity out of the way, but I still have to explain on a fairly regular basis "where your file went" to PhD's. Very few users really even understand the concept of the "User" folder hierarchy on the Mac which is as simple as file systems get. They might not admit it to you but it's fairly obvious that this is the case when you support them.
Most of the people I support see the HD on the desktop, understand that as a "file receptacle" of some kind and throw stuff in there willy nilly (absolutely the wrong thing to do on a Mac). Most use the trash as a kind of "pile of forgotten stuff" (secondary receptacle), and most store pretty much every single thing they really want to hang onto, on the desktop itself.
It's getting better now there is a Documents folder and a Downloads folder accessible to the user from the desktop, but the number of folks that immediately changed the downloads back to the desktop upon installing Leopard is quite high also.
The majority of users want all their files in a big pile in front of them, or perhaps organised into folders, (but still in front of them). Digging around in the file system makes them immediately nervous in most cases.
Honestly, using a folder structure is no more complex than using a filing cabinet. Frankly, I think you're overplaying the complexity involved here. It's a problem that isn't broken on the desktop. It's a challenge on the ipad where content creation is going to occur because the filesystem is hidden from the user.
I'm sure apple will work it out (agreeing with melgross here). They realised that 9 5x4 grids of apps is information assault and solved it by implementing a search pane.
As it stands though, anything more than a few dozens of docs and flat is going to look painful.
Apple is dramatically rethinking how applications organize their documents on iPad, leaving behind the jumbled file system and making file access between the iPad and desktop computers seamless.
In a move foreshadowed by the Newton Message Pad fifteen years ago, Apple's new iPad jettisons the conventional shared file system and introduces a new, streamlined convention for working with document files that ordinary users should find much more understandable.
Outside of savvy computer users, the idea of opening a file by searching through hierarchical paths in the file system is a bit of a mystery. Add in the concept of local and cloud file servers and things really get confusing.
Apple has already taken some steps to hide complexity in the file system in Mac OS X; Spotlight search was supposed to make a file's location almost irrelevant, while apps such as iTunes, iPhoto, and Photo Booth now present their databases of content in media folders within the open file panel rather that forcing users to slog through the underlying file system.
The Finder, iTunes and iPhoto also allow users to wirelessly share content between different systems via Bonjour-discovered file shares that pop up automatically whenever another system sharing files is sensed on the network.
The iPhone similarly abstracts away the file system entirely; there is no concept of opening or saving files, just a media library of Photos and file attachments that stay connected to their mailbox items. But the iPhone currently isn't designed to do much more than view files.
iPad's new document sharing model
With the iPad, Apple demonstrated new multitouch versions of desktop-class iWorks apps with user interfaces that need to open and save documents. There's still no file system browser with open and save panels. Instead, each app displays the files it knows about at launch for the user to navigate through directly.
An iPad developer has revealed to AppleInsider how this new mechanism works, without also requiring that users learn about the complexity of the underlying file system. Rather than iPad apps saving their documents into a wide open file system, apps on iPad save all their documents within their own installation directory. Delete the app and you'll clean out all of its related files. This is how the iPhone OS already works.
Additionally, iPad apps can now specify that their documents be shared wirelessly. With that configuration, the iPad will make available each apps' documents, allowing the user to wirelessly mount their iPad via WiFi and simply drag and drop files back and forth between it and their desktop computer.
On the desktop system, the iPad will show up as a share containing a documents folder for each app that enables sharing. For example, a user with iWork apps will be able to wirelessly connect to their iPad as if it were a directly connected drive, and simply drag spreadsheet, presentation, or word processing files between their local system and the mobile device as desired.
Documents copied to the app's shared folder will be graphically presented by the app when it launches, sparing users from having to figure out where to look for their document files and avoiding any need to sort through different kinds of documents. The document listing also presents each file as a large preview akin to Quick View on the Mac OS X desktop.
And iPad app's documents can be presented in any way that makes sense, depending on how many and what kind of documents the individual iPad app uses. Apple demonstrated its Work apps scrolling through a quick list of documents, while its iBooks app presents its various digital books as titles in a virtual bookshelf.
Just like the iPhone, the iPad will sync some apps' documents via either iTunes or MobileMe, including photos, music, movies, TV shows, contacts, calendars, and bookmarks.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
I'm not buying this fluff piece of junk article.
Apple has for a long time been running .Mac or Mobile Me or whatever it is called. My year long experience with .mac sucked (it was overpriced, syncing took forever if it worked at all). And judging by the complaints of recent Mobile Me customers, the experience has not changed.
Don't be swayed by fluff pieces like this. Apple's online "Cloud" or whatever bu!!shi! experience will not differ from years gone by...
Hype. This is nothing but hype...
This philosophy is flawed in so many ways. Apple is not giving the end user MORE freedom, but less! Filetypes should act independent to programs for one reason only. LICENSING! Let's apply Apple's logic to the way my computer works now. Being a graphic guy, I switch between Photoshop and Fireworks all the time. Why would I want Photoshop to open and save graphic files when both applications treat the same file totally differently! I also script! There are some things Pages sucks at (script writing development). Why would I want to be in Pages only to write my scripts when scriptwriter pro does it much better?
Who says that a document that you wrote in Pages on the iPad (which can read/write Word docs and more, don't forget) *must* be worked on in Pages on your laptop or desktop or PC?
Maybe you should wait to have a stroke until after some more information is available.
PDFs is another great example. I want to open PDFs in Acrobat, not PREVIEW!
So how is that going to change from current usage? You set Acrobat to be your default PDF application and you're off. iPad isn't going to change this.
The docs you swap to/from the iPad don't *have* to be limited to the iPad app's equivalent on your computer, no more than you're currently limited.
I also want to put files on my thumb drive to send to clients, or upload them to box.net for review. Now what? I have to say to the client, "sorry. That thumbnail I rendered on my iPhone can only be used with this application software of which you have to buy..."
Yea, right.
So who said that was the case? Apps on the iPad expecting documents to be in their respective subdirectories says *nothing* about where you can put/take them on your computer.
Why is Apple giving me a reason to move over to the upcoming slate or a netbook running Linux? WHY! What's next Apple? Are you going to tell me that I have to put ice cream in a cone instead of a cup?
Maybe they're not telling you anything; it's just the voices in your head.
(Why is it that the voices never tell you to anything nice?)
I don't remember saying the iPhone wasn't a computer.
But we're splitting hairs. In an earlier post today, I explained my thoughts on this. I don't want to get into semantics.
But ask yourself what you think of if someone asks you what computing is, vs reading e-mail, writing a letter, looking at photos, etc.
We may have to stop thinking about devices such as an iPhone, Touch or iPad as being computers, even though inside they are.
The face they present to use isn't that of a computer, which when we think of one, we think of Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, etc.
This is different enough so that even though it does computing, we aren't doing computing when we're using it.
Get what I mean?
yes i do
months ago i said that if you count NETBOOKS AS a computer to give apple a low 5% market share i said iphones and i touches were also computers and should count in apple market share
i was the told i guess by jeff alone that iphones are not computers
they are
i guess i do agree it you facts as you state them
how did your appointments go ??
peace 9
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. The folders in the dock in SL mitigates that problem for most, but they're still in trouble if that folder gets removed from the dock. My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
you can tell each file where to go
you can tell each folder where to live
i made an alias of my whole file system and the put the whole thing inside one folder
every single thing i do goes there
even downloads and email notes
why is that so hard \\math is hard
folder is easy
peace
9
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
I don't think the idea of people thinking they want things organised "their way" really conflicts with what I said, just that the way most people seem to want to organise is to organise things in piles on the desktop. Also, of course most people understand the concept of folders within folders, but they still mostly like to put those folders al lover their desktop. This is exactly the same as the real world fear of filing in general that most people also seem to have. Highly organised business environments may be an exception here, but everywhere I've ever worked, things get filed in the cabinet when they are no longer needed and all the reports are done. Until that time they are on the (physical) desktop. It's not that people don't understand organisation, just that many if not most, like to have instant access to the stuff they are actually working on.
... Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. ...
Here, you are just completely mistaken. The user folder file system in OS-X is one of the simplest systems there is and it is actually *not* "deeply nested" at all. User folders are top level, and all the main folders are in underneath your user name. You just can't get any simpler than that.
... My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
Based on my experience, this puts you in a very unique and small-ish category among users, so maybe your experience doesn't really translate to what others do. You not only eschew the organisational structure of the OS, (which of course puts you in the category of those that actually know its there and understand it already), you have your own ideas about organisational structures that you intentionally implement.
IMO this is great, and it's something I do myself to a degree. My point is though that from what I've seen over the years, most folks just aren't like this, and don't do this.
Apple is right. When people are making a document, they just want to see a list of the pictures they can pick to drop into it. When they are making a sideshow, they just want to see a list of music that they can pick for it. People actually seem to like "libraries" of media as presented to them by iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes, etc. The recent removal of the HD from the desktop in OS-X 10.6 has actually been a bit of a boon for me and has lowered the support threshold a bit.
The age has passed when people need to know about the physical devices connected to their "computer system" or know anything about their computer at all. No one cares about storage media and how to manage them anymore, they want a "magic file-cabinet" and Apple is giving them what they want. this is not necessarily a bad thing.
It's not about a file system making someone nervous, so much as people like things organized their way, and no two people want it exactly the same way. With a Mac you have a lot of options, with the iPad you're rigidly locked into something counter-intuitive for most people (especially the 'files on the desktop' people!)
Also, the reason a lot of people don't understand the "user" system in OS X, is that nesting things so deeply is a dumb way to store things that you use regularly. It's very poorly designed. The folders in the dock in SL mitigates that problem for most, but they're still in trouble if that folder gets removed from the dock. My preferred method is a second hard drive that I can organize folder structure however I want without any "user" or "Library" crap to dig through. With an iPad (and an iPhone for that matter), what I'd much prefer is an SD slot so I can not only store all my working files on a card, but easily move them to any other place I want to use them without having to sync to anything.
Considering that you almost never have to go directly into a folder, it's not such a big deal if you know how it works. If you don't, it's another story.
Very few people have a second HDD, even for backups.
Honestly, using a folder structure is no more complex than using a filing cabinet. Frankly, I think you're overplaying the complexity involved here. It's a problem that isn't broken on the desktop. It's a challenge on the ipad where content creation is going to occur because the filesystem is hidden from the user.
I'm sure apple will work it out (agreeing with melgross here). They realised that 9 5x4 grids of apps is information assault and solved it by implementing a search pane.
As it stands though, anything more than a few dozens of docs and flat is going to look painful.
Studies and interviews have shown that people leave files on the desktop in both Mac and Windows PCs precisely because they don't want to bother with looking for files in the folder structure. Spotlight was supposed to cure that on the Mac side, but this behavior persists. (Look it up on Google.)
By the way, my Mac desktop is empty (other than the drives), and my Windows desktop has a few application shortcuts on it.
Honestly, using a folder structure is no more complex than using a filing cabinet. Frankly, I think you're overplaying the complexity involved here. It's a problem that isn't broken on the desktop. It's a challenge on the ipad where content creation is going to occur because the filesystem is hidden from the user.
I'm sure apple will work it out (agreeing with melgross here). They realised that 9 5x4 grids of apps is information assault and solved it by implementing a search pane.
As it stands though, anything more than a few dozens of docs and flat is going to look painful.
Yes, the search pane is very good as long as you know part of the name.
Conventional computers are way too complex for the average person, no matter what someone may say.
It's like changing spark plugs in a car. It's really easy, with a couple of tools, if you know what you're doing, and are interested enough to want to do it. But most people wouldn't even know where to look, and that includes most guys nowadays.
I'm not buying this fluff piece of junk article.
Apple has for a long time been running .Mac or Mobile Me or whatever it is called. My year long experience with .mac sucked (it was overpriced, syncing took forever if it worked at all). And judging by the complaints of recent Mobile Me customers, the experience has not changed.
Don't be swayed by fluff pieces like this. Apple's online "Cloud" or whatever bu!!shi! experience will not differ from years gone by...
Hype. This is nothing but hype...
That's likely what some of those server farms are for. Now, Apple relies on two third parties. They obviously feel that if they control it themselves, it will run better.
I'm not an enthusiast of the cloud yet, but at some point it will work really well. Right now, it's just too slow. I've got a 1 Gb/s network at home, and even "n" seems slow when passing large files around. So the typical broadband connection of 3.9 Mb/s is glacial. That's not Apple's fault. It's only about 400 KB/s. That's nothing.
yes i do
months ago i said that if you count NETBOOKS AS a computer to give apple a low 5% market share i said iphones and i touches were also computers and should count in apple market share
i was the told i guess by jeff alone that iphones are not computers
they are
i guess i do agree it you facts as you state them
how did your appointments go ??
peace 9
What I meant was that they use a phone OS, and aren't counted in with desktop and laptops as a computer OS. They're a mobile platform. I didn't mean that they're not computers.
I was going to visit you, but the doctor did some laser surgery when I went in tuesday, so I was back home that day, and only went to the other doctor on Wednesday, then back home again.
I'm not buying this fluff piece of junk article.
Apple has for a long time been running .Mac or Mobile Me or whatever it is called. My year long experience with .mac sucked (it was overpriced, syncing took forever if it worked at all). And judging by the complaints of recent Mobile Me customers, the experience has not changed.
Don't be swayed by fluff pieces like this. Apple's online "Cloud" or whatever bu!!shi! experience will not differ from years gone by...
Hype. This is nothing but hype...
I'm not here to argue, just to present an alternative point of view. My syncing via mobileme has run flawlessly and push is synced very, very quickly. I don't wonder whether a calendar entry or contact edit on my iPhone will appear on my laptop--or even whether it'll be there quickly. It just is. I sync photos and music when i connect my devices, and i use the "cloud" to sync bookmarks, contacts (700+), calendar entries...not sure whether i'm forgetting anything. From what i read, the iPad'll do all that AND docs (wirelessly? dunno). I'm looking forward to it without doubts or fears, based on my past experience.
From my pov, I think you had an atypical experience.
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?
Unfortunately not.
You can have separate albums - one for when you're on the move, the other back home on your main hard disk. There are apps for managing/moving photos between libraries but not seamless.
It would be brilliant to have a master library with ALL your photos - either stored on an external disk at home, or on your other home/work Mac - and select a subset to sync to the smaller Mac.
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.
Do we know that their iPad photo app actually allows any manipulation of photos? Like crop, rotate, change brightness, create album, name faces?
If so (that's great.. and) it would be important to only have a subset of photos. I can see having the last 3 months automatically on my iPad, plus selected events or albums as per the iPhone/AppleTV. The ability to look at them, delete some, fix some would be great... then have the smaller subset sync back up to the master library COMPLETE WITH CHANGES.
I know it's not a simple need, but it is an incredibly useful one...