not sure what you are getting at? are you saying that the engineer was mistaken in telling me that?
Look at the banners in the image. They clearly state “OS X iPhone” and “OS X Leopard”. Not to mention the press releases and videos of Jobs saying that they spent years creating iPhone OS from Mac OS X.
PS: Why are posts not being understood today. It’s too many people so it has to be me.
Apple's entire existence today is the answer to the netbook. The fallacy is assuming Apple needs a targeted "netbook killer". Apple will do what they always do - release superior products that are compelling in and of themselves. No need to target Netbooks - they aren't worthy of it.
And what a shock - with a nicer choice like the iPad, netbook sales are tanking. Probably to the relief of manufacturers who haven't yet figured out how to get meaningful revenue from them without ticking off bargain concious customers.
And people are honestly puzzled as to why Apple doesn't choose to "compete" in this space, along with the majority of all other high volume, low margin computers? For all their millions of sales of not only netbooks, but other low margin computers what has it gained PC manufacturers? Marketshare, sure - but you can't tell me they wouldn't rather have Apple's balance sheet.
I'm glad PC clone makers are there for those who need them. I'm also glad Apple is there with something better. I'm glad I have the choice to pay a small premium for a much better experience.
[QUOTE=solipsism;1721099]Look at the banners in the image. They clearly state ?OS X iPhone? and ?OS X Leopard?. Not to mention the press releases and videos of Jobs saying that they spent years creating iPhone OS from Mac OS X.
os x IS iphone os. i understood where the engineer was coming from when he said that. it depends on what your defintion of IS is....
os x IS iphone os. i understood where the engineer was coming from when he said that. it depends on what your defintion of IS is....
It?s all OS X and under that generalized umbrella is Mac OS and iOS. A ?Tech Taxonomy? if you will. From there we can further break Mac OS and iOS down in more sub categories.
It?s all OS X and under that generalized umbrella is Mac OS and iOS. A ?Tech Taxonomy? if you will. From there we can further break Mac OS and iOS down in more sub categories.
Look at the banners in the image. They clearly state “OS X iPhone” and “OS X Leopard”. Not to mention the press releases and videos of Jobs saying that they spent years creating iPhone OS from Mac OS X.
PS: Why are posts not being understood today. It’s too many people so it has to be me.
[ Its you. No doubt about it... ]
When Sj introduced the original iphone he made a big point out the fact that they had managed to squeeze OSX into it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I have a feeling even Apple is learning a lot from iOS in regards to how archaic the desktop OS condept really is. I wouldnt be surprised to see Mac OS X 10.7 being a complete UI overall to an extent we haven't seen in the computing world since the change to a GUI.
I completely agree. This became clear to me when the iPad was launched. IOS is the first OS that can lay claim to being user friendly. I know there is a lot of resistance but once the pad was launched there really was no way back imo.
Quote:
Don't get me wrong, most of CocoaTouch makes no sense for a physical keyboard and trackpad input with a mouse pointer, but there are many ways to streamline the complexity of the system for the average user. On top that, there is a lot Apple could gain by making the Mac OS UI familiar to those who have only used iDevices running iOS. The iPad was a brilliant rewrite of CocoaTouch for a large I/O, so much so that some of jesters here said was exactly the same as the iPhone OS used for the 3.5" displays.
The fact that a new OS UI that is instantly familiar and usable to millions of users already familiar through the iPhone or iPad is a huge bonus but even without that IOS would point to the future. Apple has led us here and there is no way they will turn back. Their aim has always been to create a user friendly computer experience and IOS is it. CocoaTouch does not make sense for a mouse pointer, but I can't see anything about IOS that wouldn't work just fine with a mouse (from a user perspective - technically I would not know). No matter what complaints people throw at IOS as the new Apple OS there's always the answer that 'there'll probably be an app for that'.
Love my MacBook Air - Perfect laptop for life on the move. Easier to carry around than my iMac!! Screen is a good size, like the keyboard, speed is fine for Email, Word, Excel and Parallels. Wish for greater capacity SSD drive, but otherwise no complaints..
The fact that a new OS UI that is instantly familiar and usable to millions of users already familiar through the iPhone or iPad is a huge bonus but even without that IOS would point to the future. Apple has led us here and there is no way they will turn back. Their aim has always been to create a user friendly computer experience and IOS is it. CocoaTouch does not make sense for a mouse pointer, but I can't see anything about IOS that wouldn't work just fine with a mouse (from a user perspective - technically I would not know). No matter what complaints people throw at IOS as the new Apple OS there's always the answer that 'there'll probably be an app for that'.
Add to the fact that Snow Leopard is almost completely the same UI that came with Leopard, which is nearly 3 years old, I have to wonder if Apple is planning to reinvent the PC UI once again.
It is clear that while the air has some fans, it has failed to find a larger market. A lower price never hurts a product. Redesigning it to be more netbook like won't hurt, either, as long as it has clearly superior hardware to netbooks (no Atom).
No company every really paired Intel CULV processors with the original Nvidia ION- but it's a year or two too late to launch that ship and call it high tech.
It's not happening. The Air would be merged with the macbook before the iPad. The Air is supposed to be a full fledged notebook in an impossibly thin shell. As the macbook shrinks, the distinction between the two is blurred.
Very true. So they continually improve the MBP (potentially without a DVD as someone said), and it's got the internals in they want. Now they ask "can we make a lighter/smaller version of this?".
If the size is constrained by the screen only, then that's easy - smaller screen is slightly cheaper and everything else stays the same. You get a lighter/smaller Mac.
If the 13" MBP is already using every internal space it's got, then what are the options to make it smaller. There seem to be 3 options
1) Push the edge with the latest greatest small intel chips/prototypes, small drives, smaller batteries. More expensive, but you don't sacrifice capability when you get smaller
2) Go for a smaller Intel chip (like the Atom) which also draws less power, but is slower. This can be cheaper but it is less capable.
(oh - extra option... 1+2... slightly less capable and more expensive. The original MBA)
3) Do something entirely different. A4, iOS. Cheaper & still very responsive - a far less broad system but geared to its specific functions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron
The real problem with this concept is that iOS is made for touch input, while keyboards need a mouse or touchpad for easy pointing.
I think that if iOS is modified so as to easily use a touchpad or mouse, it might be a good concept in a keyboard-included form factor.
I haven't used the iPad+keyboard doc, that'd have the same issues - does it?. Also generally, would landscape mode make things better or worse, or the ability to fold the screen back far enough to make it flat with the keyboard?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
This may come to pass. I think they need to work out a few details, like the security of a shared file system, for example, but, it's entirely possible that minimalist iOS systems could become the norm. I think we could see these in both notebook and imac form factors, but, like AppleTV, just because they are iOS, doesn't mean they will have touchscreen interfaces.
True. I think the file system is a BIG issue - Apple needs to do something there anyway. I'm betting on our iOS login being intimately linked to a MobileMe account, so when you're logged in all your data is available (partially synced/cached).
two paper clips are twice as heavy as one paper clip. the difference is still negligible.
By your logic, the weight difference between an Expedition and a Ferrari is negligible. There is never anything negligible about a 2-to-1 difference. The difference in weight between an iron atom and an aluminium atom is far from negligible in the context of atomic weights. In the context of mobile consumer electronic devices, the difference in weight between a MacBook Air and an iPad is not at all negligible.
Yea, when Air was first introd I thought it would become the 13 inch Macbook Pro. In its current state, there is really no point to getting AIR in my opinion. Macbook pro is really slim, and while a tad heavier it is by no means some unliftable burden. If you want to go smaller, I think iPad is a great option. Just doesn't look good for air in my view.
Again, the smart phones before the iPhone sucked. His criticism (much like with the tablets) was well founded. It so painful to think about just how bad they were, most people totally take for granted mature app stores with lots of quality choices, syncing all kinds of content with your phone, computer and the cloud, surfing the Internet and having it be useable, upgrading you phone OS for new features without having to get a new phone - none of that stuff was widespread or even very useable before the iPhone. Too many competing interests that were self serving for either the OS manufacturers, carriers or phone producers. What got lost was the end user!
In your opinion, they sucked - lots and lots of people would disagree. Did they have the capabilities of today - no, but technology progresses and things become possible that were not. It is like saying the first cell phones sucked because they were not the size of phones today.
Some of your criticism is just wrong. The Palm OS (for the phones and the PDA's) had thousands of apps.
Secondly, you are projecting the present on the past - the "cloud" and high speed wireless connections did not really exist back in the 90's. You cannot fault a product for doing something that was not possible at the time - not that it was not widespread or useable, it was not reasonably possible.
True. I think the file system is a BIG issue - Apple needs to do something there anyway. I'm betting on our iOS login being intimately linked to a MobileMe account, so when you're logged in all your data is available (partially synced/cached).
I'm not so sure if it is as big a problem as all that. I remember when OSX was introduced the fact that the Finder was in fact an app on top of Unix was discussed at some length. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finder_(software)) I don't see why a similar type of app cannot be built for IOS.
In your opinion, they sucked - lots and lots of people would disagree. Did they have the capabilities of today - no, but technology progresses and things become possible that were not. It is like saying the first cell phones sucked because they were not the size of phones today.
Yep, technology progresses but he's comparing the iPhone then to smartphones then. You can say how great they were (and that's your opinion) but imperical data shows just how bad the entire inustry was before the iPhone and how Apple made it better for consumers even if you choose to hate the iPhone.
Let's examine some of the basics. The first iPhone didn't have fastest clocked CPU, didn't have highest megapixel camera, didn't even have 3G. Yet for some reason all eyes were on Apple trying to copy Apple from the HW to the GUI to the services. Despite all this Apple was able to take 40% of the handset market profits orbthe world (and I think the only handset vendor to have a higher valuation than it did in 2007). Yet the dissenters kept saying how great smartphones were then, how Apple was foolishly coming into a healthy, thriving, saturated, mature market. I can't for the life of me see how you can say those phones were so great when everything shows that they weren't, as proven swiftly and dessively by Apple.
I'm not so sure if it is as big a problem as all that. I remember when OSX was introduced the fact that the Finder was in fact an app on top of Unix was discussed at some length. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finder_(software)) I don't see why a similar type of app cannot be built for IOS.
I think Finder is an "Old World" app an don't expect Apple to ever add it to the iPhone. It goes against the simple, intuitive nature that has made iDevices so popular and I think Apple will try to resolve that for Mac OS X 10.7.
Does my mom need to have access to Library when she clicks on her name in Finder? Why can't she put her Audiobooks and iBooks in there, it's titled "Library"?
See what I'm getting at? I don't think users won't have access to their user settings, as well as think Apple will offer file access in iOS as the ecosystem and usage increases, I just don't think it will be a Finder type app.
I think Finder is an "Old World" app an don't expect Apple to ever add it to the iPhone. It goes against the simple, intuitive nature that has made iDevices so popular and I think Apple will try to resolve that for Mac OS X 10.7.
Does my mom need to have access to Library when she clicks on her name in Finder? Why can't she put her Audiobooks and iBooks in there, it's titled "Library"?
See what I'm getting at? I don't think users won't have access to their user settings, as well as think Apple will offer file access in iOS as the ecosystem and usage increases, I just don't think it will be a Finder type app.
I agree. The Finder - or filesystem as we know it is definitely outdated. It never really worked as it was intended anyway. For some it did but most people struggle with folders and files. I certainly do and always have done and I am definitely a power user. The best way to store and archive files / data is by using metadata. The trouble is that metadata is dull and boring and very few people can be bothered. Apple has tried a little with key words and a star system in iPhoto but I bet very few people are even aware of these functions.
I was speculating that in a world of a new, simplified file system, there could also be a file system app that would allow more advanced access. Not necessarily a Finder app, but something that can manage thousands of files.
I agree. The Finder - or filesystem as we know it is definitely outdated. It never really worked as it was intended anyway. For some it did but most people struggle with folders and files. I certainly do and always have done and I am definitely a power user. The best way to store and archive files / data is by using metadata. The trouble is that metadata is dull and boring and very few people can be bothered. Apple has tried a little with key words and a star system in iPhoto but I bet very few people are even aware of these functions.
I was speculating that in a world of a new, simplified file system, there could also be a file system app that would allow more advanced access. Not necessarily a Finder app, but something that can manage thousands of files.
Usually I can think of a few ways issues could be tackled but I'm drawing a blank on this one, for both iOS and the next version of Mac OS.
With iOS having a central depot all apps can access seems straightforward but infest this could be a security risk if one app could write to any all files that could then be accessed by all other apps.
For Mac OS hiding Library and System you could just make more folders invisible to the user, but make it easy to toggle for power users, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem with Desktop OSes.
If you or anyone else have some ideas I'd love to her them.
The essential problem with filesystems is that they are hierarchical and humans don't think hierarchically. There have been tonnes of academic and corporate research on how to replace filesystems with something non-hierarchical but putting the ideas into practice has been difficult perhaps in the greatest part due to compatibility issues. Here I think iOS has made progress and will continue to make progress. There is no shortage of ideas to draw from.
Comments
not sure what you are getting at? are you saying that the engineer was mistaken in telling me that?
Look at the banners in the image. They clearly state “OS X iPhone” and “OS X Leopard”. Not to mention the press releases and videos of Jobs saying that they spent years creating iPhone OS from Mac OS X.
PS: Why are posts not being understood today. It’s too many people so it has to be me.
Apple's answer to the netbook.
Apple's entire existence today is the answer to the netbook. The fallacy is assuming Apple needs a targeted "netbook killer". Apple will do what they always do - release superior products that are compelling in and of themselves. No need to target Netbooks - they aren't worthy of it.
And what a shock - with a nicer choice like the iPad, netbook sales are tanking. Probably to the relief of manufacturers who haven't yet figured out how to get meaningful revenue from them without ticking off bargain concious customers.
And people are honestly puzzled as to why Apple doesn't choose to "compete" in this space, along with the majority of all other high volume, low margin computers? For all their millions of sales of not only netbooks, but other low margin computers what has it gained PC manufacturers? Marketshare, sure - but you can't tell me they wouldn't rather have Apple's balance sheet.
I'm glad PC clone makers are there for those who need them. I'm also glad Apple is there with something better. I'm glad I have the choice to pay a small premium for a much better experience.
Choice - it's a wonderful thing.
os x IS iphone os. i understood where the engineer was coming from when he said that. it depends on what your defintion of IS is....
os x IS iphone os. i understood where the engineer was coming from when he said that. it depends on what your defintion of IS is....
It?s all OS X and under that generalized umbrella is Mac OS and iOS. A ?Tech Taxonomy? if you will. From there we can further break Mac OS and iOS down in more sub categories.
It?s all OS X and under that generalized umbrella is Mac OS and iOS. A ?Tech Taxonomy? if you will. From there we can further break Mac OS and iOS down in more sub categories.
its a fun, wonderful family tree to be sure!
Look at the banners in the image. They clearly state “OS X iPhone” and “OS X Leopard”. Not to mention the press releases and videos of Jobs saying that they spent years creating iPhone OS from Mac OS X.
PS: Why are posts not being understood today. It’s too many people so it has to be me.
[ Its you. No doubt about it...
When Sj introduced the original iphone he made a big point out the fact that they had managed to squeeze OSX into it.
I have a feeling even Apple is learning a lot from iOS in regards to how archaic the desktop OS condept really is. I wouldnt be surprised to see Mac OS X 10.7 being a complete UI overall to an extent we haven't seen in the computing world since the change to a GUI.
I completely agree. This became clear to me when the iPad was launched. IOS is the first OS that can lay claim to being user friendly. I know there is a lot of resistance but once the pad was launched there really was no way back imo.
Don't get me wrong, most of CocoaTouch makes no sense for a physical keyboard and trackpad input with a mouse pointer, but there are many ways to streamline the complexity of the system for the average user. On top that, there is a lot Apple could gain by making the Mac OS UI familiar to those who have only used iDevices running iOS. The iPad was a brilliant rewrite of CocoaTouch for a large I/O, so much so that some of jesters here said was exactly the same as the iPhone OS used for the 3.5" displays.
The fact that a new OS UI that is instantly familiar and usable to millions of users already familiar through the iPhone or iPad is a huge bonus but even without that IOS would point to the future. Apple has led us here and there is no way they will turn back. Their aim has always been to create a user friendly computer experience and IOS is it. CocoaTouch does not make sense for a mouse pointer, but I can't see anything about IOS that wouldn't work just fine with a mouse (from a user perspective - technically I would not know). No matter what complaints people throw at IOS as the new Apple OS there's always the answer that 'there'll probably be an app for that'.
The fact that a new OS UI that is instantly familiar and usable to millions of users already familiar through the iPhone or iPad is a huge bonus but even without that IOS would point to the future. Apple has led us here and there is no way they will turn back. Their aim has always been to create a user friendly computer experience and IOS is it. CocoaTouch does not make sense for a mouse pointer, but I can't see anything about IOS that wouldn't work just fine with a mouse (from a user perspective - technically I would not know). No matter what complaints people throw at IOS as the new Apple OS there's always the answer that 'there'll probably be an app for that'.
Add to the fact that Snow Leopard is almost completely the same UI that came with Leopard, which is nearly 3 years old, I have to wonder if Apple is planning to reinvent the PC UI once again.
No company every really paired Intel CULV processors with the original Nvidia ION- but it's a year or two too late to launch that ship and call it high tech.
It's not happening. The Air would be merged with the macbook before the iPad. The Air is supposed to be a full fledged notebook in an impossibly thin shell. As the macbook shrinks, the distinction between the two is blurred.
Very true. So they continually improve the MBP (potentially without a DVD as someone said), and it's got the internals in they want. Now they ask "can we make a lighter/smaller version of this?".
If the size is constrained by the screen only, then that's easy - smaller screen is slightly cheaper and everything else stays the same. You get a lighter/smaller Mac.
If the 13" MBP is already using every internal space it's got, then what are the options to make it smaller. There seem to be 3 options
1) Push the edge with the latest greatest small intel chips/prototypes, small drives, smaller batteries. More expensive, but you don't sacrifice capability when you get smaller
2) Go for a smaller Intel chip (like the Atom) which also draws less power, but is slower. This can be cheaper but it is less capable.
(oh - extra option... 1+2... slightly less capable and more expensive. The original MBA)
3) Do something entirely different. A4, iOS. Cheaper & still very responsive - a far less broad system but geared to its specific functions.
The real problem with this concept is that iOS is made for touch input, while keyboards need a mouse or touchpad for easy pointing.
I think that if iOS is modified so as to easily use a touchpad or mouse, it might be a good concept in a keyboard-included form factor.
I haven't used the iPad+keyboard doc, that'd have the same issues - does it?. Also generally, would landscape mode make things better or worse, or the ability to fold the screen back far enough to make it flat with the keyboard?
This may come to pass. I think they need to work out a few details, like the security of a shared file system, for example, but, it's entirely possible that minimalist iOS systems could become the norm. I think we could see these in both notebook and imac form factors, but, like AppleTV, just because they are iOS, doesn't mean they will have touchscreen interfaces.
True. I think the file system is a BIG issue - Apple needs to do something there anyway. I'm betting on our iOS login being intimately linked to a MobileMe account, so when you're logged in all your data is available (partially synced/cached).
http://gizmodo.com/5435350/chrome-os...h-ssd-and-more
Multitouch, 64GB SSD, ARM CPU....
two paper clips are twice as heavy as one paper clip. the difference is still negligible.
By your logic, the weight difference between an Expedition and a Ferrari is negligible. There is never anything negligible about a 2-to-1 difference. The difference in weight between an iron atom and an aluminium atom is far from negligible in the context of atomic weights. In the context of mobile consumer electronic devices, the difference in weight between a MacBook Air and an iPad is not at all negligible.
Again, the smart phones before the iPhone sucked. His criticism (much like with the tablets) was well founded. It so painful to think about just how bad they were, most people totally take for granted mature app stores with lots of quality choices, syncing all kinds of content with your phone, computer and the cloud, surfing the Internet and having it be useable, upgrading you phone OS for new features without having to get a new phone - none of that stuff was widespread or even very useable before the iPhone. Too many competing interests that were self serving for either the OS manufacturers, carriers or phone producers. What got lost was the end user!
In your opinion, they sucked - lots and lots of people would disagree. Did they have the capabilities of today - no, but technology progresses and things become possible that were not. It is like saying the first cell phones sucked because they were not the size of phones today.
Some of your criticism is just wrong. The Palm OS (for the phones and the PDA's) had thousands of apps.
Secondly, you are projecting the present on the past - the "cloud" and high speed wireless connections did not really exist back in the 90's. You cannot fault a product for doing something that was not possible at the time - not that it was not widespread or useable, it was not reasonably possible.
True. I think the file system is a BIG issue - Apple needs to do something there anyway. I'm betting on our iOS login being intimately linked to a MobileMe account, so when you're logged in all your data is available (partially synced/cached).
I'm not so sure if it is as big a problem as all that. I remember when OSX was introduced the fact that the Finder was in fact an app on top of Unix was discussed at some length. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finder_(software)) I don't see why a similar type of app cannot be built for IOS.
In your opinion, they sucked - lots and lots of people would disagree. Did they have the capabilities of today - no, but technology progresses and things become possible that were not. It is like saying the first cell phones sucked because they were not the size of phones today.
Yep, technology progresses but he's comparing the iPhone then to smartphones then. You can say how great they were (and that's your opinion) but imperical data shows just how bad the entire inustry was before the iPhone and how Apple made it better for consumers even if you choose to hate the iPhone.
Let's examine some of the basics. The first iPhone didn't have fastest clocked CPU, didn't have highest megapixel camera, didn't even have 3G. Yet for some reason all eyes were on Apple trying to copy Apple from the HW to the GUI to the services. Despite all this Apple was able to take 40% of the handset market profits orbthe world (and I think the only handset vendor to have a higher valuation than it did in 2007). Yet the dissenters kept saying how great smartphones were then, how Apple was foolishly coming into a healthy, thriving, saturated, mature market. I can't for the life of me see how you can say those phones were so great when everything shows that they weren't, as proven swiftly and dessively by Apple.
I'm not so sure if it is as big a problem as all that. I remember when OSX was introduced the fact that the Finder was in fact an app on top of Unix was discussed at some length. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finder_(software)) I don't see why a similar type of app cannot be built for IOS.
I think Finder is an "Old World" app an don't expect Apple to ever add it to the iPhone. It goes against the simple, intuitive nature that has made iDevices so popular and I think Apple will try to resolve that for Mac OS X 10.7.
Does my mom need to have access to Library when she clicks on her name in Finder? Why can't she put her Audiobooks and iBooks in there, it's titled "Library"?
See what I'm getting at? I don't think users won't have access to their user settings, as well as think Apple will offer file access in iOS as the ecosystem and usage increases, I just don't think it will be a Finder type app.
I think Finder is an "Old World" app an don't expect Apple to ever add it to the iPhone. It goes against the simple, intuitive nature that has made iDevices so popular and I think Apple will try to resolve that for Mac OS X 10.7.
Does my mom need to have access to Library when she clicks on her name in Finder? Why can't she put her Audiobooks and iBooks in there, it's titled "Library"?
See what I'm getting at? I don't think users won't have access to their user settings, as well as think Apple will offer file access in iOS as the ecosystem and usage increases, I just don't think it will be a Finder type app.
I agree. The Finder - or filesystem as we know it is definitely outdated. It never really worked as it was intended anyway. For some it did but most people struggle with folders and files. I certainly do and always have done and I am definitely a power user. The best way to store and archive files / data is by using metadata. The trouble is that metadata is dull and boring and very few people can be bothered. Apple has tried a little with key words and a star system in iPhoto but I bet very few people are even aware of these functions.
I was speculating that in a world of a new, simplified file system, there could also be a file system app that would allow more advanced access. Not necessarily a Finder app, but something that can manage thousands of files.
I agree. The Finder - or filesystem as we know it is definitely outdated. It never really worked as it was intended anyway. For some it did but most people struggle with folders and files. I certainly do and always have done and I am definitely a power user. The best way to store and archive files / data is by using metadata. The trouble is that metadata is dull and boring and very few people can be bothered. Apple has tried a little with key words and a star system in iPhoto but I bet very few people are even aware of these functions.
I was speculating that in a world of a new, simplified file system, there could also be a file system app that would allow more advanced access. Not necessarily a Finder app, but something that can manage thousands of files.
Usually I can think of a few ways issues could be tackled but I'm drawing a blank on this one, for both iOS and the next version of Mac OS.
With iOS having a central depot all apps can access seems straightforward but infest this could be a security risk if one app could write to any all files that could then be accessed by all other apps.
For Mac OS hiding Library and System you could just make more folders invisible to the user, but make it easy to toggle for power users, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem with Desktop OSes.
If you or anyone else have some ideas I'd love to her them.