I thought they were getting rid of Skeumorphism? These gimmicky toys are pretty useless in everyday use - I don't use Cover Flow in any way, shape or form. As a previous poster has said, it just creates a need for more horsepower without adding anything useful. To me that just makes it stupid.
I use Cover Flow all the time. You might not have a use for it but others certainly do.
He is my scenario: I reuse a lot of graphic elements from one document to the next. Say I have a brochure that links to dozens of image files. I remember using a particular image in that brochure and now I need to find it again to use in a different document. Instead of opening the large brochure or Adobe Bridge to find it, or using Quick Look one image at a time, with Cover Flow, I can shuffle through the Links folder in seconds and find the one I want. If you do not reuse a lot of images I can see why you don't need it, but I find it very valuable. I'm not sure how useful shuffling through a bunch of different application windows would be as most major applications that I use have tabbed interfaces anyway.
Obviously your statement is patently false (no pun intended), because HERE’S A PATENT THEY’VE BEEN GRANTED THAT STATES OTHERWISE.
Geez, how stupid a statement can you make? And no, that’s not a challenge.
Man, multitouch… what a gimmick, eh?
Your zealotry is so amusing, yet your logic and understanding are so..... underwhelming, disappointing even. Just because some company gets a patent on something doesn't mean they originated it. Often in the patent world it is a race to see who can get it through the system first and also who has the money to do it. Clever writing is a big part of patent applications. Just wording something the right way can decide whether a patent is granted or not. I can't explain why the originators of this concept didn't bother to get a patent on it. Maybe they had a bad patent writer. Maybe it was a lack of money. Maybe the project died before the patent phase occurred.
Clearly others had this concept working years before Apple. Ideas are often stolen in the business world. It seems that Apple isn't above it.
You've now had several people site sources for such desktop arrangements that pre-dated the patent and you still made this statement. You would make a great cult follower because you, Tallest Skil, are a true believer. You would swallow the Kool Aid (thought they actually used a different brand).
Typed on my HP machine running GNU/Linux with Compiz.
Yes I see that another group had these effects before Compiz. The difference is that Compiz is free and if Apple does it the program will be part of a commercial product.
Comments
Two words: Look up.
I am looking up, and all I see is Compiz, Linux.
http://www.freedesktop.org/software/XDevConf/LG-Xdevconf.pdf
I thought they were getting rid of Skeumorphism? These gimmicky toys are pretty useless in everyday use - I don't use Cover Flow in any way, shape or form. As a previous poster has said, it just creates a need for more horsepower without adding anything useful. To me that just makes it stupid.
I use Cover Flow all the time. You might not have a use for it but others certainly do.
He is my scenario: I reuse a lot of graphic elements from one document to the next. Say I have a brochure that links to dozens of image files. I remember using a particular image in that brochure and now I need to find it again to use in a different document. Instead of opening the large brochure or Adobe Bridge to find it, or using Quick Look one image at a time, with Cover Flow, I can shuffle through the Links folder in seconds and find the one I want. If you do not reuse a lot of images I can see why you don't need it, but I find it very valuable. I'm not sure how useful shuffling through a bunch of different application windows would be as most major applications that I use have tabbed interfaces anyway.
Obviously your statement is patently false (no pun intended), because HERE’S A PATENT THEY’VE BEEN GRANTED THAT STATES OTHERWISE.
Geez, how stupid a statement can you make? And no, that’s not a challenge.
Man, multitouch… what a gimmick, eh?
Your zealotry is so amusing, yet your logic and understanding are so..... underwhelming, disappointing even. Just because some company gets a patent on something doesn't mean they originated it. Often in the patent world it is a race to see who can get it through the system first and also who has the money to do it. Clever writing is a big part of patent applications. Just wording something the right way can decide whether a patent is granted or not. I can't explain why the originators of this concept didn't bother to get a patent on it. Maybe they had a bad patent writer. Maybe it was a lack of money. Maybe the project died before the patent phase occurred.
Clearly others had this concept working years before Apple. Ideas are often stolen in the business world. It seems that Apple isn't above it.
You've now had several people site sources for such desktop arrangements that pre-dated the patent and you still made this statement.
You would make a great cult follower because you, Tallest Skil, are a true believer. You would swallow the Kool Aid (thought they actually used a different brand).
Typed on my HP machine running GNU/Linux with Compiz.
Typed on my HP machine running GNU/Linux with Compiz.
lol.
lol.
Yes I see that another group had these effects before Compiz. The difference is that Compiz is free and if Apple does it the program will be part of a commercial product.
Keep moving those goalposts.
Wow, first time to hear about tilt UI control. Nice post, I am learned.
I conceive that .NET UI components are not able to make out these effects.