I'm concerned that you take time away from making cool stuff to come here and argue with kim here, moki. It would be a better use of your time to convince your local representative to push a bill to create a secure, fenced-in reservation out in the middle of Montana for people suffering from Onlinear Noetalitis. This way, hopefully they will decide to start talking amongst themselves, confirming their fears and suspicions with each other as only a group of babbling idiots can. Then, maybe they will form a nice little religion, find a dashing (in comparison with the rest of them) speaker/leader, transform the religion into a cult of sorts, and maybe one day the leader will tell them that it's time to drink up and they'll just die. Problem solved!
That's fine, but it's irrelevant as to which API they choose to use. That, I believe, was moki's point.
It may have been moki's point but it wasn't mine. This whole thing was thrown way off course thanks to moki.
I wasn't talking about Cocoa's merits or cons over Carbon in my posts at the beginning of the thread, I was talking about the merits of rewriting the Finder and rewriting it in Cocoa.
So please, stop changing the conversation around and making it look like a Cocoa/Carbon debate. Please, for the love of God.
The point was originally the possibilities of rewriting the Finder and moki turned it into some ****in' debate. Not to mention I wrote this over a month ago.
Way to go moki. You did it.
Your elementary school reading comprehension has brought this thread to a new low.
If I were to summarize what I said and what moki said, it would sound a little like this:
Me-"The Finder sucks. It should be rewritten. Apple is moving most of their apps to Cocoa. The Finder should be rewritten in Cocoa to make use of the current and future Cocoa APIs."
moki-"Why? Apple should use whatever it wants. Carbon is just as good as Cocoa."
Me-"wtf? This isn't a Cocoa vs Carbon thread...this is a Finder should be rewritten thread."
It may have been moki's point but it wasn't mine. This whole thing was thrown way off course thanks to moki.
It wasn't your inane assertions?
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
I wasn't talking about Cocoa's merits or cons over Carbon in my posts at the beginning of the thread, I was talking about the merits of rewriting the Finder and rewriting it in Cocoa.
You have still yet to demonstrate any credible reason why Apple should scrap hundreds of thousands of man-hours of work put into the Carbon Finder, and re-write it from scratch in Cocoa.
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Way to go moki. You did it.
Your elementary school reading comprehension has brought this thread to a new low.
Me-"The Finder sucks. It should be rewritten. Apple is moving most of their apps to Cocoa. The Finder should be rewritten in Cocoa to make use of the current and future Cocoa APIs."
If you have *any* clue what it means to rewrite something like the Finder, I find it highly unlikely you'd be proposing such a thing.
*If* the Finder is ever rewritten in Cocoa, you can be assured that it will be a decision from Management, not from Engineering. ie, a political decision, not one based on the merits of chucking away a large, well-tested codebase.
If you have *any* clue what it means to rewrite something like the Finder, I find it highly unlikely you'd be proposing such a thing.
Just curious...before the mods lock this thread up...have you written a 'Finder' lately? No? I didn't think so.
I'm sure it's no easy task...but the guy at Cocoa Tech did it. He was able to write one all by himself...what's stopping a highly talented team of about 5 people to rewrite the Finder in the last year.
Portions of code get rewritten...whole programs get rewritten. You know this and I know this. Get over it. Most often than not the rewrite proves to be beneficial...even if it meant investing time that could have been used to continue to tack on to the old codebase.
Ask indigofield's Justin Wood who's rewriting Proteus almost in whole...making Proteus faster, more flexible, and overall more pleasant.
So what exactly are trying to tell me, Mr. Welch? Are you trying to tell me that once a certain number of hours is invested into a certain piece of software, it should be out of the question to rewrite it?
Nothing is being 'chucked away'...you learn from old code base mistakes...you use what might still be good.
You're saying 'Not really' to BuonRoto but I think you're really looking for a fight since you seem to be looking long and hard to push my buttons.
Just curious...before the mods lock this thread up...have you written a 'Finder' lately? No? I didn't think so.
Actually, I did write a file management program years ago, and I also am quite familiar with working on projects with hundreds of thousands of lines of code. I'm also familiar not just with coding, but also the *process* of development, and the business decisions that are made on a daily basis in the software industry.
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
So what exactly are trying to tell me, Mr. Welch?
I'm trying to tell you that you are clueless.
I'm done with this argument; you're welcome to your beliefs, however entrenched and misinformed they are.
I'm done with this argument; you're welcome to your beliefs, however entrenched and misinformed they are.
Maybe you should tell people like Justin to stop their rewrites right now. Obviously Justin is clueless too and needs some guidance to write software, O God-of-All-Software-Moki.
What began with iSync Beta and .mac with Jaguar...
... will be taken to new levels with Panther (and the aforementioned new Location Manager). iSync in Panther will take care that your digital life will stay in synch. Contacts, schedules - that's been there before. Safari bookmarks, your home folder (with .mac and Mac OS X Server 10.3) plus anything you really want will be synched with iSync in Panther. Plus: You can set up rules for synching based on 'locations' that you set up with Location Manager. One of our sources says, jokingly (but maybe with some grain of truth in it), that this combined with the Location Manager might take most of the time of Panther's developers, as it has to 'work as advertised'. And losing stuff through synching is something you'll never want to see (again).
.mac will see some serious upgrades according to another source. Apple has seen a steep decline in .mac sales soon after the initial rebate session, that allowed you to subscribe for 49 USD. The source says we'll see some surprises. However, Apple has not yet finalised what will be part of .mac at Panther's release in late Summer. While some features need to be tightly integrated with the operating system, others (most) are internet based and don't need to be released when Panther is. More about this as the information flows in.
.Mac will allow over-the-air sync with SyncML enabled phones (I hypothesise, genuinely) so that my P800 will always be in sync with my office appointments even when I am on the road.
I reckon this maaaaaay be public beta'd at WWDC as there ain't no way they should release a v1.0 ...
But coming this feature is, as my wizened Jedi friend would say.
I hate the current Finder...it's in need of a complete overhaul. It needs speed optimizations, it needs new features, it needs lots of things. I think it would be better for Apple to rewrite the whole thing...wipe the slate clean.
Agreed.
Quote:
And if they're going to rewrite, they might as well rewrite in Cocoa like they've been doing.
Why?
Quote:
At least we'll get a consistent toolbar, some drawers (if the need arises), anti-aliased text for text clippings...
If I'm not mistaken, all of this is available through CoreFoundation - including our beloved Safari-doesn't-have-it-damnit NSToolbar, available using CFToolbar.
Quote:
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about but...I'm the customer here and if the Finder doesn't improve in 10.3, I may start looking else where.
You still don't outline how Cocoa changes the situation.
Yes I did...many, many times. Funnily, people skip over it over and over again.
You obviously are incapable of getting your message through.
Quote:
Faster dev times.
If you think rewriting 100% at twice the speed and adding another 10% at twice the speed is faster than leaving the original code alone and adding 10% at half the speed, think again.
Quote:
It was a deliberate decision to not use NSToolbar in Safari.
And a dumb one, at that.
Quote:
Apple has been moving lots of their apps to Cocoa. Why? You'll know soon enough.
You obviously are incapable of getting your message through.
Is it? Or is it that you can't grasp something that's mind-boggingly simple.
CarbonDefenders are way too touchy and always seem to read things differently.
Quote:
If you think rewriting 100% at twice the speed and adding another 10% at twice the speed is faster than leaving the original code alone and adding 10% at half the speed, think again.
I didn't say it'd be faster than leaving the original code alone and adding 10% at half the speed. I said it'd be faster to develop...and faster to develop in the future.
But enough with this Carbon/Cocoa debate that you people seem so proud to bring back into the thread.
My point is that the Finder needs to be rewritten because it's crippled beyond repair. And if it's going to be rewritten, it should be rewritten in Cocoa because they'll get the Finder working in less time. If Apple really wants to WOW me, they'll have to re-engineer a whole shitload of stuff in the Finder. Right now it looks like 1984 with 128x128 pixel icons, color, and a few gizmos here and there.
Quote:
And a dumb one, at that.
I think the Safari team doesn't want *you* specifically to move the buttons around because you're such a prick.
Comments
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about but...I'm the customer here and if the Finder doesn't improve in 10.3, I may start looking else where.
That's fine, but it's irrelevant as to which API they choose to use. That, I believe, was moki's point.
...
<div voice="snlmexicandude">I'm jus kidding!</div>
Originally posted by Kickaha
That's fine, but it's irrelevant as to which API they choose to use. That, I believe, was moki's point.
It may have been moki's point but it wasn't mine. This whole thing was thrown way off course thanks to moki.
I wasn't talking about Cocoa's merits or cons over Carbon in my posts at the beginning of the thread, I was talking about the merits of rewriting the Finder and rewriting it in Cocoa.
So please, stop changing the conversation around and making it look like a Cocoa/Carbon debate. Please, for the love of God.
The point was originally the possibilities of rewriting the Finder and moki turned it into some ****in' debate. Not to mention I wrote this over a month ago.
Way to go moki. You did it.
Your elementary school reading comprehension has brought this thread to a new low.
If I were to summarize what I said and what moki said, it would sound a little like this:
Me-"The Finder sucks. It should be rewritten. Apple is moving most of their apps to Cocoa. The Finder should be rewritten in Cocoa to make use of the current and future Cocoa APIs."
moki-"Why? Apple should use whatever it wants. Carbon is just as good as Cocoa."
Me-"wtf? This isn't a Cocoa vs Carbon thread...this is a Finder should be rewritten thread."
Originally posted by kim kap sol
It may have been moki's point but it wasn't mine. This whole thing was thrown way off course thanks to moki.
It wasn't your inane assertions?
Originally posted by kim kap sol
I wasn't talking about Cocoa's merits or cons over Carbon in my posts at the beginning of the thread, I was talking about the merits of rewriting the Finder and rewriting it in Cocoa.
You have still yet to demonstrate any credible reason why Apple should scrap hundreds of thousands of man-hours of work put into the Carbon Finder, and re-write it from scratch in Cocoa.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Way to go moki. You did it.
Your elementary school reading comprehension has brought this thread to a new low.
mmmmmm, ad hominem.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Me-"The Finder sucks. It should be rewritten. Apple is moving most of their apps to Cocoa. The Finder should be rewritten in Cocoa to make use of the current and future Cocoa APIs."
If you have *any* clue what it means to rewrite something like the Finder, I find it highly unlikely you'd be proposing such a thing.
Fight!
Mods, lock 'er up!
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Fight!
Fight!
Not really.
*If* the Finder is ever rewritten in Cocoa, you can be assured that it will be a decision from Management, not from Engineering. ie, a political decision, not one based on the merits of chucking away a large, well-tested codebase.
Originally posted by moki
If you have *any* clue what it means to rewrite something like the Finder, I find it highly unlikely you'd be proposing such a thing.
Just curious...before the mods lock this thread up...have you written a 'Finder' lately? No? I didn't think so.
I'm sure it's no easy task...but the guy at Cocoa Tech did it. He was able to write one all by himself...what's stopping a highly talented team of about 5 people to rewrite the Finder in the last year.
Portions of code get rewritten...whole programs get rewritten. You know this and I know this. Get over it. Most often than not the rewrite proves to be beneficial...even if it meant investing time that could have been used to continue to tack on to the old codebase.
Ask indigofield's Justin Wood who's rewriting Proteus almost in whole...making Proteus faster, more flexible, and overall more pleasant.
So what exactly are trying to tell me, Mr. Welch? Are you trying to tell me that once a certain number of hours is invested into a certain piece of software, it should be out of the question to rewrite it?
Nothing is being 'chucked away'...you learn from old code base mistakes...you use what might still be good.
You're saying 'Not really' to BuonRoto but I think you're really looking for a fight since you seem to be looking long and hard to push my buttons.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Just curious...before the mods lock this thread up...have you written a 'Finder' lately? No? I didn't think so.
Actually, I did write a file management program years ago, and I also am quite familiar with working on projects with hundreds of thousands of lines of code. I'm also familiar not just with coding, but also the *process* of development, and the business decisions that are made on a daily basis in the software industry.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
So what exactly are trying to tell me, Mr. Welch?
I'm trying to tell you that you are clueless.
I'm done with this argument; you're welcome to your beliefs, however entrenched and misinformed they are.
Originally posted by moki
I'm trying to tell you that you are clueless.
I'm done with this argument; you're welcome to your beliefs, however entrenched and misinformed they are.
Maybe you should tell people like Justin to stop their rewrites right now. Obviously Justin is clueless too and needs some guidance to write software, O God-of-All-Software-Moki.
I'm glad you're done with your asinine argument.
What began with iSync Beta and .mac with Jaguar...
... will be taken to new levels with Panther (and the aforementioned new Location Manager). iSync in Panther will take care that your digital life will stay in synch. Contacts, schedules - that's been there before. Safari bookmarks, your home folder (with .mac and Mac OS X Server 10.3) plus anything you really want will be synched with iSync in Panther. Plus: You can set up rules for synching based on 'locations' that you set up with Location Manager. One of our sources says, jokingly (but maybe with some grain of truth in it), that this combined with the Location Manager might take most of the time of Panther's developers, as it has to 'work as advertised'. And losing stuff through synching is something you'll never want to see (again).
.mac will see some serious upgrades according to another source. Apple has seen a steep decline in .mac sales soon after the initial rebate session, that allowed you to subscribe for 49 USD. The source says we'll see some surprises. However, Apple has not yet finalised what will be part of .mac at Panther's release in late Summer. While some features need to be tightly integrated with the operating system, others (most) are internet based and don't need to be released when Panther is. More about this as the information flows in.
Originally posted by NETROMac
MacNews posts panther details part 2 today:
In Panther:
.Mac will allow over-the-air sync with SyncML enabled phones (I hypothesise, genuinely) so that my P800 will always be in sync with my office appointments even when I am on the road.
I reckon this maaaaaay be public beta'd at WWDC as there ain't no way they should release a v1.0 ...
But coming this feature is, as my wizened Jedi friend would say.
Oh sorry, this isn't even *CONFIRMED*.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
I hate the current Finder...it's in need of a complete overhaul. It needs speed optimizations, it needs new features, it needs lots of things. I think it would be better for Apple to rewrite the whole thing...wipe the slate clean.
Agreed.
And if they're going to rewrite, they might as well rewrite in Cocoa like they've been doing.
Why?
At least we'll get a consistent toolbar, some drawers (if the need arises), anti-aliased text for text clippings...
If I'm not mistaken, all of this is available through CoreFoundation - including our beloved Safari-doesn't-have-it-damnit NSToolbar, available using CFToolbar.
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about but...I'm the customer here and if the Finder doesn't improve in 10.3, I may start looking else where.
You still don't outline how Cocoa changes the situation.
Originally posted by Chucker
You still don't outline how Cocoa changes the situation.
Yes I did...many, many times. Funnily, people skip over it over and over again.
Faster dev times.
It was a deliberate decision to not use NSToolbar in Safari.
Apple has been moving lots of their apps to Cocoa. Why? You'll know soon enough.
Consider this the last time I repeat myself. If you people are too lazy to read my posts, it ain't my problem.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Yes I did...many, many times. Funnily, people skip over it over and over again.
You obviously are incapable of getting your message through.
Faster dev times.
If you think rewriting 100% at twice the speed and adding another 10% at twice the speed is faster than leaving the original code alone and adding 10% at half the speed, think again.
It was a deliberate decision to not use NSToolbar in Safari.
And a dumb one, at that.
Apple has been moving lots of their apps to Cocoa. Why? You'll know soon enough.
Care to share your wisdom, Mr. In-the-know?
Fight!
Originally posted by Chucker
You obviously are incapable of getting your message through.
Is it? Or is it that you can't grasp something that's mind-boggingly simple.
CarbonDefenders are way too touchy and always seem to read things differently.
If you think rewriting 100% at twice the speed and adding another 10% at twice the speed is faster than leaving the original code alone and adding 10% at half the speed, think again.
I didn't say it'd be faster than leaving the original code alone and adding 10% at half the speed. I said it'd be faster to develop...and faster to develop in the future.
But enough with this Carbon/Cocoa debate that you people seem so proud to bring back into the thread.
My point is that the Finder needs to be rewritten because it's crippled beyond repair. And if it's going to be rewritten, it should be rewritten in Cocoa because they'll get the Finder working in less time. If Apple really wants to WOW me, they'll have to re-engineer a whole shitload of stuff in the Finder. Right now it looks like 1984 with 128x128 pixel icons, color, and a few gizmos here and there.
And a dumb one, at that.
I think the Safari team doesn't want *you* specifically to move the buttons around because you're such a prick.
Care to share your wisdom, Mr. In-the-know?
Not with you.