I am late on this forum and tried to read through the thread. May be I am missing something or nobody here is aware of Spotlight technology coming with Tiger? I don't know implementation details about WinFS but as far as I know it will be built on top of NTFS, that is, will use system files to store (meta)data. Well, any database engine stores the data in files. This is the case with Tiger as well.
What makes Spotlight different from the OS 9 Volume indexing and makes it look like what MS plans to have in Longhorn?
1. The scanning for metadata is made on-the-fly, while saving/transferring the file (the volumes should be scanned after the first install, however).
2. The metadata is available for every application.
3. The metadata is expendable , developers are able to add more keys/data if needed. They are strongly encouraged to provide metadata importers for their specific file types.
4. The Spotlight metadata includes much more information than we have in Finder and used to have in Sherlock. You can search for an image taken with <put your favorite digital camera here> with flash on, red eye reduction on... If you transferred, for example, your photo from a memory stick to CD and then transferred it to your hard drive the original file creation date may be lost but the date when the photo was taken will still be available for the Spotlight (imported from the EXIF data).
And some which I think do not apply for Longhorn:
5. We have smart folders automatically populated based on custom queries. They do resemble smart playlists in iTunes but the queries could be much more complicated and are build by the user (with intuitive UI).
6. You can use Automator to manipulate the files (with Finder or other apps) based on certain criteria.
And, finally, we will have one more iteration of these technologies before Longhorn ships!
I heard that Microsoft was originally going to try and write "longhorn" from the ground up. (I knew that wasn't going to last long). Anyone know to what extent Microsloth is planning to actually clean up Longhorn?
"Our OS of 2 years in the future will beat your OS of today!"
exactly...
I find a lot of windows fanboys refuse to believe that there could be a superior OS out there because they have invested so much time in learning windows. Its really quite sad, and rather than try and rationalize the increased productivity, functionality, and ease of use OSX offers we should just let them live in their antiquated PC world. I dont even try to bring up viruses, spyware, or defrags anymore because all of the PC weenies I know have been using windows machines so long they wouldent know what to do with the extra time they would have if they didnt have to resolve these issues every so often.
My favorite line is:
"I used to use Apples back in the Apple II days"
It makes me cringe...as if they have never evolved. It goes to show you how out of touch these people are.
I don't really get his ideas still...He says that you have to know the application that you want to use and then look for it in OS X...Whenever I plug something in, the correct application already starts up, I don't have to look for anything, or install anything. In Windows, you get a popup in the bottom of your screen in small ass print, detecting new hardware, then you have to go through an install wizard, then, you may have to restart, then you go through another wizard for your new hardware and what you want to do, which still means you have to select an application out of the window, still meaning you have to know what application to use, then you may or may not be able to use it, if you did or didn't install the proper files while going through the install wizard....This is supposed to be sooo much better for the user??
Also, you can right click on a file and select to print it from the menu, unlike what he says, or you can drag your printer to the desktop and then drag any file you want to print right to that, much easier in my opinion.
I dunno, I think many are under the impression that people LOVE windows. I don't really think that's the case. Windows is still the primary choice mainly because it has the most software titles. I can tell you that OSX isn't what's keeping Windows users away, it's paying more for Apple hardware. If OSX was ported to x86, I think it would be accepted quite readily. Also, if people were really that happy with windows, then Linux wouldn't be as well known as it is (it may not be used, but lots of people still know what it is). No, I don't think MS keeps people with love, I think they keep them with the massive 3rd party software library. I enjoy building PCs for friends, but I hate putting windows on it and then try to explain how to protect the install. I know it will only be a matter of time before it gets bombed with spyware (mostly installed by the user ). I have a hard enough time steering people away from IE. It certainly doesn't make me want to provide tech support to the hopeless ignorant (those that chose not to learn at all costs for fear of geekdom).
That said, I though MS shelved WinFS in Longhorn? Last I read, they weren't going to have it ready in time, so it's been delayed until the next next OS. I'm not surprised, since they are probably spending a lot of time patching the much maligned XP.
You want to listen to music? Load iTunes first. You have to know which app to use before you can do anything.
As if an application called iTunes whose icon is a CD with musical notes over it doesn't scream music.
Anyway, I do like that task thing on the side sometimes. But to be honest, I only use it as a crutch to help me navigate the messed up file system structure of Windows XP.
If I wanted to print a file, instead of having a giant billboard screaming at me, I'd simple go to File > Print, as has been done to do much the same thing since 1984. Sure, that might not help the "new user," but people are new users for five minutes before they figure out how to print, and after that point, they don't need shite wasting their screenspace.
Case in point: My grandma can't navigate websites. She has me find stuff for her, and then she writes down exactly how to get there (as in each link to click and where it is).
But even she knows how to print a document.
Yes, he's right, if you grew up in an indigenous tribe somewhere, printing a document might be a little scary, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make for the 99.9999% of users who have used a computer for more than 2 minutes.
And I think he misses a fundamental bit of illogic in his argument...
Finding applications is hard... but finding your documents is what, easy? How many applications do you have on your hard drive? 100, tops? How many do you regularly *use*? 15? 20 maybe, if you're insane like I am?
Where do they all live? Right there with the handy Applications icon. If you can fit them all, they can sit in the Dock.
Now, how many *documents* do you have? Where are they?
Face it, if finding the right document were the easy part, WinFS and Spotlight wouldn't be needed. He's blowing smoke again, and I think the wind shifted against him.
If I wanted to print a file, instead of having a giant billboard screaming at me, I'd simple go to File > Print, as has been done to do much the same thing since 1984. Sure, that might not help the "new user," but people are new users for five minutes before they figure out how to print, and after that point, they don't need shite wasting their screenspace.
...
I like this argument. That is exactly why i prefer
the Macintosh Window Buttons over the Windows
ugly cross red box. Bah MS Windows doesn't trust its
If I wanted to print a file, instead of having a giant billboard screaming at me, I'd simple go to File > Print, as has been done to do much the same thing since 1984. Sure, that might not help the "new user," but people are new users for five minutes before they figure out how to print, and after that point, they don't need shite wasting their screenspace.
One of Microsoft's most evil effects on computers, as far as I'm concerned, is defining usability and "How easy is it for an idiot to use in the first five minutes of ever using an application."
There is a lot more to usability than that, and how the program works after you are familiar with it is a lot more important.
Windows needs to be task-based because the interface is so terrible and inconsistant between apps that you need this holding-of-hand or layer-of-friendliness, as Amorph colorfully put it, otherwise lots of people would be totally lost.
People don't need to be guided all the time. It's ok if you're a total newbie but humans have a something called a 'brain'. This 'brain' allows people to learn and remember. I don't need to be asked "shall I wipe your ass?" everytime I'm done going to the bathroom. I was taught how to wipe my ass when I was 3 in my house and I can now do it whenever I'm confronted by a public bathroom.
A consistant interface is key. Someone that knows the basics of an app will easily apply what he knows to another app.
exactly Windows needs wizards for everything. Every-time you want to do the thing again you have yo go through that wizard. It's a pain in the arse.
Whoa. I did *not* notice that this thread was started a year ago. It's interesting to see what a year has done to Paul's thinking re: Apple in general: on his internet-nexus blog, he simply gushes about the Mac mini, and also Tiger:
Quote:
So does it suck? Oh no. It does not suck. It does not suck at all. The Mac mini is a revolutionary product, one whose ramifications will be felt around the PC industry for months to come. I love it. I love that they did this.
The Mac mini is drool-worthy. The Mac mini is beautiful. The Mac mini is affordable. The Mac mini is small, quiet, and elegant.
[B]... I know this sounds awful and I hope it never happens, but what if Apple does start becoming the most widely used OS? Will quality and care be sacrificed now that the battle for the user base is won? Or will they keep innovating forever?
The last thing I would want is for Mac to become the leader, and for their ethics to transform into those resembling ossified, passive Microsoft business standards, leaving end-users unsatissfied and disappointed..
I don't think I could ever turn on a computer again..
...
This is a great question. My feeling is that while Apple may change they probably won't become another MS. I've traveled a lot and have worked with a lot of companies. I've found that companies, like people, have their own personalities and these corporate personalities are remarkably persistent. It seems that as time goes by they either hire people like themselves or the new people adapt the personality of the group.
This is my answer to why windows still sucks. It was easy to understand why it was bad from the start. But later when they were rich it didn't make sense. Why not just take $10B out of the bank and fix windows? Make it totally virus proof and bug proof and with a great interface. The answer is they can't. They are full of corporate blind spots and neuroses that prevent them from being anything except what they are. A lot of clever engineers work there but overall the company will have a very difficult time changing.
I think as long as Steve is there Apple will keep on being Apple. The big question is what happens after Steve? Will Apple be bought and absorbed into some other company (IBM, SONY, Cingular)? Will Apple purchase several other companies and become some sort of conglomerate (Cisco, Tivo, Xerox, Hilton) with a different personality?
I think as long as Steve is there Apple will keep on being Apple. The big question is what happens after Steve? Will Apple be bought and absorbed into some other company (IBM, SONY, Cingular)? Will Apple purchase several other companies and become some sort of conglomerate (Cisco, Tivo, Xerox, Hilton) with a different personality?
That is my question, what happens after Steve. I don't know another company where the CEO is so crucial to the success. Microsoft does not need Bill Gates in the way Apple needs Steve Jobs.
Longhorn is a few years away. i have read that it will be introduced with the new UI first (basically XP with an OsX type GUI). all the other aspects such as the new file system will come later, do to it taking longer than expected to complete. but regardless of what Os is better it is more interesting to speculate how Longhorn is going to be implimented. there are currently problems with XP and Longhorn Os' working well together. it's all gonna be amazing to watch it unfold.
the Os9 to OsX conversion took a few years to impliment in the real world. ironically, Apple having such a small user base helped make such a leap viable and relatively painless. making a similar leap in the Windows world is a whole other problem. Apple was chiefly updating single user desktops, while Microsoft is having to update complete corporate server systems and massive data bases on a global scale. it is a monster job with a high degree of disaster waiting to happen. spreading Longhorn out over a few years might be the plan. Longhorn is a major rewrite, making it work differently from the present XP/NT.
Microsoft is not going to make the conversion a cheap affair either. corporations will be spending lots of money on this, with a short term expectation of expensive IT maintenance till all the kinks are worked out. it makes me wonder if companies like IBM have analyzed the situation and see the potential for Linux and Unix expansion. if a company sees that the benefit of Longhorn is not enough to justify the expense and headache, providing a cheaper alternative might prove to be attractive. it's not like Unix is old fashioned anymore, with Apple making it a cool Os again, and Longhorn trying to emulate it.
Must say I'm surprised by Paul Thurrot's blog on MacWorld. I hardly expected him to be so complimentary about so many Mac-related things. And his complaints (under-powered iMac, less than awesome iWork) seemed reasonable.
Comments
What makes Spotlight different from the OS 9 Volume indexing and makes it look like what MS plans to have in Longhorn?
1. The scanning for metadata is made on-the-fly, while saving/transferring the file (the volumes should be scanned after the first install, however).
2. The metadata is available for every application.
3. The metadata is expendable , developers are able to add more keys/data if needed. They are strongly encouraged to provide metadata importers for their specific file types.
4. The Spotlight metadata includes much more information than we have in Finder and used to have in Sherlock. You can search for an image taken with <put your favorite digital camera here> with flash on, red eye reduction on... If you transferred, for example, your photo from a memory stick to CD and then transferred it to your hard drive the original file creation date may be lost but the date when the photo was taken will still be available for the Spotlight (imported from the EXIF data).
And some which I think do not apply for Longhorn:
5. We have smart folders automatically populated based on custom queries. They do resemble smart playlists in iTunes but the queries could be much more complicated and are build by the user (with intuitive UI).
6. You can use Automator to manipulate the files (with Finder or other apps) based on certain criteria.
And, finally, we will have one more iteration of these technologies before Longhorn ships!
Originally posted by Eugene
"Our OS of 2 years in the future will beat your OS of today!"
exactly...
I find a lot of windows fanboys refuse to believe that there could be a superior OS out there because they have invested so much time in learning windows. Its really quite sad, and rather than try and rationalize the increased productivity, functionality, and ease of use OSX offers we should just let them live in their antiquated PC world. I dont even try to bring up viruses, spyware, or defrags anymore because all of the PC weenies I know have been using windows machines so long they wouldent know what to do with the extra time they would have if they didnt have to resolve these issues every so often.
My favorite line is:
"I used to use Apples back in the Apple II days"
It makes me cringe...as if they have never evolved. It goes to show you how out of touch these people are.
Also, you can right click on a file and select to print it from the menu, unlike what he says, or you can drag your printer to the desktop and then drag any file you want to print right to that, much easier in my opinion.
I still think this guy is nuts...
That said, I though MS shelved WinFS in Longhorn? Last I read, they weren't going to have it ready in time, so it's been delayed until the next next OS. I'm not surprised, since they are probably spending a lot of time patching the much maligned XP.
You want to listen to music? Load iTunes first. You have to know which app to use before you can do anything.
As if an application called iTunes whose icon is a CD with musical notes over it doesn't scream music.
Anyway, I do like that task thing on the side sometimes. But to be honest, I only use it as a crutch to help me navigate the messed up file system structure of Windows XP.
If I wanted to print a file, instead of having a giant billboard screaming at me, I'd simple go to File > Print, as has been done to do much the same thing since 1984. Sure, that might not help the "new user," but people are new users for five minutes before they figure out how to print, and after that point, they don't need shite wasting their screenspace.
Case in point: My grandma can't navigate websites. She has me find stuff for her, and then she writes down exactly how to get there (as in each link to click and where it is).
But even she knows how to print a document.
Yes, he's right, if you grew up in an indigenous tribe somewhere, printing a document might be a little scary, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make for the 99.9999% of users who have used a computer for more than 2 minutes.
Sorry for my rant
Finding applications is hard... but finding your documents is what, easy? How many applications do you have on your hard drive? 100, tops? How many do you regularly *use*? 15? 20 maybe, if you're insane like I am?
Where do they all live? Right there with the handy Applications icon. If you can fit them all, they can sit in the Dock.
Now, how many *documents* do you have? Where are they?
Face it, if finding the right document were the easy part, WinFS and Spotlight wouldn't be needed. He's blowing smoke again, and I think the wind shifted against him.
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
...
If I wanted to print a file, instead of having a giant billboard screaming at me, I'd simple go to File > Print, as has been done to do much the same thing since 1984. Sure, that might not help the "new user," but people are new users for five minutes before they figure out how to print, and after that point, they don't need shite wasting their screenspace.
...
I like this argument. That is exactly why i prefer
the Macintosh Window Buttons over the Windows
ugly cross red box. Bah
users. Lame.
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
If I wanted to print a file, instead of having a giant billboard screaming at me, I'd simple go to File > Print, as has been done to do much the same thing since 1984. Sure, that might not help the "new user," but people are new users for five minutes before they figure out how to print, and after that point, they don't need shite wasting their screenspace.
One of Microsoft's most evil effects on computers, as far as I'm concerned, is defining usability and "How easy is it for an idiot to use in the first five minutes of ever using an application."
There is a lot more to usability than that, and how the program works after you are familiar with it is a lot more important.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Windows needs to be task-based because the interface is so terrible and inconsistant between apps that you need this holding-of-hand or layer-of-friendliness, as Amorph colorfully put it, otherwise lots of people would be totally lost.
People don't need to be guided all the time. It's ok if you're a total newbie but humans have a something called a 'brain'. This 'brain' allows people to learn and remember. I don't need to be asked "shall I wipe your ass?" everytime I'm done going to the bathroom. I was taught how to wipe my ass when I was 3 in my house and I can now do it whenever I'm confronted by a public bathroom.
A consistant interface is key. Someone that knows the basics of an app will easily apply what he knows to another app.
exactly Windows needs wizards for everything. Every-time you want to do the thing again you have yo go through that wizard. It's a pain in the arse.
So does it suck? Oh no. It does not suck. It does not suck at all. The Mac mini is a revolutionary product, one whose ramifications will be felt around the PC industry for months to come. I love it. I love that they did this.
The Mac mini is drool-worthy. The Mac mini is beautiful. The Mac mini is affordable. The Mac mini is small, quiet, and elegant.
Freaky. 8)
Originally posted by MacCrazy
exactly Windows needs wizards for everything. Every-time you want to do the thing again you have yo go through that wizard. It's a pain in the arse.
Absolutely
Well, now it is time to give this guy a warm thank you.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Absolutely
Well, now it is time to give this guy a warm thank you.
yup agree
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
Another quote from the article:
As if an application called iTunes whose icon is a CD with musical notes over it doesn't scream music.
But still, I kind of have to agree with him. The iLife integration between the four applications is a step forward to the Mac OS X ideal.
Originally posted by Jimzip
[B]... I know this sounds awful and I hope it never happens, but what if Apple does start becoming the most widely used OS? Will quality and care be sacrificed now that the battle for the user base is won? Or will they keep innovating forever?
The last thing I would want is for Mac to become the leader, and for their ethics to transform into those resembling ossified, passive Microsoft business standards, leaving end-users unsatissfied and disappointed..
I don't think I could ever turn on a computer again..
...
This is a great question. My feeling is that while Apple may change they probably won't become another MS. I've traveled a lot and have worked with a lot of companies. I've found that companies, like people, have their own personalities and these corporate personalities are remarkably persistent. It seems that as time goes by they either hire people like themselves or the new people adapt the personality of the group.
This is my answer to why windows still sucks. It was easy to understand why it was bad from the start. But later when they were rich it didn't make sense. Why not just take $10B out of the bank and fix windows? Make it totally virus proof and bug proof and with a great interface. The answer is they can't. They are full of corporate blind spots and neuroses that prevent them from being anything except what they are. A lot of clever engineers work there but overall the company will have a very difficult time changing.
I think as long as Steve is there Apple will keep on being Apple. The big question is what happens after Steve? Will Apple be bought and absorbed into some other company (IBM, SONY, Cingular)? Will Apple purchase several other companies and become some sort of conglomerate (Cisco, Tivo, Xerox, Hilton) with a different personality?
Originally posted by neutrino23
I think as long as Steve is there Apple will keep on being Apple. The big question is what happens after Steve? Will Apple be bought and absorbed into some other company (IBM, SONY, Cingular)? Will Apple purchase several other companies and become some sort of conglomerate (Cisco, Tivo, Xerox, Hilton) with a different personality?
That is my question, what happens after Steve. I don't know another company where the CEO is so crucial to the success. Microsoft does not need Bill Gates in the way Apple needs Steve Jobs.
the Os9 to OsX conversion took a few years to impliment in the real world. ironically, Apple having such a small user base helped make such a leap viable and relatively painless. making a similar leap in the Windows world is a whole other problem. Apple was chiefly updating single user desktops, while Microsoft is having to update complete corporate server systems and massive data bases on a global scale. it is a monster job with a high degree of disaster waiting to happen. spreading Longhorn out over a few years might be the plan. Longhorn is a major rewrite, making it work differently from the present XP/NT.
Microsoft is not going to make the conversion a cheap affair either. corporations will be spending lots of money on this, with a short term expectation of expensive IT maintenance till all the kinks are worked out. it makes me wonder if companies like IBM have analyzed the situation and see the potential for Linux and Unix expansion. if a company sees that the benefit of Longhorn is not enough to justify the expense and headache, providing a cheaper alternative might prove to be attractive. it's not like Unix is old fashioned anymore, with Apple making it a cool Os again, and Longhorn trying to emulate it.