After the Sherlock 3/Watson fiasco, Watson's name got out there more, and people saw that Sherlock 3 was a buggy piece of crap, and that Watson seemed to run snappier and was less buggy.
So, after the release of 10.2, Watson's sales started to rise. At least according to Macworld.
<strong>After the Sherlock 3/Watson fiasco, Watson's name got out there more, and people saw that Sherlock 3 was a buggy piece of crap, and that Watson seemed to run snappier and was less buggy.
So, after the release of 10.2, Watson's sales started to rise. At least according to Macworld.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's great to hear!
I personally didn't find Watson quite worth $30 (I'm on a tight budget and supersensitive to even slightly clunky UI), but I'm glad to hear Dan Wood isn't getting screwed over.
I use both. I find Sherlock useful for somethings and Watson useful for others. I love how Watson sync's with iCal and Address Book but I also love the Yellow Pages in Sherlock...to name a few...
I use Watson daily. I find it much better than Sherlock3. It's faster, has a better GUI, and more useful channels. It also is updated more often with new channels and improvements. I find it well worth the $30.
i've used the demo version of watson a bit, but didn't pay for it, and now i don't use it. when i paid for jaguar (after paying for the first OS X), one of the ways i convinced myself that it would be worth it was because watson was basically included (at least that how the new sherlock seemed to have been advertised back then). When i finally got jaguar and realized how completely lame sherlock 3 was compared to watson, i was a bit pissed. But, i didn't want to have to pay another thirty bucks for something i felt i already should have had (i.e. a real, functioning, sherlock 3 that didn't bite)
But, recently, there are more third party sherlock channels becoming available, (the one's i can think of off hand are: weather, traffic, google, shopping, pub-med, newsreader, to name a few - still needs a good white pages, though) which are the main one's i used with watson anyway. so now i'm finally starting to use sherlock more.
I use Watson daily and love it. I wish that Apple would buy them out and include it with every copy of OSX. I think that people would find that Watson is very different and useful. Having been using Macs since the mid 80s' I think that Watson is another program that is Mac only, for now, and is very different in a positive way. Having said that I think that Apple is making a mistake by not buying Watson and improving it and integrating it into the OS, actually the Finder app would be very useful with Watson built in. I feel that consumers would enjoy it and see that the Mac is different in a positive way.
Watson is well worth it, even now with Sherlock 3, just because it has more, looks nicer, runs faster, is less buggy
this is one time when Apple did not THINK DIFFERENT! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
I also use Watson, and LOVE IT....not like it...LOVE IT. I was HORRIFIED when I saw that an "undisclosed" party" had managed to make a knockoff of a great idea. I will admit that I use both, but more than 95% of the time, I use Watson. Sherlock has a couple of channels that I find useful, but would just as easy for Watson to include the "same types" of channels on their software. I will NEVER stop using Watson until it does not work on the Mac. The forward thinking that the creator of Watson has shown, even inspired the company who usually does the leading and inspiring of other companies...Apple. Lets show our support of Watson..if you have been unfortune in not having try Watson, do yourself a favor and download the trial today!!
<strong>"I believe that Watson is such a unique app and is very useful to the average user that Apple should buy it and include it in OSX. If we look back and see all of the software that was created on the Mac first and could have been added to the OS this app really stands out. Buy it and the development team and roll this app into the finder as well as a stand alone app. In my opinion it is too useful to the home user to not include. Apple could and should include it and improve it, but I don't know how other than including the WhitePages and YellowPages of Sherlock along with MapQuest. Their the perfict internet utility, only on a Mac. Apple should seize the moment!
<strong>I use Watson daily and love it. I wish that Apple would buy them out and include it with every copy of OSX. I think that people would find that Watson is very different and useful. Having been using Macs since the mid 80s' I think that Watson is another program that is Mac only, for now, and is very different in a positive way. Having said that I think that Apple is making a mistake by not buying Watson and improving it and integrating it into the OS, actually the Finder app would be very useful with Watson built in. I feel that consumers would enjoy it and see that the Mac is different in a positive way.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Every time I try Watson, I find that its still too clunky to use. It seems slow, just like Sherlock to me. I have a 800Mhz G4 TiBook - but its far faster for me to go to a web browser and just go to where I need to go.
But again, I find Watson's interface clunky. Sherlock actually seems better in that regard...not by much.
I think what I really don't like about Watson is its use of drawers. In my mind, drawers are used for things that you need occasionally - like a preview window or something. But here, you basically have to have the drawers out all the time. It should just be a pane. Sherlock does that better.
I find $30 far too much for this. $5 yes. $30...no way.
actually, apple may have taken "liberal artistic license" in designing sherlock 3 in lieu of watson's features and interface (if you think not, you are blind...period), BUT apple did one very important thing, possibly unintentionally, that works in watson's favor...
htting command-f does NOT bring up sherlock by default anymore. therefore, it's not a ciritical component of the underlying gears and cogs of the system, so you can choose to replace it without losing core-functionality.
Comments
So, after the release of 10.2, Watson's sales started to rise. At least according to Macworld.
<strong>After the Sherlock 3/Watson fiasco, Watson's name got out there more, and people saw that Sherlock 3 was a buggy piece of crap, and that Watson seemed to run snappier and was less buggy.
So, after the release of 10.2, Watson's sales started to rise. At least according to Macworld.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's great to hear!
I personally didn't find Watson quite worth $30 (I'm on a tight budget and supersensitive to even slightly clunky UI), but I'm glad to hear Dan Wood isn't getting screwed over.
[ 12-12-2002: Message edited by: Hobbes ]</p>
But, recently, there are more third party sherlock channels becoming available, (the one's i can think of off hand are: weather, traffic, google, shopping, pub-med, newsreader, to name a few - still needs a good white pages, though) which are the main one's i used with watson anyway. so now i'm finally starting to use sherlock more.
this is one time when Apple did not THINK DIFFERENT! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Who DOESN'T use Watson?
[quote] google from terminal <hr></blockquote>
Tell me more! Tell me more!
<strong>"I believe that Watson is such a unique app and is very useful to the average user that Apple should buy it and include it in OSX. If we look back and see all of the software that was created on the Mac first and could have been added to the OS this app really stands out. Buy it and the development team and roll this app into the finder as well as a stand alone app. In my opinion it is too useful to the home user to not include. Apple could and should include it and improve it, but I don't know how other than including the WhitePages and YellowPages of Sherlock along with MapQuest. Their the perfict internet utility, only on a Mac. Apple should seize the moment!
Ty"</strong>
To OSX feedback <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/"; target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/</a>;
Perhaps others will provide feedback, it is the best way for us to help OSX improve.
<strong>I use Watson daily and love it. I wish that Apple would buy them out and include it with every copy of OSX. I think that people would find that Watson is very different and useful. Having been using Macs since the mid 80s' I think that Watson is another program that is Mac only, for now, and is very different in a positive way. Having said that I think that Apple is making a mistake by not buying Watson and improving it and integrating it into the OS, actually the Finder app would be very useful with Watson built in. I feel that consumers would enjoy it and see that the Mac is different in a positive way.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Every time I try Watson, I find that its still too clunky to use. It seems slow, just like Sherlock to me. I have a 800Mhz G4 TiBook - but its far faster for me to go to a web browser and just go to where I need to go.
But again, I find Watson's interface clunky. Sherlock actually seems better in that regard...not by much.
I think what I really don't like about Watson is its use of drawers. In my mind, drawers are used for things that you need occasionally - like a preview window or something. But here, you basically have to have the drawers out all the time. It should just be a pane. Sherlock does that better.
I find $30 far too much for this. $5 yes. $30...no way.
htting command-f does NOT bring up sherlock by default anymore. therefore, it's not a ciritical component of the underlying gears and cogs of the system, so you can choose to replace it without losing core-functionality.
gosh, that sounds familar, doesn't it?
Are these Sherlock 3 channels? where did you find them?
googling did not get me anywhere on sherlock 3 channels.