iAudio: A light version of Emagic's logic. Or, Apple could buy something like Amadeus and hire it's author to head the iApp's development. This would be an iApp that provided basic functions for recording, editing, and processing audio. It would have a bag of DSP effects and would also be able to convert audio files between all used audio formats.
I'm pessimistic about such an app for two reasons:
1. Most Macs lack both mic and line input. Because of this oversight, users would have to buy a USB adaptor like the iMic, or purchase a PCI audio card with a microphone input and line input. iAudio would only draw attention to the lack of audio inputs on most Macs. Furthermore, for out of the box functionality, Apple would have to provide a microphone with new Macs....although iPhoto can't be used out of the box without first purchasing a camera, so perhaps this isn't a strike against iAudio.
2. Recording audio requires a skill or talent that other iApps don't. For other iApps like iMovie and iPhoto, all that is required is for the user to have enough money to buy the proper camera. For something like iTunes, the user need only have CDs or an iPod, again money is sufficient. But for iAudio, a user would need more than money, they would have to be able to play an instrument well enough to create music worth recording. This would only constitute a small subset of Mac users--although since Mac users tend to be more artistic, the proportion of Mac users who could use iAudio would be greater than the proportion of Windows users who could use a similar app.
I currently use Amadeus II for recording and editing my own music, and it works fine. But I'd much rather have an iApp than have to pay for Amadeus.
The other argument against iAudio is that there is already healthy competition among shareware authors for simple audio recording and editing apps, There are:
Amadeus II
Audiocorder OS X
Sound Studio
SparkMe
And probably some others I've forgotten. In other words, Apple would put lots of shareware authors out of business if they released such an iApp. However iTunes did the same thing, yet it was done gracefully because Apple chose the best shareware MP3 player and bought it along with hiring the author. If they did the same with Amadeus then I'd be stoked.
As for other OS X features I'd like to see in 10.3:
OPEN/SAVE dialogues:
?Retain the same view settings and size from last dialogue.
?Scrollwheel support.
?Adjustable collumns....the view should be the same as a finder window in collumn view.
?This is a cool feature from Windows: I want to be able to click on a file and have its name appear in the file name box. This helps when I'm saving lots of files with identical names except for a number or letter.
?The top of the save dialogue could have the same icons as the finder toolbar for locations, including the Computer location to navigate different volumes easily, and then a pull-down menu for favorites. This would make navigating as easy as it is in the finder in collumn view. There's no reason not to have this sort of navigation support in open/save dialogues.
?Of course, carbon and cocoa should have identical open/save dialogues.
?There should be built-in finder support for saving directly to PDF format and also for file encryption. The technology is there, just put a GUI on it.
?Permit renaming of folders and items in the open/save dialogue. It can be done the same as in a Finder view.
?Have some view options, such as font size and icon size.
DOCK improvements:
1. Spring-loaded folders in the dock.
2. A utility for creating and managing "apple menus" in the dock, i.e., for creating folders filled with aliases, and giving these folders custom icons. I can do this no problem, but many new OS X users don't realize that this can be done with the dock, and to compensate they fill the dock with every app icon they have, making it unusable. Apple needs to lead people through this with a dock utility, it could be a tab within the dock preferences in system preferences.
3. Additional dock customization features, like separators, spaces, and the ability to create multiple docks.
4. How about the option of separating the trash from the dock and giving it its own small "dock"? I'd like to be able to put it in a corner and keep it hidden, then have it pop up whenever I drag something to said corner.
FINDER: Better threading and more performance optimizations. I don't want to see the spinning LSD-cursor ever again. List view should work instantaneously, menus should pop open instantly, and the Finder should never stall or become unresponsive when doing network activity. Much of this comes down to better threading.
?Spring-loaded folder improvements: More options for how folders open (view), and support for SLFs in the dock so one can drag an item onto a folder in the dock and then drill down to the directory they want.
?Resolution-independent scaling. This is a big one, but with QE it should be easy to do. Basically, there should be a simple slider that controls the size of the GUI, EVERYTHING, widgets, fonts, dock, everything. It should scale the interface to the user's desired size, and then adjust the interface size based on the display's resolution setting, so that no matter what the display is set to, the interface is the same size. Furthermore, the OS should compensate for odd-sized resolutions, like 1280x1024 (which is 1.25:1 instead of 1.33:1). This feature is even more important now that LCD displays are becoming standardized and resolutions are increasing. One shouldn't have to change the font settings in every application when they get a higher resolution display, rather, it should be a simple slider change in System Preferences.
?Retain the [...] size from last dialogue.</strong><hr></blockquote>This has worked fine for me in every app I use for a LONG time. What apps do you use that don't remember the open/save sheet/window size?
Excellent input JD. I've been thinking about the same actually although not the business side of it.But I don't think people would need to play an instrument to fancy iAudio (or iMusic, iRecord or whatever).
People only have to have the desire to be able to do so. Lots of people 'fancy' creating and editing their own videos and buy expensive tools to do so. Only 'few' people put it into practice. But people buy the idea of doing it. Ultimately that's what really matters when it comes to selling products to consumers.
<strong>I think you're all forgetting something here. Apple likes to surprise us. They won't get people to upgrade just for getting new versions of the iApps. I'm pretty sure the next major upgrade will include new exciting features.]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think so too.
I didn't include any iApps in my prediction, as just iApp updates alone won't make people upgrade.
And what would be the justification for, say, iMovie 3 requiring Panther?
Besides, the iApps seems to be follow their own upgrade path, one that's practically independent from the OS...
<strong>This has worked fine for me in every app I use for a LONG time. What apps do you use that don't remember the open/save sheet/window size?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't recall any particular app. I could be that since installing Jaguar I've been having to reset the size of open/save dialogues more....but maybe it's just my imagination. Could be that they are fine on my system like you say.
[quote]iAudio: A light version of Emagic's logic. Or, Apple could buy something like Amadeus and hire it's author to head the iApp's development. <hr></blockquote>
They wouldn't have to. Emagics Micrologic AV could have a tweaked UI and stripped down somewhat into becoming a nifty iApp.
[quote] . Most Macs lack both mic and line input. Because of this oversight, users would have to buy a USB adaptor like the iMic, or purchase a PCI audio card with a microphone input and line input. iAudio would only draw attention to the lack of audio inputs on most Macs. <hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't say "most" Macs. Apple's brainfart about pushing users to USB audio seems over thank God. Audio inputs aren't much of a big deal as even the Pros "Overdubb" new recording over their previously laid tracks.
[quote] Recording audio requires a skill or talent that other iApps don't. For other iApps like iMovie and iPhoto, all that is required is for the user to have enough money to buy the proper camera. For <hr></blockquote>
The issue is not Muscicianship here it's showing potential users the capabilities of Core Audios seamless handling of Audio, Midi and Effects. You can't impress the laymen with a $700 app but you can with a nifty freeby. Plug in a USB Midi Keyboard and run.
[quote] The other argument against iAudio is that there is already healthy competition among shareware authors for simple audio recording and editing apps, There are:
Amadeus II
Audiocorder OS X
Sound Studio
SparkMe
<hr></blockquote>
None of those apps support Midi and Audio interleaved together.
[quote] And probably some others I've forgotten. In other words, Apple would put lots of shareware authors out of business if they released such an iApp. However iTunes did the same thing, yet it was done gracefully because Apple chose the best shareware MP3 player and bought it along with hiring the author. If they did the same with Amadeus then I'd be stoked. <hr></blockquote>
No. Any app that support Core Audio Hosting can access Audio Units. Apple would then have created a reason for Audio Developers to create small affordable $25 Audio Units that would work on most Core Audio applications. This would tremendously expand the market penetration for plugin developers.
Will Apple do it. They should. Amadeus and others won't be affected because they're primarily two track editors. Not Sequencing/Recording apps. There's a large difference in scope.
Apple should be promotiong Core Audio very hard. They provided the SDK v2 and fully documented creating Audio Unit hosts. Now they just need to gently give the market a nudge.
The paradigm here is the opportunites that iMovie has created for special effects. iMidi could do the same thing.
<strong>10.3 will be a mini-upgrade along the lines of 10.1.
</strong><hr></blockquote> I wouldn't be so sure. You can't compare new OS like X to the old MacOs. OsX is still not fully major and parts of it even still on the drawing board. The old OS remained stagnant for years, something Apple doesn't afford in today's marked. MS won't stop their development of Windows now they have XP and Apple wont either.
I see the logic of the idea that 10.3 will be a free update, since 10.1 was also. However, I think that 10.1 was an exceptional release because of the state 10.0.
I have long moaned about the return of tabbed windows, and hopefully it will pop up in 10.3 - on tidBits today, they describe a feature in 10.2 (kinda like edge-sensitive desktop scrolling, except that here partly-covered or out-of-sight windows *move in* to the screen centre so they are accessible) which might be developed so it not only gives back the tabbed windows functionality but even extends it in a way so we all say, "Why didn't *I* think of that?"
The Dock will not be customizable to the extent that is suggested above. Apple does not want - for political/psychological reasons - to do anything that might be seen as reneging on what has arguably been the largest UI change from OS9 to OSX.
More APIs will be locked so only Apple-approved utilities can access and modify them, in the same way that happened to Menu Bar items in 10.2.
I'd like to see Apple add further Unicode fonts to OS X 10.3, notably Devanagari, Gujarati and Punjabi. Since they added Arabic, Hebrew, and Thai font support in 10.2, and Devanagari, Gujarati and Punjabi are available in the OS 9 language kits, I think that this is a reasonable expectation.
10.3 will be compiled with GCC 3.3 and the development tools will most likely use GCC 3.3 as well. That alone should provide some performance increase since there will most likely have been a host of improvements to it's ability to write PowerPC code. (There is a lot of room for improvment here).
Aside from that, there will probably be some more iApps, new features, etc.
Journaling may be always on in 10.3, and it may also have been improved to the point where it doesn't really cause a speed hit compared to what we have now.
Memory swapping should be smarter resulting in less hard drive access during normal use, thus resulting in faster performance.
most existing iApps will probably have been given big updates adding features, speed, and useless junk we don't need.
There will likely be a nice host of surprises as well.
Lots of stuff to talk about, but to some up the better features that i would really like:
File system enhanced with LiveFind ala iTunes.
Continued GUI, system responsiveness optimizations, under-the-hood optimizations.
And a new one:
iApp that provides the functionality that XP media center has. You can just by a special remote or remote/TV card bundle from apple, and you have an entertainment PC. This is definately along the lines of digital hub, and im sad to see MS beat apple to the punch. Apple should respond by making this remote/tv card a really cheap bundle if bought with 10.3. The idea is just to tie together all of the features of many of apples current iApps together, like iTunes, iPhoto, and new quicktime with VCR capabilities.
Comments
iAudio: A light version of Emagic's logic. Or, Apple could buy something like Amadeus and hire it's author to head the iApp's development. This would be an iApp that provided basic functions for recording, editing, and processing audio. It would have a bag of DSP effects and would also be able to convert audio files between all used audio formats.
I'm pessimistic about such an app for two reasons:
1. Most Macs lack both mic and line input. Because of this oversight, users would have to buy a USB adaptor like the iMic, or purchase a PCI audio card with a microphone input and line input. iAudio would only draw attention to the lack of audio inputs on most Macs. Furthermore, for out of the box functionality, Apple would have to provide a microphone with new Macs....although iPhoto can't be used out of the box without first purchasing a camera, so perhaps this isn't a strike against iAudio.
2. Recording audio requires a skill or talent that other iApps don't. For other iApps like iMovie and iPhoto, all that is required is for the user to have enough money to buy the proper camera. For something like iTunes, the user need only have CDs or an iPod, again money is sufficient. But for iAudio, a user would need more than money, they would have to be able to play an instrument well enough to create music worth recording. This would only constitute a small subset of Mac users--although since Mac users tend to be more artistic, the proportion of Mac users who could use iAudio would be greater than the proportion of Windows users who could use a similar app.
I currently use Amadeus II for recording and editing my own music, and it works fine. But I'd much rather have an iApp than have to pay for Amadeus.
The other argument against iAudio is that there is already healthy competition among shareware authors for simple audio recording and editing apps, There are:
Amadeus II
Audiocorder OS X
Sound Studio
SparkMe
And probably some others I've forgotten. In other words, Apple would put lots of shareware authors out of business if they released such an iApp. However iTunes did the same thing, yet it was done gracefully because Apple chose the best shareware MP3 player and bought it along with hiring the author. If they did the same with Amadeus then I'd be stoked.
As for other OS X features I'd like to see in 10.3:
OPEN/SAVE dialogues:
?Retain the same view settings and size from last dialogue.
?Scrollwheel support.
?Adjustable collumns....the view should be the same as a finder window in collumn view.
?This is a cool feature from Windows: I want to be able to click on a file and have its name appear in the file name box. This helps when I'm saving lots of files with identical names except for a number or letter.
?The top of the save dialogue could have the same icons as the finder toolbar for locations, including the Computer location to navigate different volumes easily, and then a pull-down menu for favorites. This would make navigating as easy as it is in the finder in collumn view. There's no reason not to have this sort of navigation support in open/save dialogues.
?Of course, carbon and cocoa should have identical open/save dialogues.
?There should be built-in finder support for saving directly to PDF format and also for file encryption. The technology is there, just put a GUI on it.
?Permit renaming of folders and items in the open/save dialogue. It can be done the same as in a Finder view.
?Have some view options, such as font size and icon size.
DOCK improvements:
1. Spring-loaded folders in the dock.
2. A utility for creating and managing "apple menus" in the dock, i.e., for creating folders filled with aliases, and giving these folders custom icons. I can do this no problem, but many new OS X users don't realize that this can be done with the dock, and to compensate they fill the dock with every app icon they have, making it unusable. Apple needs to lead people through this with a dock utility, it could be a tab within the dock preferences in system preferences.
3. Additional dock customization features, like separators, spaces, and the ability to create multiple docks.
4. How about the option of separating the trash from the dock and giving it its own small "dock"? I'd like to be able to put it in a corner and keep it hidden, then have it pop up whenever I drag something to said corner.
FINDER: Better threading and more performance optimizations. I don't want to see the spinning LSD-cursor ever again. List view should work instantaneously, menus should pop open instantly, and the Finder should never stall or become unresponsive when doing network activity. Much of this comes down to better threading.
?Spring-loaded folder improvements: More options for how folders open (view), and support for SLFs in the dock so one can drag an item onto a folder in the dock and then drill down to the directory they want.
?Resolution-independent scaling. This is a big one, but with QE it should be easy to do. Basically, there should be a simple slider that controls the size of the GUI, EVERYTHING, widgets, fonts, dock, everything. It should scale the interface to the user's desired size, and then adjust the interface size based on the display's resolution setting, so that no matter what the display is set to, the interface is the same size. Furthermore, the OS should compensate for odd-sized resolutions, like 1280x1024 (which is 1.25:1 instead of 1.33:1). This feature is even more important now that LCD displays are becoming standardized and resolutions are increasing. One shouldn't have to change the font settings in every application when they get a higher resolution display, rather, it should be a simple slider change in System Preferences.
<strong>OPEN/SAVE dialogues:
?Retain the [...] size from last dialogue.</strong><hr></blockquote>This has worked fine for me in every app I use for a LONG time. What apps do you use that don't remember the open/save sheet/window size?
People only have to have the desire to be able to do so. Lots of people 'fancy' creating and editing their own videos and buy expensive tools to do so. Only 'few' people put it into practice. But people buy the idea of doing it. Ultimately that's what really matters when it comes to selling products to consumers.
<strong>I think you're all forgetting something here. Apple likes to surprise us. They won't get people to upgrade just for getting new versions of the iApps. I'm pretty sure the next major upgrade will include new exciting features.]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think so too.
I didn't include any iApps in my prediction, as just iApp updates alone won't make people upgrade.
And what would be the justification for, say, iMovie 3 requiring Panther?
Besides, the iApps seems to be follow their own upgrade path, one that's practically independent from the OS...
<strong>This has worked fine for me in every app I use for a LONG time. What apps do you use that don't remember the open/save sheet/window size?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't recall any particular app. I could be that since installing Jaguar I've been having to reset the size of open/save dialogues more....but maybe it's just my imagination. Could be that they are fine on my system like you say.
They wouldn't have to. Emagics Micrologic AV could have a tweaked UI and stripped down somewhat into becoming a nifty iApp.
[quote] . Most Macs lack both mic and line input. Because of this oversight, users would have to buy a USB adaptor like the iMic, or purchase a PCI audio card with a microphone input and line input. iAudio would only draw attention to the lack of audio inputs on most Macs. <hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't say "most" Macs. Apple's brainfart about pushing users to USB audio seems over thank God. Audio inputs aren't much of a big deal as even the Pros "Overdubb" new recording over their previously laid tracks.
[quote] Recording audio requires a skill or talent that other iApps don't. For other iApps like iMovie and iPhoto, all that is required is for the user to have enough money to buy the proper camera. For <hr></blockquote>
The issue is not Muscicianship here it's showing potential users the capabilities of Core Audios seamless handling of Audio, Midi and Effects. You can't impress the laymen with a $700 app but you can with a nifty freeby. Plug in a USB Midi Keyboard and run.
[quote] The other argument against iAudio is that there is already healthy competition among shareware authors for simple audio recording and editing apps, There are:
Amadeus II
Audiocorder OS X
Sound Studio
SparkMe
<hr></blockquote>
None of those apps support Midi and Audio interleaved together.
[quote] And probably some others I've forgotten. In other words, Apple would put lots of shareware authors out of business if they released such an iApp. However iTunes did the same thing, yet it was done gracefully because Apple chose the best shareware MP3 player and bought it along with hiring the author. If they did the same with Amadeus then I'd be stoked. <hr></blockquote>
No. Any app that support Core Audio Hosting can access Audio Units. Apple would then have created a reason for Audio Developers to create small affordable $25 Audio Units that would work on most Core Audio applications. This would tremendously expand the market penetration for plugin developers.
Will Apple do it. They should. Amadeus and others won't be affected because they're primarily two track editors. Not Sequencing/Recording apps. There's a large difference in scope.
Apple should be promotiong Core Audio very hard. They provided the SDK v2 and fully documented creating Audio Unit hosts. Now they just need to gently give the market a nudge.
The paradigm here is the opportunites that iMovie has created for special effects. iMidi could do the same thing.
7.5 -> 7.6 major clean-up/overhaul, few new features
7.6 -> 8.0 major upgrades to interface & features
8.0 -> 8.1 optimizations, a few new features (HFS+)
8.1 -> 8.5 major interface updates and features
8.5 -> 8.6 optimizations, added USB support
9.0 -> 9.1 new features across the board, iTools, etc.
then we make the leap to X:
X.0 -> X.1 major optimizations, DVD, CD-RW support
X.1 -> X.2 major overhaul, many new features
i predict more optimizations and a few new features in X.3. anything more is probably just wishful thinking.
major features for the future?
- clustering at the kernal level
- ability to login to your computer (via GUI) remotely as in NeXT
- 64-bit overhaul
- tighter integration of iApps
na
<strong>10.3 will be a mini-upgrade along the lines of 10.1.
</strong><hr></blockquote> I wouldn't be so sure. You can't compare new OS like X to the old MacOs. OsX is still not fully major and parts of it even still on the drawing board. The old OS remained stagnant for years, something Apple doesn't afford in today's marked. MS won't stop their development of Windows now they have XP and Apple wont either.
The Dock will not be customizable to the extent that is suggested above. Apple does not want - for political/psychological reasons - to do anything that might be seen as reneging on what has arguably been the largest UI change from OS9 to OSX.
More APIs will be locked so only Apple-approved utilities can access and modify them, in the same way that happened to Menu Bar items in 10.2.
OSX will reach full POSIX compliance.
engpjp
any takers on 10.3 coming out jan 2003?
<strong>Wow! Did I just step into Future Hardware? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
So much wishful thinking!
Such high expectations!
So many people that will be let down and disappointed when they get the actual product!
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
We weren't let down by the powerbooks and ibooks!
10.3 will be compiled with GCC 3.3 and the development tools will most likely use GCC 3.3 as well. That alone should provide some performance increase since there will most likely have been a host of improvements to it's ability to write PowerPC code. (There is a lot of room for improvment here).
Aside from that, there will probably be some more iApps, new features, etc.
Journaling may be always on in 10.3, and it may also have been improved to the point where it doesn't really cause a speed hit compared to what we have now.
Memory swapping should be smarter resulting in less hard drive access during normal use, thus resulting in faster performance.
most existing iApps will probably have been given big updates adding features, speed, and useless junk we don't need.
There will likely be a nice host of surprises as well.
File system enhanced with LiveFind ala iTunes.
Continued GUI, system responsiveness optimizations, under-the-hood optimizations.
And a new one:
iApp that provides the functionality that XP media center has. You can just by a special remote or remote/TV card bundle from apple, and you have an entertainment PC. This is definately along the lines of digital hub, and im sad to see MS beat apple to the punch. Apple should respond by making this remote/tv card a really cheap bundle if bought with 10.3. The idea is just to tie together all of the features of many of apples current iApps together, like iTunes, iPhoto, and new quicktime with VCR capabilities.