If I were a doctor carrying a pseudo-tablet laptop around I'd go nuts. They're awkward. Tablet with docking station seems better.
There are probably doctors who agree with you. But I'm a doctor who does all of his notes (hospital and office) on a laptop. I do get tired of opening and closing the clamshell. However, Jobs is (unfortunately) right about the bandwidth problem. I type MUCH faster than I write. And I have no desire to use any of the template-based programs. Very few patients' complaints really match the templates... except when you use templates, and suddenly they all do. When I see a note from another doctor, and you can see he/she used one of those programs, I almost never find the information useful to me. The history I get from the patient almost never matches what's in that note.
Now,if Apple makes a tablet, I'll buy one and try VERY hard to find a way to make it work for my practice. (And if it doesn't work for the medical stuff, I'll find something else to use it for and will no doubt love it for that). But there aren't many things that beat a keyboard for getting information into a device quickly (dictations don't work for me; I can do it, but it's much easier to say exactly what you intend if you type it).
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
Which is very interesting. If ever there had been a release specifically tailored to tidying up specifically this kind of problem, I thought that's what Snow Leopard was all about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adisor19
More and more i get the feeling that resolution independence can NOT be implemented on Carbon based applications.. so untill Apple dumps Carbon, i doubt we will see RI
Adi
Someone explain this to me, please. I dabble in Cocoa. I don't do any work in Carbon. Why is Carbon an obstacle to resolution independence?
There are probably doctors who agree with you. But I'm a doctor who does all of his notes (hospital and office) on a laptop. I do get tired of opening and closing the clamshell. However, Jobs is (unfortunately) right about the bandwidth problem. I type MUCH faster than I write. And I have no desire to use any of the template-based programs. Very few patients' complaints really match the templates... except when you use templates, and suddenly they all do. When I see a note from another doctor, and you can see he/she used one of those programs, I almost never find the information useful to me. The history I get from the patient almost never matches what's in that note.
Now,if Apple makes a tablet, I'll buy one and try VERY hard to find a way to make it work for my practice. (And if it doesn't work for the medical stuff, I'll find something else to use it for and will no doubt love it for that). But there aren't many things that beat a keyboard for getting information into a device quickly (dictations don't work for me; I can do it, but it's much easier to say exactly what you intend if you type it).
My 2 cents. Off-topic, I see. Sorry 'bout that.
I agree completely. It's always amusing, when it isn't frustrating, when a form requires you to check off "always, sometimes, never", when it's really almost never, or almost always. We recently had that problem with my daughter. We had her going to The NYU Child Development Center to get a final evaluation of her ADD, which has become milder as she has gotten older. The 6 page form had us scratching our heads at times. Often, the answer is "not quite, but maybe almost one of the above, but maybe not".
You get forced into a position where your responses aren't quite correct.
Which is very interesting. If ever there had been a release specifically tailored to tidying up specifically this kind of problem, I thought that's what Snow Leopard was all about.
I can't believe they're finally supporting AAC+. I had all but given up on this...and so did many other content providers. I hope it's not too late for mass adoption.
I just hope this doesn't mean we'll have to shell out more money to upgrade our libraries to the new AAC+ format like Apple did with the iTunes Plus format.
I just hope this doesn't mean we'll have to shell out more money to upgrade our libraries to the new AAC+ format like Apple did with the iTunes Plus format.
iTunes Plus was a doubling of bitrate and removal of DRM, it wasn't a different audio codec. This audio codec is designed for low bitrate streaming for low bandwidth situations. You won't find this on the iTS for music.
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
In reality, what are the benefits of resolution independence? Would it mean so much to the general Mac user as people tend to believe?
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
Man, I sure hope so, my eyes are getting too old to be squinting at OS X through high-density monitors. Windows does this without any issues. One other thing that I really, really wish OS X had for the longest time, and it's so damn simple, is the ability to resize windows from anywhere on the window instead of just the stupid little corner on the bottom right. Does anyone know if we will finally have this in SL? I thought we were supposed to have that in 10.5?!?
It's these 2 issues that bug me the most about having to work cross-platform. \
I seem to be the only one who thinks resolution independence is a bad thing. It consumes vast amounts of processing power in exchange for worse detail rendering.
Windows does this just fine, at least Vista anyway, don't know about XP. But there is no performance hit whatsoever.
Windows does this just fine, at least Vista anyway, don't know about XP. But there is no performance hit whatsoever.
Windows doesn't utilize real RI, they use Windows Presentation Foundation API which, to put it simply, is a graphical subsystem for rich user interface development. While not true RI I wish Apple would offer a better option for scaling their GUI if they aren't going to ready RI anytime soon. Windows has always handled this better then OS X.
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
All the APIs needed are available since Tiger. There is nothing special in this. The most important part is to follow a number of rules which boil down to the following: don't assume the pixel size and actual size are the same. Then, the only APIs needed are those to align the image to an integer pixel boundary to avoid blur. The tricky part is to align several UI elements in the same way when needed.
Man, I sure hope so, my eyes are getting too old to be squinting at OS X through high-density monitors. Windows does this without any issues. One other thing that I really, really wish OS X had for the longest time, and it's so damn simple, is the ability to resize windows from anywhere on the window instead of just the stupid little corner on the bottom right. Does anyone know if we will finally have this in SL? I thought we were supposed to have that in 10.5?!?
It's these 2 issues that bug me the most about having to work cross-platform. \
resizing from somewhere other than the bottom right corner would be nice - especially when the bottom right corner is off the bottom of the screen and you cannot get to it - though at the other end of the extreme I find Windows to be aggravating when I accidentally resize windows without meaning to.
There are some third party options that claim to allow window resizing from anywhere or with keyboard shortcuts - I have not tried any of them myself but if you go to versiontracker.com and search on "resize window" you will get some shareware and freeware hits.
You can also try the keyboard combo - Command-Option-8 plus Command-Option = or Command-Option - to turn on Zoom then to zoom in and out - although that does not resize the window - it does zoom the screen contents which could be useful in some cases (I use this on the computer attached to my TV - at 1920x1080 on a 65" screen most of the time it is okay - but sometimes I need to zoom in a bit to get a better look at what I am doing.
In reality, what are the benefits of resolution independence? Would it mean so much to the general Mac user as people tend to believe?
It depends. I've got a 24" monitor. The menu bar on the top is thin, and the type small. But I can still use it. On a much higher rez 30" monitor, it's verging on the edge of illegibility. The same thing is true for icons, type etc. For programs, we get the same problems. With Rez independence, the entire screen can be brought up in size the way you could do it with CRT monitors, but with all the resolution your monitor has. Things will still be sharp, and you might even see a bit more detail as a result of vectors being used instead of bitmaps.
You know where in a program you can magnify the page you're working on, but not the program itself? Well, with Rez independence, everything will be larger. If your eyesight isn't the best, this will be a godsend.
Man, I sure hope so, my eyes are getting too old to be squinting at OS X through high-density monitors. Windows does this without any issues. One other thing that I really, really wish OS X had for the longest time, and it's so damn simple, is the ability to resize windows from anywhere on the window instead of just the stupid little corner on the bottom right. Does anyone know if we will finally have this in SL? I thought we were supposed to have that in 10.5?!?
It's these 2 issues that bug me the most about having to work cross-platform. \
Windows doesn't do Rez independence. It doesn't do any more than OS X does now. There are various ways to enlarge what's on the screen, but Apple's Rez independence prototype is the best around right now.
Resizing windows has nothing to do with Rez independence either. Sometimes having the ability to drag any side is good, sometimes it doesn't matter.
All the APIs needed are available since Tiger. There is nothing special in this. The most important part is to follow a number of rules which boil down to the following: don't assume the pixel size and actual size are the same. Then, the only APIs needed are those to align the image to an integer pixel boundary to avoid blur. The tricky part is to align several UI elements in the same way when needed.
The special thing is preparing all the elements needed for RI. That's one. The second it to get all the thousands of developers on board. That's not so easy.
Ya, so far no trace whatsoever of resolution independence.
More and more i get the feeling that resolution independence can NOT be implemented on Carbon based applications.. so untill Apple dumps Carbon, i doubt we will see RI Adi
Resolution independence is a long term goal... We won't be seeing it any time soon.
As a matter of fact, you don't need any new APIs for RI. You can already (as in 10.5) tweak some developer preferences to enable it. But the view with zoomed windows won't be pretty (icons and stuff not aligned, low-res bitmaps pixelized, etc)...
Carbon might be a part of this, but the main reason is that it needs changes from all software developers too. Current programs are not written to be RI. Not even all of Apple's programs are.
I seem to be the only one who thinks resolution independence is a bad thing. It consumes vast amounts of processing power in exchange for worse detail rendering.
You confuse "resolution independence" with changing resolutions.
Actually RI does not consume vast amounts of processing power (it's all in the GPU, and it's not a complicated process).
And the detail rendering is MUCH, MUCH improved.
It's only when currently changing resolution on an LCD/TFT screen to something other than the native that you get worse rendering. And this worse rendering is because of lack of RI.
Windows doesn't utilize real RI, they use Windows Presentation Foundation API which, to put it simply, is a graphical subsystem for rich user interface development. While not true RI I wish Apple would offer a better option for scaling their GUI if they aren't going to ready RI anytime soon. Windows has always handled this better then OS X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
No, it does not.
Excuse me if this isn't technically RI, but it does allow me to increase the resolution of all elements of the GUI in Windows so that everything is much more legible on a high-density monitor. From what I had understood previously, this had seemed to be resolution independence. Maybe technically it isn't RI, and I still cannot determine why it isn't by reading the wikipedia link above, but I would sure love this function in OS X.
Comments
If I were a doctor carrying a pseudo-tablet laptop around I'd go nuts. They're awkward. Tablet with docking station seems better.
There are probably doctors who agree with you. But I'm a doctor who does all of his notes (hospital and office) on a laptop. I do get tired of opening and closing the clamshell. However, Jobs is (unfortunately) right about the bandwidth problem. I type MUCH faster than I write. And I have no desire to use any of the template-based programs. Very few patients' complaints really match the templates... except when you use templates, and suddenly they all do. When I see a note from another doctor, and you can see he/she used one of those programs, I almost never find the information useful to me. The history I get from the patient almost never matches what's in that note.
Now,if Apple makes a tablet, I'll buy one and try VERY hard to find a way to make it work for my practice. (And if it doesn't work for the medical stuff, I'll find something else to use it for and will no doubt love it for that). But there aren't many things that beat a keyboard for getting information into a device quickly (dictations don't work for me; I can do it, but it's much easier to say exactly what you intend if you type it).
My 2 cents. Off-topic, I see. Sorry 'bout that.
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
Which is very interesting. If ever there had been a release specifically tailored to tidying up specifically this kind of problem, I thought that's what Snow Leopard was all about.
More and more i get the feeling that resolution independence can NOT be implemented on Carbon based applications.. so untill Apple dumps Carbon, i doubt we will see RI
Adi
Someone explain this to me, please. I dabble in Cocoa. I don't do any work in Carbon. Why is Carbon an obstacle to resolution independence?
There are probably doctors who agree with you. But I'm a doctor who does all of his notes (hospital and office) on a laptop. I do get tired of opening and closing the clamshell. However, Jobs is (unfortunately) right about the bandwidth problem. I type MUCH faster than I write. And I have no desire to use any of the template-based programs. Very few patients' complaints really match the templates... except when you use templates, and suddenly they all do. When I see a note from another doctor, and you can see he/she used one of those programs, I almost never find the information useful to me. The history I get from the patient almost never matches what's in that note.
Now,if Apple makes a tablet, I'll buy one and try VERY hard to find a way to make it work for my practice. (And if it doesn't work for the medical stuff, I'll find something else to use it for and will no doubt love it for that). But there aren't many things that beat a keyboard for getting information into a device quickly (dictations don't work for me; I can do it, but it's much easier to say exactly what you intend if you type it).
My 2 cents. Off-topic, I see. Sorry 'bout that.
I agree completely. It's always amusing, when it isn't frustrating, when a form requires you to check off "always, sometimes, never", when it's really almost never, or almost always. We recently had that problem with my daughter. We had her going to The NYU Child Development Center to get a final evaluation of her ADD, which has become milder as she has gotten older. The 6 page form had us scratching our heads at times. Often, the answer is "not quite, but maybe almost one of the above, but maybe not".
You get forced into a position where your responses aren't quite correct.
Which is very interesting. If ever there had been a release specifically tailored to tidying up specifically this kind of problem, I thought that's what Snow Leopard was all about.
I thought so too. I had my hopes up.
I can't believe they're finally supporting AAC+. I had all but given up on this...and so did many other content providers. I hope it's not too late for mass adoption.
I just hope this doesn't mean we'll have to shell out more money to upgrade our libraries to the new AAC+ format like Apple did with the iTunes Plus format.
I just hope this doesn't mean we'll have to shell out more money to upgrade our libraries to the new AAC+ format like Apple did with the iTunes Plus format.
iTunes Plus was a doubling of bitrate and removal of DRM, it wasn't a different audio codec. This audio codec is designed for low bitrate streaming for low bandwidth situations. You won't find this on the iTS for music.
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
In reality, what are the benefits of resolution independence? Would it mean so much to the general Mac user as people tend to believe?
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
Man, I sure hope so, my eyes are getting too old to be squinting at OS X through high-density monitors. Windows does this without any issues. One other thing that I really, really wish OS X had for the longest time, and it's so damn simple, is the ability to resize windows from anywhere on the window instead of just the stupid little corner on the bottom right. Does anyone know if we will finally have this in SL? I thought we were supposed to have that in 10.5?!?
It's these 2 issues that bug me the most about having to work cross-platform.
I seem to be the only one who thinks resolution independence is a bad thing. It consumes vast amounts of processing power in exchange for worse detail rendering.
Windows does this just fine, at least Vista anyway, don't know about XP. But there is no performance hit whatsoever.
Windows does this just fine, at least Vista anyway, don't know about XP. But there is no performance hit whatsoever.
Windows doesn't utilize real RI, they use Windows Presentation Foundation API which, to put it simply, is a graphical subsystem for rich user interface development. While not true RI I wish Apple would offer a better option for scaling their GUI if they aren't going to ready RI anytime soon. Windows has always handled this better then OS X.
This looks to be killing the possibility for us seeing rez independence in 10.6. That would require other API's, and if we're not seeing it in the new developer builds, then, I assume it's out. Too bad.
All the APIs needed are available since Tiger. There is nothing special in this. The most important part is to follow a number of rules which boil down to the following: don't assume the pixel size and actual size are the same. Then, the only APIs needed are those to align the image to an integer pixel boundary to avoid blur. The tricky part is to align several UI elements in the same way when needed.
Man, I sure hope so, my eyes are getting too old to be squinting at OS X through high-density monitors. Windows does this without any issues. One other thing that I really, really wish OS X had for the longest time, and it's so damn simple, is the ability to resize windows from anywhere on the window instead of just the stupid little corner on the bottom right. Does anyone know if we will finally have this in SL? I thought we were supposed to have that in 10.5?!?
It's these 2 issues that bug me the most about having to work cross-platform.
resizing from somewhere other than the bottom right corner would be nice - especially when the bottom right corner is off the bottom of the screen and you cannot get to it - though at the other end of the extreme I find Windows to be aggravating when I accidentally resize windows without meaning to.
There are some third party options that claim to allow window resizing from anywhere or with keyboard shortcuts - I have not tried any of them myself but if you go to versiontracker.com and search on "resize window" you will get some shareware and freeware hits.
You can also try the keyboard combo - Command-Option-8 plus Command-Option = or Command-Option - to turn on Zoom then to zoom in and out - although that does not resize the window - it does zoom the screen contents which could be useful in some cases (I use this on the computer attached to my TV - at 1920x1080 on a 65" screen most of the time it is okay - but sometimes I need to zoom in a bit to get a better look at what I am doing.
In reality, what are the benefits of resolution independence? Would it mean so much to the general Mac user as people tend to believe?
It depends. I've got a 24" monitor. The menu bar on the top is thin, and the type small. But I can still use it. On a much higher rez 30" monitor, it's verging on the edge of illegibility. The same thing is true for icons, type etc. For programs, we get the same problems. With Rez independence, the entire screen can be brought up in size the way you could do it with CRT monitors, but with all the resolution your monitor has. Things will still be sharp, and you might even see a bit more detail as a result of vectors being used instead of bitmaps.
You know where in a program you can magnify the page you're working on, but not the program itself? Well, with Rez independence, everything will be larger. If your eyesight isn't the best, this will be a godsend.
Man, I sure hope so, my eyes are getting too old to be squinting at OS X through high-density monitors. Windows does this without any issues. One other thing that I really, really wish OS X had for the longest time, and it's so damn simple, is the ability to resize windows from anywhere on the window instead of just the stupid little corner on the bottom right. Does anyone know if we will finally have this in SL? I thought we were supposed to have that in 10.5?!?
It's these 2 issues that bug me the most about having to work cross-platform.
Windows doesn't do Rez independence. It doesn't do any more than OS X does now. There are various ways to enlarge what's on the screen, but Apple's Rez independence prototype is the best around right now.
Resizing windows has nothing to do with Rez independence either. Sometimes having the ability to drag any side is good, sometimes it doesn't matter.
Windows does this just fine, at least Vista anyway, don't know about XP. But there is no performance hit whatsoever.
No, it does not.
All the APIs needed are available since Tiger. There is nothing special in this. The most important part is to follow a number of rules which boil down to the following: don't assume the pixel size and actual size are the same. Then, the only APIs needed are those to align the image to an integer pixel boundary to avoid blur. The tricky part is to align several UI elements in the same way when needed.
The special thing is preparing all the elements needed for RI. That's one. The second it to get all the thousands of developers on board. That's not so easy.
Ya, so far no trace whatsoever of resolution independence.
More and more i get the feeling that resolution independence can NOT be implemented on Carbon based applications.. so untill Apple dumps Carbon, i doubt we will see RI
Resolution independence is a long term goal... We won't be seeing it any time soon.
As a matter of fact, you don't need any new APIs for RI. You can already (as in 10.5) tweak some developer preferences to enable it. But the view with zoomed windows won't be pretty (icons and stuff not aligned, low-res bitmaps pixelized, etc)...
Carbon might be a part of this, but the main reason is that it needs changes from all software developers too. Current programs are not written to be RI. Not even all of Apple's programs are.
I seem to be the only one who thinks resolution independence is a bad thing. It consumes vast amounts of processing power in exchange for worse detail rendering.
You confuse "resolution independence" with changing resolutions.
Actually RI does not consume vast amounts of processing power (it's all in the GPU, and it's not a complicated process).
And the detail rendering is MUCH, MUCH improved.
It's only when currently changing resolution on an LCD/TFT screen to something other than the native that you get worse rendering. And this worse rendering is because of lack of RI.
Windows doesn't utilize real RI, they use Windows Presentation Foundation API which, to put it simply, is a graphical subsystem for rich user interface development. While not true RI I wish Apple would offer a better option for scaling their GUI if they aren't going to ready RI anytime soon. Windows has always handled this better then OS X.
No, it does not.
Excuse me if this isn't technically RI, but it does allow me to increase the resolution of all elements of the GUI in Windows so that everything is much more legible on a high-density monitor. From what I had understood previously, this had seemed to be resolution independence. Maybe technically it isn't RI, and I still cannot determine why it isn't by reading the wikipedia link above, but I would sure love this function in OS X.