Why impractical? HD won't stop growing in size. One day we'll have storage devices that could store all of today's Internet content just to show you that technology will never stop advancing.
Logging this info will bring lots of flexibility (and complexities too) to the end-user.
It's impractical because it's a LOT of information. If, to use one of Gon's examples, I'd liked my code the way it was last December, I wouldn't have changed it in the first place. Until ripping all my DVDs to disk and keeping all the audio files I've recorded (probably several TB right there) takes up less than half my hard drive, I'd much rather have more drive space than the ability to see what all my documents looked like at some arbitrary point in the past.
take it from a long time windows user whos next purchase will be a macintosh, xp is ok as long as you dont connect it to the internet, the minute u do that, you had better have an anti-virus, firewall, ad-aware, mozilla, because ie sux, and spybot(imunized) all this to stop some punk ass 12 yearold lamo scriptkiddy in melasia from hijackin you to use as a spambot or a phone dialer. i hope the much hyped sp2 fixes this but i doubt it. for this, and the included spam filter in mail i would swich, but for me, unix just seals the deal, mac is the best thing to happen to unix in years
It's impractical because it's a LOT of information. If, to use one of Gon's examples, I'd liked my code the way it was last December, I wouldn't have changed it in the first place. Until ripping all my DVDs to disk and keeping all the audio files I've recorded (probably several TB right there) takes up less than half my hard drive, I'd much rather have more drive space than the ability to see what all my documents looked like at some arbitrary point in the past.
I thought I just demonstrated the amount of space you need to do this is minuscule.
There is a lot of value in being able to access your stuff the way it used to be. That's why we have version control systems like CVS, Subversion and SourceSafe today. Version control functionality is, of course, additional functionality over what the "plain" database file system would provide (metadata/search). But it would be a great addition after the database existed...
Things like CVS work great for test files and code and small stuff like that, but obviously, once you start editing graphics, music, movies, etc, it doesn't work so well. What I'd be more interested in than know the file state from a given date is to know simply which files were used. Instead of having a single modification date, a file could have many associated with it. But most of the system files and Library files should be exempt from this as they're used all the time and every day.
I thought I just demonstrated the amount of space you need to do this is minuscule.
There is a lot of value in being able to access your stuff the way it used to be. That's why we have version control systems like CVS, Subversion and SourceSafe today. Version control functionality is, of course, additional functionality over what the "plain" database file system would provide (metadata/search). But it would be a great addition after the database existed...
It's not miniscule, not on my system anyway. After a long day of using my computer, I'd bet that 100MB is on the small side for me. I don't have the drive space to keep track of it all, nor do I want to pay for said drive space. If, on the other hand, you want to, go right ahead. I'm sure it would be useful from time to time. I just don't think the price is worth paying.
Well, not to sound cocky or anything...but do you really think Apple is gonna sit on it's duff? I mean think about it, Apple is a mover and a shaker...they don't sit idle until someone makes something cool and then smashes it..they constantly evolve things and make them better. By the time LongHorn(e) comes out, Apple would have covered some serious ground. I for one and not scared. I beleive that they will give us more than what LongHorn will/could be. How many times has M$ delayed this so far? This may be wishful thinking, but maybe this could be 'forever-ware'...meaning it will keep being delayed until it is scrapped and re-invented. No worries, Apple is, and will continue to innovate.
Longhorn is very much looking more and more like "forever-ware". I am not holding my breath. Having such a large community for which to develop may actually make it much more difficult for Microsoft than it was for Apple (in the case of OS X, and earlier attempts) to take a fundamentally new direction in OS design (and remember how difficult it was for Apple, over the years). Windows is Microsoft's strength and foundation...and its curse.
Mr brother had just reformatted the hard drive and reinstalled XP on it. Having only finished the install 5 minutes ago, he discovered intense network activity. Turns out he already had 2 viruses.
I haven't had a virus at all in over 10 years of owing macs.
The thing that bugs me the most about this whole topic is this guy is comparing a beta version M$ OS that is 2 years away from being released with the current version of OSX... How can anyone do that ? Maybe the ideas behind Longhorn are "cool" and "advanced" but they are not in wide usage yet, and wont be for at least 2yrs. Apple is always updating their software. Since OSX was released, we've gotten an OS upgrade every year. So if Apple continues with this schedule, we'll have 2 more revs of OSX before Longhorn even hits the shelves. By that time, Apple should have some sweet new ideas and technologies built into the OS.
BTW, thanks M$ for giving Apple some advanced warning on how to kick you a$$ by the time Longhorn is released.
[B]The thing that bugs me the most about this whole topic is this guy is comparing a beta version M$ OS that is 2 years away from being released with the current version of OSX...
Yep, Longhorn is due 2006 at the earliest. Assuming that Apple stick to the current yearly update pattern, that means Apple will be on 10.6 by the time Longhorn is released.
Now, if Longhorn slips anymore (which seems likely - interim releases, which were due this year, of SQL server and .NET frameworks that in part make up some of the technology going into Longhorn have slipped into 2005 already) then Apple could well be showing off 10.7 at WWDC by the time Longhorn sees the light of day.
On top of that, some people are putting money on it being as far away as 2008 by the time Longhorn is out. Ouch.
There is a clear need for a systemwide database. One question I'd like to be able to ask the computer is "what did I do on 24.12.2003" and when I ask that, I want to see e-mails from that day, I want to see the playlist that was playing, photos taken, code written, et cetera.
You know, this is just what the FBI would like your computer to do too.
If XP and Office XP are any indication of Microsoft's direction, their idea of "helpful" is my idea of "f*cking intrusive."
Ever watch the Bloomberg Channel? That's where Longhorn seems to be heading.
30" monitors will become mandatory if you want any workspace left over while all of the "helpful" tool bars and task lists and friendly reminders and quick-access whatevers squeeze in from the top, bottom, left and right of your display. Every keystroke will bring up pop-up menus with choices like "You have now typed 'th'. Here's a list of the most popular words beginning with 'th' to choose from...". Every pull-down menu will start looking like the XP Start menu, covering half or more of your display while it's active, probably adding video how-to displays playing next to each menu choice...
If XP and Office XP are any indication of Microsoft's direction, their idea of "helpful" is my idea of "f*cking intrusive."
Ever watch the Bloomberg Channel? That's where Longhorn seems to be heading.
30" monitors will become mandatory if you want any workspace left over while all of the "helpful" tool bars and task lists and friendly reminders and quick-access whatevers squeeze in from the top, bottom, left and right of your display. Every keystroke will bring up pop-up menus with choices like "You have now typed 'th'. Here's a list of the most popular words beginning with 'th' to choose from...". Every pull-down menu will start looking like the XP Start menu, covering half or more of your display while it's active, probably adding video how-to displays playing next to each menu choice...
Aaaarrrrgggghhhhh!
It's Windows.. What do you expect? lol.. That's the main reason I hate MS Office (any version). There are too many damned toolbars and pallettes etc.. Longhorn is gonna suck just as all the other versions of Windows do.
Don't forget the "Wizards" that pop up to handhold the user through a puzzling, counter-intuitive 17-step process. That's your "task-based" interface at work.
Here's some problems with task-based interfaces:
1) They don't give any hint to the user how the task really works, therefore depriving them of "computer knowledge" they can put to use in similar applications.
2) Because the wizard must guess at what the user is trying to do, and the wizard is only as smart as its programmer (read: dumb), it's either too restrictive or loaded with confusing questions that normal users can't even begin to answer. Oftentimes, the wizard does both.
3)The "wizards" can often dump you out of the process with one or two steps left, assuming you know how to do the rest. Nero on PC is the king of this (they're also king of hiding the "burn" button around a swarm of useless icons).
Task-based interfaces for a general purpose computer are a very, very bad idea.
One of the OPENSTEP [read: Mac OS X] philosophies is that users want small tools that do a particular task very well. They don't want a monolithic Swiss Army Knife that tries to do everything and yet doesn't really do anything particularly well. The idea is that the user can choose a bunch of tools that suit their needs and then apply them to the task at hand. This may seem a foreign concept to the user of, say, Microsoft applications. Those applications are designed to take over the computer and the user is not expected to leave them until they are done with them. The OPENSTEP [Mac OS X] approach is to launch an armada of applications and have them all working on the document together, with the user jumping from one application to the next. In the Microsoft world, this wouldn't work because the applications do such a poor job of communicating with each other. OPENSTEP [Mac] applications don't have this same problem, however, because inter-application communication is handled masterfully by the pasteboard.
You can also include things such as common frameworks like Cocoa text features, the AddressBook API, Quicktime and the accessible iTunes database as more examples of inter-application communication in Mac OS X. Then of course, the UI is geared towards this by interleaving windows among applications, Exposé, pervasive drag-and-drop, etc.
So do you want to eat what the kitchen gives you, or do you like your dinner a la carte?
Comments
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Why impractical? HD won't stop growing in size. One day we'll have storage devices that could store all of today's Internet content just to show you that technology will never stop advancing.
Logging this info will bring lots of flexibility (and complexities too) to the end-user.
It's impractical because it's a LOT of information. If, to use one of Gon's examples, I'd liked my code the way it was last December, I wouldn't have changed it in the first place. Until ripping all my DVDs to disk and keeping all the audio files I've recorded (probably several TB right there) takes up less than half my hard drive, I'd much rather have more drive space than the ability to see what all my documents looked like at some arbitrary point in the past.
Originally posted by Krob81
So what does WINFS stand for? I read it as "Windows F@#$ing Sucks"
Originally posted by Whisper
It's impractical because it's a LOT of information. If, to use one of Gon's examples, I'd liked my code the way it was last December, I wouldn't have changed it in the first place. Until ripping all my DVDs to disk and keeping all the audio files I've recorded (probably several TB right there) takes up less than half my hard drive, I'd much rather have more drive space than the ability to see what all my documents looked like at some arbitrary point in the past.
I thought I just demonstrated the amount of space you need to do this is minuscule.
There is a lot of value in being able to access your stuff the way it used to be. That's why we have version control systems like CVS, Subversion and SourceSafe today. Version control functionality is, of course, additional functionality over what the "plain" database file system would provide (metadata/search). But it would be a great addition after the database existed...
Originally posted by Gon
I thought I just demonstrated the amount of space you need to do this is minuscule.
There is a lot of value in being able to access your stuff the way it used to be. That's why we have version control systems like CVS, Subversion and SourceSafe today. Version control functionality is, of course, additional functionality over what the "plain" database file system would provide (metadata/search). But it would be a great addition after the database existed...
It's not miniscule, not on my system anyway. After a long day of using my computer, I'd bet that 100MB is on the small side for me. I don't have the drive space to keep track of it all, nor do I want to pay for said drive space. If, on the other hand, you want to, go right ahead. I'm sure it would be useful from time to time. I just don't think the price is worth paying.
I haven't had a virus at all in over 10 years of owing macs.
BTW, thanks M$ for giving Apple some advanced warning on how to kick you a$$ by the time Longhorn is released.
Originally posted by fulmer
[B]The thing that bugs me the most about this whole topic is this guy is comparing a beta version M$ OS that is 2 years away from being released with the current version of OSX...
Yep, Longhorn is due 2006 at the earliest. Assuming that Apple stick to the current yearly update pattern, that means Apple will be on 10.6 by the time Longhorn is released.
Now, if Longhorn slips anymore (which seems likely - interim releases, which were due this year, of SQL server and .NET frameworks that in part make up some of the technology going into Longhorn have slipped into 2005 already) then Apple could well be showing off 10.7 at WWDC by the time Longhorn sees the light of day.
On top of that, some people are putting money on it being as far away as 2008 by the time Longhorn is out. Ouch.
Neil.
a.k.a. Arnel
Originally posted by Gon
There is a clear need for a systemwide database. One question I'd like to be able to ask the computer is "what did I do on 24.12.2003" and when I ask that, I want to see e-mails from that day, I want to see the playlist that was playing, photos taken, code written, et cetera.
You know, this is just what the FBI would like your computer to do too.
Ever watch the Bloomberg Channel? That's where Longhorn seems to be heading.
30" monitors will become mandatory if you want any workspace left over while all of the "helpful" tool bars and task lists and friendly reminders and quick-access whatevers squeeze in from the top, bottom, left and right of your display. Every keystroke will bring up pop-up menus with choices like "You have now typed 'th'. Here's a list of the most popular words beginning with 'th' to choose from...". Every pull-down menu will start looking like the XP Start menu, covering half or more of your display while it's active, probably adding video how-to displays playing next to each menu choice...
Aaaarrrrgggghhhhh!
Originally posted by shetline
If XP and Office XP are any indication of Microsoft's direction, their idea of "helpful" is my idea of "f*cking intrusive."
Ever watch the Bloomberg Channel? That's where Longhorn seems to be heading.
30" monitors will become mandatory if you want any workspace left over while all of the "helpful" tool bars and task lists and friendly reminders and quick-access whatevers squeeze in from the top, bottom, left and right of your display. Every keystroke will bring up pop-up menus with choices like "You have now typed 'th'. Here's a list of the most popular words beginning with 'th' to choose from...". Every pull-down menu will start looking like the XP Start menu, covering half or more of your display while it's active, probably adding video how-to displays playing next to each menu choice...
Aaaarrrrgggghhhhh!
It's Windows.. What do you expect? lol.. That's the main reason I hate MS Office (any version). There are too many damned toolbars and pallettes etc.. Longhorn is gonna suck just as all the other versions of Windows do.
Here's some problems with task-based interfaces:
1) They don't give any hint to the user how the task really works, therefore depriving them of "computer knowledge" they can put to use in similar applications.
2) Because the wizard must guess at what the user is trying to do, and the wizard is only as smart as its programmer (read: dumb), it's either too restrictive or loaded with confusing questions that normal users can't even begin to answer. Oftentimes, the wizard does both.
3)The "wizards" can often dump you out of the process with one or two steps left, assuming you know how to do the rest. Nero on PC is the king of this (they're also king of hiding the "burn" button around a swarm of useless icons).
Task-based interfaces for a general purpose computer are a very, very bad idea.
Originally posted by Proud iBook Owner 2k2
Longhorn is gonna suck just as all the other versions of Windows do.
You know why I think that, too?
They're going to have full backwards compatibility, that's why. It means they will have all the same holes, and add new ones.
Originally posted by Gon
You know why I think that, too?
They're going to have full backwards compatibility, that's why. It means they will have all the same holes, and add new ones.
RIGHT ON BROTHA/SISTAH!! ^_^
Service Call
the pertinent part:
One of the OPENSTEP [read: Mac OS X] philosophies is that users want small tools that do a particular task very well. They don't want a monolithic Swiss Army Knife that tries to do everything and yet doesn't really do anything particularly well. The idea is that the user can choose a bunch of tools that suit their needs and then apply them to the task at hand. This may seem a foreign concept to the user of, say, Microsoft applications. Those applications are designed to take over the computer and the user is not expected to leave them until they are done with them. The OPENSTEP [Mac OS X] approach is to launch an armada of applications and have them all working on the document together, with the user jumping from one application to the next. In the Microsoft world, this wouldn't work because the applications do such a poor job of communicating with each other. OPENSTEP [Mac] applications don't have this same problem, however, because inter-application communication is handled masterfully by the pasteboard.
You can also include things such as common frameworks like Cocoa text features, the AddressBook API, Quicktime and the accessible iTunes database as more examples of inter-application communication in Mac OS X. Then of course, the UI is geared towards this by interleaving windows among applications, Exposé, pervasive drag-and-drop, etc.
So do you want to eat what the kitchen gives you, or do you like your dinner a la carte?