Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dashboard Exposed
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
craigiest said:
having seen it now, i didn't really like it either. when i read *ripple effect* i imagined the space the widget occupied to ripple as the widget appeared or disappeared. bit more subtle like.
Iain
whooleytoo said:The way I understand it:
Quartz Extreme consists of two parts, Quartz 2D and Quartz Compositing. Q2D is a 2D graphics API. It (along with QuickDraw, QuickTime and OpenGL) passes it's resultant bitmap data to Quartz Compositer, which takes those bitmaps and renders them onto OpenGL polygons and offloads them to the GPU, which is ideally suited for handling translucency, layering etc.
CoreImage is an API for manipulation of bitmaps, so you most likely will only be using it if you're using a Tiger-requiring graphics or video app. (Then again, who knows what uses developers will find for it and CoreVideo. My first thought was - wouldn't it be cool to use that to send ripples across my desktop picture periodically, or have it shimmer like it's underwater. Very relaxing..)
Kool, I don't know a whole lot about the graphics engine behind OS X so that's interesting. I don't know what you do for a living, but considering what you say is true and you know a thing or two about QuartzExtreme, would you happen to know anything yet about Avalon? How do you think QuartzExtreme will compare to Avalon considering Avalon will be a graphics engine of the future? How would we tell this early if Avalon is ahead or behind it's time by the time Longhorn is released? Just curious as to what you know about that graphics engine so far.
widgets
hi hope when the tiger is lauched, the appearance of the widgets is a bit more in line with the rest of the OS. I do find them colorful, but a bit "childish". I know, iknow, mac computing should be fun too, but i just prefer them to look a bit more 'proffesional' , i thought the times of color designs were gone, and to be honest make me think a bit of MS XP..... apple can do better than that i feel...... just my thoughts...
hi hope when the tiger is lauched, the appearance of the widgets is a bit more in line with the rest of the OS. I do find them colorful, but a bit "childish". I know, iknow, mac computing should be fun too, but i just prefer them to look a bit more 'proffesional' , i thought the times of color designs were gone, and to be honest make me think a bit of MS XP..... apple can do better than that i feel...... just my thoughts...
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/
This is explaining an important difference between Dashboard and the Konfabulator versions of product.
What pro Konfabulator people are saying is that Apple should pay all other browser manufacturers of Web Browser because they copied an idea?
If Konfabulator is a better product people will still use it.
Dashboard is a better implementation of a very old idea, it's called a graphic user interface. All Konfabulator has been is a recent leader in fashion and style, about to be superseded on technological grounds.
This is explaining an important difference between Dashboard and the Konfabulator versions of product.
What pro Konfabulator people are saying is that Apple should pay all other browser manufacturers of Web Browser because they copied an idea?
If Konfabulator is a better product people will still use it.
Dashboard is a better implementation of a very old idea, it's called a graphic user interface. All Konfabulator has been is a recent leader in fashion and style, about to be superseded on technological grounds.
Problems go deeper than Konfabulator
Perhaps it's a rip-off, perhaps not. Doesn't matter. To me, this is a prime example of what Apple is doing wrong, at least from a professional Mac user.
I can't tell you how annoying it would be to see that blasted ripple effect each time I launched the calculator or my address book. And even though I could and would likely turn this "feature" off, just knowing that it's there bugs me. Effects like this -- made simply as eye candy with no design- or form-based function -- only contribute to the Mac's reputation as a toy.
Now, if they wanted to use (a much more sublime) ripple when an alert box apears, that could be useful. At a point like that the OS needs to interrupt you so you can make a decision. I'm getting too deep into this criticism, and it's not even my biggest bone to pick.
OK, main argument: This is nothing more than an attempt to minimize shortcommings of Apple's Doc, which is little more than a eye candy version of the Window's task bar. Except I find the task bar on Windows useful. Now, rather than refining the Doc the way the Apple of the mid '90s would have done, the "new" apple glosses over the problem and introduces the next big thing.
If the problem was having all the DA-style applications taking up room in the doc, wouldn't a better implementation have been to give users an option to use tiny icons in an area on the doc a la the launcher buttons you could drag to the Window's task bar from Win98 on? Or would it be better to add an entirely new GUI interface element?
I'm tired of Steve Jobs smirking over effects that make my OS look ever more like VH1's "Pop Up Video" when my OS GUI is not snappy. I'm tired of an Apple that increasingly shuns the human interface for the GUI widget of the week.
Perhaps it's a rip-off, perhaps not. Doesn't matter. To me, this is a prime example of what Apple is doing wrong, at least from a professional Mac user.
I can't tell you how annoying it would be to see that blasted ripple effect each time I launched the calculator or my address book. And even though I could and would likely turn this "feature" off, just knowing that it's there bugs me. Effects like this -- made simply as eye candy with no design- or form-based function -- only contribute to the Mac's reputation as a toy.
Now, if they wanted to use (a much more sublime) ripple when an alert box apears, that could be useful. At a point like that the OS needs to interrupt you so you can make a decision. I'm getting too deep into this criticism, and it's not even my biggest bone to pick.
OK, main argument: This is nothing more than an attempt to minimize shortcommings of Apple's Doc, which is little more than a eye candy version of the Window's task bar. Except I find the task bar on Windows useful. Now, rather than refining the Doc the way the Apple of the mid '90s would have done, the "new" apple glosses over the problem and introduces the next big thing.
If the problem was having all the DA-style applications taking up room in the doc, wouldn't a better implementation have been to give users an option to use tiny icons in an area on the doc a la the launcher buttons you could drag to the Window's task bar from Win98 on? Or would it be better to add an entirely new GUI interface element?
I'm tired of Steve Jobs smirking over effects that make my OS look ever more like VH1's "Pop Up Video" when my OS GUI is not snappy. I'm tired of an Apple that increasingly shuns the human interface for the GUI widget of the week.
hehe.
people need to CHILL.
Tiger is still ~ a year away.
Apple had guts to show this stuff so early - risking people "not putting the bits in perspective."
people need to CHILL.
Tiger is still ~ a year away.
Apple had guts to show this stuff so early - risking people "not putting the bits in perspective."
superninjagoat said:
Wow...someone's got a lot of pent-up anger/frustration.
I'd rather forget that Apple even existed in the 90's. Whether or not you like Steve Jobs or the little effects that pop up here and there in OS X, you have to admit that Apple now at least puts out a respectable OS, (in my opinion, the most advanced OS out there). If Apple still did things as they were done in the stagnant 90's, I'd definitely be using Windows.
And I think you mean "dock" instead of "Doc".
And saying that Dashboard is just a band-aid for a crowded dock is a gross oversimplification. There are many things that we keep on our real desks (staplers, stickies, clocks, etc.) that we'd gladly remove if we could get to them quickly when we needed them. Dashboard makes this possible on our computer desktops. Tiny little icons would be a mess and a joke, but I find the concept of Dashboard (while gaudy in its current incarnation) very elegant. Push button, bring up simple reference tools/utilities. Push button once more, they're gone. Completely gone. No need to hunt for ugly, little Windows-like icons in the dock. No need to keep gaudy widgets permanently on the desktop. They just quickly float off "above your head".
While I did find the ripple effect a little over the top, it didn't cause me any emotional distress that it was there (which it apparently did for others...). The "clock-flip" effect seemed to be both cool and functional, which is the kind of thing I'd like to see more of in Dashboard.
superninjagoat said:
I think the Dock is far superior to the windows task bar. It's not as cluttered, the icons are more versitle (eg, Adium or iCal). Magnification is there for those that need it, not there for those that don't. It also holds applications that aren't running for easy access, and apps that are running can have custom contextual menus. Even the trash makes sense in the Dock, other applications can use it as a deleting metaphor.
jakemikey said:
You're right, I do have a lot of pent up anger about some of the OS changes in OSX. They mainly center around eye candy and the dock (Don't know what I was thinking about with "doc." Sorry.). I use a computer as a tool. And I need it to function -- even at the sake of the innovation. It's just gotta' work.
Now, this is not to say that the Unix underpinnings of OSX aren't a breath of fresh air; they are. And little things like not having to set my own memory allocations are a god send. I'd never go back.
But for me, the dock bothers me more than it helps. If I have a half dozen html files open for editing, it's hard to tell which icon belongs to which window. I want some sort of filename, not a picture of a file (html documents all look pretty much the same). And I don't want to have to roll over the icon to find out which file I'm dealing with. This slows my workflow down considerably.
I also think using the dock as a launcher is a bit misguided. I preferred to launch applications from the apple menu. But that's a bit of a moot point. We've all got our preferences.
On the other hand, dock icons are great for identifying which Photoshop document I'm working on.
And I think you're right; much of my last post was an oversimplification. But I still see what I interpret as a trend toward forcing users to interface with their computer in a new, novel ways and that implement features that are "fluffier" that necessary. Kinda' like when you get consumer software with a cheap digital camera that is supposed to be so easy that your grandmother can figure it out -- except she can't. And neither can you because it doesn't follow any logic. Apple hasn't gone that far with this; I'm not saying that. But I think I see inklings of it.
I miss the elegance and finesse of the Mac OS. Now I'm getting flash. I don't want flash; I want substance.
I feel as though I'm trolling a bit on this, and that's not my intention. I love Macintosh. I've been using them since '86, and they will always hold my allegiance. But that same passion means that I get ever so pissed when they do something that I feel violates the basic "contract" between a user and his or her computer.
Chill Out.
I, too, have been using Mac's professionally for quiet some time. Not as long as some but since the 512e. I was always taught to believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see. I believe we should all sit back and withhold judgement till all the facts come out. I have used similar "Konfab"-like products in both Windows and Macs for many years. Seems reasonable that Apple is just improving on something they intro'd years ago. But I'll wait to see the final implementation and all the facts from both sides to condemn anyone. Dashboard looks like it could be pretty useful to some of us and not so useful to others. And why shouldn't it look cool while it does what it does. People who think its just eye-candy don't have to use it if they don't want to. But don't condemn Apple for giving me something I think is nicely done and that I may find pretty useful for the way I work which may be different from the way you work. There is plenty of room at the table for all of us utilize Tiger as it suits each of us.
I, too, have been using Mac's professionally for quiet some time. Not as long as some but since the 512e. I was always taught to believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see. I believe we should all sit back and withhold judgement till all the facts come out. I have used similar "Konfab"-like products in both Windows and Macs for many years. Seems reasonable that Apple is just improving on something they intro'd years ago. But I'll wait to see the final implementation and all the facts from both sides to condemn anyone. Dashboard looks like it could be pretty useful to some of us and not so useful to others. And why shouldn't it look cool while it does what it does. People who think its just eye-candy don't have to use it if they don't want to. But don't condemn Apple for giving me something I think is nicely done and that I may find pretty useful for the way I work which may be different from the way you work. There is plenty of room at the table for all of us utilize Tiger as it suits each of us.
Jalexster said:
You're starting to lose faith in Apple because they're going to be released yet another revolutionary OS is early 2005? Yah, innovation always make me lose faith in companies too..
And Spotlight seems similar to certain Longhorn features? Spotlight's based on the iTunes search tool, so I don't think so, and secondly, how can Apple be rippping stuff off from Longhorn when Longhorn won't even be released for 2 more years?!?
If anything, Longhorn will be ripping off Tiger. News flash - Tiger will be released WELL BEOFRE Longhorn. Saying that Apple is copying Microsoft in this respect is like saying that there are features in the Canon PowerShot S500 camera that are copying a Sony camera that's going to be released in 2 years. Give me a break...
discstickers said:
I beg to differ, and as I recall, the Macintosh community balked big when apple first showed the dock. I know a lot of that was resisting change, but some of the dock's criticism is valid (see my filename rant in my last post). As for the Windows taskbar: It's ugly, blocky and cluttered as hell. But it doesn't slow down my workflow when I have to use it.
I like the idea of the dock. Before I ever used it, I lauded it. I thought Apple was going to take a good idea executed poorly on Windows and give it the panache of Macintosh. While my icons dance and shimmy on open, and things "genii" in and out -- heck, my movies play down there! -- I don't get to see the name of my file. That's such an egregious oversight. And putting a launcher in the dock isn't a bad idea, but if that's where you're supposed to put the aps you use most -- and for me that's easily a dozen aps -- you start to get clutter. Add some DAs and you've got pandemonium.
But rather than work out a better way to integrate the launcher into the dock (which is where I believe it belongs) they come up with another area to launch from. That's not intuitive, at least I don't think so.
In conclusion, I agree with you on this: The dock is a nice piece of software. (It took me a while, but I finally like the trash in the dock.) Where I disagree is that I think that, for all its shortcomings, being able to see window names at a glance gives the Window's task bar a usability edge when working with multiple, similar documents. And that's what I do much of the time.
superninjagoat said:
I understand a little better where you're coming from now...If I understand you correctly, you want the dock to be more of a document manager than an app manager (like windows, as you said). That's a valid point, and you also have a valid point about Apple pressuring people into working a certain way, but I still can't relate much because I worked "Apple's way" before I even used OS X.
If you want better document management, I suggest using Expose a little more. F10 is my best friend when working with multiple docs within an app. It may take some getting used to, but I find it much more effective than the "Windows way" of just having names in the taskbar. I relate to things visually, not really by doc name (but like you said, that's just a matter of preference). So when I see what the doc looks like rather than just the name, I can identify it much more quickly.
As for the dock being an app launcher, I wouldn't have it any other way. I hate having to hunt through menus to find an app (I have to use Windows at work and this is a pain for me). Yeah, yeah there's the little launcher there, but if you have more than 4-5 (I use more apps than that), you encroach on the space you'd use for document names, etc.
jakemikey said:
I use pop up dock to launch apps , ie a dock on the left with folders of logically arranged apps (my logic anyway), and unlike Apples dock, this dock is fixed in size and does not get filled up with open app icons, so muscle memory actually works, going to the same point everytime to launch something. Expose keeps me in touch with what is up and running document ways. Basically Apples dock has become redundant, and is mainly a repositry for open apps. I hardly ever go there. Even to force quit I find it easier to go to pop up dock to open Application Monitor
Try this:
Use Exposé to reveal the current app's windows (sorry, I don't know what the official keyboard shortcut was - I changed it long ago)
Use Command-` to move between each open app and it's own set of windows.
Point and click at the one window you want when you locate it.
I think it's a brilliant design.
jakemikey said:
Honestly, I've never related to the dock as an aplication manager before. And I guess that's exacly what it is. I'd always tried to use it as a document manager. Perhaps the reason I've been so frustrated before is that I've been using the wrong tool. While I do like expose, it doesn't help me when differentiating between two of my most common documents: html source code and press releases (not from each other but between each subset).
I feel frustrated because the "Apple way," which has always made me feel at home, is now making me feel frustrated. Frustrated is for WinTel users -- not me.
I think its that frustration that fueled my first post.
billyboy said:
This is almost exactly how I find myself using OSX. And for most computing tasks, it's quite useful -- except when trying to differentiate between windows with visually similar content.
All: I'm getting redundant now, so I'll get off it. </high horse>
Umm...doesnt anyone remember the word...
competition.
"rip off"...or simply a better version.
"but...but...of course apple could make a better version..."
exactly.
*sigh* it's not a DUPLICATE of konfab... just a better interpretation.
and apple did things akin to this before as discussed.
and cucumbers may or may not taste better pickled.
competition.
"rip off"...or simply a better version.
"but...but...of course apple could make a better version..."
exactly.
*sigh* it's not a DUPLICATE of konfab... just a better interpretation.
and apple did things akin to this before as discussed.
and cucumbers may or may not taste better pickled.
logicat2001 said:
Am I the only one who (even when using PC's) keeps nudging the cursor into the corner out of habit, expecting Expose to kick in?
MacQuest said:
LMAO
come one...no one sees how funny a statement like this is?
it WASNT the first of it's kind..BUT APPLE should be accosted for "stealing" the idea which ISNT the first incarnation of this idea from Konfab?
confused.? you're supposed to be...this is dumb
Following up on an earlier post, here's what Dave Hyatt has to say:
All I have to say is "wow". It sure sounds like this could be a quantum leap past Konfabulator (and I love Konfabulator). All that functionality wrapped into widgets could produce some really interesting mini-apps.
Tulse said:
And the next logical step - with the use of the new spotlight type file search locate systems, a collection of widgets would replace the need for a Finder at all. Finder would become a secondary application found (or search located) as a Utility for the organisation of data/documents, a way of browsing the physical directory hierarchy.