If they could just lose their values of simplicity on this one subject... my God, this would be amazing to release to the public. People would absolutely love it.
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.
Hidden iOS 7 Settings Reveal Potential Gesture and Folder Enhancements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Seems like Apples opening up iOS, and giving in to the fact people may actually WANT to remove Newstand, otherwise why would any menu be there at all ??
Good news for extra tweaks. If Apple leaves this in, i don't care if their hidden, it will become slowly like Android with customisation.
This is what we all been waiting for. Why would Apple take them out ?
I bet any smart ass will be able to pull up the hidden menu within days...
I'll be for one, now that i know
Good news for extra tweaks. If Apple leaves this in, i don't care if their hidden, it will become slowly like Android with customisation.
This is what we all been waiting for. Why would Apple take them out ?
I bet any smart ass will be able to pull up the hidden menu within days...
I'll be for one, now that i know
This is a jailbreak, no question. look at the sub setting folder names. Parallax is a tweak so are the others.
If you read the YouTube comments, someone located the table images for the springboard settings in the simulator. Not saying it's not a jb, but if the images exist, the it stands to reason the hidden settings app could be real.
Yes, exactly! I hope apple starts doing more significant updates in between complete version updates. Last couple new iOS releases left like medium updates not even close to full version change. We shall see what post Scott Forstall era brings
Umm, iTunes and a little effort to enter some details for each pdf is all it takes actually. You have a myriad of ways to have them sorted if you enter the details correctly.
My son has them organised under genres, I have mine sorted by artist, which I actually use as a keyword instead of entering the writers surname. My wife has them sorted under writers surname.
The two ways you could spend money "in newstand"... The app store and in-app purchases... can already be disabled. There is therefor no logical reason to include it in restrictions.
Zing...
yep they had it so right Apple duplicated the entire thing except the gesture to invoke it. If you've ever used webOS you'd know how much more fluid it is to move around the system this way than to double press a button.I'm hoping they'll add a setting to decide which gesture invokes control center and which one invokes the app switcher.
10:1 odds that there wouldn't BE an iOS if it wasn't for Steve Jobs and Scott Forestall.
Swan Song for Traditional File Management
Apple has been moving away from users managing their files for a while now. They regard it as an antiquated workflow method more akin to working with physical documents than digital information. And, as much as even I find myself holding onto that old way of organizing my data, I have to agree.
File management, whether in the existing Finder, in Windows Explorer, or through a service like DropBox, SugarSync, or the rest, is, when you think about it, skeuomorphism of the digital workflow. Apple recognized this a while ago, and is methodically shedding it.
For years, I've been effectively "tagging" my music in iTunes using the Group field, and using those tags to organize my music into Smart Playlists like "Spielberg" or "Sci-Fi" or "Secret Agents" (I have a lot of movie scores and soundtracks) without ever having to rename the songs or albums or access the actual files on my system. Now Apple has brought that same powerfully flexible functionality to the Finder in Mavericks in the form of Tagging.
Using tags will allow for file management without ever having to worry about where the files are actually located, or even named. Students, for example, can use tags to organize their documents, rather than endure the tedium of creating separate folders for each class or project and/or incorporating the name of those classes or projects into each document filename. It can get extremely laborious, and tagging offers a much simpler, more efficient, and forward-thinking, solution.
This seems to be Apple's thinking to me, and will truly be confirmed if they bring Tagging to iOS, perhaps in some kind of Finder for iOS app, but more likely incorporated into the iOS search function. By using tags throughout the Apple ecosystem, the need for antiquated (i.e., skeuomorphic) methods of file management will be swept away.
It'll certainly be a rocky transition for many, and some will resist it tooth and nail, but, ultimately, I think it will allow for greater flexibility of data location, organization, and sharing, and generally make the user experience even more intuitive.
Apple has been moving away from users managing their files for a while now. They regard it as an antiquated workflow method more akin to working with physical documents than digital information. And, as much as even I find myself holding onto that old way of organizing my data, I have to agree.
File management, whether in the existing Finder, in Windows Explorer, or through a service like DropBox, SugarSync, or the rest, is, when you think about it, skeuomorphism of the digital workflow. Apple recognized this a while ago, and is methodically shedding it.
For years, I've been effectively "tagging" my music in iTunes using the Group field, and using those tags to organize my music into Smart Playlists like "Spielberg" or "Sci-Fi" or "Secret Agents" (I have a lot of movie scores and soundtracks) without ever having to rename the songs or albums or access the actual files on my system. Now Apple has brought that same powerfully flexible functionality to the Finder in Mavericks in the form of Tagging.
Using tags will allow for file management without ever having to worry about where the files are actually located, or even named. Students, for example, can use tags to organize their documents, rather than endure the tedium of creating separate folders for each class or project and/or incorporating the name of those classes or projects into each document filename. It can get extremely laborious, and tagging offers a much simpler, more efficient, and forward-thinking, solution.
This seems to be Apple's thinking to me, and will truly be confirmed if they bring Tagging to iOS, perhaps in some kind of Finder for iOS app, but more likely incorporated into the iOS search function. By using tags throughout the Apple ecosystem, the need for antiquated (i.e., skeuomorphic) methods of file management will be swept away.
It'll certainly be a rocky transition for many, and some will resist it tooth and nail, but, ultimately, I think it will allow for greater flexibility of data location, organization, and sharing, and generally make the user experience even more intuitive.
Last edited:
Tagging is a great way to manage files. So is iTunes. So is the Finder. What's wrong with having multiple ways to manage files? Each method has it's strengths and weaknesses and if used appropriately all of them are valuable.
For the record, I have my ebook collection fully tagged in Calibre and I'm quite familiar with managing files via tagging. But say I want to transfer my entire Asimov epub collection to an iPad: there is no easy way to do so since I have no access to the iPad's file structure. And no, I'm not moving my ebook collection to iTunes because iTunes isn't any good for managing an ebook collection. Apple could easily use some of that multi-billion dollar stash to make it into something better than Calibre, but realistically I don't believe they care. iTunes is good enough to sell books and that's apparently enough.
In the final analysis, it's not about luddite vs. bleeding edge, it's about versatility and ease of use. I'm fully confident in Apple's ability to introduce a Finder into iOS in a way that doesn't force it upon those who fear it. Just as most Mac users can use a Mac for years without ever looking inside the scary Library folder (now hidden to keep the noobs all fuzzy and comfy), it could be the same with an iOS file system.
For the record, I have my ebook collection fully tagged in Calibre and I'm quite familiar with managing files via tagging. But say I want to transfer my entire Asimov epub collection to an iPad: there is no easy way to do so since I have no access to the iPad's file structure. And no, I'm not moving my ebook collection to iTunes because iTunes isn't any good for managing an ebook collection. Apple could easily use some of that multi-billion dollar stash to make it into something better than Calibre, but realistically I don't believe they care. iTunes is good enough to sell books and that's apparently enough.
In the final analysis, it's not about luddite vs. bleeding edge, it's about versatility and ease of use. I'm fully confident in Apple's ability to introduce a Finder into iOS in a way that doesn't force it upon those who fear it. Just as most Mac users can use a Mac for years without ever looking inside the scary Library folder (now hidden to keep the noobs all fuzzy and comfy), it could be the same with an iOS file system.
Last edited:
I don't see how tagging can work in all use cases. It should therefore not replace traditional folder-based file organisation, but could complement it.
For a task which involves just a few files, I think tagging could be fine.
For a larger project, say we have the following kinds of documents:
* one main report (word processing or similar)
* a small number of supporting spreadsheets
* a moderate number of images which were inserted into the report, but kept as separately-saved image files
* a moderate number of scripts (e.g. Python or whatever) to create images
* a large number (say 100 to 1000) of configuration files for use with the scripts
* a huge number (say 10,000 or more) of data files
I would contend that a file management system which relied on tagging only (without folders), effectively flattening these many files into one 'view' (in lieu of the top-most project folder), would be very impractical. I'd rather sort them into logical folders, contained within the project's folder. As we've been doing for decades. How could we manage this kind of thing without folders?
Cheers, A.
For a task which involves just a few files, I think tagging could be fine.
For a larger project, say we have the following kinds of documents:
* one main report (word processing or similar)
* a small number of supporting spreadsheets
* a moderate number of images which were inserted into the report, but kept as separately-saved image files
* a moderate number of scripts (e.g. Python or whatever) to create images
* a large number (say 100 to 1000) of configuration files for use with the scripts
* a huge number (say 10,000 or more) of data files
I would contend that a file management system which relied on tagging only (without folders), effectively flattening these many files into one 'view' (in lieu of the top-most project folder), would be very impractical. I'd rather sort them into logical folders, contained within the project's folder. As we've been doing for decades. How could we manage this kind of thing without folders?
Cheers, A.
Nothing wrong with having multiple ways to manage files, I just don't think Apple is interested in supporting traditional file management on iOS devices at all, and seems to be encouraging people away from it in Mac OS X. You raise a great point though about incorporating content from outside the Apple ecosystem into Apple devices. Not that it's right, but that seems to be the price of admission.
Personally, I hated that Apple got rid of iDisk, which offered "relatively" reliable file management across Apple devices (RELATIVELY, I know others' mileage varied a lot, so please don't flame me). I didn't get a clear explanation that greater data security of files because of sandboxing was one of the main benefits of the change to iCloud. I went to SugarSync for a while, but never felt comfortable having my data spread to yet another server. Once I upgraded to my new iMac (my old one didn't support Mountain Lion), working within iCloud wasn't nearly so cumbersome. I recently deleted my SugarSync account and had been making plans to make sure all the files I needed available across all my devices were uploaded to iCloud. But with tagging in Mavericks, and hopefully in iOS 7 as well, it looks like I may not need to do as much work (beyond tagging) as I thought.
It'll be interesting to see what, if any, file management makes it to iOS 7. With tagging and even tighter iCloud integration in Mavericks, it seems like there's going to have to be something.
Another good point. Apple obviously isn't getting rid of traditional file management altogether, at least not yet. Still, I'm not sure your example couldn't be handled exclusively with tagging, even with the large number of files you suggest. Honestly, tagging such a large number of files might be easier than the headache of keeping up with where they all are. And presumably, if they're all tagged to the same project (even a large one) they could still all be located with a query for that tag and then relocated (or copied) to a single project folder if desired.
Regardless, you're probably correct in that Apple is currently seeking to complement (not replace) traditional file management in Mac OS X with tagging, but I'm dubious of the idea that they may introduce traditional file management to iOS in any way. That's the kind of Microsoft move that Apple tends to ridicule. Plus, they had it already with iDisk and nixed it. My guess is that tag-aware apps in iOS, or the iOS search feature, will be able to search for tagged files in iCloud and open them within the appropriate app.
The tagging in Mavericks is indeed promising. I could see it working well enough to mitigate the absense of a Finder, especially if third party software can easily hook into it.
It looks like he finally gave rough directions on how to do it but none of it is very user-friendly. Here's a link to his "directions" http://pastie.org/8067977