Oh, I have a countdown widget but not that one... and I want both.Laser47 said:
What's the url to download that please? Or the name of the widgets?I'm not having to good of luck finding it myself.
Lol. Just noticed that. XDjmark said:
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.
iLife'06 CONFIRMED!
- Thread starter rOckAPE
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What's the url to download that please? Or the name of the widgets?I'm not having to good of luck finding it myself.
Hmm... The funny thing is, when you consider that the "i" in the original iMac stood for Internet, iWeb = InternetWeb
emutree said:
OH...MY...GOD!
I didn't share many people's sympathy the first time around with Watson, as I considered it a random lightning strike, and life is full of examples of bad things that (randomly) happen to good people.
But...if it happens again...either:
1) Apple hates these guys
2) I don't want to live next door to these guys (bad luck!)
and in either case (which we'll probably never know which is true), my sympathy will follow.
Can you imagine, from their perspective, having stuck around after the bitterness of the Watson affair, to have it happen again?
RAGE!
edit: These are the Watson (not Konfabulator) guys.
If iWeb is true web hosting, that would ge breat.
If it is some .mac add on , it is pretty lame.
If it is some .mac add on , it is pretty lame.
Yeah... um, hahaha. I'm dumb.xsnightclub said:
Umm... is there a program like Apache for Mac? Or can Apache be for Mac? Wow. I'm so stupid. I'll go sit blushing in my little loser corner. But seriously, can someone answer my question please? 
ivirus said:
maybe they will outsource .mac to Google and are working with Google on a media device & service based on a fusion of the Mac mini, .mac and various Google services such as Gmail, Picasa, Talk and Blogger. Apple for the client side, Google for the server-side.
amateurmacfreak said:Yeah... um, hahaha. I'm dumb.
Erm Apache COMES WITH OS X so.... yes.
amateurmacfreak said:Yeah... um, hahaha. I'm dumb.
Start your "Perosnal Web Sharing" in your Sys Prefs.
Then type in your brower:
127.0.0.1
What do you see?
amateurmacfreak said:
the web in iWeb reminded me of Spiderman. in a pervious keynote stev-o had the ceo of sony onstage and they were discussing how they were going to pair up in the future doing "who knows what"
Sony is obsessed with spiderman (hell even the PS3 logo has the same font as the spiderman logo). i can see it happening
Spiderman 3 is going to rocccckckk!!!111111
Thanks. Wow. Can't believe I didn't know that.DavidLeblond said:Erm Apache COMES WITH OS X so.... yes.
Thank you!
Wow. Thank you!! So much!! Yay!!MacsRgr8 said:Start your "Perosnal Web Sharing" in your Sys Prefs.
Then type in your brower:
127.0.0.1
What do you see?
Thanks. And the whole time... it was just sitting there.... Personal Web Sharing unchecked.
Oh, haha. Get it.Phat_Pat said:
I wrote the [old] Apple mailing list post that has been linked by several others.
http://lists.apple.com/archives/Web-dev/2004/Nov/msg00130.html
It was part of a comparison of web programming languages-- specifically, ColdFusion MX (CF/CFMX/CFML) vs more granular languages like PHP, ASP, Java, etc.
I believe it is much easier to create and maintain web sites using CF.
To support this belief, I suggested that a package (iWeb) could be created that allowed beginners to create an instant web site. While easy to learn/use, iWeb would allow users to create more robust sites if they had the need/desire.
It could be done with wizards and templates as well as open source web applications for shopping carts, drill-down database, blogging, etc.
The theory, being, that the provided apps would illustrate good program design and implementation-- so that a user could start quickly/easily and stop whenever he wanted, with a well-documented, well-designed, maintainable web site.
The site could be hosted on the user's computer, or a web hosting service-- or even tied in with a service like .Mac
At the time, I even created a simple web page explaining the concept (attached).
As you can see, the i in iWeb stands for instantaneous! (seemed like a pretty good name at the time).
A basic site could be hosted on the user's computer or something like .Mac.
To host more than a basic web site would have required ColdFusion MX and a DB Server. Likely, these sites would be hosted on a hosting service.
If .Mac were expanded to offer the necessary programming and db services at a competitive price it would be a reasonable option.
Dick Applebaum
http://lists.apple.com/archives/Web-dev/2004/Nov/msg00130.html
It was part of a comparison of web programming languages-- specifically, ColdFusion MX (CF/CFMX/CFML) vs more granular languages like PHP, ASP, Java, etc.
I believe it is much easier to create and maintain web sites using CF.
To support this belief, I suggested that a package (iWeb) could be created that allowed beginners to create an instant web site. While easy to learn/use, iWeb would allow users to create more robust sites if they had the need/desire.
It could be done with wizards and templates as well as open source web applications for shopping carts, drill-down database, blogging, etc.
The theory, being, that the provided apps would illustrate good program design and implementation-- so that a user could start quickly/easily and stop whenever he wanted, with a well-documented, well-designed, maintainable web site.
The site could be hosted on the user's computer, or a web hosting service-- or even tied in with a service like .Mac
At the time, I even created a simple web page explaining the concept (attached).
As you can see, the i in iWeb stands for instantaneous! (seemed like a pretty good name at the time).
A basic site could be hosted on the user's computer or something like .Mac.
To host more than a basic web site would have required ColdFusion MX and a DB Server. Likely, these sites would be hosted on a hosting service.
If .Mac were expanded to offer the necessary programming and db services at a competitive price it would be a reasonable option.
Dick Applebaum
I think the http://www.apple.com/support/garageband/podcasts/ site should say "As of iTunes 4.9", instead of "With iTunes 4.9".autrefois said:It is surprising though since Apple seems to be pretty good at keeping their site updated. Hopefully they'll (finally) update the iTunes version number on this page once iLife '06 is released!
Here you goamateurmacfreak said:Oh, I have a countdown widget but not that one... and I want both.
I'm not having to good of luck finding it myself.
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/business/countdowncalendar.html
Oh, cool, thanks!Laser47 said:
Wow.
I'd say 80% that this will actually happen. It'll probably be marketed as a way to "bring your digital media together and share it on the intenet". We'll probably see HTML exporting, but it WILL be integrated with .Mac, which will probably see an update or price reduction.
As for GarageBand, it seems like the headline feature will be that you can make music videos and video podcasts without involving iMovie.
EDIT: 80% because it may be a fake planted by Apple.
I'd say 80% that this will actually happen. It'll probably be marketed as a way to "bring your digital media together and share it on the intenet". We'll probably see HTML exporting, but it WILL be integrated with .Mac, which will probably see an update or price reduction.
As for GarageBand, it seems like the headline feature will be that you can make music videos and video podcasts without involving iMovie.
EDIT: 80% because it may be a fake planted by Apple.
I hope iWeb is an easy to use website designer...this would be great timing because I just got the urge to learn basic HTML and website design and with iWeb my dreams can come true... oh boy
FreeState said:
A while back, I thought that as well. But if you create an html page using TextEdit (which, if you'll remember, will save html now), you'll see that the source code says something about Cocoa HTML Writer (or at least it used to the last time I checked, which admittedly was several months ago).
Perhaps they are working on an HTML editor that will be incorporated at system level just like Safari Webkit. Then the framework could be used by TextEdit, Pages, and whatever else Apple decides to create. The trend at Apple over the past few years seems to have been geared toward including frameworks in the operating system that can be utilized by any application, like it's currently sub-par RAW converter.
I have no problem with Apple creating an html editor, as long as it creates standards-compliant, table-free, XHTML/CSS markup. Simple, Clean, Semantic.