Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is Cover flow a student of XP folder preview?

TiAdiMundo said:
That's not completely true. The new Finder sidebar is inspired by the iTunes 7 sidebar, that's right but iTunes got it from Windows Media Player 11. Really.
Click to expand...
iTunes sidebar is used for media management, WMP9 and 10 left sidebar is used for unintuitive buttons and right sidebar is used to display the songs in the playlist or album currently playing. Besides iTunes has the sidebar at least since 2003. When was WMP11 released? Your post is total flame bait and I guess I am falling for it.

My frustrating experience with WMP and winamp due to their bad interface is the reason why digital music on computers never appealed to me. It was iTunes that changed my music related lifestyle. I guess that is why iTunes and iPod dominate the marketplace.
 
TiAdiMundo said:
561456009_461f0f8349_o.jpg
Click to expand...
That looks quite good. Much better than whatever XP can offer and I gotta say better than OSX column view previewer.

BTW, after Windows 3.1, I don't think MS copied much from the Mac side until Vista. Even for Vista, it seems like the feature set may be similar to Tiger, but the interface design is quite different. Well, maybe widgets-gadgets is another story. I think both companies are set in their design philosophies.
 
TiAdiMundo said:
And you can choose from all view modes on the left side. Very usefull is also, that in Vista the column headers (?) are always there for sorting files. (Did I mentioned, that you can edit the meta data? :cool: ) Also works for videos, documents, mails and so on
Click to expand...



for god sakes please use the attachment button.


I never ever ever ever want to see Vista that large again, ever!
 
TiAdiMundo said:
The new Finder sidebar is inspired by the iTunes 7 sidebar, that's right but iTunes got it from Windows Media Player 11.
Click to expand...

How could iTunes have got it from WMP11 when WMP11 is fairly new and iTunes has been around for a number of years now ???

Are you suggesting time travel ?
 
The "finder" in Vista is miles ahead of the Finder as it is in OSX right now.

The new Finder in Leopard looks promising enough, but I still miss some of the great features that are in the Vista finder (such as very easy meta data editing)

(And before you guys start bitching at Vista, yeah I know it looks horrible)
 
Hey, laugh if you want, I was really hoping that metadata would be elevated to its proper Godlike status in Leopard, and I'm sad to see it's still taking a back seat. BeOS was doing this better than either Vista or Leopard and it was doing it more than 10 years ago! Arbitrary, extensible meta-data for every file, instantly indexed and searchable, on ancient hardware. Microsoft and Apple are STILL playing catch-up all these years later (Apple with a former Be filesystem engineer in their employ, no less).

My dream: when iPhoto and iTunes become simply specialized interfaces to data that's actually stored in the Finder as metadata on each file. Smart playlists/albums are actually just saved Spotlight searches. Play count, rating, all these specialized iTunes fields are simply added metadata fields on the file that any program can access and manipulate.

And, of course, when the OS makes adding and editing file metadata simple, perhaps with a Motion/iPhoto-style dashboard (floating dark pane) that pops up and allows for contextual meta-data manipulation. The worst part is that the pieces are all already there. There are command-line tools in OS X (that have been in OS X since Tiger was released) that expose the underpinnings of a VASTLY more powerful metadata system that has YET to be exploited! And there's no reason for Apple not to tackle this. It might not be a "OMG CHECK THIS OUT" kind of feature, but it's the kind of thing that (as people adapt to it and make use of it) will change computing in a big way.
 
That screenshot is quite impressive to be honest, I didn't knew Vista was capable of that! really nice.


as for coverflow vs. xp ... well, its very close, they both are very similar and XP had implemented this wayy before apple did, but then one can argue that apple had this cover flow in itunes and they have just expanded it making it available in finder ...

close call, I would say this feature in mac is not copied but an inspiration from XP.

Having said that, I don't think it is very useful, cover flow is very time consuming cuz atleast I always seem to over-scroll the album I am looking for, the animation does look good but starts to irritate me after a while ..

Icon view+column view rules.
 
samh004 said:
How could iTunes have got it from WMP11 when WMP11 is fairly new and iTunes has been around for a number of years now ???

Are you suggesting time travel ?
Click to expand...

iTunes 7 got a new sidebar which now shows also devices and is arranged exactly as the sidebar in WMP11.
 
TiAdiMundo said:
iTunes 7 got a new sidebar which now shows also devices and is arranged exactly as the sidebar in WMP11.
Click to expand...

Devices?

CDs, iPods, and third party MP3 players have showed up in that sidebar since the beginning of iTunes.

What other devices could you possibly be referring to?
 
I gotta say, the people bashing the usability of the XP "filmstrip" mode must be lacking in basic computing skills.

Of course there aren't separate buttons on the sides "like cover flow" to move from item to item: You are expected to use the mouse wheel. Or are you guys still using the hockey puck with your cubes?

The sad fact is that right now, today, you can without any extra software get a meaningful preview of an image file in the 2001 version of Windows, but not in the 2005 version of OS X which was supposed to be everything that Longhorn was going to offer and more, by Apple's own marketing talk.

And if you look at Vista, even a casual glance tells you that, good grief, you can click inside an explorer window and add all sorts of metadata just right there—to any file. And then you can sort by that data. And apparently Leopard won't be doing this, if the reports from WWDC are correct. This one feature would be a God-send for photographers and designers and anyone who does work that can be easily broken down into separate projects. Coverflow in finder? Great, now I'll have to rip out the crap graphics card in my dual 1.8 G5 to keep preview from skipping frames.

I don't use coverflow in iTunes. I'm not going to use it in Finder. Where is metadata? As one poster alluded to, it's built into the underlying system in a big way, but it is almost completely unrealized in Tiger, and apparently will remain so in Leopard. 10.6 is a long, long ways away. It's very disappointing.
 
you completely missed the point.

why open a program if all you're doing is tagging files? What if I want to tag my InDesign files and my Photoshop layered files and my CR2 RAW files with a specific project code or two so that I can have one copy of each file and a backup, instead of making multiple versions of the same file for each project so that they all show up in a folder together?

system-wide metadata as done in vista, combined with a smart folder, would do this perfectly. Why should Aperture be needed to reliably and easily tag photos? With a very small amount of work, Finder could literally replace iTunes and iPhoto when it comes to viewing, organizing, and listening. if Finder's got smart folders and flexible metadata, a couple of custom Finder taskbar icons could do almost everything I needed from itunes and iphoto.
 
theBB said:
BTW, after Windows 3.1, I don't think MS copied much from the Mac side until Vista. Even for Vista, it seems like the feature set may be similar to Tiger, but the interface design is quite different. Well, maybe widgets-gadgets is another story. I think both companies are set in their design philosophies.
Click to expand...

NeXT was copied a bit by Apple and Microsoft wasn't it? Then apple bought them, just like they do now.
 
trevorlsciact said:
NeXT was copied a bit by Apple and Microsoft wasn't it?
Click to expand...

Not really... I can't think of any similarities. NeXT systems were so much more advanced than Winodws and Mac OS. That's why Apple bought them (plus Steve Jobs was there, so I mean there were obviously ties between NeXT and Apple).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back